No, like questioning how box cutters hijacked planes is assumed with no analysis. Or like questions the supposed theory that 19 flight school flunkies flew around the country in 747s and hit their mark perfectly...
Apologies, I didn't note the sneaky edit. See page one where I outlined the criteria for debate. Put your argument together, pick the author whose source you want to use, and do your part. Sitting around demanding answers to questions is lazy and not a debate. Put forth your argument, based on the video you introduced in this thread and I will counter it. Of course, that would require effort.
I'm glad you admit the molten steel is debunked. Put your argument together, pick the author's source you wish to rely upon, provide your sources, and I'll counter your assertion. Make sure it's part of the video. See my last comment. Stop being lazy and do your part.
You've debunked nothing. I listed the credible witnesses and the reason no analysis can be done (it's called a cover up genious). Flip it around.. why don't you present one of your little facts that you think proves 19 flight school flunkies hijacked planes with box cutters... and I'll counter it using your same technique
GTech, Nice to see some sense added to the debate yo-yo, Why can't you give me a reliable proof that confirms that the hitted section was empty?
Since you are the one that told me that the hitted section in pentagon was hitted, it's your answer to find such proof. Well you got another alternative; Stop your BS anti-Bush propaganda!
That's 26,000 people in the building. Thats 125 dead from an entire section of the building exploding and collapsing. That's .5% of the people in the building died. Getting a hint yet? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pentagon#September_11.2C_2001
It does require effort, and to be honest with you I run a business that requires my full attention all day long, so therefore can not follow all the threads fulltime. But to make it short and sweet I will list you my core belief and you may have your take at it, hope its fair enough without arguing: Why did 9/11 happen? I believe it was created with the intent of instilling fear in the american public to be used later as a "carte blanche" by our government to justify anything and everything. The Iraqi war had been in preparation 5 years prior to 9/11 by Paul Wolfowitz chief architect of the war. The only missing part for a pre-emtive war was an excuse to go to war. If there is no execuse you just create one. Its like, like in high school, there's always a bully that wants to fight you simply because he does not like you, even though he has no reason to fight you he will make one just so he can fight you anyways. Same happens in this situation, they (the Bush base) knew they wanted to go to war with Iraq, but they lacked reason to justify going to war, hence the WMDs, it is not uncommon for governments to apply these techniques, look 60 years back to Germany and the rise in power of Hitler. So, I believe that all was staged to create the pretext for going to war. Remember when the rest of the world was saying to us hold your horses, send indepent monitors to look for WMDs before you start a freaking war, but Mr. Bush was in a hurry he had to strike the iron while it was hot (while people are still shocked and angry about 9/11 and need someone to blame), so he just struck and we are where we are today, I dont need to go in every little detail: 1. Bush, Cheney their associates and associated/related business are richer then ever 2. The US government has more powers over us citizens than ever before. 3. There is more stress in the American everyday way of life than ever 4. We are all left to pay a growing deficit due to the war (about $30,000 per person in the US and growing) thanks to GW 5. There is more division between americans to day than during the civil war In my book, if there were ever real terrorists that wanted us bad they have succeded as they have used our own president to divide its own people. Bush knowingly or uknowingly has created a deep division in this country (and the world for that matter) as a result of his actions. Damien: Omen II - watch it. There is so much more, but I am not about to write a whole book on the matter, there is plenty of people doing that already.
Perhaps the reason you failed to prove molten steel, let alone any molten metal existed, is because you refer to people as genious instead of "genius." While I normally don't care about typos or misspellings, the least you could do when referring to me as a "genius" is use your sixth grade education from Jethro Bodine Junior High School. Or is that what you were doing? I don't have "little facts" nor do I sit around on websites with "prison" and "happened" in the url looking for stupid clues to rush out and prove to the world how rediculous I am. You assert it's a cover up, provide your argument as I noted in my challenge. Surely the three of you are not afraid of lil' ol' GTech
HAHA, I don't believe you, yo-joke You said that the hitted section was empty, still 125 people in the empty section died. Ok I won, start a new thread or something
It seems most of your commentary is based on personal feelings regarding the Iraq war. Opinions are opinions. We all have them. They become more than an opinion when we can back them up with factual evidence to support a position. I'd prefer to stick to the debate of the video. I could certainly counter your objections to the Iraq war. I chose to take the three of you up on a debate over four topics from the video. I've made the challenge blindly, as I'm giving the three of you control over what from the video you wish to debate as well as which author's commentary you wish to use to debate. That puts me in the position of taking *anything* you throw at me from the video. If facts do not influence your beliefs or opinions, then nothing I counter will change that. But I'm still prepared to counter any of your (the three of you) arguments from what I outlined when I made the challenge. If you change your mind, please pick a topic from the video of this post you started to assert why you believe 9/11 was an inside job (or whatever your contention is). Present your argument, present the sources you wish to cite as evidence to support your position. I'm not opposed to taking on the Iraq war down the road.
Let me know if you change your mind. You seemed so eager to accept my challenge at first. Of course, you started off with the usual lazy way by asking me to explain something with science, but after clarification, you did give it a failed attempt. I'm guessing that's why you are chosing not to take anything else from the video. Not willing to question those *facts* eh?
The video makes plenty of points that I agree with: 1. Pentagon. Where in the world are the remains of a whole freaking 737? Why can't we watch the video of the plane hitting the pentagon? If it was a plane that hit it than it should be a clear case of a plane hitting the pentagon recorded live on tape for all of us to see and believe, that will eliminate all dobt and all arguments between all of us. 2. It's not possible for 2 towers to fall in an unatural way like they did that quickly; I use common sense on that one. 3. Why are eyewitnesses saying that they kept hearing explosions? 4. Why didn't Bush want and independent 911 commission to investigate 9/11 and the WMDs? Maybe he had something to hide. The truth will surface one day, but by than Bush and his crooked friends will have had a full rich life, while millions of Americans cry everytime they pump overpriced gas to their oversized cars.
Whats the point? Without george bush's own confession you wouldn't consider it good enough. I challenge you to provide any facts that prove 19 men hijacked planes and carried out 9/11 without the help of our government.. in fact you aren't limited to any videos.. you can use *anything* you want on the entire internet if it's a proven fact. I'm guessing you'll be too lazy to defend your position (very hypocritical as usual)...
Please see page one where I offered my challenge. Asking question after question after question is lazy and not a debate. Pick a topic from the video you posted that you believe supports your position. Explain that position and provide whatever support you wish to validate your belief. I will counter it. All I'm asking for is the opportunity to debate an assertion and that you do your part. Be fair with me and I will be fair with you. The expecation that I will sit around and answer question after question after question after question is not fair, nor is it debate. I will not. I will debate any of you on anything from the video as long as you do your part. For reference, see yo-yo's format when he initially took the challenge. That was fair. He did an excellent job of communicating the argument along with sources for his argument.
So after the first debate, you no longer accept my terms? Surely there must be *something* truthful in the video that you could stand behind? I don't understand the fear of standing behind your beliefs. You seem anxious to rush out and convince the world that 9/11 was a cover up, but shy away from a debate when it requires some effort, such as backing up your claims. Perhaps you are not as willing to "question" things as you like to lead others to believe.