| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Pikey
Banned
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 1491
Location: North Lancashire
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ignatz
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918
|
 Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 11:52 am Post subject: Re: Debunking the official 911 conspiracy theory |
 |
|
| Pikey wrote: | | http://www.serendipity.li/wot/holmgren01.htm |
The most monumental piece of CT tripe it's been my displeasure to read.
e.g.
"For a start, they conveniently skip over the awkward fact that there weren't any Arabs on the planes. If there were, one must speculate that they somehow got on board without being filmed by any of the security cameras and without being registered on the passenger lists"
I refer the Dishonourable Gentleman to Chipmunk Stew's passenger lists, posted a few days ago.
And the idiot who wrote the piece doesn't even know the melting point of aluminium.
_________________
So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aggle-rithm
Moderate Poster
Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 557
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 12:05 pm Post subject: Re: Debunking the official 911 conspiracy theory |
|
|
| Pikey wrote: | | http://www.serendipity.li/wot/holmgren01.htm |
| Quote: | | According to the practitioners of the fruit loop, 19 Arabs took over the 4 planes by subduing the passengers and crew through the use of guns, knives, box cutters and gas, and then used electronic guidance systems which they had smuggled on board to fly the planes to their targets. |
This has to be the mother of all straw men. Who has made the claim that they smuggled electronic guidance systems on board? The planes already had their own guidance systems. Plus, at least one of the hijackers (and probably all of them) merely followed visual landmarks to find his target.
| Quote: |
For a start, they conveniently skip over the awkward fact that there weren't any Arabs on the planes. If there were, one must speculate that they somehow got on board without being filmed by any of the security cameras and without being registered on the passenger lists.
|
This "fact" is only awkward because it isn't true. They WERE filmed by security cameras, and they WERE on the passenger lists.
| Quote: |
With vague mumblings that they must have been using false ID (but never specifying which IDs they are alleged to have used, or how these were traced to their real identities)
|
Where is this nutcase getting his information from? No one has claimed that they used false ID's! Most of the hijackers had a clean record. There first crime was destined to be their last crime. There was no reason to hide their identities.
| Quote: |
And if they used gas in a confined space, they would have been affected themselves unless they also had masks in their luggage.
|
They didn't use mustard gas, genius. They used tear gas or pepper spray that could be directed towards the victims through a high-pressure aerosol.
| Quote: |
So if they used credit cards that identified them, how does that reconcile with the claim that they used false IDs to get on to the plane?
|
It doesn't, but since it was the author of this article who made this claim, and not any serious investigators, it doesn't matter.
| Quote: |
However, by this time the fruit loop has been completely circumnavigated,and the conspiracy theorist exclaims impatiently, "Who said anything about false IDs? We know what seats they were sitting in! Their presence is well documented!" And so the whole loop starts again. "Well, why aren't they on the passenger lists?" "You numbskull! They assumed the identities of other passengers!" And so on...
|
But they ARE on the passenger lists. They aren't on the VICTIMS list because they were the perpetrators.
| Quote: |
Having for the sake of amusement, allowed them to get away with with the silly story of the 19 invisible Arabs, we move on to the question of how they are supposed to have taken over the planes. Hijacking a plane is not an easy thing to do. Hijacking it without the pilot being able to alert ground control is nearly impossible. The pilot has only to punch in a four-digit code to alert ground control to a hijacking. Unconcerned with the awkward question of plausibility, the conspiracy buffs maintain that on that Sept 11, the invisible hijackers took over the plane by the rather crude method of threatening people with boxcutters and knives, and spraying gas (after they had attached their masks, obviously), but somehow took control of the plane without the crew first getting a chance to punch in the hijacking code. Not just on one plane, but on all four.
|
Yes, I agree this would have been impossible if there hadn't been some sort of, oh, I don't know...a PLAN?
The hijackers observed the routine on airline flights. They knew there was a certain window in time when the cockpit was vulnerable. There were three (flight 93) or four "muscle" hijackers in each plane, sufficient for one or two to "freeze" the passengers by using tear gas, or whatever, and by killing a couple of passengers as a warning to the others. The other two could enter the cockpit quickly and kill the pilot and copilot, who would be in a helpless position in their seats.
