How can I be challenging you.

You are cuttin and pastin.

I am challenging those C & P posts how can that be a challenge to you.


example (from one of your C & P post).
'Speech 7/1/06: "... there is no evidence to support the commonly held
belief that 19 Arab religious fanatics were responsible for the attack
of 9/11. And further, the evidence we do have strongly supports the
alternative theory that the attacks were actually an inside job. ... The
government and our media have endlessly repeated a Big Lie about 9/11.
The fficial version of this lie was published in a book called The 9/11
Commission Report." '

I do remember a hearing on this very subject: Enough evidence was
presented at said hearing to convict. Convictions are not made without
evidence so how can it be truthfully claimed that no evidence exists.
_____________________________________________

I have not challenged all of them yet cause it will take time. You have
approached this like a corporate lawyer. You present so many reams of
data that to find the truth in it could take years. If you dump enough
data into our laps it becomes hard to see all of it for the balderdash
it is buried in.

Please, please just answer this,

Do you have a problem with Col. Bowman?

You had a problem with Peter lance, do you also have a problem with
Major General Alber Stubblebine?

Take your time and research these guys and get back to us. I really want
to know.

Do you have a problem with Lt. Col. Shelton F. Lankford?

we all have time and will wait for your reply.


__________________________________________


Lt. Col. Shelton F. Lankford, U.S. Marine Corps (ret) – Retired U.S.
Marine Corps fighter pilot with over 300 combat missions flown. 21-year
Marine Corps career.

Letter to the Editor 2/5/07: Regarding 9/11 "Our government has been
hijacked by means of a "new Pearl Harbor" and a lot of otherwise good
and decent people who are gullible enough to think that the first three
steel-framed buildings in history fall down because they have some fires
that the fire fighter on the scene said could be knocked down with a
couple of hoses and through which people walked before they were
photographed looking out the holes where the plane hit . One of these -
bldg 7, [610 feet tall, 47 stories] was never hit by a plane and even
NIST is ashamed to advance a reason for its collapse. And, miracle of
miracles, these three buildings just happened to be leased and insured
by the same guy who is on tape saying they decided to "PULL" the last
one to fall." http://www.michigandaily.com


Statement to this website 2/20/07: "This isn't about party, it isn't
about Bush Bashing. It's about our country, our constitution, and our
future. ...

Your countrymen have been murdered and the more you delve into it the
more it looks as though they were murdered by our government, who used
it as an excuse to murder other people thousands of miles away.

If you ridicule others who have sincere doubts and who know factual
information that directly contradicts the official report and who want
explanations from those who hold the keys to our government, and have
motive, means, and opportunity to pull off a 9/11, but you are too lazy
or fearful, or ... to check into the facts yourself, what does that make
you? Scholars for 9/11 truth have developed reams of scientific data.
Michael Ruppert published an exhaustive account of the case from the
viewpoint of a trained investigator. David Ray Griffin provides a
context for the unanswered or badly answered questions that should nag
at anyone who pretends to love this country.

Are you afraid that you will learn the truth and you can't handle it?
...

Do a little research. Google is a wonderful tool.

What does it all add up to? The Commission was, as was the Warren
Commission before it, a dog and pony show ... " Link to full statement


Member: Pilots for 9/11 Truth Association Statement: "Pilots for 9/11
Truth is an organization of aviation professionals and pilots throughout
the globe that have gathered together for one purpose. We are committed
to seeking the truth surrounding the events of the 11th of September
2001. Our main focus concentrates on the four flights, maneuvers
performed and the reported pilots. We do not offer theory or point
blame. However, we are focused on determining the truth of that fateful
day since the United States Government doesn't seem to be very
forthcoming with answers."

I have not ridiculed anyone.

I have simply stated my differing view on the same subject.

um lets see a marine corp fighter pilot.

You cite him as an expert while telling me I am not.

Yet he is not writing about flying planes. He is talking about
buildings falling. Since when does being a pilot make someone an expert
on buildings falling?

Earlier you stated a man was a fighter pilot and then listed some of his
aircraft as a F111,B1, F15 strike to mention a few. Hello these
aircraft are BOMBERS. Get your facts straight.

You continualy ignore or by-pass what I post and just continue to post
these cut and paste pickings. Yet you are asking me to check what you
are posting. I have!

so, you wont answer the question, because of time and other excuses.

Im sorry for you.


do you have a problem with Lt. Col. Guy S. Razer?


LOL


____________________________________________



Lt. Col. Guy S. Razer, MS, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Retired U.S. Air Force
fighter pilot (F-111, F-15E, F-16, B-1, F-18, Mig-29, and Suu-22). Flew
combat missions over Iraq. Former instructor at the USAF Fighter
Weapons School and NATO’s Tactical Leadership Program. 20-year Air
Force career.
Statement to this website 3/25/07: "After 4+ years of research since
retirement in 2002, I am 100% convinced that the attacks of September
11, 2001 were planned, organized, and committed by treasonous
perpetrators that have infiltrated the highest levels of our government.
It is now time to take our country back.

