Does anybody know something about crispy´s Anti-No-Boeing-Website?

This thread was deleted by the moderators. Probably I used unrespectful words. I acknowledged that and I have *corrected* the posts, hoping that they are compatibel with the DU-rules:

crispy announced some weeks ago that he will present a website debunking the "Hunt-the-Boeing"-thoeries. We´re really waiting for this site, because it´s fighting windmills to debunk and correct all the same all the time. Outside the US they are still "hunting the Boeing" very noisy and it would be perfect to have a clearly arranged site. There are of course some others here in the forum who could do that; wouldn´t that make more sense than fighting this endless struggle here **? Fanny


Ron, you say that would be quite useless, because "they will not notice".

Please let me say that your pole-analysis-page was very helpful for me and others sifting the chaff from the wheat. Meyssan himself was directed to your site; of course he just lost some *illogical* words about the poles...

I regret it, that your site is not completed from time to time (that would be less work than posting in this forum...!) I know that this could become a never ending story, but some more details to show HOW THEY ARGUE and a solid refutation of the most common aspects would be great. THEY have thousend of websites! I for myself was a 9/11 sceptic from the beginning, but the more "Dulces" and "Abes" etc. I read, the more I´m sceptical about the scepsis... May be that´s what they want? ;-)

Without such a site we have to repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat all the old points, but they are starting the same old *"questions"* without any shame just in another forum, so the game goes on and on. If we would have such a site, we could just say "your ** question was already answered here..." etc. pp.

Fanny (who asks to excuse the bad english)

we have to repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat
I really appreciate your honest intention to educate these conspiracy fanatics, but probably it's worthless. They will never understand that the most obvious and simple explanation can be indeed the right one.
Such a huge body of clear, unambiguous, striking evidence, and extensive, aboveboard investigations prove that Arab terrorists who hate our freedom are responsible for this terrible attack, which happened -- with some very minor corrections -- as reported to us by the media.
I will never understand how so many people just refuse to accept this simple truth.

This administration even lies when it is to their advantage to tell the truth.

you speak of? Surely you are being sarcastic.

What are you talking about? There is no "huge body of evidence."

All that we have seen from the "Officials" is a meager assemblege of factoids. I'll never understand why so many people are willing to take on faith the few bits of official scraps thrown about like so much litter, and use that litter to form a conclusion.

Reading what has been presented here, and on the rest of the web, does lead to the conclusion that we don't know the half of it. For those who come to any conclusion about this matter I say: I hope you never sit on a jury that tries me!


You people that say "it happened just like they say" make me ill.

I thought it was clear that my post was a little bit sarcastic.

Yeah....ok, NOW I see. But I wasn't the only one fooled, now was I? I would say that it was not a 'little' sarcastic, but very, very.

I've read these "arguments" so often that I would make a good promotor of the official version... But I am certainly not.

I am not going to waste any more time here just to have messages deleted.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

was crispy´s Anti-No-Boeing-Website.

to feature so prominently in your life.

Incidentally,
your English is improving with every post.

... because there are thousends and millions like you, ridiculing any critics of mass media....

http://www.dragonslair.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/77/poles_.htm

here I had two freeweb-sides which contained fotos of the debris - i.e. a Boeingwheel. Never heard of cruise-missiles with wheels, chairs. But these homepages vanished ...-sorry.

http://www.nationalreview.com/robbins/robbins040902.asp

and I may add my own one:
http://www.medienanalyse-international.de/rumsfeld.html

In one eyewitness article the NR site, it is claimed that the airplane comes in at an unrecoverable angle. Meaning real steep. Quote from article: "The sight of the 757 diving in at an unrecoverable angle is frozen in my memory,"

The other site, the poles site, leads to the conclusion that a gentle slope path is what took down the numerous light poles stretching several hundred yards away from the POI.

Contradictory at best.

BeFree, if that would be the quality of all the contradictories the sceptists found, than I should become a hard-core-follower of the official version (which I´m not)...

You just forgot that the highway is at a much higher level than the ground floor of the Pentagon, so the pole site does not lead to the conclusion that there was a gentle slope path. (I estimate the path glide to be arround 10°, which is quite much for a Boeing).

Fanny

That the more I read messages that seem to be from newcomers with an oddly familiar storyline, the more I too, am "sceptical" about "sceptics" and ... maybe that also is related to my "scepticism" about how the more names change, the more they stay the same.

Note to "sceptics" - This post has nothing to do with country ways of coping with the need for alternative waste removal technology.

Abe (who asks to be allowed to respond to posts in which his name is used in less than adulatory descriptions)

remember
this too,
shall pass.