Lawyers And Victims’ Families File Petition For Federal Grand Jury Investigation Into 9/11

Submitted by: monkwarrior 4 days ago in News & Politics


On April 11th, 2018, Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry, together with more than a dozen family members of 9/11 victims, filed a petition with the Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Geoffrey S. Berman, demanding that he present evidence of unprosecuted federal crimes at the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, to a special grand jury.

The 52-page petition, which is accompanied by 57 exhibits, can be seen here. The un-prosecuted crime alleged to have taken place on 9/11 is the bombing of a place of public use or a government facility -- as prohibited under the federal bombing statute or 18 U.S.C. § 2332f -- as well as a conspiracy to commit, or the aiding and abetting of, said offense.

The petition states, “The Lawyers’ Committee has reviewed the relevant available evidence ... and has reached a consensus that there is not just substantial or persuasive evidence of yet-to-be-prosecuted crimes related to the use of pre-planted explosives and/or incendiaries ... on 9/11, but there is actually conclusive evidence that such federal crimes were committed.”

The petition notes, "If any crime ever warranted a full special grand jury inquiry, the mass murder of thousands on our nation’s soil on 9/11 clearly does."

The voluminous and detailed petition filed by the Lawyers’ Committee and backed by more than a dozen 9/11 family members is the culmination of years of hard work and collaboration. It all began when several attorneys who signed the AE911Truth petition started working together in 2014 and later decided to form this organization.  Several expert witnesses affiliated with AE911Truth testified before a distinguished panel of attorneys representing the Lawyers’ Committee, and that testimony makes up a significant portion of the 52-page petition and 57 exhibits filed.

Videos of the Justice In Focus symposium can be viewed here. 

Source: Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth
There are 152 comments:
Male 1,389
I've always admired people who can cherry-pick evidence so much that they create conspiracies out of them.

I value the truth over my personal beliefs (or at least try to the best of my ability) so it would never work for me, but it sure does sound like it would make life much more interesting.
0
Reply
Male 9,356
pazerlenis Most people who understand the facts surrounding 9/11 (namely physicists and engineers, among others in the science community) value the truth too.  They would simply like the truth to be known, rather than a lie, or the beliefs and opinions of the media and the fabricated 'official report' (not founded on fact)
-4
Reply
Male 2,856
pazerlenis 
It takes dedication for them to become olympic mental gymnasts.

Thing is, they clearly want some sense of purpose, yet often don't seem very happy.

Maybe they should devote their time to learning a musical instrument, and volunteer with a charity.
1
Reply
Male 9,356
jaysingrimm said " It takes dedication for them to become olympic mental gymnasts. "

You would know, after all you've demonstrated it quite often through this thread.
-4
Reply
Male 1,149
wow....at time of this comment, -243 for the thread. 1 day in. That's gotta be an IAB record. Even 5cats posts don't fare that bad.
But some will say it's pple downvoting to skew the numbers...yeah, duh, dickhead! That's how it works.
2
Reply
Male 4,041
buttersrules What's more amazing is that the way the voting system works is that it adds all the votes for each comment into a sum, -243 in this case.
That means, even though I see a lot of positively voted comments, there are just that many more negatively voted comments. I can only guess (and assuredly be right) about who has those negatively voted comments.

squrlz4ever , or any mods reading this; any chance we could come up with an idea and pitch it to fancy/sonny/j-dog/whomever so that votes actually mean something?
Something that uses positive punishment if too many negative votes occur (ie if someone habitually trolls/shitposting), but something that also doesn't stifle the unpopular opinion (ie 9/11 conspiracies). My goal is to limit the one-liners of users (drink, synth). It does get a bit cumbersome to go into a thread and the only thing I see is 2-4 users spewing catch phrases back and forth.
-1
Reply
Male 8,885
DuckBoy87 I like your idea but I'm guessing it would require building some sort of software infrastructure that isn't currently there.  I'm not sure how we would achieve what you are asking.  I like the idea though.
-1
Reply
Male 804
AE911Truth testified before a distinguished panel of attorneys representing the Lawyers’ Committee, including the late Ferdinando Imposimato, Honorary President of the Supreme Court of Italy.

