Ye Olde Republican Safe House

PreachersWife2004 said:

translation: I can't really explain the conspiracy but it sounds neat.

Your posts make you sound as brainwashed as you claim everyone else to be. You almost parrot the numerous conspiracy sites out there.

Thankfully, I have better things to do. 9/11 was horrible and it will forever be seared into my memory. I lost friends and loved ones that day.

Click to expand...

Never said I couldn't explain it but once again it is demonstrated there is no ability to discuss the facts without personal insults. I also didn't claim others are "brainwashed" but why stop at childish insults? False accusations add more spice! And you're an Admin? That's embarrassing.


You make derogatory comments about truthers and as soon as your position gets challenged you suddenly have "better things to do." Thankfully there are people who lost loved ones on 9/11 that know what it means to respect their loss. They would certainly never sink to the level of exploiting their deaths to score points in a discussion nor try to guilt trip others into silence.

Eta: you claimed people did it for loony religious reason but when asked if you could provide a quote from just one of 19 hijackers you respond with nothing. Isn't that kind of strange? Since the terrorists had been planning it for a long time and were going to carry out the largest terrorist attack on the US you'd think they would leave letters or video or something to brag about why they did it. But there is absolutely nothing. There is no factual evidence on why it happened.

Mobiosity said:

< staff edit > < staff edit > < staff edit >

Click to expand...

So far I'm the only one posting facts. What screams volumes of double standards is you say the Report is wrong about the official speed of 77 being 530 mph. If a truther said the info was wrong there would be no shortage of posts jumping on that person but you can say it is wrong, without a shred of evidence and........silence.

For those who can't discuss the facts and can't handle having their claims being proven wrong then the ignore feature is a valuable asset.

rosenherman said:

<staff edit > < staff edit > < staff edit > .

Click to expand...

< staff edit > < staff edit > < staff edit >

Like I said, nobody cares mobi is claiming the Report is wrong with absolutely nothing to back it up. The main problem is explanation of the destruction. The Report says it was going 530 mph to help explain how a passenger jet could go through three Pentagon rings and the only side of the Pentagon that had just completed reconstruction including steel reinforced concrete. If you reduce that speed to say.....300 mph it contradicts the evidence of the destruction. So in a nutshell, it had to be going slow enough so wind shear would not tear up the lawn and blow cars over but at the same time it had to be going fast enough to justify the destruction. It's a contradiction. But hey, I'm guessing not many here are interesting in dialogue regarding facts and thinking. The responses (as many have so far) will prove me correct.

RealDealNeverstop said:

If you'd bother looking around you'd know anyone who has claimed to see faces of passengers on 77 has been laughed off out of sheer common sense.

Like I said, nobody cares mobi is claiming the Report is wrong with absolutely nothing to back it up. The main problem is explanation of the destruction. The Report says it was going 530 mph to help explain how a passenger jet could go through three Pentagon rings and the only side of the Pentagon that had just completed reconstruction including steel reinforced concrete. If you reduce that speed to say.....300 mph it contradicts the evidence of the destruction. So in a nutshell, it had to be going slow enough so wind shear would not tear up the lawn and blow cars over but at the same time it had to be going fast enough to justify the destruction. It's a contradiction. But hey, I'm guessing not many here are interesting in dialogue regarding facts and thinking. The responses (as many have so far) will prove me correct.

Click to expand...

I thought this was pretty funny. I work at an airport and watch commercial planes land every day. I imagine they are traveling well under 200 miles an hour, and I still can't see people in the windows. Sure, I can see the windows....just not the people.

JustOneWay said:

I thought this was pretty funny. I work at an airport and watch commercial planes land every day. I imagine they are traveling well under 200 miles an hour, and I still can't see people in the windows. Sure, I can see the windows....just not the people.

Click to expand...

It also contradicts the Commission Report because it says all the people including flight staff were herded to the back of the plane. It's amazing how much one can claim the Report is false with no evidence so long as the official version is cheered.

I've looked around and there isn't a single witness taken seriously when claimed they saw faces of flight 77 passengers.

