Three second search. Fixed. http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/ten-years-after-the-fbi-since-9-11/by-the-numbers
This link contains the statement "Explosives experts examined plane wreckage and building debris for evidence of bombs." However .... where is the link to the actual report on the testing, its one thing to say that testing was done, its quite another to provide the data of what sort of testing was done and on what samples and when and exactly how did they certify the results of this testing?
its very surprising that in the years since the event, somebody hasn't obtained the info, and posted it on a web-site. however, if it takes processing a FOA request, that is what its going to have to be. I question WHY should it be necessary to specifically ask for this data, when the NIST simply published their white-wash job on the web as soon as it was released. Question for anybody who reads this forum, has anyone already asked for the information from the FBI and if so, is this data published anyplace on the web? One would think that if there was this desire on the part of the people who support the hijacked airliners story to convert the lost ( as in all those "truthers" ) such that they would have ready supply of INFORMATION and links to INFORMATION so that the lost could be enlightened as to the error of their ways, however with the huge gaping holes in the data, and the fact that the "loyal opposition" doesn't have handy the INFORMATION to substantiate claims such as all the aircraft had been accounted for..... ( etc ... ) I personally am quite disappointed. oh well .....
Yeah well, maybe the real stroy is, there are no gaps and only those who can't grasp the obvious are the one with the issues so, what concern is that of the FBI?
First of all, you say there are no gaps, we disagree ...... next you say that its obvious, what? is it supposed to be obvious that is the bit about hijacked airliners being used as weapons? what constitutes "obvious" in your perception? and as for why the FBI should be concerned, maybe, maybe not, the question was raised about testing for explosives at ground zero, and the FBI may have done some testing, however if they did, where is the documentation of that testing?
I have posted the evidence and unless you're being completely dishonest, which I think are now being, you would admit, you have been debunked. Again, ASK THE FVCKING FBI AND STOP USING YOUR LAZINESS AS AN EXCUSE TO BE OBTUSIVE. WHY IS IT, YOU CAN'T DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH???
Note: http://www.bushstole04.com/911/9-11_forensics.htm This is but one of several sites that have posted similar bits, that is: "A computer search of FBI and Justice Department documents and press releases failed to turn up any record of the FBI’s findings concerning tests for explosives at Ground Zero. The FBI and another Justice Department unit, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, routinely do forensic testing of crime scenes where explosives or incendiaries are a possibility." That is, the data is not posted on the FBI web-page, because it doesn't exist. 50,000 quatloos for the person who can prove me wrong about that. ( + bragging rights for the debunkers side ) have a nice day : )
Wait, so a claim posted on a nutter website get your full belief without YOUR verification? I guess we know your level of intellectual honesty....none. Now, fill out the FOI form and ask the FBI for the information you seek. I'm guessing you won't because you're more interested in having your personal incredulity validated than learning the truth. So, until you do that, you can't claim the FBI did not test for explosives because YOU would be lying. Oh, and the site you are linking to, is Alex Jones...you know, the guy that believe Reptilian/Humans control the world. Good luck with that as an "authority".
The ever lingering question remains if the side that is all for dispensing enlightenment to the lost ( that is the truther faction ) had ever checked on the facts of the case so as to have ready proof for the poor lost souls who have taken the wrong path, maybe then you would have less problem in explaining the facts ( or the facts as you see it ). I find it unconscionable that in the years that have passed, NOBODY has compiled a web-site or book of facts that supports the hijacked airliners story ( maybe because the proof simply isn't there ). I stand by my earlier statement that is: 9/11 is the most poorly documented disaster since the invention of photography.
Better to believe some jackoff donning a flight suit (pretending he's a pilot) claiming 'mission accomplished', I guess? Some 'authority' he turned out to be huh?
I would rather amend that to WAS a pilot the fact is that if any given military pilot has been too long without flying anything their status as a "pilot" comes into question at the very least. The shrub had not flown anything except for being a passenger on AirForce 1, who knows the last time he actually flew ( that is being at the controls of the aircraft ) anything at all?
I see. No deception intended there at all, huh? Apologizing for everything and defending anything that fits the 'official' version of events, simply because it does is underhanded, in my opinion. - - - Updated - - - 'Mission accomplished' though. That was the lie.
"Mission accomplished" kinda depends on how you define the mission. Are we at all certain that we understand the agenda of the administration?
