• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

911: Planes Hijacked? Crashed into buildings? So where is the evidence?

Your claim that the Moussaoui trial was the "official story having its day in court" is bogus Maus, and we both know it.

The prosecutors introduced fabricated evidence, and the only issue at question was Moussaoui's presumed involvement. It WAS NOT any sort of trial of the official story.

They did not talk about the 911 Report, did not talk about the NIST Fiction, did not talk about any of the major parts of the official story.

One big heaping helping of hand-waving going on.......

A whole lot of claims... Zero support for said claims.

Lets take one CLAIM... The prosecutors introduced fabricated evidence? SHOW ME.
 
One big heaping helping of hand-waving going on.......

A whole lot of claims... Zero support for said claims.

Lets take one CLAIM... The prosecutors introduced fabricated evidence? SHOW ME.

There was no Flight 93 at Shanksville. There is no picture of it there, and all witness testimony said it wasn't there. It cannot be proved that it was there. ACARS shows it was still airborne in Illinois somewhere 30 minutes after the supposed crash.

Yet the prosecutors show the jury pictures of Boeing parts with United paint scheme, claiming it belonged to 93 when it did not. That is fraud and perjury, but the emotions ran high and even the judge was caught up in the emotion.

What's funny all these years later is that one piece of the fuselage section presented as belonging to 93 has the wrong dimensions to be from a 757. More likely from a 727, but the jurors were too overcome with emotion to have asked any questions at all.
 
There was no Flight 93 at Shanksville.
False
There is no picture of it there,
There are pics of the wreckage
and all witness testimony said it wasn't there.
Outright lie.
It cannot be proved that it was there.
Lie.
ACARS shows it was still airborne in Illinois somewhere 30 minutes after the supposed crash.
Another false claim
Yet the prosecutors show the jury pictures of Boeing parts with United paint scheme, claiming it belonged to 93 when it did not.
Got proof of this claim? Didnt think so.
That is fraud and perjury, but the emotions ran high and even the judge was caught up in the emotion.
How is it fraud? As to perjury the only ones lying are the truthers making stupid false claims.

What's funny all these years later is that one piece of the fuselage section presented as belonging to 93 has the wrong dimensions to be from a 757. More likely from a 727, but the jurors were too overcome with emotion to have asked any questions at all.

Thats a new claim fom you got any proof? Didnt think so.
 
There was no Flight 93 at Shanksville. There is no picture of it there, and all witness testimony said it wasn't there. It cannot be proved that it was there. ACARS shows it was still airborne in Illinois somewhere 30 minutes after the supposed crash.

Yet the prosecutors show the jury pictures of Boeing parts with United paint scheme, claiming it belonged to 93 when it did not. That is fraud and perjury, but the emotions ran high and even the judge was caught up in the emotion.

What's funny all these years later is that one piece of the fuselage section presented as belonging to 93 has the wrong dimensions to be from a 757. More likely from a 727, but the jurors were too overcome with emotion to have asked any questions at all.

What are you talking about?

the above is clearly nonsense.
 
Bman,

He feigned ignorance as to the trial in question.

A trial I linked to.

And I understand the proceedings.... Do you?
The question was not to me... If you want to ask me the same you would say "(my answer), how about you?"
 
What are you talking about?

the above is clearly nonsense.

If you think it's nonsense Maus, show me your proof that 93 crashed at Shanksville. Show me what makes it clear in your military mind that 93 crashed there.
 
If you think it's nonsense Maus, show me your proof that 93 crashed at Shanksville. Show me what makes it clear in your military mind that 93 crashed there.

it has been shown to you over and over but you refuse to see facts instead preferring to get your information from truther sites.
Every single comment in the post Fled was referring to was a lie.
 
If you think it's nonsense Maus, show me your proof that 93 crashed at Shanksville. Show me what makes it clear in your military mind that 93 crashed there.

Asked and answered time and again.

Cockpit voice recorder
Debris
Engine components
DNA
Radar tracking
Phone records
Personal effects

The list goes on....
 
Are you talking about the Moussaoui trial?

