Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Viewing Single Post From: My thoughts on the hijackers.
NK-44 Mar 13 2009, 08:58 PM
Member Avatar
Quote:
 
I do not know anything about Hanjour other than he was probably a good enough pilot to crash a plane into a big building.


So, you knew him better than the people unsuccessfully trying for years to teach him how to fly.

Quote:
 
You still think he was only 5 feet tall?


Where did I ever claim so?

Quote:
 
So how many times did Burlington successfully resist an armed terrorist? I am not claiming that he could not, there is just no direct evidence he was able to on 9/11.


With 'armed' you mean boxcutters with unstable blades fabricated with predetermined breaking lines, which where used on 9/11 according to the exihibits from the Moussaoui trial?

And how could there be direct evidence when no one survived to give testimony? And to my knowledge, there wasn't a live-web-cam on board, was it? To avoid reasonable thinking and conclusions, you demand evidence, though this evidence could not be presented to you.

Quote:
 
I claimed that just because they were in the military, this does not mean they were trained to fight. If you want evidence that demonstrates otherwise, or to support your own conclusions, then you need to find it yourself.


Of course, you're free to believe that most people in the military had never ever something to do with fighting. I'd recommend that you work on your skills to convince people...

Quote:
 
It is fine that you believe that all people would chose to fight to save their lives, but it is obvious to even the most unformed person that some competent adults just are not capable of it. How many times have you read a news story about people being killed without defending themselves? It happens at times. Not everyone is capable to using deadly force, even to save themselves.


Your denial has nothing to do with reasonable argumentation. We're not talking about people who for instance have been robbed and subsequently killed on the street, and didn't resist because they might hoped to get out alive. In case of Flight 77 we deal with a completely other situation. Dozens of people KNOWING they we're going to die for quite a while. And nobody took the challenge? When I said earlier that with what you're stating you're unknowingly saying that Burlingame was a coward, then I was wrong. You're stating this in full knowledge. Of course, you phrase this otherwise, as "just not capable" - knowing that it doesn't benefit your point when you openly say what your statements imply - that Burlingame was a coward. People who knew him neither think that he was a coward or that he was not capable. Just follow the links I presented and you will recognize how unreasonable your point is - though I'm convinced you're quite aware of it.

Quote:
 
You will not gain anything by suggesting that I said I would not even try to defend myself when I actually said I might not be capable of doing so. Stick to the facts, do not make them up. As long as you are so good at making things up, you tell us the difference.


So I make things up, lol. You're making things up all the time. From Burlingame not capable to fight to Hani capable to control the flight.

Quote:
 
It sounds like you are making an accusation. If you can’t show me evidence of my satisfaction, l then I suggest that you do not put your thoughts online.


My 'accusation' was more a conclusion derived from what you said. But I do not hesitate to admit when I was wrong. Especially when I have the pleasure to learn that another one is joining our fight to get a new investigation that leads to accountability. I really appreciate that, what I do not understand, is, why then you're doing here what you're doing here.
Edited by NK-44, Mar 13 2009, 10:04 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post
My thoughts on the hijackers. · Hijackers