• 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!

List of incorrect information being passed around regarding 9/11...

Thoreau72 said:
Made up crap is an excellent description
Click to expand...
This perfectly describes almost everything you post. It's all been laid out in this forum. Whether it's 9/11 or school shootings. It's been proven you either lie or exaggerate things.
 
Thoreau72 said:
Made up crap is an excellent description of the official story of a number of public events, ESPECIALLY the events of 11 September.
Click to expand...

If the truthers were just disputing a claim that would be fine, but when they go all crazy with crazy as claims of their own; is when most people just chalk it up as crazy people, being crazy.

I mean come on magic spheres, nukes, missiles, fake planes, aliens, actors, cgi, nano thermite, pretty much anything that people with bad imagination can think of just so they can say that they were not duped by the so called official story. You do not need your own made up story to dispute something, that is not how it works. The way it works is that you dispute the claim, by showing evidence to the contrary. Not present stuff that you cannot back up at all.

What we see is that the conspiracy crowd keeps presenting ridiculous claims lacking any actual reputable players to present those claims. And if god forbid anyone disputes said conspiracy claims all hell breaks loose on whoever dared to not believe their crap. All the sudden those who do not believe the conspiracy are shills or what the **** ever. You yourself have attacked me in such a way that it makes me not like you as a person. And I say this knowing that your response will be cruel in nature. You will go on about how stupid I must be to believe the official story, but there is no such thing as an official story. The conspiracy theorist idea of an official story is that there is another story that is actually the truth. The thing though is that the bottom line is that all conspiracy theorists are anti-Americans given how they portray the US government.

But there is an actual conspiracy going on and you fell for it. You see the people who have been manipulating you are not the US government. No, what you fell for was a disinformation campaign by Russia aimed to make Americans distrust our government. It was you guys that indirectly trained the Russians for what they are doing now. Thats right you were duped by a government, it just was not the US government.
 
gamolon said:
This picture tries to deceive the viewer by showing the incorrect structural column used in the facade and also tries to say how the "plane" could not have penetrated such robust columns. Again, those columns were NOT the thick I-Beams shown. They were the same box columns shown in point number 5. above.
Click to expand...

In addition to the perimeter column dimensions already pointed out, you also got this wrong. The corner panels were not the same thickness as the box columns shown in your point.
 
mike2810 said:
Just like the editor of Veterans Today who admitted and put in writing that most of what VT publishes is made up.
Click to expand...

At least VT admits it.

NYT claims what they publish is true and accurate, as does the rest of the MSM, and the gullible folks lap it up.
 
Thoreau72 said:
At least VT admits it.

NYT claims what they publish is true and accurate, as does the rest of the MSM, and the gullible folks lap it up.
Click to expand...

If you recall, I have stated any article needs to be checked and verified. There are numerous scientific and engineering publications that addressed 9/11.
It seems it is you who relies on MSM and trash publications as the main source of information.

Are you saying the sources you use are 100% telling the truth? Of course, we know you use blogs like Kevin Ryan. In case you did not know blogs are opinions. They are not necessarily the truth.

“When an alleged fact is debunked, the conspiracy meme often just replaces it with another fact” (Goertzel 2011)."

and the beat goes on. :lamo
 
Last edited:
22.

Love this.

Here is "Scott" from another forum.
The Pentagon on 9/11 | Page 82 | PoliticalForum.com - Forum for US and Intl Politics

Scott said:
The bottom line is that a 757 couldn't have hit the Pentagon because a 757 wouldn't fit in the space behind the gate-lifting mechanism.
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/videos/docs/pcamframe1.jpg

(post #1613)
The Pentagon on 9/11 | Page 81 | PoliticalForum.com - Forum for US and Intl Politics


People can lie and/or be mistaken or remember things incorrectly. This doesn't make the above proof go away as there are plausible scenarios that would explain it.


