It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

9/11 Bombshell: Methodical Deception -- Rebekah Roth

page: 17
135
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 06:53 PM
link   
a reply to: cardinalfan0596

I am not hung up over cell phone & airphone thank you.
And it is also confirmed by Boeings own maintenance logs that the airphones were disconnected in Januayr 2001 so could NOT have been used in September 2001. It is also confirmed by 2 spokemen for AA that the only planes still using AT&T's airphone service after January 2001 were 767's & 777's on international flights only.
I give in


Regardless of how many calls Barbra Olsen placed, the FBI state in evidence that her calls were not connected...not one
Furthermore, what sort of person holds a press conference minutes after hearing his wife being obliterated in an horrific plane crash? Ted Olsen's story over the years got rather embroidered and exaggerated to the point where the conversations appear to be gong on for hours!
edit on 13-9-2015 by PhyllidaDavenport because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 06:57 PM
link   
a reply to: PhyllidaDavenport You are going to give in and stick with believing wrong information. okay.



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 06:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: PhyllidaDavenport You are going to give in and stick with believing wrong information. okay.



You and I both know thats not what shes implying.

Lets keep a level head, shall we!
edit on 0400x6704America/ChicagovAmerica/Chicago9 by six67seven because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 07:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: six67seven
I dont have an MO.


The answer the question.


And no, I wont answer your frivalous question because you wouldnt post the pic that was easily located with a google search...and you had ample time because you kept replying to me over and over and chose not to post because you knew you were in the wrong.


Considering I was using Bing Images (you would have picked up on that if you clicked on the link) what I was getting was not the same as what you were getting.


I am not in any wrong, I simply posed a question about a ring that piqued my interest, and you responded - quite irresponsibly I might add - and now you're trying to save face by coming at me. But buddy...its too late. Im done with you!


It is irresponsible to say that a West Point grad would be wearing a class ring? It looked more like one of those than a Masonic ring. Additionally, I searched to see if the General was actually a Mason and the only sites that had him as one were all conspiracy related which I also indicated.

So again, why would a non-Mason wear a Masonic ring?



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 07:02 PM
link   
a reply to: six67seven

Oh, I have an extremely level head. It comes from 14 years of research, not a goofy, easily disproven video.



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 07:03 PM
link   
a reply to: cardinalfan0596

right information to me just as your information is right to you

Its very very difficult to believe such horror could be perpetrated by your own Government I would feel exactly the same I'm sure if it was my Government but I would still question and research as much as possible if there were so many holes in the OS however upsetting. Rocking someone's belief system is unpleasant. Beliefs are so very personal

On the subject of another call can anyone explain the CeeCee Lyles phone call which I have listened to over and over. It starts with CeeCee speaking quite matter of factly and only at the end does she show any emotion and then just before she hangs up you can hear a man's voice say "it was great". There is no background noise on any of the calls I've listened to no sounds of the plane no yelling or screaming and to be fair what hijackers would be allowing passengers free rein to use phones anyway (even presuming they worked!)



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 07:04 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Get over yourself.

No one has to answer to you!

Your intellectual arrogance is showing through. Its not a good look for you.

Keep trying though, I might answer your question... Yes, keep trying. (Is this considered trolling?)



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 07:14 PM
link   
a reply to: PhyllidaDavenport


You do not understand terrorism then. Not to mention, how were the hijackers going to stop anyone from using the phones? Or why would they care, they were more concerned with keeping the cockpit secure so they could finish their mission. This wasn't a hijacking where the plane sat in Beirut or Mogandishu for several days until the terrorists were killed/got what they wanted. There was ONE goal, staying in control of the aircraft until it hit its target.



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 07:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: six67seven

Oh, I have an extremely level head. It comes from 14 years of research, not a goofy, easily disproven video.



Basing your level-headedness on # of yrs researching a topic is the antithesis of level-headedness. Your lack of level-headedness that I spoke of was spurred by your emotional response from above which amounted to a passive-aggressive claim of victory, when obviously the debate continues.

We are all guilty of it now and then



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 07:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: six67seven
Get over yourself.

No one has to answer to you!


No one said they did. It is just common forum courtesy.


Your intellectual arrogance is showing through. Its not a good look for you.


My 'intellectual arrogance'? What truth am I blinded to or what error have I not admitted? I think you should apply this to yourself since you are the one flaunting the fact that you do not want to answer questions that you first claimed where not asked and then ignored.


Keep trying though, I might answer your question... Yes, keep trying. (Is this considered trolling?)


Maybe. Do you want to troll people?



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 07:18 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus


So again, why would a non-Mason wear a Masonic ring?

That is obviously a Masonic ring. And he was/is a Mason.


The Lemnitzer papers span the period from Lemnitzer’s service in the Tenth Coastal Artillery unit at Fort Adams during the early 1920’s until his wife’s death in 1994. The collection is composed of eleven series: biographical materials, including magazine and newspaper articles, academic transcripts, honors, vitas, and oral history interviews; General Lemnitzer’s writings and speeches; the correspondence of General and Katherine Lemnitzer, both official and personal, including greeting cards; the activities of General and Katherine Lemnitzer, ranging from charitable activities, dinner and entertainment functions, army social functions, membership on advisory boards; Masonic and civic activities, as well as political activities and lobbying; photographs; printed materials; newspaper clippings; memorabilia; and personal papers, such as family financial, legal and medical records; subject files for miscellaneous materials and oversize materials. The eleven series occupy eighteen boxes.

