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.

 

Which PLANE did Bush claim to have seen on 9/11!!???

page: 3
2
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 09:40 AM
link   
FTR, I do not think he had a secret view... I just think he fouled up the coverup story and got caught in a lie.




posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by snoopy
You guys seem to think that I am implying it was a mistake asin he said the wrong thing. But I don't think that at all. I think that's jsut the way he talks. just as in he always mis pronounces the word 'nuclear', he will constantly speak in his redneck draw.


I could agree to this, except for him saying once that he saw it on the television in the corridor at the school (BTW, why would a school have a tv on in the hallway to begin with?). And then he says that they watched it in the classroom (BTW, why would they have the TV on in the classroom when the PRESIDENT is coming to visit them.....wouldn't that be kinda rude?)

When in actuallity he saw it in his limo. I don't care if he was litterally talking about seeing the first plane or not, because he lied either way. End of story.



posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 09:54 AM
link   
He must have seen a Boeing 757 at the airport in Tallahassee.



posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 11:06 PM
link   
So, I guess the overall consensus is that Bush lied no matter what he said since none of the "official" story believers have responded to my post?

BTW, yes I'm trying to bump the thread because I think this is a VERY valid point. No matter what he said....he lied...not only once...but twice. No one can refute that.



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 12:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by 2smooth4ya
Snoopy,

I don't get it.

If you are saying that you are not making excuses for Bush and that you hate him more than anyone on the planet, then how can you say that he didn't really mean to say that he "saw" a plane?


That analogy you displayed in your post is irrelevant. Mispronouciation isn't what Bush was doing. But if you want to believe that it's something else other than what came out of his mouth, so be it.

Sad.


He didn't mispronounce anything. It's simply a way of talking. Just as my example of "I saw you got a raise". It's the way some people talk. This analogy is more than relevant because many people talk like this and use the word "say" to mean "heard". "I saw you made the varisty team", "I saw you had a big date the other night". I could go on for days since this is so common speak.

So if you want to take a way of speaking that millions of people use every day and turn it into some conspiracy that makes no sense and has no rational reasoning, then that's your business, not mine. But if you want to know why the general public doesn't take this as a conspiracy, this is the reason. Most people understand that this is just a way of speaking and that the president is not very articulate with english as it is. If you want to use the words that came out of his mouth to meet your pre determined conclusion, so be it.



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 12:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Griff

I could agree to this, except for him saying once that he saw it on the television in the corridor at the school (BTW, why would a school have a tv on in the hallway to begin with?). And then he says that they watched it in the classroom (BTW, why would they have the TV on in the classroom when the PRESIDENT is coming to visit them.....wouldn't that be kinda rude?)

When in actuallity he saw it in his limo. I don't care if he was litterally talking about seeing the first plane or not, because he lied either way. End of story.


"And I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower -- the TV was obviously on,"

Outisde the classroom, in his limo. saw meaning "heard", but since he wasn't listening to the radio, but watching TV, he used the word "saw" instead.

"well, first of all, when we walked into the classroom, I had seen this plane fly into the first building. There was a TV set on"

This doesn't mean he was watching it in the classroom, he had just got done watching the news in the limo. The actual audio of him talking makes a little more sense because you can see he is chopping his sentence up as he is switching from one thought to the next as opposed to one smooth continuous sentence. It's more like:

well, first of all, when we walked into the classroom - I had seen this plane fly into the first building - There was a TV set on.

So he started saying he walked into the classroom, but realized he left out something important so he explained that he had already seen the news of the plane, then realized he left out more information and explained there was a TV. We all know the guy is not very articulate hand have all excepted that and made him the but of jokes because of it. Except in this case for some reason.



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 05:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by snoopy

Originally posted by Griff

I could agree to this, except for him saying once that he saw it on the television in the corridor at the school (BTW, why would a school have a tv on in the hallway to begin with?). And then he says that they watched it in the classroom (BTW, why would they have the TV on in the classroom when the PRESIDENT is coming to visit them.....wouldn't that be kinda rude?)

When in actuallity he saw it in his limo. I don't care if he was litterally talking about seeing the first plane or not, because he lied either way. End of story.


"And I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower -- the TV was obviously on,"

Outisde the classroom, in his limo. saw meaning "heard", but since he wasn't listening to the radio, but watching TV, he used the word "saw" instead.