If so, that is hardly "Official 911 Story having its day in court". That was a Kangaroo Court if there ever was, complete with fabricated evidence.

So why aren't you working with his defense team to get him an appeal?
 
There was no Flight 93 at Shanksville. There is no picture of it there, and all witness testimony said it wasn't there. It cannot be proved that it was there. ACARS shows it was still airborne in Illinois somewhere 30 minutes after the supposed crash.

I was wondering if anyone else would pick up on this obvious false global generalization. HD has been warned about this before but as usual, does not learn from his mistakes. Thanks to HD all we need is a single witness to say Flight 93 crashed in Shanksville to prove him wrong.

How hard could that be?

Terry Butler, at Stoystown sees the plane coming out of the clouds, low to the ground. “It was moving like you wouldn’t believe. Next thing I knew it makes a heck of a sharp, right-hand turn.” It banks to the right and appears to be trying to climb to clear one of the ridges, but it continues to turn to the right and then veers behind a ridge. About a second later it crashes.

Lee Purbaugh, 300 yards away: “There was an incredibly loud rumbling sound and there it was, right there, right above my head—maybe 50 feet up.… I saw it rock from side to side then, suddenly, it dipped and dived, nose first, with a huge explosion, into the ground. I knew immediately that no one could possibly have survived.”

Linda Shepley: She hears a loud bang and sees the plane bank to the side. She sees the plane wobbling right and left, at a low altitude of roughly 2,500 feet, when suddenly the right wing dips straight down, and the plane plunges into the earth. She says she has an unobstructed view of Flight 93’s final two minutes.

Kelly Leverknight in Stony Creek Township of Shanksville: “There was no smoke, it just went straight down. I saw the belly of the plane.” It sounds like it is flying low, and it’s heading east.


Faye Hahn, an EMT who responds to the initial call for help, finds “pieces of mail” everywhere.
Roger Bailey of the Somerset Volunteer Fire Department finds mail “scattered everywhere” around the site. He says, “I guess there were 5,000 pounds of mail on board.”
Tom Spinelli found lots of paper debris which he described as “mainly mail” but also includes “bits of in-flight magazine.”

Coroner Wallace Miller: “Searchers recovered about 510 pounds of human remains at the crash scene, equaling about eight percent of the total bodyweight on the plane. According to Somerset County Coroner Wallace Miller, everything else was vaporized.”

‘The interesting thing about this particular case is that I haven’t, to this day, 11 months later, seen any single drop of blood. Not a drop. The only thing I can deduce is that the crash was over in half a second. There was a fireball 15-20 metres high, so all of that material just got vaporised.'”

“The FBI said yesterday that it has finished its work at the crash scene of United Flight 93 after recovering about 95 percent of the downed airliner and concluding that explosives were not responsible for bringing it down.

At the same time, the Somerset County coroner said that he has ended his own search for remains of the 44 people aboard the airliner.

“It’s been very thorough,” Coroner Wallace Miller said of the recovery effort.”

“We’re in the process of notifying families,” said Miller near the crash scene yesterday. “We’re continuing the identification process as we speak.”

Miller identified the last of the bodies Dec. 19. He is still doing DNA tests on additional tissue samples.
 
I was wondering if anyone else would pick up on this obvious false global generalization. HD has been warned about this before but as usual, does not learn from his mistakes. Thanks to HD all we need is a single witness to say Flight 93 crashed in Shanksville to prove him wrong.

I pointed it out as well as the fact that everything else in his post was a lie.
However good job going into detail on that specific point, mind you it has all been debunked several times before.
 
I pointed it out as well as the fact that everything else in his post was a lie.
However good job going into detail on that specific point, mind you it has all been debunked several times before.

He made a false global generalization; "all the witnesses,..." It only takes a single witness to prove him wrong. In 30 seconds of Google Searching I found many (and I could have easily kept going). HD has been warned of this fundamental logical error many times before yet he keeps making it. Yet another example - as if more were required - that HD is slow to learn from his mistakes and does not properly prepare his arguments or his evidence.

Yet he's the guy that has it all figured out,... :roll:
 
Asked and answered time and again.