Why are they mis contextualising stuff? The late Ferdinando Imposimato was a an Italian politician with prior legal experience and in the Italian system honorary judges etc are not legal experts but lay input. Itd be like saying Hillary Clinton is a distinguished judicial authority.

When you read that it makes you wonder what other stuff is mis contextualised and manipulated. How many of thier distinguished engineers are not.
3
Reply
Male 1,644
Do these have to be posted every 2 months?
0
Reply
Female 4,884
You'd have to Forrest Gump to believe the offical story of what went down on 9/11.
-8
Reply
Male 4,811
2
Reply
Male 454
monkwarrior should start his own website:  I-am-boring.com
1
Reply
Male 42,110
abetterworld now,now,now - does belittling another IABer
really make this abetterworld as your name suggests?
Play nice.
0
Reply
Male 454
Gerry1of1 monkwarrior has a one track mind and seems to use this site to spew his views on god and conspiracies.  I am game to play fact tennis on such matters as I don't mind opinions different than mine.  Monkwarrior doesn't play ball; he wears earmuffs and uses a megaphone, so to speak.  I can't respect that.  He's always 100% right on everything as we all know.  I saw the twin tower image and thought "Is this a monkwarrior post"? Yep.  Agree with him or else...
1
Reply
Male 9,356
abetterworld i have a multi-track mind.  try not to project yourself on others.
-10
Reply
Male 42,110
abetterworld   Sounds like you don't mind other opinions 
different than your own so long as they aren't Monk's opinions. 
Is Monk not playing ball the way you want? Who are you to make the rules?
1 track mind?   How many tracks are required in your view ?
-1
Reply
Male 454
Gerry1of1 The rules is we should all be looking for the truth as much as possible.  If I thought Sandy Hook was staged and kept posting updates and constantly denied anyones facts no matter what, then you would probably think F him, and rightly so.  
I watched Loose Change. Then I read the counter arguments.  The counter arguments won. This petition is moot. 12 people? On top of that he didn't even donate!
1
Reply
Male 42,110
abetterworld  The rules is [are] we should all be looking for the truth....

And if someone believes they found it, but you disagree, that person is then obligated to keep looking?  

Truth is sometimes absolute, as in math. But sometimes it's relative as in even mom's think an ugly baby is cute.
-1
Reply
Male 454
Gerry1of1 If Monk has some new killer proof, then by all means I'd like to hear it, like a demolition team that admits doing it.  You mentioned Occam's Razor earlier; you are fully aware of the odds of events happening.  I'll keep you posted on the Loch Ness monster sightings.
1
Reply
Male 9,356
abetterworld You previously said "i watched Loose Change".  You know that PBS has a documentary on Explosive Evidence right?   Now prove, are you really willing to hear it, or are you just going to keep ignoring.  You now no debunkers have been able to debunk the explosive evidence, right?  They've pulled red-herrings, ad hominems, and all manner of fallacies, but have not debunked it yet despite years of trying? 
-8
Reply
Male 42,110
abetterworld You lack facts or truth so you resort to insults..... sure sign of a weak argument.
-1
Reply
Male 454
Gerry1of1 What's my insult? That Monk's boring?  When do facts even matter on faith based matters?  What facts do you want? Has he ever said anything that is even in the realm of fun? funny? interesting?  You're just playing the devil's advocate here.
1
Reply
Male 9,356
abetterworld  "i watched Loose Change"?  You know that PBS has a documentary on Explosive Evidence right?   Or did you make up your mind already, and have 'faith' you are right even though the evidence points to explosives?
-8
Reply
Male 9,356
abetterworld you should start your own : I-Am-A-Whiner.com
-13
Reply
Male 4,811
monkwarrior he said one of his words!!!
1
Reply
Male 9,356
rumham when will your synth be done?
-9
Reply
Male 16,490
2
Reply
Male 9,356
Draculya lol, another user with a drinking problem.
-10
Reply
Male 454
monkwarrior Everybody: if you think that I am a whiner, like this comment.
-10
Reply
Male 9,356
abetterworld you should have opted to not whine.  As for me i'm clearly not boring, the many replies, many ratings, and close attention people pay to my posts (almost too much sometimes).
-10
Reply
Male 454
monkwarrior uh huh. let me scroll up top to check out the latest rating.  -60  (a new record)
1
Reply
Male 9,356
abetterworld that's normal for this site, as there's many butt-hurt people who are afraid of the truth, so they just like to down vote everything to affect the score of things, because they're terrified of the truths.

