Have a 9/11 related question, but it is minor in importance and not really worth a thread? Well, this is the thread to ask it in! Question: When browsing the Internet, does one ever stumble upon articles that are behind pay walls, like High Beam Research, for example? Furthermore, what are some of the best articles that you have found behind that wall (if you've been behind it, that is)?
Question: Why doesn't anyone talk about the money exchange between the former head of the ISI and Mohamed Atta? Or, for that matter, that same ISI director dining with American politicians on the morning of 9/11.
I was reading this: http://www.911myths.com/html/israeli_art_student_spies.html And I thought of a Question: Do you think Israel sends assets over here to protect American Jews? Furthermore, which brings me to a follow-up Question: Would you think that there are things inside the US that Israel would use assets to ascertain clandestinely?
I think that's a broad question that can be answered any number of ways. Are we referring to bodyguards, military installments, etc? Can you clarify the question please? Once again, I am not sure that I understand the question. Despite what anyone thinks about our friendship with Israel, and despite what Holston posts, they can't just come in here and take what they want. America isn't a playground for them. They do have to follow the same laws as all the other Americans. If they get in trouble with the cops they can't pull out an Israeli ID, then both the cop and him laugh it off, and walk away.
Better believe they do.They work hand in hand together with the CIA.oh and you wont find any truth there at those DEB WUNKER links put out by operatives of the government. btw,did you get my pm I sent you? I never heard back from you on it and that question i asked you in it.
Question: Why are there disparities between Google News and the New York Times search engines on the search queries 'bin Laden' and 'bin Ladin'? I'm finding many NYTimes articles on Google News searches that are not popping up when searched for under the NYTimes search engine. Furthermore, the articles that I find perform weirdly when opened. They load all of the text and then the page suddenly goes to their 'this page cannot be found' page.
Question: What kind of surveillance did the N.S.A. have on the hijackers? During a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing a few days ago, N.S.A. Director and U.S. Cyber Command Chief General Alexander said, 'We had intercepts on Mihdhar.' http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=120284 http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1306/12/cnr.11.html http://www.nypost.com/p/news/international/dozens_of_attacks_thwarted_nXJ10NuP1kMd1RrIT1IU8J
Question: Why is approximately only 35% of the 9/11 Commission's textual records publicly available after the deadline imposed by the Commissioners themselves? http://www.archives.gov/research/9-11/
Question: Why are there so many classified sections on the F.B.I. timelines of hijacker activity? http://vault.fbi.gov/9-11 Commission Report/9-11-chronology-part-01-of-02/view http://vault.fbi.gov/9-11 Commission Report/9-11-chronology-part-02-of-02/view
Question: Why is it Debunkers insist on believing fact and evidence? Why do they not just read unsourced, unconfirmed "reports" that come from "whistleblowers" and believe them as the actual fact of what happened? Why don't debunkers just accept things at face value? Why do debunkers always demand that things have evidence to support them? That's all your questions are Jango. You trying to make things sound scary, and then refusing to believe the answers that are backed up by the evidence. Quit asking questions that you refuse to accept the answers too, it's pointless.
So what explanation(s) from that list do you think covers the classifications we see on the activity list?
Lol. No. I'd search for 'bin Laden' and 'bin Ladin' under the NYTimes sorted by date. It would give me a set of results. I'd then search for 'bin Laden' and 'bin Ladin' under Google News with the date before 9/11/01, and it would give me a set of results that included NYTimes articles NOT included in the NYTimes search. And as I said, the articles I found with Google News acted weird. They load all of the text and then the page suddenly goes to their 'this page cannot be found' page.
1. Because that is the right thing to do. However, a realistic person realizes that not everything under the sun is supported by a NYTimes article, a peer-reviewed journal or has a government stamp of approval on it. 2. What's wrong with whistleblowers? Is it because you're not hearing it from a government spokesmen or official's mouth that makes a whistleblower "bad" or "less than credible"? 3. Lol. So you're saying you accept nothing from anyone at face value, including your parents, wife and family members? Must be interesting when they say something to you and you say, "Do you have evidence to back that up?" To which they would be entitled to say, "What, you don't trust me?" Speaking of trust, why is it that you trust the NIST report and the 9/11 Commission report? How much access do you have to their materials to verify what they're saying is true, or, do you just take what they're saying at face value, thus, defeating your little spiel here on this "point"? 4. Because that is the right thing to do. However, a realistic person realizes that not everything under the sun is supported by a NYTimes article, a peer-reviewed journal or has a government stamp of approval on it.
As a matter of fact, yes, some of us do. You can download all the NARA data from 911datasets.org, along with all the radar/atc/USNORTHCOM data bundled into it. It's about 300GB worth.
And that proves there were planes. That's fine and dandy. I saw one of them on television. There were planes, I know that. But what about the other footnotes, or lack thereof? What's your going thesis on that?
Uhm, can you please link me to or provide a quote where I said that? However, a realistic person doesn't take information from known anti-semite, or known truther websites and expects them to be fact. I do the same exact thing with NY times or any other information I come across. I research it to find out if it's factual, and if it is backed by evidence that can be confirmed. When that is confirmed I then utilize that article when making points. Nothing is wrong with whistleblowers, if what they are saying is true. However, a lot of whistleblowers are out to line their own pockets. Just like with your newspaper articles, they have to be confirmed. You can't just take them at face value because they say that they have the inside goods. Prove it, or shut the (*)(*)(*)(*) up. It's that easy. Why do you guys always have to build these dumb ass strawmen? I mean seriously. However, I actually just did debate my mother because she told me that since she's a nurse, she has to report certain things. I thought it was bull(*)(*)(*)(*). I looked into it, did some research, contacted a few attorneys to find out the facts or the where I could find the word of the law, and found out that she was wrong. I then let her know that. On the flip, if my dad says, "Built two new garages today, they were 2 stall, took quite awhile." I'm not going to ask him for pictures of the garages, or his pay stubs to prove it took awhile. I don't care. More than once I've told my kids to back up what they say, and they've replied with just that. My kids will lie, as all kids do. No I didn't take that cookie, my sister did it, I wasn't playing video games past 10, etc. They know that if they make a claim, they have to back it up or I will look into it and call them on it. It's called (*)(*)(*)(*)ing parenting Jango. It doesn't surprise me you don't know anything about it. First off, I've never said I trust the commission report. I've told you time and again that this is putting words in my mouth. I also have told a thousand (*)(*)(*)(*)ing times that I know people covered their asses on 9/11, some of them even lied. I just don't believe that those lies caused 9/11, or that those lies means the government was behind 9/11. They just wanted to keep their jobs, like every person would do if they were at risk of losing their jobs. Make themselves look good, pass blame, and try to come out clean. The NIST report, however, I feel is the most factual description of why those towers collapsed starting from the plane impacts up to global collapse. There is no documentation contrary, and it has been supported by schools like MIT, and Purdue. See cjnewsons post. Everything is downloadable, however, you wouldn't know what the (*)(*)(*)(*) to do with any of the information once you had it. You have no way of using that information to understand 9/11, you're a laymen. I'm a laymen, but I do research as much as possible so that I understand what happened. I ask professionals with relevant degrees in the areas I am looking into. I contact local college professors (I live in a city with one of the better engineering schools in the U.S.), and have them help me understand it. I did (*)(*)(*)(*)ing research Jango. Research. See above, just more non sense.
A lot of them are included. You think those files just contain audio and videos? They contain about 2,000 pdf files, a bunch of text documents, different boxes from all the investigation teams, where do you think I got my copies of the secrete service logs or the flight plan data? Another place you can go is here; http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecution.html
