The truth of 9/11, pt. 2 *POLL*

TmcMistress · Post by **TmcMistress** » Mon Mar 24, 2008 6:50 am

Here are my rules for these threads; I ask that you please follow them if you participate in this poll.

1. If you participate in part 1, please also participate in part 2.

2. This thread is not for debate. If you wish to debate any issues these threads bring to mind, please start a new topic. All I'm looking for here is your vote, and an explanation of that vote.

3. Please answer as honestly as possible, without regard to your answer in the other part.

Note: By 'official version', I mean that presented by the 9/11 Commission Report and various official sources to this day; i.e., that it really was plotted by Osama bin Laden and carried out by 19 Muslim hijackers, with no prior knowledge by government sources of that specific plot.

marky 54 · Post by **marky 54** » Mon Mar 24, 2008 10:03 am

absolutly, again however one persons proof is different to anothers. but if the proof explained all the discrepences that exsist at present with no contridictions then how could you not believe it.

9/11 truth to me(and i'm sure to most) dos'nt mean only looking for evidence of a conspiracy, but also confirmation and more solid proof the offical version is true, which is where im stuck in certain area's of the 'evidence' surronding the event, some of the evidence and procedures surronding the event and investigastion afterwards are somewhat suspect or the proof is'nt clear and numerous contridictions exsist. for example was cheney in his bunker or not? etc etc.

NorthernSoul · Post by **NorthernSoul** » Mon Mar 24, 2008 1:24 pm

If it faced up to professional scrutiny, yes.

Stefan · Post by **Stefan** » Mon Mar 24, 2008 2:57 pm

The "term absolute proof" means you'd be insane if you didn't believe it - so yes of course I would.

Hagbard Celine · Post by **Hagbard Celine** » Mon Mar 24, 2008 4:33 pm

Stefan wrote:The "term absolute proof" means you'd be insane if you didn't believe it - so yes of course I would.

Is such a thing as absolute proof possible in anything except simple mathematical systems like 1+1=2 etc?

Stefan · Post by **Stefan** » Mon Mar 24, 2008 4:36 pm

Hagbard Celine wrote:
Stefan wrote:The "term absolute proof" means you'd be insane if you didn't believe it - so yes of course I would.
Is such a thing as absolute proof possible in anything except simple mathematical systems like 1+1=2 etc?

That could be the beggining a long philosophical debate which would be beside the point -

Within a hypothetical - as presented above - it doesn't matter. The hypothetical is that we have complete proof - so within that hypothetical anyone saying they would refuse to beleive what has been 100% demonstrated to be fact would have to be insane...

Hagbard Celine · Post by **Hagbard Celine** » Mon Mar 24, 2008 5:03 pm

Stefan wrote:
Hagbard Celine wrote:
Stefan wrote:The "term absolute proof" means you'd be insane if you didn't believe it - so yes of course I would.
Is such a thing as absolute proof possible in anything except simple mathematical systems like 1+1=2 etc?
That could be the beggining a long philosophical debate which would be beside the point -

Within a hypothetical - as presented above - it doesn't matter. The hypothetical is that we have complete proof - so within that hypothetical anyone saying they would refuse to beleive what has been 100% demonstrated to be fact would have to be insane...

OK. If I somehow had universal knowlege of the entire situation, that could be guarenteed to be true, then I would accept as real whatever I discovered.

9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom

The truth of 9/11, pt. 2 POLL

If someone brought you absolute proof that the official version of 9/11 events was true, would you believe it?

The truth of 9/11, pt. 2 POLL