Also notice how you got no 'likes' to your question about whining?  interesting revelation, hmm?


-10
Reply
Male 6,025
monkwarrior, “Also notice how you got no 'likes' to your question about whining?  interesting revelation, hmm?”

Read his question again:
“Everybody: if you think that I am a whiner, like this comment.”

Clicking like would be for if someone agreed with you that he was whining. Nobody agreed with you.
0
Reply
Male 9,356
markust123 oh i had just woke up when i wrote that, and i should have added that it was interesting because there are a lot of whiners on this thread. 

You know the smiley/sad face is a terrible indicator for such things as well, as 5000 people could smileyface it and 5000 could sadface it and it would seem like no one did anything.  Also i notice trolls manipulate them quite heavily.

Perhaps this should be a feature removed or discussed in an upcoming 'modpost', as this post is an indication of the abuse some people like to do with the smiley/sad face.  Maybe a smiley face only?

It's completely a flawed system if you ask me.
-10
Reply
Male 4,811
monkwarrior you dont care about the opinions of i a b users
3
Reply
Male 9,356
rumham i care about your synth
-10
Reply
Male 16,490
1
Reply
Male 9,356
Draculya  lol, another user with a drinking problem.
-9
Reply
Male 4,811
monkwarrior wow you are always hanging right by your computer to add your wonderful insights. i thought you were busy planting your field of science
2
Reply
Male 9,356
rumham many fields of science use computers these days
-10
Reply
Male 4,811
monkwarrior can you still fly a 747 through a tornado? personal info!!!!!
3
Reply
Male 9,356
rumham It's been a while but i bet i still could.
-8
Reply
Male 4,811
rumham or hanging out with all those friends you have
2
Reply
Male 454
abetterworld Everybody: if you think that monkwarrior is boring, like this comment.
6
Reply
Male 4,811
abetterworld i think he doesnt get enough fiber in his diet and is in need of a healthy dump
2
Reply
Male 9,356
rumham clutch!
-9
Reply
Male 16,490
5
Reply
Male 9,356
Draculya  lol, another user with a drinking problem.
-9
Reply
Male 4,811
monkwarrior GRASP FOIST
2
Reply
Male 9,356
rumham SyntherMan
-10
Reply
Male 26
The official explanation for the 9/11 attacks is by definition a conspiracy theory. It names Osama bin Laden as the leader of the conspiracy.
I don't have a theory, conspiracy or otherwise, about what happened that day. Yet two things still bother me: the official explanation contradicts the few facts we know about that day; and the story changed radically several times on that day and the following day, as pieces of the story were found not to fit.
Every parent and every cop knows what it means when the story keeps changing.
0
Reply
Male 42,110
semichisam01
" Every parent and every cop knows what it means when the story keeps changing "

It means the media news was rushing to report before finding out the true facts
and reporting those later ? 
-1
Reply
Male 2,856
WTC - Zero Hallmarks of Controlled Demolition

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsUYhrXonXQ
-1
Reply
Male 9,356
jaysingrimm oh, a 4m youtube video is the best you have (especially one with comments disabled - a good sign they can't handle reasonable concerns of their 'mockumentary')?  You know that PBS has a documentary on Explosive Evidence right?  I also find it a bit amusing that you who supposedly has a 'recording studio' are in deep denial over the first responder eyewitness reports of explosions not to mention many examples of audio being 'scrubbed' on youtube (where your source comes from).  No doubt you could find them with some deeper research.  What's wrong, don't you pay attention to finer details of the audio or is it that you pay more attention to what your tv tells you?
-11
Reply
Male 6,025
monkwarrior, “You know that PBS has a documentary on Explosive Evidence right?”