RealDealNeverstop said:

I've looked around and there isn't a single witness taken seriously when claimed they saw faces of flight 77 passengers.

Click to expand...

Often times people see what they want to see or think they see something that they did not see. In this case, claiming to see faces in a plane which is traveling well over 500 miles in a descent angle is far-fetched.....to the point of absurd. Then again, some see pictures of Jesus in their breakfast foods, so who are we to say they did not see what they say they saw?

JustOneWay said:

Often times people see what they want to see or think they see something that they did not see. In this case, claiming to see faces in a plane which is traveling well over 500 miles in a descent angle is far-fetched.....to the point of absurd. Then again, some see pictures of Jesus in their breakfast foods, so who are we to say they did not see what they say they saw?

Click to expand...

Good point. Just last night I saw Angelie Jolie and Mariska Hargitay walk into my bedroom. Really they did!

I am grateful to many 9/11 families for being the backbone to the Truth movement and am awed by their relentess dedication to honoring their loved ones by demanding accountability and turning down millions of dollars in the process.

RealDealNeverstop said:

Good point. Just last night I saw Angelie Jolie and Mariska Hargitay walk into my bedroom. Really they did!

Click to expand...

lol You are confusing subliminal persuasion (seeing windows and expecting to see people) with fantasy!

RealDealNeverstop said:

I am grateful to many 9/11 families for being the backbone to the Truth movement and am awed by their relentess dedication to honoring their loved ones by demanding accountability and turning down millions of dollars in the process.

Click to expand...

Amen brother!

RealDealNeverstop said:

So far I'm the only one posting facts. What screams volumes of double standards is you say the Report is wrong about the official speed of 77 being 530 mph. If a truther said the info was wrong there would be no shortage of posts jumping on that person but you can say it is wrong, without a shred of evidence and........silence.

For those who can't discuss the facts and can't handle having their claims being proven wrong then the ignore feature is a valuable asset.

Click to expand...

You're not posting facts, you're parroting many conspiracy theorists.

I was just watching a History Channel show on the 9/11 conspiracies and the more I heard the people talking, the more I realized that they sounded just like you. So...which movement do you head?

And what is your excuse as to why Popular Mechanics has debunked every single conspiracy claim? Are they too under some spell of magic mystery?

It's like one of the professors said on the show...for some reason people can't take simple as a reason. They have to inflate everything in order for it to make sense. The same people who couldn't accept that one person killed Kennedy, couldn't accept Pearl Harbor...those are the same people who can't accept that 19 terrorists worked together to bring down four planes on US soil.

You do the survivors a disservice by making this some ploy by the government. The administration needed no excuse to go to war. We were already at war.

PreachersWife2004 said:

You're not posting facts, you're parroting many conspiracy theorists.

I was just watching a History Channel show on the 9/11 conspiracies and the more I heard the people talking, the more I realized that they sounded just like you. So...which movement do you head?

And what is your excuse as to why Popular Mechanics has debunked every single conspiracy claim? Are they too under some spell of magic mystery?

It's like one of the professors said on the show...for some reason people can't take simple as a reason. They have to inflate everything in order for it to make sense. The same people who couldn't accept that one person killed Kennedy, couldn't accept Pearl Harbor...those are the same people who can't accept that 19 terrorists worked together to bring down four planes on US soil.

You do the survivors a disservice by making this some ploy by the government. The administration needed no excuse to go to war. We were already at war.

Click to expand...

Oh boy. Is it at all possible to be honest? The only thing I've linked so far is the 9E Commission Report stating 77 was going 530 mph when it hit the Pentagon. But you want to claim I've not posted "any facts?" The jump from inflammatory pics to dishonesty is still jogging in the same circle.

If you watched the same HC piece I did it basically had a young executive from PM taking pot shots at anyone who simply questioned the official version. It looked at the looniest freaking theories out there, presented the weakest evidence, ignored the omissions from the Commission's Report, and failed to address even the most obvious of problems. PM has not done nearly the amount of neat work you claim but hey, it's quite clear the agenda here is to ignore the facts being posted and trying to paint anyone who disagrees as a whack job.