They KNEW they had to act fast, or the plot wouldn't work. They PRACTICED it over and over until they got it right. The only way anyone could consider their success "luck" is if they have a prejudice towards a race that they consider ignorant savages.
| Quote: |
So now that our incredibly lucky hijackers have taken control of the planes, all four pilots fly them with breath-taking skill and certainty to their fiery end, all four pilots unflinching in their steely resolve for a swift meeting with Allah. Apart from their psychotic hatred of "our freedoms", it was their fanatical devotion to Islam which enabled them to summon up the iron will to do this. Which is strange, because according to another piece of hearsay peddled by the conspiracy buffs, these guys actually went out drinking and womanizing the night before their great martyrdom, even leaving their Korans in the bar — really impeccable Islamic behavior — and then got up at 5 am the next morning to pull off the greatest covert operation in history.
|
What would YOU do on your last night on Earth, especially considering that whatever you do, you have a guaranteed ticket to Paradise?
I don't have time to go through the whole steaming mess right now, but it doesn't look good for Mr. Holmgren. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pepik
Banned
Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 591
Location: The Square Mile
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 12:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | really impeccable Islamic behavior |
This of course suggests that that hijacking a jet and flying it into a building full of civilians is impeccable Islamic behaviour.
An interesting interpretation of muslim values. And yet the OCT supporters are called Islam haters. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Patrick Brown
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 10 Oct 2006
Posts: 1201
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 12:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| aggle-rithm wrote: | | This "fact" is only awkward because it isn't true. They WERE filmed by security cameras, and they WERE on the passenger lists. |
I've never seen any evidence that the 'terrorists' were film entering the airports or that their names appeared on any passenger lists. Can you please provide links to your evidence?
_________________
We check the evidence and then archive it: www.911evidencebase.co.uk
Get the Steven E Jones reports >HERE< |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster
Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aggle-rithm
Moderate Poster
Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 557
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 12:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
See, CS, this is why I hesitated to bring up the manifest. I was afraid you were going to whip out that damn jpeg again!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster
Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Patrick Brown
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 10 Oct 2006
Posts: 1201
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 12:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry but I'll have to repeat my question:
I've never seen any evidence that the 'terrorists' were film entering the airports or that their names appeared on any passenger lists. Can you please provide links to your evidence?
_________________
We check the evidence and then archive it: www.911evidencebase.co.uk
Get the Steven E Jones reports >HERE< |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster
Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 12:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| aggle-rithm wrote: |
See, CS, this is why I hesitated to bring up the manifest. I was afraid you were going to whip out that damn jpeg again! |
Yeah, yeah, I know. It just mystifies me that so many of these "researchers" still think these don't exist.
_________________
"They, the jews, also have this thing about linage don't they?
We know a person from recent history who had a thing for linage and gene pools don't we?"
--Patrick Brown |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster
Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Patrick Brown wrote: | Sorry but I'll have to repeat my question:
I've never seen any evidence that the 'terrorists' were film entering the airports or that their names appeared on any passenger lists. Can you please provide links to your evidence? |
...I'm sorry but...what???
Were you expecting to see Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld on the lists?
There's loads more documentary evidence here:
http://www.rcfp.org/moussaoui/
_________________
"They, the jews, also have this thing about linage don't they?
We know a person from recent history who had a thing for linage and gene pools don't we?"
--Patrick Brown |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Patrick Brown
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 10 Oct 2006
Posts: 1201
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I was expecting some independently verifiable evidence, preferably from several different sources, not 'Stuff' from your photobucket account.
Sorry but I'll have to repeat my question yet again:
I've never seen any evidence that the 'terrorists' were film entering the airports or that their names appeared on any passenger lists. Can you please provide links to your evidence?
_________________
We check the evidence and then archive it: www.911evidencebase.co.uk
Get the Steven E Jones reports >HERE< |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster
Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Patrick Brown wrote: | I was expecting some independently verifiable evidence, preferably from several different sources, not 'Stuff' from your photobucket account [or the Moussaoui trial].
Sorry but I'll have to repeat my question yet again:
I've never seen any evidence [that I trust] that the 'terrorists' were film entering the airports or that their names appeared on any passenger lists. Can you please provide links to [more evidence and I'll tell you when I've seen some that I can trust]? |
How about 911research.wtc7.net? Are they trustworthy?
http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/evidence/passengers.html
Another link to Moussaoui trial evidence:
http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/
_________________
"They, the jews, also have this thing about linage don't they?
We know a person from recent history who had a thing for linage and gene pools don't we?"
--Patrick Brown |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aggle-rithm
Moderate Poster
Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 557
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Patrick Brown wrote: | I was expecting some independently verifiable evidence, preferably from several different sources, not 'Stuff' from your photobucket account.
Sorry but I'll have to repeat my question yet again:
I've never seen any evidence that I will accept that the 'terrorists' were film entering the airports or that their names appeared on any passenger lists. Can you please provide links to your evidence that I will accept? |
I've corrected your post for you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Patrick Brown
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 10 Oct 2006
Posts: 1201
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I was expecting some independently verifiable evidence. It's not complicated.
_________________
We check the evidence and then archive it: www.911evidencebase.co.uk
Get the Steven E Jones reports >HERE< |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster
Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pepik
Banned
Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 591
Location: The Square Mile
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 2:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I think we should all applaud Patrick on his progress at learning to be a CTer. He has learned rule #1: There is no evidence which cannot be denied. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Patrick Brown
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 10 Oct 2006
Posts: 1201
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 3:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Patrick Brown wrote: | I was expecting some independently verifiable evidence, preferably from several different sources, not 'Stuff' from your photobucket account.
Sorry but I'll have to repeat my question yet again:
I've never seen any evidence that the 'terrorists' were film entering the airports or that their names appeared on any passenger lists. Can you please provide links to your evidence? |
I'm still waiting for the independently verifiable evidence, preferably from several different sources, not 'Stuff' from your photobucket account.
Next you'll try and use your uncles airbrushed holiday snaps as evidence “look look see, that man had a turban on so he must have been in the country and and a friend of mine who was at the airport said...”.
Anyway where did chipmunk stew get those pics from his aunty in New Jersey?
_________________
We check the evidence and then archive it: www.911evidencebase.co.uk
Get the Steven E Jones reports >HERE< |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster
Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 3:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Patrick Brown wrote: | | Patrick Brown wrote: | I was expecting some independently verifiable evidence, preferably from several different sources, not 'Stuff' from your photobucket account.
Sorry but I'll have to repeat my question yet again:
I've never seen any evidence that the 'terrorists' were film entering the airports or that their names appeared on any passenger lists. Can you please provide links to your evidence? |
I'm still waiting for the independently verifiable evidence, preferably from several different sources, not 'Stuff' from your photobucket account.
Next you'll try and use your uncles airbrushed holiday snaps as evidence “look look see, that man had a turban on so he must have been in the country and and a friend of mine who was at the airport said...”.
Anyway where did chipmunk stew get those pics from his aunty in New Jersey? |
For cripe's sake...
I got them from here:
http://www.911myths.com/html/the_passengers.html
| Quote: | | We don’t actually subscribe to these ideas, but without any official documentation it’s hard to prove a point, one way or the other. Which is why we were very interested to see a photo of what looked like a passenger manifest in the Terry McDermott book, Perfect Soldiers. We emailed the author, and he said yes: apparently these were amongst a bunch of investigative files he obtained from the FBI while researching his book. 24 hours later we had copies, too. So what would they tell us? |
I also found them here:
| Quote: | | Low-quality reproductions of alleged passenger manifests were released on a website of Moussaoui trial exhibits in July of 2006. 9 Â |
_________________
"They, the jews, also have this thing about linage don't they?
We know a person from recent history who had a thing for linage and gene pools don't we?"
--Patrick Brown |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MiniMauve
Moderate Poster
Joined: 24 Aug 2006
Posts: 220
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 3:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
How do we know that these passenger lists are authentic?
I'm not saying they aren't authentic, they might be, but it's not like they couldn't have been typed up by... well... anyone.
_________________
Stick to what you KNOW. All else is disinformation, intended or not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ignatz
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 3:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pepik wrote: | | I think we should all applaud Patrick on his progress at learning to be a CTer. He has learned rule #1: There is no evidence which cannot be denied. |
I was trying to think of rules #2, #3 etc. But I think rule #1 is all they really need.
