...............where did the passengers go then?.......If we knew exactly what happened it would be a done deal.
How about a new independant investigation with supeona power? I think we have enough justifiable questions to warrent one.

They are being tortured in some secret CIA gulag. They have that much power and this would simply be them exerting that power and getting away with it.

Used simply as a hitch in any conspiracy theory directed at them. If we can get people to understand the towers.... the missing people is just another hurdle that they couldn't possibly accept
___________________
Together in Truth!

Its an irrelevant argument.

It is most likely they are dead. the correct question is how they died. It would be too risky for the criminal elements to have the passengers alive elsewhere under new identities, even in another country. they had to be eliminated. Now, whether or not they were disposed of in a second aircraft over deep seas is a reasonable speculation. It is plausible, and fits with the moral pattern displayed by the criminal elements that pulled this op off.

as the break in the chain of the governments logic has already been established, its irrelevant at this juncture to speculate on the final disposition of the passengers. Its impossible that Hani Hanjour piloted the plane, its impossible that he could have made the final approach and impact, its impossible he could have remained in control of the aircraft even after striking the light poles and from the ground effect lift at the high speed following a tight bank.

Until we have the full opportunity for discovery, access to unfiltered records, and the ability to enforce subpoenas and testimony under oath, attempting to guess the fate of the passengers is pure speculation.

Why don't you tell that to a family member who lost someone, that the fate of their father, or mother, or brother is irrelevant except that they died.

These kinds of statements only underscore to those who want to malign us how disconnected we are from humanity.

A false flag took place and there are some good points to expose it, but making wild speculation about missiles, bombs, flyovers, etc., based on claims like how some people can be trusted to know what they saw, and some cannot (because they are a government worker . . . just as every single troop is in Iraq is right now, just as many of those on patriotsquestion911 are, and just as the vast majority of DC probably is) will only tank the rest of the strong and good work that people are doing by tainting it with offensive nonsense.

This is way beyond sloppy.

You are making an appeal to emotion in your arguments. I made no wild assertions in my arguments and for you to suggest otherwise is either sloppy reading, or poor understanding of what I said.

You obviously do not understand how to weigh evidence, how to impeach witnesses, or how to establish or quash credibility.

In the absence of physical evidence, the next logically weighted evidence is going to be competing witness statements. You then have to both establish your witnesses superior credibility versus the governments witnesses - who by the nature of their office, are going to have an advantage - initially. The presumption is initially going to be in favor of the government. The Truth movement must overwhelm that presumption - not just equal. A draw based on the evidence, or the witnesses is going to be insufficient.

You cannot prove either way beyond a reasonable doubt what truly happened to the passengers on Flight 77. Just because they are dead does not establish how they died, merely that they are dead.

If Lloyd England is worried that he will be exposed as the mastermind of 9/11?
I guess he doesn't count as a witness, being to busy smashing out his windshield in rush hour traffic.
Mike Walter I'm sure is also sweeting bullets, along with that evil Father McGraw. And wheelhouse I'm sure is worried that he will be exposed as an "agent".

last minute because apparently that's the way this show comes together.

we certainly pushed for more lead time.

that it is happening at all is the point.

...the collapses of the three buildings? Aren't they better smoking guns, especially WTC7, to wake up the public? Why specifically exclude this? Because this is what was talked about last week with Steven Jones. By the way, no disrespect to family members, but it was Steven Jones who found traces of nano-thermite in the dust, not the family members. I don't understand your unwarranted prejudice towards anyone who isn't an family member and didn't attend every commission meeting.

"Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. Whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government." -The Declaration of Independence

And the "day of 9/11" includes EVERYTHING, and A LOT of people in that list did not attend the investigations. By the way... "unwarranted prejudice?" Remember... whatever anger, frustration, anguish, stress you feel with regards to everything concerning the 9/11 attacks, PALES in comparison to what the family members are going through. I simply can't imagine what they're going through (think of everything done in their loved ones name), but whatever it is, I know they deserve better than they've gotten. As do we all. They have NOT gotten ANY coverage (with VERY few exceptions), and they deserve to be heard.

How can you watch that, and NOT want to do everything in your power to help him, and them? Maybe it's the way I think. Maybe I'm wrong. It doesn't feel like it.

...the family members don't get enough coverage but something is better than nothing and I don't think just because family members don't get enough exposure that we shouldn't get Richard Gage, Steven Jones and other experts in their field in the media as much as possible. I would much rather Richard Gage describing to the masses the anomalies of the collapses than a family member. He just has more authority on that particular subject, even if he didn't lose someone on 9/11.

"Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. Whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government." -The Declaration of Independence

Know how much interaction you've had with them, but I am forever amazed at the information the families are aware of. Especially those that took part in the hearings.

He was great and then some bozo came on and called him "a liar" and Richard Greene told him that he would not tolerate Ad Hominems.

I think its a great show so far.

On an Amazon discussion last year on the product page for Debunking 9/11 Debunking, someone started a thread about the then newly-formed ae911truth.org. Ronald Wieck posted, saying: "Gage recycles all the thoroughly debunked canards conspiracy liars have been peddling for years. Will the latest kid on the fantasist block actually be willing to debate anyone who can expose his snake oil? Don't hold your breath."

I put him in his place saying:
_______________________________

Ronald "Pomeroo" Wieck:

Not only are you a "shill," you are a hypocrite as well. When I watched the "off-air" footage with yourself, Roberts, and the Loose Change crew, you said, politely: "One thing that really bugs me [addressing Avery and Bermas] is when people call each other liars and shills" and so forth. Well, why is it that when you post as "pomeroo" on JREF or when you post silly comments on forums like this, you refer to the truth movement as "liars" and its claims as "canards" which we have been "peddling." In fact, the word "peddling" is also right out of Jim Meigs' mouth. You are the ultimate hypocrite, sir.

You also refer to us as fantasists, and, as is the vogue for JREF, "twoofers." With regard to your moniker and description on the JREF forum, even your self-description of "unpaid gubmint shill" is something of an untruth, given that SOMEONE must have given you a paycheck for these Hardfire shows in which you invite people on your show, including Rodriguez (who declined), for the sole purpose of debunking them. I'm sure you were paid for the episodes Mark Roberts was on. I also imagine you get paid for contributing to the right-wing magazine "American Thinker," in which you call Michael Moore a socialist America-hater. Regardless of WHO is paying you, and obviously your paycheck is coming from various private-sector employers in journalism, etc., you are shamelessly shilling for the government's official version of the 9/11 attacks, and as Griffin shows in the present book, it is the "debunking attempts" on behalf of Popular Mechanics which are the canards that have been thoroughly debunked.

Why don't you give your conscience a good look in the mirror and step over to the correct side of history.