The "collapse" of WTC Building 7 [610 feet tall, 47 stories, and not hit
by an airplane] shows beyond any doubt that the demolitions were
pre-planned. There is simply no way to demolish a 47-story building (on
fire) over a coffee break. It is also impossible to report the
building’s collapse before it happened, as BBC News did, unless it was
pre-planned. Further damning evidence is Larry Silverstein's video
taped confession in which he states "they made that decision to pull
[WTC 7] and we watched the building collapse."

We cannot let the pursuit of justice fail. Those of us in the military
took an oath to "support and defend the Constitution of the United
States against all enemies, foreign and domestic". Just because we have
retired does not make that oath invalid, so it is not just our
responsibility, it is our duty to expose the real perpetrators of 9/11
and bring them to justice, no matter how hard it is, how long it takes,
or how much we have to suffer to do it.

We owe it to those who have gone before us who executed that same oath,
and who are doing the same thing in Iraq and Afghanistan right now.
Those of us who joined the military and faithfully executed orders that
were given us had to trust our leaders. The violation and abuse of that
trust is not only heinous, but ultimately the most accurate definition
of treason!"


Member: Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice Association Statement:
"Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice is a non-partisan organization
consisting of independent researchers and activists engaged in
uncovering the true nature of the September 11, 2001 attacks."


Member: Pilots for 9/11 Truth Association Statement: "Pilots for 9/11
Truth is an organization of aviation professionals and pilots throughout
the globe that have gathered together for one purpose. We are committed
to seeking the truth surrounding the events of the 11th of September
2001. Our main focus concentrates on the four flights, maneuvers
performed and the reported pilots. We do not offer theory or point
blame. However, we are focused on determining the truth of that fateful
day since the United States Government doesn't seem to be very
forthcoming with answers."


Website: http://www.myspace.com/supereagle69

Yes. By all means. Play fair and answer our challenges to your claims.
We have challenged a few of "yours" (or whomever they truly belong to).
Not all- but then- who has the kind of time to actually go through all
that copy/paste junk you provide?

I answered.

Once again you posted as though my answer did not exist.

and listed yet another 'fighter pilot' with bomber aircraft predominant
in his list of birds and speaking not of flying but of buildings
falling.

I reckon if I want to know about structural things I must go to flight
school? If I want to know how to fly I must become an engineer?

In the contex quoted this person is no more an expert than you or I.

But you researched Peter Lance and gave us your wisdom of him and his
thoughts.

what about Major Douglas Rokke, call him dougie for short.


I know it takes time, thats why Ill give you lots of time.

______________________________________


Major Douglas Rokke, PhD, U.S. Army (ret) – Former Director U.S. Army
Depleted Uranium Project. 30-year Army career.

Article 8/19/05: Regarding the impact at the Pentagon on 9/11/2001 "When
you look at the whole thing, especially the crash site void of airplane
parts, the size of the hole left in the building and the fact the
projectile's impact penetrated numerous concrete walls, it looks like
the work of a missile. And when you look at the damage, it was
obviously a missile." http://www.rense.com


Editor's note: For more information on the impact at the Pentagon, see
General Stubblebine, Colonel Nelson, Lt. Col. Kwiatkowski, Capt.
Wittenberg, and Steve DeChiaro.

I wonder... why intelligent people keep on trying to make others
understand that I debate is based on real facts and your opinions, not
copy and paste? It is so disrespectful. At least discuss base on real
facts, not others "non-espert" opinions.

JMHO

In reguards the pentagon.

If you look at the picture in the link posted by Poet (buried near the
begining of this thread) you can clearly see the aircraft parts. That
picture was one of the first shots of the building after the strike and
before the fires had a chance to bring the upper part of the structure
down and is uncontested.

I also pointed out that the vehicles parked in front of the building
could be used for measurement. The claim is that the damaged area is
only 18 feet across.

An average car is 12 to 15 feet long. Compare it!

the damaged area is CONSIDERABLY larger then the cars parked in front of
it by many car lengths. This puts me in serious doubt of anyone
claiming the 18 foot hogwash cause I can do math.

In that picture there is a person standing in the rubble right next to
the aircraft parts you say do not exist. Just based on the size of an
average man the damaged area is larger than the 18 feet claimed.

That 18 foot claim is a deliberate attempt to misinform. But isn't that
the goal of propaganda.

Well then, AB, I almost forgot about that evidence I presented. Heh.
That was a cool site, though- and it actually had an intelligent
conspiracy theory. One that might even be rational. Although I still
don't think they could cover anything that big up.

I agree.

It is the first 'conspiracy theory' web site I had seen that did not
appear to be choked by propaganda. They presented their case in a
respectful manner and left me to draw my own conclusions.

I love that "the government originally created the "no planes" theory
in order to discredit legitimate truth seekers" line. I admit, if I were
in charge and felt the need to start a massive war, I'd do the same
thing.


And the "it's possible that those who planned 9/11 did not realize the
buildings would collapse". That one was great, too.