Maybe -
Rule#2 - uninformed speculation by a CT Prophet carries far more weight than a detailed report by any number of world-renowned experts
Rule #3 - forget anything that even you accept as debunking. Just wait a while and trot out those same weary old "obvious truths" yet again.
Rule #4 - when your back is really against the wall, and all your rational brain is screaming "arghhh , yes ! you're right !!!", it's the time to be strong and just say "This is exactly why we need a new independent investigation"
Rule #5 - avoid jelly rain, or you might end up as a Govt. shill
_________________
So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aggle-rithm
Moderate Poster
Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 557
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 4:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Patrick Brown wrote: | I was expecting some independently verifiable evidence, preferably from several different sources, not 'Stuff' from your photobucket account.
|
How do you know they are not verifiable? What steps have you taken to verify them? Or do you expect someone who you clearly do not trust to verify them for you?
Or, perhaps you expect them to be self-verifying? So that just looking at this evidence demonstrates beyond a shadow of a doubt that it is valid? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster
Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 4:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MiniMauve wrote: | How do we know that these passenger lists are authentic?
I'm not saying they aren't authentic, they might be, but it's not like they couldn't have been typed up by... well... anyone. |
Tell you what. Here are some ideas for how to go about verifying the lists.
Contact Terry McDermott. (If you don't know how to go about that, contact Mike Williams at 911myths.com (mike[at]911myths[dot]com) and see how he got in touch with Mr. McDermott.)
Ask Mr. McDermott who his FBI contact was, if there was any corroborating evidence, and if you can have a copy of the lists.
Get in touch with his FBI contact and confirm.
Contact AA and United and ask them about the lists.
Contact someone who knows how to read a passenger list and ask them if there's anything weird about them in all the codes and acronyms and headers.
Contact one of the many news agencies that published victims lists, and ask where they got the names from and if they were ever in possession of any similar lists.
The only reason this is even considered an "unanswered question" in the first place is that dozens of conspiracy sites made a big deal out of the "mystery" that most of the victims lists published in the press did not contain the names of the hijackers. (Although at least one story printed a complete passenger list.) For some reason, even after the lists surfaced, these no-hijackers-on-the-manifests stories persisted, and the lists themselves were called into question (even though the claim was bogus from the beginning!)
_________________
"They, the jews, also have this thing about linage don't they?
We know a person from recent history who had a thing for linage and gene pools don't we?"
--Patrick Brown |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aggle-rithm
Moderate Poster
Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 557
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 5:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's passages like this that make me wonder if this is an elaborate put-on:
| Quote: |
This is another favourite deductive method of the conspiracy theorist. The "improbability drive", in which they decide upon a conclusion without any evidence whatsoever to support it
|
...followed shortly by...
| Quote: |
Anybody who has seen the endlessly-replayed footage of the second plane going into the WTC will realize that the plane was packed with explosives. Planes do not and cannot blow up into nothing in that manner when they crash.
|
"the plane was packed with explosives" sounds like a conclusion without any evidence whatsoever to support it, doesn't it...?
Unless "anyone can tell by looking at it" is considered evidence? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aggle-rithm
Moderate Poster
Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 557
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 5:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
As you all know, an invalid premise invalidates an argument. To save time, I thought I would just list the invalid premises made by the author of this article:
The Air Force didn't know what to do on 9/11
There were no Arabs on the planes
Strawman: The official story claims that the Arabs used fake ID's
The hijackers aren't on the passenger lists
Passports cannot survive fiery crashes
The hijackers took over the plane by threatening people with boxcutters and knives -- (this is true if you consider killing someone "threatening" them)
The pilots flew "with breath-taking skill and certainty"
The pilots learned how to fly airliners by reading flight manuals in the car on the way to the airport.
The planes were completely vaporized by the crashes
Strawman: The official story claims "planes have never crashed into buildings before, so there's no way of telling."
Strawman: The official story claims "Its a well-documented fact that planes explode into nothing on impact."