Seriously, you’re back to deceptively saying the Truther documentary shown on PBS is a PBS documentary? Aren’t monks supposed to be honest?
1
Reply
Male 9,356
markust123 I'm sorry, your issue before, if i recall correctly was the positioning of the word documentary.  You took issue with "PBS Documentary'.

I didn't use that here, i said nothing deceptive, but the truth:

"PBS has a documentary on Explosive Evidence"

Lets break it down again.
1 PBS  http://www.pbs.org - you see the site is officially PBS


2 has http://www.dictionary.com/browse/has -  to possess; own; hold for use; contain : eg.  He has property. The work has an index.

3 A http://www.dictionary.com/browse/a -  not any particular or certain one of a class or group: eg. a man; a chemical; a house.

4 documentary http://www.dictionary.com/browse/documentary -  pertaining to, consisting of, or derived from documents: eg. a documentary history of France.

5 on http://www.dictionary.com/browse/on -  used to indicate subject, reference, or respect: views on public matters.

6 Explosive Evidence http://www.pbs.org/video/colorado-public-television-presents-911-explosive-evidence-experts-speak-out/


There was nothing deceptive there.
-11
Reply
Male 6,025
monkwarrior Saying that PBS has a documentary on Explosive Evidence is even more deceptive than you were saying it before. I’m not getting into this bullshit with you again. Your not this stupid. Quit being deceptive.
2
Reply
Male 9,356
markust123 i'm not being deceptive at all, that's what i was trying to point out.   "PBS has a documentary on Explosive Evidence"  and they do if you click on the link you'll see PBS does indeed have a documentary on Explosive Evidence.

-11
Reply
Male 6,025
monkwarrior I’m done with this post. You are being deceptive and dishonest again with the way you are saying this statement, and now you’re spamming this deception in earlier threads. Quit being a troll.
2
Reply
Male 9,356
markust123 again, i'm not being deceptive.  But on the topics of trolls, what about the issue i previously mentioned of users exploiting the smiley/sad face feature of this site?
-9
Reply
Male 6,025
monkwarrior Dude, you have earned almost every frowny face you get. You flood posts with comments (47 out of 126 on this post are yours). In your comments you are either pushing some ridiculous already disproved conspiracy theory or aggressively pushing your religion on others. Almost everyone who interacts with you ends up frustrated because you don’t debate like an adult. You argue like a middle school girl who has studied a list of fallacies. You use these fallacies freely and often, then hypocritally point out, often incorrectly, when someone is using a fallacy. Then when you have achived your goal of pissing off the people you’re arguing with you switch to your other favorite role of pretending to be a victim, pretending you have won, or pretending you are smart. You have absolutely earned the title of IAB’s biggest troll.
4
Reply
Male 9,356
markust123 personally i don't care about votes on myself, like i said i know it comes with the territory, but others might not.  Also it's the issue of abusers exploiting it (as most trolls here have).

Most people don't end up frustrated because they don't cling to those delusions pushed by the media.  But I'll agree that there are a select few people who live by the delusion that can't stand it's called a delusion, and who are quite unhappy with it being called out for what it is, when they depend on such.  