Do you have any clue at all as to how many career military people, scientists, engineers, architects and pilots all point out obvious problems with the offical version? Do you realize the Truth movement is based and moved by 9/11 families, survivors and first responders?

I have no idea what happened that day so for you to falsely accuse me of claiming it is some "government ploy" is just one more example of dishonesty.

If the subject renders people emotionally crippled and incapable of simple dialogue then I suggest avoiding it altogether. If anyone wants to call truthers "whackjobs" "weirdos" or "loons" of any sort here is a suggestion. Email some of the 9/11 families who are demanding a new investigation and tell them they are dishonoring victims by demanding accountability. I will even make it very easy and post the necessary link. Please let us know how that email exchange goes. (I doubt anyone here has the courage to do it)


"We, the undersigned Families, First Responders and Survivors of September 11 raise our voice with those from across our country and around the world in support of NYC CAN and the establishment of an independent, impartial subpoena powered investigation into the events surrounding the September 11 attacks on our nation.

We believe a new investigation is our only path forward to
the answers and accountability every American deserves
and our only path back to the moral high ground upon which our great nation was built."
NYC Coalition For Accountability Now

(Wow. How bad does it sting to have the "9/11 family" card backfire?)

PreachersWife2004 said:

You're not posting facts, you're parroting many conspiracy theorists.

I was just watching a History Channel show on the 9/11 conspiracies and the more I heard the people talking, the more I realized that they sounded just like you. So...which movement do you head?

And what is your excuse as to why Popular Mechanics has debunked every single conspiracy claim? Are they too under some spell of magic mystery?

It's like one of the professors said on the show...for some reason people can't take simple as a reason. They have to inflate everything in order for it to make sense. The same people who couldn't accept that one person killed Kennedy, couldn't accept Pearl Harbor...those are the same people who can't accept that 19 terrorists worked together to bring down four planes on US soil.

You do the survivors a disservice by making this some ploy by the government. The administration needed no excuse to go to war. We were already at war.

Click to expand...

My dad is a civil structual engineer and he explained it very simply. The fuel in the plane heated the steal hot enough to melt. Due to the weight of the building it collapsed. After seeing the documentary on the building today and how even then they cut corners, I am sure my dad who has been an engineer/designer for 40 years knows more than RDNS.

KarrieTex said:

My dad is a civil structual engineer and he explained it very simply. The fuel in the plane heated the steal hot enough to melt. Due to the weight of the building it collapsed. After seeing the documentary on the building today and how even then they cut corners, I am sure my dad who has been an engineer/designer for 40 years knows more than RDNS.

Click to expand...

Nobody was talking about the Towers. The discussion has been centered around flight 77 but if you want to discuss the towers this is probably not the best foot forward. I worked directly with jet fuel for a few years so I know from first hand experience how quickly it burns. You know the big explosion upon impact? That was most of the jet fuel being consumed and it burns very fast. It burns way way way to fast to claim it existed long enough to heat the structural elements beyond load bearing capacity so your dad is passing around old fabled campfire stories on the same level of Bigfoot.

I'm not asking anyone to take my word for it. This is verifiable through any number of sources.

RealDealNeverstop said:

I wish you had the honesty to back your claims up with evidence.

Click to expand...

Tell me again why you post here...I know we've had this discussion before, but you spend the majority of your time fighting in here. At any rate, this will be my last post to you because I don't wish to argue about this.

I've been through the conspiracy theories and everything about 9/11 before, not here at CF, nor do I have the patience to do it again and again and again. As I said, I lost friends and family that day. None of the survivors that I know wish to open some new investigation. They know the truth, they believe who was behind it. Some people need controversy and negativity in their lives in order for them to feel useful. I honestly put any "Truther" in that category. They think that it just HAS to be a conspiracy because the events and the way they unfolded don't fit into their little mold of how life should go. Too bad. Not everything goes the way people think it should. The twin towers were never supposed to get hit with two large planes. The pentagon wasn't supposed to be hit by a plane. I wasn't supposed to lose two cousins, two friends and five co-workers on 9/11.

But I did, and I accept that.

