I'm still waiting for you to tell me what a recovered Passport actually proves. It proves Nothing, that's why Eddie bailed.
Shall we refer to the rules You've to tear apart my allegations A quick change of direction matched again Tinfoil 3 Dev 0
You've not made any allegations. You do understand what I'm asking, tell me what the Passport proves? What inference should be drawn by the passport being recovered?
I put it simply for you How does the paper passport of an alleged terrorist survive a plane crash that destroyed the blackbox recorder onboard, set fire to the entire plane AND melt a buildings steel structure from the inside without being placed, surreptitiously,in the street by a second party?
What does it matter? The Passport was not used as “evidence” that Satam Al Suqami was on the plane, he was on the flight passenger list, he was on the register at the Milner Hotel with two of the other Highjackers and he went through a CAPPS check at the Airport where he boarded the plane. He has NEVER been heard from again, he's Dead. The Passport is irrelevant. So there is lots of evidence that shows he was on the plane. I’ve already explained that lots of objects survived intact, a seat cushion from the plane survived; do you think was that planted too? As for your “Melted Steel”, you said yesterday that No steel Melted??
People lied at both inquiries, of that I have no doubt. If they colluded with each other that would be classed as a "Conspiracy" by some, not by me, I just feel that Inquiries seldom (if ever) get the whole truth and nothing but.
Did the Government tell lies? If the government lied and colluded in their lies then yes it was a Conspiracy - by definition. However, its also a distinct possibility that other witnesses lied too and if they colluded then they Conspired too - by definition.
I've just been reading up on the Saville report and a book about it. I enjoy these NI chats, I find them interesting, but I am aware that I'm partisan in this matter and whenever I get the feeling that I'm pretty much certain of something I usually go out of my way to find evidence that will contradict my beliefs. My own unit was a Para unit so I know full well the Para ethos and have myself felt the esprit de corps and undestand the Gung Ho attitude they are known for. I had many friends in 2 and 3 Para, 1 Para not so much, and at the time I joined, Bloody Sunday was still fresh in the memory and soldiers who were there, or who knew people were there, told me their version of events. Naturally I believed their versions, why not? You believe the version you've been given, that's fine, perfectly logical. But now, honestly? I don't believe the version of events I was told many moons ago, not all of it. Innocent people were murdered, of that there is little doubt, but I don't believe we will ever know the full story because some people will never talk, some witnesses never even gave evidence and some who did contradicted others. NO inquiry could ever hope to get the truth, the whole truth and nothing but.