Actually I saw something once during the weeks after the attacks to the
effect tha Al Quieda did not know they would colapse and were pleasently
suprised by the greater destruction even gloating over it.

I could not verify the source of the statement so I largely igonored it.

aircraft parts or Boeing 757 parts?

This government said it was a Boeing 757 that hit the Pentagon, but they
wont show us the security cameras, I wonder why.

But Ab, you still havent told me/us of what you think of some of the
400+ people that have a background in fields which would help us
understand what really happened, you only attacked Peter Lance, why?

What do you think about Capt. Russ Witteberg Ret. Air force?

___________________________________________________

Capt. Russ Wittenberg, U.S. Air Force – Former Air Force fighter pilot
with over 100 combat missions. Commercial pilot for Pan Am and United
Airlines for 35 years, flying 707, 720, 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, and 777
’s. Had previously flown the actual two United Airlines airplanes that
were hijacked on 9/11 (Flight 93, which impacted in Pennsylvania, and
Flight 175, the second plane to hit the WTC).

Article 7/17/05: "The government story they handed us about 9/11 is
total B.S. plain and simple." … Wittenberg convincingly argued there was
absolutely no possibility that Flight 77 could have "descended 7,000
feet in two minutes, all the while performing a steep 270 degree banked
turn before crashing into the Pentagon's first floor wall without
touching the lawn."…

"For a guy to just jump into the ****pit and fly like an ace is
impossible - there is not one chance in a thousand," said Wittenberg,
recalling that when he made the jump from Boeing 727's to the highly
sophisticated computerized characteristics of the 737's through 767's it
took him considerable time to feel comfortable flying."
http://www.arcticbeacon.com


Audio Interview 9/16/04: Regarding Flight 77, which allegedly hit the
Pentagon. "The airplane could not have flown at those speeds which they
said it did without going into what they call a high speed stall. The
airplane won’t go that fast if you start pulling those high G maneuvers
at those bank angles. … To expect this alleged airplane to run these
maneuvers with a total amateur at the controls is simply ludicrous...

It’s roughly a 100 ton airplane. And an airplane that weighs 100 tons
all assembled is still going to have 100 tons of disassembled trash and
parts after it hits a building. There was no wreckage from a 757 at the
Pentagon. … The vehicle that hit the Pentagon was not Flight 77. We
think, as you may have heard before, it was a cruise missile."
http://911underground.com


Editor's note: For more information on the impact at the Pentagon, see
General Stubblebine, Colonel Nelson, Lt. Col. Kwiatkowski, Major Rokke,
and Steve DeChiaro.


Member: Pilots for 9/11 Truth Association Statement: "Pilots for 9/11
Truth is an organization of aviation professionals and pilots throughout
the globe that have gathered together for one purpose. We are committed
to seeking the truth surrounding the events of the 11th of September
2001. Our main focus concentrates on the four flights, maneuvers
performed and the reported pilots. We do not offer theory or point
blame. However, we are focused on determining the truth of that fateful
day since the United States Government doesn't seem to be very
forthcoming with answers."

Dude. Have you ever had a thought of your own in your life? Seriously,
stop the needless and useless stream of quotes.


And I told you my theory on the stuff they're hiding from us about the
pentagon. They fired on it before it hit the building. And that's half a
dozen reasons why I'd hush the incident as much as possible.


Besides, as that site I was so nice to link you two clearly
demonstrated- the wreckage was about right for a 757. Or maybe a 747.
Give or take. But it was about the right size for the wingspan and
engine locations for such a plane.

Man would you stop twisting my words please.

I did not attack Mr. Lance. I merely pointed out that he makes his
living writing books about coverups and other things like that. big
diference.

I am not going to answer all of these because they have no more bearing
on what happened on 9/11 than I do. The title of this thread is
'opinions about 9/11'. Therefore I am posting MY opinions.

I think I need to clear up a misconception you have hammered at since
this thread started the Planes were NOT 757's.
The government has never said a 757 hit the pentagon. They said a 767
hit the pentagon and the link provided by Poet earlier had pictures from
the security cameras. So did one of yours.

Since I have debunked (for anyone that looks at poet's link) the 'no
aircraft parts' portion of your posting now your gonna nit pick the type
of aircraft parts?

This is the reason I and many others have not even attempted the so
called 'Million dollar offer' cause the people that are offering it will
and have nit picked the presenters with pseudo science and reams of
balderdash.

Wow. I must be tired. I just used the wrong "to".

Yes Mr. lance writes books about cover ups.

and this government is doing some covering up.

LOL


if you cant see that, well then you cant. I can only lead a horse to
water, cant force him to drink from it.

Once again, you skip all the valid points.

And that same line was used on you, if I recall.

Although, in this case, it's leading a horse to the septic system and
TELLING him it's water.

tell us the vaild points and respond in kind.


you never told us what you think of that 10 minute video of Larry
Silverstien telling us that the firefighters "pulled" the building
(building 7)


but that dont matter to you guys cause just because he is the Lease
owner of the buildings hes just a "non-expert" and "non-important"


LOL