PreachersWife2004 said:

Tell me again why you post here...I know we've had this discussion before, but you spend the majority of your time fighting in here. At any rate, this will be my last post to you because I don't wish to argue about this.

I've been through the conspiracy theories and everything about 9/11 before, not here at CF, nor do I have the patience to do it again and again and again. As I said, I lost friends and family that day. None of the survivors that I know wish to open some new investigation. They know the truth, they believe who was behind it. Some people need controversy and negativity in their lives in order for them to feel useful. I honestly put any "Truther" in that category. They think that it just HAS to be a conspiracy because the events and the way they unfolded don't fit into their little mold of how life should go. Too bad. Not everything goes the way people think it should. The twin towers were never supposed to get hit with two large planes. The pentagon wasn't supposed to be hit by a plane. I wasn't supposed to lose two cousins, two friends and five co-workers on 9/11.

But I did, and I accept that.

Click to expand...

Tell you why I post? Is that some sort of Rule I've overlooked or is this an unreasonable request due to frustration of not being able to discuss an issue with basic respect?

It is absurd for people to take potshots at anyone who questions the official version then pulls out the "I lost loved ones!" card. If the loss was so great why open the wound by slinging ad homs onto others who hold a different view?
I linked a site representing over 100 families demanding a new investigation and the response is to say you personally don't know any survivors who want one. What exactly is that supposed to mean? Or is this another cheap ploy? People have the right to live in the idea they know exactly what happened just like other people have the right to look at facts and question what happened. Frankly, it is always morbid and obscene when anyone uses the "I lost loved ones!" card to try and silence others and it is most disrespectful to those who died by trying to exploit their deaths in place of dialogue. I would think people who lost loved ones would be respectful enough of their passing to not use them like carnival tricks to try and justify slamming Truthers.

Like many 9/11 families have said, the best way to honor those who were murdered is to have full accountability and transparency about what happened that day. How sad is it not all survivors hold the same view? Many people who didn't personally lose any loved ones seem to care more about finding out all the facts than some who lost loved ones. I wonder why that is?

RealDealNeverstop said:

Tell you why I post? Is that some sort of Rule I've overlooked or is this an unreasonable request due to frustration of not being able to discuss an issue with basic respect?

It is absurd for people to take potshots at anyone who questions the official version then pulls out the "I lost loved ones!" card. If the loss was so great why open the wound by slinging ad homs onto others who hold a different view?
I linked a site representing over 100 families demanding a new investigation and the response is to say you personally don't know any survivors who want one. What exactly is that supposed to mean? Or is this another cheap ploy? People have the right to live in the idea they know exactly what happened just like other people have the right to look at facts and question what happened. Frankly, it is always morbid and obscene when anyone uses the "I lost loved ones!" card to try and silence others and it is most disrespectful to those who died by trying to exploit their deaths in place of dialogue. I would think people who lost loved ones would be respectful enough of their passing to not use them like carnival tricks to try and justify slamming Truthers.

Like many 9/11 families have said, the best way to honor those who were murdered is to have full accountability and transparency about what happened that day. How sad is it not all survivors hold the same view? Many people who didn't personally lose any loved ones seem to care more about finding out all the facts than some who lost loved ones. I wonder why that is?

Click to expand...

Because they know their loved ones died in a horrible attack by Islamists.

Why are you claiming the reports are lies and then bringing them up as proof? They're either right or they aren't. You can't have it both ways.

rosenherman said:

Because they know their loved ones died in a horrible attack by Islamists.

Why are you claiming the reports are lies and then bringing them up as proof? They're either right or they aren't. You can't have it both ways.

Click to expand...

Show the post where I said the 9E Report is a lie? I'm not the one that has said that. The report itself is a cherry picked hack job and the problem is it leaves out a lot of information. The only one here implying the Report is a lie is Mobi by saying 77 wasn't going 530 mph. The Report is definitely incomplete as it omits information it could not fit in with the Official version. It claims to be a "full account" of the events surrounding 9/11 yet there isn't anything on WTC 7. It also blatantly omitted Mineta's testimony stating he heard Cheney giving military orders.