Cockpit voice recorder
Debris
Engine components
DNA
Radar tracking
Phone records
Personal effects

The list goes on....

Nobody could find any "personal effects" except the feds. Locals could not.

Phone records do not prove 93 at Shanksville. Phone calls impossible.

Radar tracking does not prove 93 at Shanksville. Because of injects associated with Vigilant Guardian, they are suspect and unreliable.

DNA was provided by the feds, and everybody in town knows it. More fabricated evidence.

Engine components were never identified by serial number, and on the surface are NOT consistent with 757.

Same for debris, and one particular piece of debris shown at Moussaoui trial appears to be from 727, not 757.

Voice recorder was invisible to everybody else except the feds. Even if legit, which it is not, it does not prove 93 at Shanksville. It is contradicted by ACARS data.

You have offered no proof Maus, only government talking points. Your military mind's analytical abilities fall way short.
 
Nobody could find any "personal effects" except the feds. Locals could not.

Phone records do not prove 93 at Shanksville. Phone calls impossible.

Radar tracking does not prove 93 at Shanksville. Because of injects associated with Vigilant Guardian, they are suspect and unreliable.

DNA was provided by the feds, and everybody in town knows it. More fabricated evidence.

Engine components were never identified by serial number, and on the surface are NOT consistent with 757.

Same for debris, and one particular piece of debris shown at Moussaoui trial appears to be from 727, not 757.

Voice recorder was invisible to everybody else except the feds. Even if legit, which it is not, it does not prove 93 at Shanksville. It is contradicted by ACARS data.

You have offered no proof Maus, only government talking points. Your military mind's analytical abilities fall way short.

Lol if it comes from the govt it cant be accepted and must be faked. The govt does all the investigations so I guess HD believes all accidents are faked
 
Last edited:
Nobody could find any "personal effects" except the feds. Locals could not.

Phone records do not prove 93 at Shanksville. Phone calls impossible.

Radar tracking does not prove 93 at Shanksville. Because of injects associated with Vigilant Guardian, they are suspect and unreliable.

DNA was provided by the feds, and everybody in town knows it. More fabricated evidence.

Engine components were never identified by serial number, and on the surface are NOT consistent with 757.

Same for debris, and one particular piece of debris shown at Moussaoui trial appears to be from 727, not 757.

Voice recorder was invisible to everybody else except the feds. Even if legit, which it is not, it does not prove 93 at Shanksville. It is contradicted by ACARS data.

You have offered no proof Maus, only government talking points. Your military mind's analytical abilities fall way short.

More false global generalizations. Should we pick these apart too?

Why bother, you are the only no-planer-at-Shanksville here and it is hardly worth the bother.
 
Nobody could find any "personal effects" except the feds. Locals could not.

Garbage CLAIM. Got Citation?

Phone records do not prove 93 at Shanksville. Phone calls impossible.


Garbage CLAIM. And no, the PHONE CALLS were NOT "impossible".

Radar tracking does not prove 93 at Shanksville. Because of injects associated with Vigilant Guardian, they are suspect and unreliable.

Another garbage CLAIM. There were no "injects associated with Vigilant Guardian" pertaining to Flight 93. Utter garbage.

DNA was provided by the feds, and everybody in town knows it. More fabricated evidence.

Garbage CLAIM X10. And "everybody in town knows it"? Show me.

Engine components were never identified by serial number, and on the surface are NOT consistent with 757.

Irrelevant and garbage CLAIM. "On the surface"? What the **** does THAT mean?

Same for debris, and one particular piece of debris shown at Moussaoui trial appears to be from 727, not 757.

More hand-waving garbage CLAIMS. And "appears to be from 727, not 757"? I don't suppose you have citation for that?

Voice recorder was invisible to everybody else except the feds. Even if legit, which it is not, it does not prove 93 at Shanksville. It is contradicted by ACARS data.

Another garbage CLAIM. Followed by a NON-SEQUITIR.

And the ACARS data? THAT was supposed to be accurate?

You have offered no proof Maus, only government talking points. Your military mind's analytical abilities fall way short.

I have offered proof. You have offered garbage CLAIMS and little else.
 
Back
Top Bottom