Sure you may think i'm a troll, but ultimately i'm not, i just have the ability to take on the biggest trolls, and send them flying off their bridge, and it irks them they can't do the same to me.  They think i'm a troll, but i'm a billy-goat who knows how to butt them off, and there's no doubt that a billy-goat seems like a troll to the trolls, since the billy-goat prevents the trolls from getting their way.  They're left to whining (aka sadface'ing), so like i said, i'm fine with sadfacing me in this territory.  It means nothing to me.  I was speaking about this in terms of an I-A-B functionality standpoint.
-10
Reply
Male 6,025
monkwarrior Whatever.
0
Reply
Male 143
markust123  monkwarrior
You know what keeps a meaningless conversation short. Not responding.
-1
Reply
Male 9,356
markust123 i have no need to troll, part of my mission is to deal with them though.
-11
Reply
Male 6,025
monkwarrior You are such a fraud. If you were on a mission the thing you would never do is tell people you are on a mission.
0
Reply
Male 9,356
markust123 you can think what you want, but you're wrong about me still.
-8
Reply
Male 2,856
monkwarrior 
You're welcome to address the points in that 4min video here.

Yes, I do trust my own hearing over reports of others.

I'm aware that PBS hosts non PBS productions. What type of explosives did they claim were used?
-1
Reply
Male 9,356
jaysingrimm You're welcome to address the points in those videos and the links of this post when you watch/read them, and might even have some of your questions answered.

However i suspect you'd prefer to deluded yourself with the lies your TV has told you, based on your desperate posts here.  It would have been better to remain silent than expose your desperation if you ask me.
-9
Reply
Male 2,856
monkwarrior 
I asked one simple question that you can't answer.
-1
Reply
Male 9,356
jaysingrimm because you chose not to answer simple questions yourself.  And you already have asked this question and received your answer many moons ago, so there's really no need to answer again. Your nature is well known to me :)
-10
Reply
Male 2,856
monkwarrior 
You couldn't answer the question before either.

Lets review your questions:

"oh, a 4m youtube video is the best you have...?"

Its consistently been enough. All you can do is assume a reason for comments being disabled - If you want to address the points in that short video, feel free to do so here.

"What's wrong, don't you pay attention to finer details of the audio or is it that you pay more attention to what your tv tells you?"

Once again, I trust my own hearing over reports of others.

"You know that PBS has a documentary on Explosive Evidence right?"

Again, I'm aware that PBS hosts non PBS productions. What type of explosives did they claim were used?
0
Reply
Male 9,356
jaysingrimm Apparently your memory is quite bad, the answer was provided to before, and alsohere (".. links of this post when you watch/read them, and might even have some of your questions answered ") which you have already ignored (part of your nature).

Your  4 minute youtube video is not enough. As another youtube video provides information on the explosives here.  I've posted the link from the start time and you only need to watch for 6-8 minutes.  Conveniently enough it starts out by laying out the 'debunkers' points (who you seem to like the most).  Though i doubt you will watch it (your nature helps me understand this), or if you do you'll remain ignorant (again, your nature tells me this).

As for the documentary on PBS called "Explosive Evidence", (which your nature causes you to specifically target what you don't like to attempt to discredit it), you're free to watch and see what types of explosives are most likely.  Again i doubt you'll watch it (as you probably already have, and are just doing what your nature is).

-9
Reply
Male 2,856
monkwarrior 
Your youtube video starts by claiming the antenna begins to fall first, a point refuted in my video, with different camera angles - You're not off to a good start.

It then spends several minutes conjecturing and promoting conspiracy theories involving elevator renovations, a prior power outage, etc.

Does it ever discuss the type of explosives allegedly used?

"As for the documentary..."

Yours is a lengthy video. Entice me to watch it - What type of explosives did they claim were used? 
-1
Reply
Male 9,356
jaysingrimm ah yes more ignorance and denial (just as i had expected due to your nature).  The second, as i mentioned, points out  what types of explosives are most likely.  You'll have to educate yourself by watching it to find out what.
-8
Reply
Male 2,856
monkwarrior 
You can't answer one simple question.
-1
Reply
Male 9,356
jaysingrimm you can't remember the answer nor find out for yourself.  like you said " I do trust my own hearing over reports of others" , so what good would it be for me to tell you when you can learn on your own?
-8
Reply
Male 2,856
monkwarrior 
Oh, I'd verify your claims by watching the video.

