9/11 what do you think?

Novicehomegrower said:

iv sent** atleast 50 mins of proof .

PLUS Doer named himself after a click of govt
http://www.mass.gov/eea/grants-and-tech-assistance/guidance-technical-assistance/agencies-and-divisions/doer/

Click to expand...

Defense Operations Engineering Resources.....close.

To me it is simple. Will one single person that voted for Bush agree to this craziness of SCAC?

Find me a Bush voter, that will Deny 9/11.\

So, 1/2 the country that voted, voted for Bush.
None of those are SCAC.

The other 1/2 of voters don't hate Bush except for a very few and shrill set of Royalists on TV.

Then there are the non-voting idiots of the world. Not much access to reality, just CNN.
And access to theirlocal, shill and hateful, jew blamers.

And of those, there are a very few that learned from the very shrill Rosy and Woppie and the other jew haters to shift from Bush to Jews.

This was a no-thing until the View girls got it.

But, most actual thinking people, the DEMS that run this world, don't deny 9/11, they buy it. They use the secrecy. We see it on TV. They are the Sky Killers.

They, the DEMS agreed we invade the worse place in the world to invade....the Afgans.

The DEMS and their Just War..(wtf??) as opposed to Iraq. In Iraq we did something.
Afgan is the usual bloody mess of 3000 years. Our guys died today there, for nothing....the Just Hate Bush War.

And it really does make you all look like a bunch of sissies.

Doer said:

Defense Operations Engineering Resources.....close.

Click to expand...

see so you work for the govt or just really like them so much you put it as your name

the pieces are going together now to why you deny all this evidence

Novicehomegrower said:

here's another peice of scientific information dis proving the official story
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I56kafEB5Ng

Click to expand...

Science is peer reviewed and then published formally in a Journal. I have read all the peer review used to bolster the Deny. Some is very interesting. The nano-thermite stuff. But, if it was there, it was obviously mfg by the collision of aluminum into steel in the high energy of collision.

echelon1k1 said:

No when he realised he might not make it, he made a 330 degree turn 5miles out, at the end of which the plane dove a couple of thousand feet, at 500mph, then hit the target. I don't believe in coincidences, 1 guy getting lucky fine... But 3 getting lucky...

Click to expand...

Wait so your saying on his first approach /attempt he missed? And from that you extrapolate that he's too good a pilot?

Novicehomegrower said:

see so you work for the govt or just really like them so much you put it as your name

the pieces are going together now to why you deny all this evidence

Click to expand...

it doesn't mean i work for the govt

ginjawarrior said:

Wait so your saying on his first approach /attempt he missed? And from that you extrapolate that he's too good a pilot?

Click to expand...

is that all you've come to add? I've never even inferred the hijackers were good pilots. If flying a commercial airliner was so easy, basically amounting to flicking some dials then pointing and praying, they would've hit it first go and on the straightest trajectory considering they could not have known how long it would've taken fighters to intercept them,... thanks for checking in, uncouth misfit...

Novicehomegrower said:

your just a science denier too so icould care less .

Click to expand...

I work in a scientific field. Try again.

Loose change guy: not a scientist. He is some dude from his moms basement.

While my science is environmental, I'm still more qualified than he. I will not watch your video. There will be nothing new that I haven't seen in the past 12 years.

The questions HAVE been answered. If you don't want to believe them, that's fine. But stop saying they haven't been answered. You're just lying to yourself and everyone else.

echelon1k1 said:

is that all you've come to add? I've never even inferred the hijackers were good pilots. If flying a commercial airliner was so easy, basically amounting to flicking some dials then pointing and praying, they would've hit it first go and on the straightest trajectory considering they could not have known how long it would've taken fighters to intercept them,... thanks for checking in, uncouth misfit...

Click to expand...

• . I don't believe in coincidences, 1 guy getting lucky fine... But 3 getting lucky...
  
  
  
  ​
  
  
  
  

Click to expand...

So they weren't good just lucky? Even if it took one multiple attempts to hit target? And another failed to hit target?