Same as above. His saying a 757 hit the Pentagon doesn't make the fact that a 757 wouldn't fit in that space go away. He may be one of the planted bogus witnesses. Facts trump testimony.
Click to expand...

After debating him for pages and showing him the math as to why he was wrong, he finally admits it. This after accusing people of being paid sophists, obfuscation, and trying to muddy the waters to mislead readers during the debate. What a joke.
Scott said:
I see my mistake. I looked at my ruler wrong. I had to hold it backwards because it was too long to fit on the screen and I misread it. Now I get 82MM. Now it works out to 180 feet. I guess I have to eat crow on this one. I've got to stop drinking so much coffee.
Click to expand...
 
23.

The Pentagon on 9/11 | Page 88 | PoliticalForum.com - Forum for US and Intl Politics
Bob0627 said:
There is a video of a NTSB guy at the Pentagon site claiming a recovered part with a visible serial number will be used to identify the airplane.
Click to expand...

The video that this quote supposedly came from:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lk-fwt3jIyc

What the gentleman REALLY said:
We found this... uh... part in the... uh... vicinity of where we were standing earlier today. It's been washed... uh... a bit away. Um... but uh... hopefully with something like this we be able to identify exactly where it came from. And... uh... maybe that'll help us, for purposes later on, [hard to hear but sound like "best solution"] find out exactly what part of the aircraft this is.
Click to expand...

So no, he NEVER said they would use the part to identify the plane.
 
zyzygy said:
A mushroom cloud and very high temperatures and a large part of New York destroyed? Like Hiroshima?
Click to expand...

The Hiroshima bomb exploded above the city, thus causing more damage.
A underground nuke can be contained. The mini nukes there were semi contained or subsurface. Had they been at the top of the towers, yes, it would of wiped out a lot of NYC. Being they were mostly underground, the granite absorbed most of it. Being it can't be explained all at once, when you have the time, if you can review these articles or videos:

Engineers at the WTC discussing..... SH&E at Ground Zero
How the undgnd detonation works. 7,8,15,17,22,23,25,27,30,35,39,40,56,68 https://www.osti.gov/biblio/4612556
Pertaining to investigator Asteneh. Hot spots map. Context of 'September 12, 2001-February 2002: Witnesses See Molten Metal in the Remains at Ground Zero'
A physicist explains how the WTC were brought down. Can match some info to osti report. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ry4UWQjJnSc
Temps at this test. https://mashable.com/2016/11/06/mississippi-nuclear-test/#.xSB4DmzYiqK
Water wouldn't put out the WTC fires. This foam had to be used. Still took months. http://www.pyrocooltech.com/
 
He was alive last week.
 
Thoreau72 said:
At least VT admits it.

NYT claims what they publish is true and accurate, as does the rest of the MSM, and the gullible folks lap it up.
Click to expand...


^
Truth talking about "gullible folks." You cannot make this **** up..
 
muttkat said:
The Hiroshima bomb exploded above the city, thus causing more damage.
A underground nuke can be contained. The mini nukes there were semi contained or subsurface. Had they been at the top of the towers, yes, it would of wiped out a lot of NYC. Being they were mostly underground, the granite absorbed most of it. Being it can't be explained all at once, when you have the time, if you can review these articles or videos:

Engineers at the WTC discussing..... SH&E at Ground Zero
How the undgnd detonation works. 7,8,15,17,22,23,25,27,30,35,39,40,56,68 https://www.osti.gov/biblio/4612556
Pertaining to investigator Asteneh. Hot spots map. Context of 'September 12, 2001-February 2002: Witnesses See Molten Metal in the Remains at Ground Zero'
A physicist explains how the WTC were brought down. Can match some info to osti report. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ry4UWQjJnSc
Temps at this test. https://mashable.com/2016/11/06/mississippi-nuclear-test/#.xSB4DmzYiqK
Water wouldn't put out the WTC fires. This foam had to be used. Still took months. http://www.pyrocooltech.com/
Click to expand...

Seen it all before mate. Garbage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom