| Viewing Single Post From: Hey there | |
|---|---|
| Arcterus | Jan 26 2009, 06:20 PM |
|
Ooh, I forgot I had posted it there. Way to go finding it.
As I said in my introduction, I never close the door on an issue.
I know a great deal about both of them. I've also met Jim Hoffman in the past. But none of that concerned me. I'm more interested in the facts and the proof behind said facts than the details of who wrote them. Jim Hoffman, I find, is one of the most accurate 9/11 researchers out there.
Although past experience suggests I'll find what evidence is available on said sites will be non-convincing or debunkable, I'll gladly take a look at those sites soon enough. Also, with all that being said, I'd like to know if you have any direct responses to any of the points brought up in my article. Would you mind?
I disagree. The evidence I've obtained thus far has been terribly conclusive in support of a Boeing 757 hitting it.
See my article for my response.
Forgive me if I find it rather arrogant to disregard eyewitness testimony, particularly when not one witness account details a missile or anything similar hitting The Pentagon. Not a single one.
See my article for my response.
I still can't believe that's an actual theory. It's like the special olympics of 9/11 Truth.
I think the main part is that humans, generally, have difficulty accepting when they're wrong. Those who care more about the truth than about their W/L record are the real truthers out there. Also, I figure some of these people are disinfo agents who, naturally, would continue spreading such an outright hoax. Ever notice how the ones with these radical theories like lasers and holograms and such are generally the most hostile? |
![]() |
|
| Hey there · Welcome Newcomers! | |




6:48 PM Nov 30