So because 2 hit their targets first time, the other second attempt and last missing by hundreds of miles all adds up to what in your head? And how did you get 3/3 from that?

Well, there is no second approach in the radar track data. No do over.

So, that's just made up, as well.

Doer said:

Well, there is no second approach in the radar track data. No do over.

So, that's just made up, as well.

Click to expand...

Oh I know that.

I'm just trying to find how echelon squares the fake radar (with added misses) to his belief that something doesn't add up WRT pilots skill level

So they didn't make a last minute turn? Cool story bras... Where did I claim fake radar data?

echelon1k1 said:

So they didn't make a last minute turn? Cool story bras... Where did I claim fake radar data?

Click to expand...

Let's not focus on whether your narrative is fake or not.

Let's look at why you think something is wrong with pilot skill level

What exactly are you saying is wrong?

ginjawarrior said:

Let's not focus on whether your narrative is fake or not.

Let's look at why you think something is wrong with pilot skill level

What exactly are you saying is wrong?

Click to expand...

I'll happily let you know why I think is wrong with the skill level of the hijackers once you show me the fake flight path and radar data you claim I stand by? because last time I checked everything I've claimed about flight 77's flight path etc is straight from the NTSB and 9/11 commission report.

echelon1k1 said:

I'll happily let you know why I think is wrong with the skill level of the hijackers once you show me the fake flight path and radar data you claim I stand by? because last time I checked everything I've claimed about flight 77's flight path etc is straight from the NTSB and 9/11 commission report.

Click to expand...

And I haven't questioned you about that data have I?

what is wrong with the skill level of pilots?

ginjawarrior said:

And I haven't questioned you about that data have I?

what is wrong with the skill level of pilots?

Click to expand...

They were shit pilots by all accounts and I personally don't believe they were in control of that aircraft when the auto pilot was disengaged. Way too many former military aviators don't buy into the idea that hanjour was in control either... Im not inferring there was no plane or it was a missile or any other bullshit like that, I simply do not believe hanjour was in control of that plane after 0929 that morning. Can you point me to a commercial airline pilot that claims he could do what hanjour did?

Now where have I falsely claimed "fake radar"?

Doer said:

To me it is simple. Will one single person that voted for Bush agree to this craziness of SCAC?

Find me a Bush voter, that will Deny 9/11.\

Click to expand...

You're onto something here. Of course you left out that Bush voters tend to be feeble minded religious folks. Believers in such nonsense have no place debating scientific matters. Don't worry Christians, I hate every other religion equally. Your soft brains are so easily manipulated into believing the most ridiculous of things. Shit, I forgot where I was going with this (if anywhere)... Probably just trying to bust doer's balls. Oh, I see another who's balls need bustin'!

Antidisestablishmentarian said:

I work in a scientific field. Try again.

Loose change guy: not a scientist. He is some dude from his moms basement.

While my science is environmental, I'm still more qualified than he. I will not watch your video. There will be nothing new that I haven't seen in the past 12 years.

The questions HAVE been answered. If you don't want to believe them, that's fine. But stop saying they haven't been answered. You're just lying to yourself and everyone else.

Click to expand...

The questions HAVE been answered? What kind of nonsense statement is that? If all the questions have been answered, there wouldn't be an ongoing debate between people who aren't afraid to question things, and fools who live in a fucking fantasy. You don't have to validate yourself by stating your line of work, it just makes you sound like a SHITTY environmental scientist, lol.

Mike Young said:

You're onto something here. Of course you left out that Bush voters tend to be feeble minded religious folks. Believers in such nonsense have no place debating scientific matters. Don't worry Christians, I hate every other religion equally. Your soft brains are so easily manipulated into believing the most ridiculous of things. Shit, I forgot where I was going with this (if anywhere)... Probably just trying to bust doer's balls. Oh, I see another who's balls need bustin'!

Click to expand...

That's quite a broad statement. I'm Christian and my brain is no where near soft, jackass.

chronictre said:

That's quite a broad statement. I'm Christian and my brain is no where near soft, jackass.

Click to expand...

I'm speechless.