Vanguard News Network Forum - View Single Post

Contumacyman · March 5th, 2006

To Joe Snuffy,

All of us would like to see the hard evidence you seek - bar none. Access denied. The strongest evidence to prove controlled demolition (for ANY collapsed building) is an analysis of the reinforcing steel in the rubble - no way around it - the residue (or lack thereof) of explosives would constitute conclusive proof. Access denied. Who is powerful enough and BOLD enough to deny access to the strongest piece of evidence - the controlling authorities. Draw you own conclusions. I, and many others, conclude, or at least suspect with powerful inclination, that the parties who caused the controlled demolition, and the parties that deny access to the stongest evidence to prove it, are one and the same. But, you say, correctly using PLATO's logic, we are JUMPING THE GUN - if we can't get the evidence to prove it, then how do we even know there was a contolled demolition. That response, though textbook logically sound, seems to be rather STUPID to those of us who are outraged at the denied access to the evidence. You can be forgiving if you like, but I, and many others, are looking to the contolling authorities as the most likely ones to be responsible because they are the ones who HID THE EVIDENCE.
The same thing goes with the case of the lost flights. The strongest evidence of a hijacking, or of a malfunction, or whatever, are the tape recordings between the flight controllers and the pilots of THE VERY FIRST PLANE on that day that showed up on the controllers screen as going off course. That recording would prove, or disprove, whether or not a hijacking was in progress, OR, if there were some other malfunction that prevented the pilots from communicating back (in that case, the recording would only have the voice of the flight controller repeatedly trying to raise the pilot, but no response from the pilot). This evidence is the STARTING POINT for any investigation to the loss of these flights. ACCESS DENIED. Got that? The public is NOT ALLOWED to hear the tape recording of the very first moment when someone (a flight controller) suspected something was wrong. We, the interested public, are left to grumble and squak and speculate endlessly, all because the controlling authorities have something to hide and refuse to let us in on it. Everything else we talk about here is after-the-fact and speculation because we have been denied access to the primary evidence. You can draw your own conclusions or suspicions. Contumacyman. NOTE: They played the tape recordings of the shuttle crash ON THE SAME DAY IT HAPPENED (nothing to hide there). Also, back in the 80's, when we were friends with the Iraqis, a navy jet shot down an Iraqi jet and they played the tapes between the navy cockpit and their contollers ON NATIONAL TV - again, no one had anything to hide. The ONLY REASON to withhold the evidence is because somebody powerful has something to hide. Contumacyman.

March 5th, 2006	#71
Contumacyman Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 446	To Joe Snuffy, All of us would like to see the hard evidence you seek - bar none. Access denied. The strongest evidence to prove controlled demolition (for ANY collapsed building) is an analysis of the reinforcing steel in the rubble - no way around it - the residue (or lack thereof) of explosives would constitute conclusive proof. Access denied. Who is powerful enough and BOLD enough to deny access to the strongest piece of evidence - the controlling authorities. Draw you own conclusions. I, and many others, conclude, or at least suspect with powerful inclination, that the parties who caused the controlled demolition, and the parties that deny access to the stongest evidence to prove it, are one and the same. But, you say, correctly using PLATO's logic, we are JUMPING THE GUN - if we can't get the evidence to prove it, then how do we even know there was a contolled demolition. That response, though textbook logically sound, seems to be rather STUPID to those of us who are outraged at the denied access to the evidence. You can be forgiving if you like, but I, and many others, are looking to the contolling authorities as the most likely ones to be responsible because they are the ones who HID THE EVIDENCE. The same thing goes with the case of the lost flights. The strongest evidence of a hijacking, or of a malfunction, or whatever, are the tape recordings between the flight controllers and the pilots of THE VERY FIRST PLANE on that day that showed up on the controllers screen as going off course. That recording would prove, or disprove, whether or not a hijacking was in progress, OR, if there were some other malfunction that prevented the pilots from communicating back (in that case, the recording would only have the voice of the flight controller repeatedly trying to raise the pilot, but no response from the pilot). This evidence is the STARTING POINT for any investigation to the loss of these flights. ACCESS DENIED. Got that? The public is NOT ALLOWED to hear the tape recording of the very first moment when someone (a flight controller) suspected something was wrong. We, the interested public, are left to grumble and squak and speculate endlessly, all because the controlling authorities have something to hide and refuse to let us in on it. Everything else we talk about here is after-the-fact and speculation because we have been denied access to the primary evidence. You can draw your own conclusions or suspicions. Contumacyman. NOTE: They played the tape recordings of the shuttle crash ON THE SAME DAY IT HAPPENED (nothing to hide there). Also, back in the 80's, when we were friends with the Iraqis, a navy jet shot down an Iraqi jet and they played the tapes between the navy cockpit and their contollers ON NATIONAL TV - again, no one had anything to hide. The ONLY REASON to withhold the evidence is because somebody powerful has something to hide. Contumacyman.