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.

 

The strangest Coincidence regarding the Pentagon attack on 9/11

page: 72
287
<< 69  70  71    73  74  75 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:13 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee

Oh I am just telling a true story. Like you telling the OS of 911 and it is all true in your "opinion".




posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958



However he wink at me and said, no I don't believe the government version to what the government said of how the WTC came down, in fact, most engineers don't.



Oh I am just telling a true story.


No.

You are making a claim and stating it as fact, like you do on so many occasions.

Now, where's you proof?

Again you don't have any, because, like usual, your 'fact' is nonsense.

If it were not nonsense, you would back it up with proof, which you cannot do.

Thus, you have zero credibility here.

edit on 17-5-2017 by D8Tee because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:31 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee

Nothing wrong in having an "opinion", you have no problems given yours.

If you want to call my information BS, that is your right. However, to call it nonsense, that is your "opinion".

Sometimes like the OS, many parts cannot be proven, so I guess it is also nonsense then.

As far as my credibility? I am not here begging for credibility, no sir, that is entirely up to the casual ATS readers, not you.

I have no doubt that you believe I don't have any credibility, and that is ok with me. I am not going to ever change your mind about anything concerning 911.

What you don't understand is, ATS is a place for all different thinkers, and believers, weather you like it or not.
edit on 17-5-2017 by Informer1958 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

A large jet hit the pentagon and only irrationally people would make vague and unprovable innuendo, would make slanderous allegations by providing no credible evidence to discredit eyewitnesses that attest to a large jet hitting the pentagon, make false claims of only the government claiming a large commercial jet strike, and deny a large jet hit the pentagon.

Wink



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

So, please do tell what caused the damage at the pentagon. Simple... large jet strike? Yes or No?

Put it on the line! Or, the only credible theory is a large jet hit the pentagon.

Am I wrong to say the damage at the pentagon was caused by a large commercial jet?

Wonder why a majority of people distrust and see through conspiracy sites and conspiracists that cannot answer a simple question.
edit on 17-5-2017 by neutronflux because: Fixed damage



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958




However he wink at me and said, no I don't believe the government version to what the government said of how the WTC came down, in fact, most engineers don't.



Nothing wrong in having an "opinion", you have no problems given yours.


Do you not understand the difference between a fact an an opinion?

If your opinion is that most engineers don't believe the guv version of the collapses, you are merely deluded. When you state it as a fact, you are a liar.

edit on 17-5-2017 by D8Tee because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:47 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee

Are you replying to an individual that use to say "that was not peer reviewed." Or the person that would over and over go, " that is your opinion." Or would state, "cite a source please." Or a person that would state, "that is heresay."

Maybe a majority of people cannot stand conspiracists because of the conspiracist's hypocrisy?



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:50 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

Debate is great, nonsense is always just nonsense.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:52 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

You're entitled to your "opinions" as everyone else is.

If you believe the OS that's ok with me, I have no issue with it. I believe in freedom, the right to our own beliefs.

If you want to repeat the OS over and over, I say knock yourself out. If you want to call everything I say "false", that is your right.

If you seriously believe I am making slanderous allegations take me to court.

It is also my right to deny anything I choose, as you do, do you have a problem with that?
edit on 17-5-2017 by Informer1958 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:55 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee


When you state it as a fact, you are a liar.


You are not above ATS TC, Name calling is not allowed.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:56 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee

How can a person say the pentagon human remain photos are not credible evidence. Then say the photos are evidence passengers on the jet were not from flight 77 because of orange jail suits. ( we all know only prisoners wear orange. It's state law). Then claim they never said anything about orange jail suits after basing a whole theory on orange clothing?

I guess in a way we all agree a large jet hit the pentagon.....
edit on 17-5-2017 by neutronflux because: Fixed this and that



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: neutronflux

You're entitled to your "opinions" as everyone else is.

If you believe the OS that's ok with me, I have no issue with it. I believe in freedom, the right to our own beliefs.

If you want to repeat the OS over and over, I say knock yourself out. If you want to call everything I say "false", that is your right.

If you seriously believe I am making slanderous allegations take me to court.

It is also my right to deny anything I choose, as you do, do you have a problem with that?


Are you actually going to state a logical argument to discredit the 100 plus eyewitnesses that attest to seeing a large jet hitting the pentagon?

Are you saying it's a lie? Don't the people that attest to seeing a large commercial jet hitting the pentagon have a right to hear why you claim it's unbelievable?
edit on 17-5-2017 by neutronflux because: Fixed this and that



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: D8Tee


When you state it as a fact, you are a liar.


You are not above ATS TC, Name calling is not allowed.


You sir state as fact what cannot be validated by any sources, what do you call a person who does that?

Either be prepared to back up your 'fact' with sources, or qualify them as your opinion instead

You want others to sit idly by while you control the narrative and dish out a heaping helping of BS and call it factual.

You don't think people will call you out for that?



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:08 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux


I guess in a way we all agree a large jet hit the pentagon.....


Perhaps you are appealing to the hive minds, some of us and not followers.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:11 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee


You want others to sit idly by while you control the narrative and dish out a heaping helping of BS and call it factual.


Thank you, you give me so much power.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux

Are you actually going to state a logical argument to discredit the 100 plus eyewitness that attest to seeing a large jet hitting the pentagon?

Are you saying it's a lie? Don't the people that attest to seeing a large commercial jet hitting the pentagon have a right to hear why you claim it's unbelievable?


Not wanting to further inflame things, and though I believe AA77 crashed into the Pentagon - I did want to highlight that eyewitnesses can be biased, even in a large crowd. There's some info out there I recall when I was studying psychology. I will find you some links if you want.

EDIT:

So basically investigators would look for commonality in descriptions of events. You would obviously have differences here and there. But memory can be affected by a serious traumatic event, and certainly witnessing a passenger jet slamming into a building, seeing so much damage/smoke/fire would be traumatic, responding at the scene is traumatic. The body would be on an Adrenalin rush, hormones flood the ol noggin and can hamper memory retrieval/storage. Probably not explaining this properly lol.

The memory can easily become biased (see Misinformation effect), and biased based on background etc
edit on 17-5-2017 by auroraaus because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

So you are saying a large jet hit the pentagon. How can you be part of any camp if you don't make a provable statement? Make a credible argument in a jet hit the pentagon, or didn't hit the pentagon.

If you cannot state either way, then you have no point.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

Ah yes - opinions ......

An opinion is like a rectum, everyone had one, often full of crap......

You are entitled to your opinion, but not your own (made up) facts



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:27 PM
link   
a reply to: auroraaus

You seem nice, so please don't take this the wrong way.

You have a hundred plus eyewitnesses, backed by an air crew seeing a silver jet hitting the pentagon, backed by radar data and flight controllers, backed by recovered flight recorder data, backed by DNA analysis of flight 77 passengers, back by wreckage at the pentagon, wreckage in the pentagon, personal effects in the wreckage, death certificates, remains released for burial, funerals, eyewitness accounts of wreckage and human remains, trial evidence, The Pentagon Performance Repots, a entrance hole 70 to 90 feet wide and two stories tall where the tail section penetrated before building collapse, physical evidence where a jet engine hit a concrete lip outsider the pentagon ....


So you got a person saying accounts are not credible, but they will not state who and why.

Then there is another person stating people on the scene claim wreckage at the pentagon was wrong, but they will not cite the quotes.
edit on 17-5-2017 by neutronflux because: Fixed this and that

edit on 17-5-2017 by neutronflux because: Fixed this and that



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

Richard Gage, your hero...




top topics



 
287
<< 69  70  71    73  74  75 >>

log in

join