What I'm not going to do, is waste my time on your long videos, when you can't answer a simple question.

Your evasiveness indicates you and your sources don't actually have an answer.
-1
Reply
Male 9,356
jaysingrimm neither am i going to waste time re-answering a question that was already answered.
-8
Reply
Male 2,856
monkwarrior 
You've never answered. You can't answer.
-1
Reply
Male 9,356
jaysingrimm i can answer and did answer, but like you said " I do trust my own hearing over reports of others" , so what good would it be for me to tell you when you can learn on your own? 
-7
Reply
Male 2,856
monkwarrior 
Of course I'd verify your claims for myself.

You could prove you can answer by providing one, but you won't, because you can't.
-1
Reply
Male 9,356
jaysingrimm I see you're wasting time with your ignorance again.  So once again  i can answer and did answer, but like you said " I do trust my own hearing over reports of others" , so what good would it be for me to tell you when you can learn on your own?  
-8
Reply
Male 2,856
monkwarrior 
You're just wasting my time. Obviously, you and your sources can't answer.
0
Reply
Male 9,356
jaysingrimm You're already wasting time, since it's your nature is to waste time with pettiness and ignorance.
-8
Reply
Male 2,183
I'll start believing that it was a government plot, (1) explain convincingly why the goverment would want this (2) that two planes did not fly into the buildings, and hijackers were not linked to Osama Bin Laden. Oh ya  and that metal beams will not bend at high temp and allow the collapse of millions of pounds of stuff on top of it.   
2
Reply
Male 6,025
casaledana Notice how Monk ignored your logic. I believe it was you who mentioned this in another post. The main flaw in every conspiracy argument is the impossibility of keeping it a secret. Two years would be the max for the number of people who would have had to be involved. It’s been an impossible 17 years that every single person would have had to keep it a secret that they were involved in killing thousands of their own people. It it so asininely stupid to believe this conspiracy theory. Anyone who believes this is either not of a sane mind or are supper trolling.
2
Reply
Male 9,356
markust123 The reason i didn't address his point is because he came out with a premise i don't agree with: "I'll start believing that it was a government plot if..".  I have no desire for people to believe that, as i don't believe that, i only believe the facts point to the need for a re-investigation.  While i will admit if a re-investigation does draw out the use of explosives, there will likely be government people investigated, where that goes though, is far too many steps ahead of where things are now - which is the need for a re-investigation.

Also casaledana provided some reasons for his statement, that require a re-investigation (the main reason for this OP), but it appears that those reasons are based off a media lie, and or a poor understanding of physics.

As for me, it wasn't a secret right from day one.  The very first thing i said to myself on that day when i saw the fall was "This is a controlled demolition"  Buildings do not fall symmetrically like that with asymmetrical damage, nor would the structure be compromised (somehow be unable to hold up all the weight it was holding up already) right down to the very base floors with a huge gaping center-hole in the middle of the rubble (showing it was pushing outward from the center).  Especially when it most of its concrete was somehow pulverized to dust.  And especially we would not see material ejecting laterally at a high rate of speed.  The energy required to do this was not in the building structure or the plane, and it would have had to be devices added to give it that extra 'kick'.  It's almost like the elevator shafts were rigged with explosives, along with other key points in the structure.
-8
Reply
Male 42,110
The truth about 9/11