Strawman: The official story claims the terrorists engineered the collapse of both the WTC towers
The only source of fuel in the WTC fires was the jet fuel
Strawman: The official story claims that a few thousand gallons of kerosine vaporized an aircraft, burned for over an hour, melted steel, THEN poured down elevator shafts to start other fires
Black smoke indicates an oxygen-starved fire
Strawman: The official story claims the temparature in the WTC towers was at 2000°C
The towers fell at near free fall
It is physically impossible for an object to crash through other objects and still fall at near free-fall
Strawman: The official story claims many of the WTC victims can't be identified because of the heat of the kerosene fire
A missile hit the Pentagon
Whatever crashed into the Pentagon left "a neat circular hole of about a 12-foot diameter through three rings"
Strawman: The official story claims that the Pentagon closed up like a piece of meat after it was penetrated (leaving only a 12-foot hole)
There may be more, but this is enough to pretty much shred the guy's credibility. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jay Ref
Moderate Poster
Joined: 20 Jul 2006
Posts: 511
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 7:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MiniMauve wrote: | How do we know that these passenger lists are authentic?
I'm not saying they aren't authentic, they might be, but it's not like they couldn't have been typed up by... well... anyone. |
Well you could place a single call to AA. Then if you're a really ambitious little conspirititoid you could make a similarly simple phone call to UAL.
Of course it's not as simple as dropping all pretense at sanity and logic while clinging to the unrepeatable "thermite" findings of Dr. Jones. No. Dr. Jones and his good ole booty-buddy Alex Jones are spinning a cool tale of intrigue and danger in which you get to star as one of the "real heroes". Why let reality come along and mess it all up? After all this is arguablly your last shot at finding meaning in your life...better cling to it with all your might!
-z
_________________
"Knowledge is good"
-Emil Faber
"God in heaven. Here's the hard-headed, evidence-only freak who will not, like we CTers, indulge himself in self-inflating, utterly misconceived fantasies." -kbo234 (who is NOT a nazi) briefly makes sense |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anti-sophist
Moderate Poster
Joined: 30 Sep 2006
Posts: 531
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 11:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MiniMauve wrote: | How do we know that these passenger lists are authentic?
I'm not saying they aren't authentic, they might be, but it's not like they couldn't have been typed up by... well... anyone. |
Do you have any reason to believe they aren't authentic? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MiniMauve
Moderate Poster
Joined: 24 Aug 2006
Posts: 220
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Don't get your panties in a knot, critics.
All I'm saying is that if one believes there is a coverup occurring, these passenger lists are easily created by anyone, therefore, they are not going to sway anyone who believes that there is a coverup. I'm not saying they are not genuine lists (i.e. that they did not come from AA, FAA or FBI) but I'm saying that if there is a coverup, these lists would be quickly and easily faked at their source. I'm not saying they are (I'm actually on the fence on this one due to insufficient evidence either way) but they easily could have been. So, presenting them as evidence that there was not a coverup is still asking to put trust in the alleged conspirators.
_________________
Stick to what you KNOW. All else is disinformation, intended or not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anti-sophist
Moderate Poster
Joined: 30 Sep 2006
Posts: 531
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 26, 2006 3:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MiniMauve wrote: |
All I'm saying is that if one believes there is a coverup occurring, these passenger lists are easily created by anyone, therefore, they are not going to sway anyone who believes that there is a coverup. |
No amount of evidence is going to convince someone believes in a coverup. It's a religious and faith-based belief.
| Quote: |
I'm not saying they are not genuine lists (i.e. that they did not come from AA, FAA or FBI) but I'm saying that if there is a coverup, these lists would be quickly and easily faked at their source. |
Right, and that logic is very powerful, and very circular. If there is a coverup, and the governmant can fake everything, then they did, and they made no mistakes, and didn't leave a trace. Rational people demand evidence that there is a coverup, before they believe it.
If you approach all the evidence "knowing" there is a coverup, you will find one. If you try to find evidence of a coverup, without "knowing" it ahead of time, you will find none. This is the power of circular logic.
| Quote: | | So, presenting them as evidence that there was not a coverup is still asking to put trust in the alleged conspirators. |
Only to someone who is irrational and practicing circular logic. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster
Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 26, 2006 3:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MiniMauve wrote: | | So, presenting them as evidence that there was not a coverup is still asking to put trust in the alleged conspirators. |
They weren't offered as evidence against a cover-up. They were offered as evidence against the claim that the "alleged" hijackers did not appear on the passenger lists (an assertion based on literally nothing.)
_________________
"They, the jews, also have this thing about linage don't they?
We know a person from recent history who had a thing for linage and gene pools don't we?"
--Patrick Brown |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