The Report also helps show why the official version is highly questionable. For instance, there is not a single factual record of a phone call originating from flight 77 but the Report states Barb Olson spoke with her husband Ted based on the FBI interviewing Ted. How is it the FBI could not document calls coming in to the State Department? It also shows that when 77 disappeared from radar it was never actually confirmed to come back on radar. It also claims Hani Hanjour was the pilot but by golly, when the first manifest of 77 was released Hani Hanjour's name was not on it. Then boom! Two days later his name appears. This is the guy who couldn't even rent a single engine cessna due to an inability to fly but he controlled a 757 at over 500 mph to hit the first floor of the Pentagon? He also paid a speeding ticket 3 weeks before 9E. Kinda strange no? Do you know what some instructors had to say when his name was made public? (These are the flight instructors who personally tried to train him). They said they couldn't believe it was him because "he could not fly at all."

One of the weirdest coincidences about flight 77 is the exact match it played out with Operation Northwoods. In that plan our top military leaders wondered how they could help convince Americans that a falsified hijacking by Cuban terrorists could be aided in convincing people it was real. They had already solved the problem of getting a plane painted to look like a civilian passenger jet but they wanted to take it one step further so their idea was to have an unsuspecting military pilot be diverted from his original flight plan to do a visual confirmation. On 9/11 a military pilot was diverted from his original flight plan to do a visual check on flight 77 headed towards the Pentagon. That is one whopper of a coincidence. Again, I bore with facts.

All four attack areas had gone through terrorist attack training exercises. The Towers are obvious but the other two places cause a problem for the Official Version. On June 16, 2001 there was a simulated terrorist attack in Pennsylvania in the county bordering where flight 93 went down. What was in the area to justify such an exercise? There are a lot of other more viable targets yet, this one just happened to be the grave marker for 93 a mere three months prior.

The other exercise was less than a year before 9/11 where the Pentagon simulated a terrorist attack via a hijacked plane being flown into the Pentagon. Anyone else remember Rice saying "nobody could have imagined" terrorists turning passenger jets into missiles? Rumsfeld also initially denied knowledge of the exercise. Then we can look at the amazing coincidence of war games occurring during the attacks. This was a combination of real world and simulation and it included a passenger jet being hijacked. As one 9/11 widow has said, how many coincidences does it take?

Let's see...

Loose Change, Investigate 9/11, InfoWars, etc...all their claims have been systematically debunked and proven wrong.

9/11 Conspiracy Theories - Debunking the Myths - World Trade Center - Pentagon - Flight 93 - Popular Mechanics


Factual evidence will win over unhealthy skepticism and absurd & outlandish claims any day...It is obvious that what lies beneath these conspiracy theories (and this is for any conspiracy theory for that matter) is a hate for the current administration and a will to destroy that administration.

DieHappy said:

Wow, we almost doubled the thread in 2 days and got realdeal out of hiding!

Fun times.

Click to expand...

I've noticed that really the only time the 9/11 conspiracy guys come out these days is the anniversary dates.

PreachersWife2004 said:

Let's see...

Loose Change, Investigate 9/11, InfoWars, etc...all their claims have been systematically debunked and proven wrong.

9/11 Conspiracy Theories - Debunking the Myths - World Trade Center - Pentagon - Flight 93 - Popular Mechanics


Factual evidence will win over unhealthy skepticism and absurd & outlandish claims any day...It is obvious that what lies beneath these conspiracy theories (and this is for any conspiracy theory for that matter) is a hate for the current administration and a will to destroy that administration.

Click to expand...

Loose Change? Lol! That's a joke of a site like infowars so bragging about debunking ignorant sites like that is on par with Michael Jordan bragging about dunking on a five year old. The lead researcher for PM is now a freelance photojournalist. Can anyone even begin to explain why he was brought in to PM in 9/04 specifically to write the 9/11 hit piece? I could join in the hapless useless parade of linking sites but I won't because I don't need to and because it is a waste of time.

Here's a question I've yet anyone see give an answer:

Why did the government withhold hundreds of testimonies from firefighters and other first responders who stated they witnessed multiple explosions in the towers long after the planes hit? The government fought hard to keep these a secret for years so why did they do it?