Sorry, I know 9/11 jokes are wrong...... plane wrong
4
Reply
Male 6,025
Told you, Monk. Too soon after that last post. No one is in the mood for this shit.
4
Reply
Male 479
People are always willing to believe the quick simple answer. To me, the smoking gun will always be building 7. It had minor fires on a couple floors, and dropped like a rock.
-3
Reply
Male 6,025
Ozmose The smoking guns are the two 767’s that hit the Buildings.
3
Reply
Male 479
markust123 Neither of which hit building 7.
-4
Reply
Male 42,110
Ozmose    Occams razor - the simplest answer is usually the correct one.
1
Reply
Male 4,811
Gerry1of1 monks razor is used for taint hair removal before the flogging
1
Reply
Male 42,110
rumham If the best you have is that level of insult Monk wins
-1
Reply
Male 4,811
Gerry1of1 crap, then he wins. thanks gerry
0
Reply
Male 9,356
Gerry1of1 usually != always
-8
Reply
Male 42,110
monkwarrior   Not always, but it's logical to go with that until FACTS prove otherwise.
0
Reply
Male 9,356
Gerry1of1 exactly, and in the case of 9/11, facts point to the use of explosives, as more energy was needed to do what happened to those buildings than a simple plane that would have had most of it's energy burnt off in the initial fireball.
-8
Reply
Male 4,811
Gerry1of1 FACTS = western media and 9/11 and the moon. and the lizard people that monk hears while he poops
1
Reply
Male 9,356
rumham Facts, like what scientists in labs have discovered.
-9
Reply
Male 9,356
Ozmose my thoughts exactly.
-8
Reply
Male 4,811
monkwarrior i know right?
0
Reply
Male 9,356
rumham Is that the name of your synth?
-8
Reply
Male 16,490
monkwarrior I'm halfway through this thread and already I'm drunk 
3
Reply
Male 9,356
Draculya  lol, another user with a drinking problem.
-8
Reply
Male 4,811
0
Reply
Male 9,356
rumham will it be in a minor?
-8
Reply
Male 4,811
monkwarrior stop talking about catholic priests and their love of minors. you weird fuck
1
Reply
Male 9,356
rumham oh i see your trolling (or excess drinking) got in the way of understanding what i was asking.  I was sking, will it be in A minor (click to learn what that means)

-8
Reply
Male 16,490
No words; just picture me with a disapproving wry grimace.
2
Reply
Male 11,698
Too busy to derp today. Best of luck to you all.
4
Reply
Male 4,811
the forecast for this comment thread is partly cloudy with a 100% chance of derp vortex
5
Reply
Male 8,885
rumham HAHA
0
Reply
777
2
Reply
Male 4,811
layla_wilson lol atleast that vortex is interesting
2
Reply
Male 2,856
A dozen or so family members...out of several thousand.

I wonder how much money they've been conned out of. 

The links we've been provided solicit automatic monthly donations.
0
Reply
Male 9,356
jaysingrimm said, "The links we've been provided solicit automatic monthly donations."

More petty butt-hurt-inspired dishonesty?  One link has it at the bottom of the page, after the document.  The other 2 links you have to go to another page.  Those 2 other links also have links to evidence, volunteers, events, online stores, about them, their mission, and their contact information, but you could only focus one thing that would appear to satisfy your feeble clutch at straws to discredit.

You know, lots of places on the web ask for donations, right?
-12
Reply
Male 66
monkwarrior clutch at straws *drink*
3
Reply
Male 9,356
popsicle01  so drinking helps with your denial? 
-12
Reply
Male 2,856
monkwarrior
fancylad should ask you for donations for posting this for you.

You don't see a support banner at the top of that page?

I wasn't trying to suggest every link you shared here was soliciting...but you say they all are?
1
Reply
Male 9,356
jaysingrimm Oh, you're demanding that i address this point after refusing to conceded or accept that you were exposed?  Looks like you're moving the goalposts again.

Also when you said " I wasn't trying to suggest every link you shared here was soliciting ..", if you were honest you would have said:
a) "One link.."
b) "A link.."
C) "This specific link <link here>.."
"..we've been provided solicit automatic monthly donations. "


Not "The links* we've been provided solicit automatic monthly donations."
*Denotes all


Might be wise to wrap up your desperation and dishonesty, put it in your pocket, and r-u-n-n-o-f-t


-10
Reply
Male 2,856
monkwarrior 
You're welcome to your opinion. 