Source


edit on 13-9-2015 by eisegesis because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 07:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: six67seven
Get over yourself.

No one has to answer to you!


No one said they did. It is just common forum courtesy.


Your intellectual arrogance is showing through. Its not a good look for you.


My 'intellectual arrogance'? What truth am I blinded to or what error have I not admitted? I think you should apply this to yourself since you are the one flaunting the fact that you do not want to answer questions that you first claimed where not asked and then ignored.


Keep trying though, I might answer your question... Yes, keep trying. (Is this considered trolling?)


Maybe. Do you want to troll people?


Just in case you missed it....

Good day! (Seriously, I'm sorta done with you, thanks!)



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 07:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: Informer1958

FBI file on ATT Operator who received a call asking to be connected to (202) 514-2201 (Ted Olson's DoJ office)

www.911myths.com...

FBI files on notes on phone calls made that day, including an interview with Lori Lynn Keyton about the telephone calls she received from Barbra Olson that day. Ms. Keyton, at the time was Ted Olson's secretary.

www.911myths.com...





So, according to the FBI, Barbra Olson, DID call her husband, she just used an Airfone and not her personal cellphone.



911 Myths is not a credible source and has been exposed as a shill site.

What part of "FBI said no calls were made to Barbara Olson" do you not understand ?

Old saying ...You can lead a horse to water but you cant make him drink.



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 07:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: six67seven
Can you post the blown pic w/ vectors?

There's blur and reflection. I just outlined what seem to be the actual edges.
postimg.org...



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 07:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: eisegesis
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus


So again, why would a non-Mason wear a Masonic ring?

That is obviously a masonic ring. And he was/is a Mason.


The Lemnitzer papers span the period from Lemnitzer’s service in the Tenth Coastal Artillery unit at Fort Adams during the early 1920’s until his wife’s death in 1994. The collection is composed of eleven series: (1) biographical materials, including magazine and newspaper articles, academic transcripts, honors, vitas, and oral history interviews; (2) General Lemnitzer’s writings and speeches; (3) the correspondence of General and Katherine Lemnitzer, both official and personal, including greeting cards; (4) the activities of General and Katherine Lemnitzer, ranging from charitable activities, dinner and entertainment functions, army social functions, membership on advisory boards; Masonic and civic activities, as well as political activities and lobbying; (5) photographs; (6) printed materials; (7) newspaper clippings; (8) memorabilia; and (9) personal papers, such as family financial, legal and medical records; (10) subject files for miscellaneous materials and (11) oversize materials. The eleven series occupy eighteen boxes.

Source


Oh no.... I'm sure hes going to chase you all night with QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED!!!!

RUN!!!



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 07:26 PM
link   
a reply to: eisegesis

I stand corrected. Thank you.



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 07:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: six67seven
Oh no.... I'm sure hes going to chase you all night with QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED!!!!

RUN!!!


No, unlike you, I man up and admit my mistakes.



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 07:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: six67seven

originally posted by: eisegesis
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus


So again, why would a non-Mason wear a Masonic ring?

That is obviously a masonic ring. And he was/is a Mason.


The Lemnitzer papers span the period from Lemnitzer’s service in the Tenth Coastal Artillery unit at Fort Adams during the early 1920’s until his wife’s death in 1994. The collection is composed of eleven series: (1) biographical materials, including magazine and newspaper articles, academic transcripts, honors, vitas, and oral history interviews; (2) General Lemnitzer’s writings and speeches; (3) the correspondence of General and Katherine Lemnitzer, both official and personal, including greeting cards; (4) the activities of General and Katherine Lemnitzer, ranging from charitable activities, dinner and entertainment functions, army social functions, membership on advisory boards; Masonic and civic activities, as well as political activities and lobbying; (5) photographs; (6) printed materials; (7) newspaper clippings; (8) memorabilia; and (9) personal papers, such as family financial, legal and medical records; (10) subject files for miscellaneous materials and (11) oversize materials. The eleven series occupy eighteen boxes.

Source


Oh no.... I'm sure hes going to chase you all night with QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED!!!!

RUN!!!

Chill out and be civil. I didn't imply anything with my post to Augustus so if it goes anywhere, he took it there.


edit on 13-9-2015 by eisegesis because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 07:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: gentledissident

originally posted by: six67seven
Can you post the blown pic w/ vectors?

There's blur and reflection. I just outlined what seem to be the actual edges.
postimg.org...


I appreciate the time and effort with the pic, but that version, with the overlay distorts it even more to the extent that it forces us to see the Masonic symbol.

Nonetheless, sources point to Lemnitzer being a Mason, so its probably the ring is Masonic!

Sometimes I just love ATS.



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 07:32 PM
link   
a reply to: PhyllidaDavenport

I see you don't bother reading. David Ray Griffin is the one I quoted in my first post as saying he was wrong, and the spokesperson was talking about the aircraft in 2004.

As for the evidence by Rob Balsamo, he's apparently the only one that has a copy of that engineering order, as it's not to be found online anywhere, and all the information on it only goes back to 9/11 websites, not to American.




top topics



 
135
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join