The fact is both 'Lawyer's Committee' and 'AE911truth' are soliciting automatic monthly donations.
1
Reply
Male 9,356
jaysingrimm you're welcome to your dishonesty.  But the fact is only one of those links is has an actual donation in the footer, as for the other ones, you have to take another link to see a donation page.  Again, it's simply your petty butt-hurt-dishonesty grasping at straws to try discredit what you don't like.
-10
Reply
Male 6,025
monkwarrior, “Looks like you're moving the goalposts again.”

You’re hilarious. The king of goalpost moving is pretending that someone is moving the goalpost.
4
Reply
Male 9,356
markust123 you're hilarious, coming to the defense of someone who is, while claiming they're not, all because you think there's strength in numbers against me. lol
-10
Reply
Male 4,811
monkwarrior there is derp in the vortex, synth
1
Reply
Male 9,356
rumham synth of your vortex.
-9
Reply
Male 4,811
monkwarrior i make a joyful noise . what do you contribute SYNTH 
0
Reply
Male 9,356
rumham i don't synth
-9
Reply
Male 6,025
monkwarrior As much as I’d like to stay and watch you lazily throw people’s insults back at them, I have to go have fun on the Funny Bus in Charlotte.
1
Reply
Male 9,356
markust123 It's not like you could do much anyway.  have fun.
-9
Reply
Male 6,025
monkwarrior The fact that you mostly mirror what I say back to me shows your utter lack of creativity.
3
Reply
Male 9,356
markust123 well when people deny facts, such as the basic laws of physics, there's not really much else to be said, but continuing to point out the flaw.  But face it, defending someone's moving the goalpost is just not a good choice.
-7
Reply
Male 4,982
eye roll
1
Reply
Male 6,025
I actual hope the court accepts this petition and moves along with a trial. I’m sad that families of the victims were manipulated like this by a conspiracy group, but it would be a great moment for sanity when AE911Truth are proved unequivocally wrong. The New York court will never take such an idiotic case, though.
2
Reply
Male 9,356
markust123 IMHO its more sad that the people of a nation have been herded by group dynamics (enforced with ridicule and mockery) coming from their own national broadcasters, whom mostly have chosen to live by lies rather than the truth.  It's especially so when seeing it happening in a nation that claims to value truth and facts.

-8
Reply
Male 66
monkwarrior group dynamics *drink*
2
Reply
Male 9,356
popsicle01  so drinking helps with your denial? 
-10
Reply
Male 6,025
monkwarrior I would tread lightly. People are still pissed from that “Crisis Actor” post yesterday. Yes, the conspiracy theorists in that were the worst of the worst but it still exposed the crazy of your world.
2
Reply
Male 9,356
markust123 i don't really care if people are upset over another post, to be honest. I just went to see the post, and it looks like a red herring people caught in group dynamics might use to feel better.  You know, to make a crazy example all to target their frustration and attempt to vilify or nullify the 'side' they dislike.
-7
Reply
Male 66
monkwarrior group dynamics *drink*
3
Reply
Male 9,356
popsicle01 so drinking helps with your denial?
-9
Reply
Male 66
monkwarrior No, drinking helps me cope with your horseshit.
4
Reply
Male 4,811
popsicle01 he doesnt give out personal information except his horseshit ideas
2
Reply
Male 9,356
popsicle01 So denial then, thanks.
-9
Reply
Male 2,856
monkwarrior 
Did you buy tickets and attend the symposium you referenced?
0
Reply
Male 9,356
jaysingrimm if i did or didn't i wouldn't say.
-8
Reply
Male 198
markust123 the conspiracy theorists won't accept any proof
1
Reply
Male 5,357
And here I was guessing, maybe he finally let it go.

6
Reply