"well, first of all, when we walked into the classroom, I had seen this plane fly into the first building. There was a TV set on"

This doesn't mean he was watching it in the classroom, he had just got done watching the news in the limo. The actual audio of him talking makes a little more sense because you can see he is chopping his sentence up as he is switching from one thought to the next as opposed to one smooth continuous sentence. It's more like:

well, first of all, when we walked into the classroom - I had seen this plane fly into the first building - There was a TV set on.

So he started saying he walked into the classroom, but realized he left out something important so he explained that he had already seen the news of the plane, then realized he left out more information and explained there was a TV. We all know the guy is not very articulate hand have all excepted that and made him the but of jokes because of it. Except in this case for some reason.


Ask yourself this question genious. Why was he watching TV to begin with? Was there some episode of Barney on that he needed to see? Is it typical for the most powerful man in the world to have to get his information from CNN? Listen to yourself dude. Your coming up with every possible meaning to what he said no matter how rediculus you sound and you're ignoring the obvious one. The TV was on, he saw the plane fly into the building. What does that look like to you?

Let's pretend for a second that 9/11 attacks never happened. Let's pretend that one plane hit one tower and it was an accident. Don't you think thats a major accident? Don't you think maybe that would require his attention since, if the towers REALLY were so unstable as to collapse do to fire, as the government claims, then the potential of the one tower collapsing is great, thus, killing thousands of people. Don't you think that's an important and serious situation? I do. But no, george wanders on in and continues on his day to read My Pet Goat to some little kids, or have it read to him. Either way, he failed. He lied. End of story.



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 06:10 AM
link   
snoopy,

Why did you ignore my post?

First you said it was because he left a "that" out. Now you say it is because he used "saw" instead of "heard". You claim he is using some form of speech that "millions" use.

You're telling me that you know millions of americans who say

I had seen that this plane fly into the first building.

when they really meant

I had heard that this plane fly into the first building.

???



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 06:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
snoopy,

Why did you ignore my post?

First you said it was because he left a "that" out. Now you say it is because he used "saw" instead of "heard". You claim he is using some form of speech that "millions" use.

You're telling me that you know millions of americans who say

I had seen that this plane fly into the first building.

when they really meant

I had heard that this plane fly into the first building.

???


This is stupid. I heard about it too. I'm not going around saying I "saw" it hit. That's retarded. Snoopy is desperate to keep his side of the argument going so he'll sink to any level to try and prove his point. Give up.



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 08:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by dstarsfan879905
This is stupid. I heard about it too. I'm not going around saying I "saw" it hit. That's retarded. Snoopy is desperate to keep his side of the argument going so he'll sink to any level to try and prove his point. Give up.


Quit the name calling thats twice you've reffered to Snoopy as retarded, its completely unnecessary....


Debate the subject not the poster.



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
snoopy,

Why did you ignore my post?

First you said it was because he left a "that" out. Now you say it is because he used "saw" instead of "heard". You claim he is using some form of speech that "millions" use.

You're telling me that you know millions of americans who say

I had seen that this plane fly into the first building.

when they really meant

I had heard that this plane fly into the first building.

???




Tell me about it.

He's reaching. He doesn't answer the question, only want to keep a circular arguement going on about how the words "saw" and "heard" have the same meaning.


I've "saw"(heard) it all.



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 08:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
snoopy,

Why did you ignore my post?

First you said it was because he left a "that" out. Now you say it is because he used "saw" instead of "heard". You claim he is using some form of speech that "millions" use.

You're telling me that you know millions of americans who say

I had seen that this plane fly into the first building.

when they really meant

I had heard that this plane fly into the first building.

???


That's exactly what i am saying. You have never seen anyone use examples such as I have given? You have never heard someone say something along the lines of "I saw you got a promotion". Which in past tense slang would be "I had seen you got a raise". None of them meaning that the person visually saw it.

He wouldn't use the word hear, because he was watching TV. So rather than say "I had seen on the news that a plane flew into the building", He chose the shortcut of "I had seen a plane flew into the WTC". Just as someone would use the word "ain't" instead of Isn't. Southerners have all kinds of slang shortcuts. Bush uses them in just about every speech he has ever given. Remeber when he tried to do the "fool me once" speech? No one question his slang then or during any of his other speeches. yet for some reason you guys do on this one.

So if you want to base your analysis by completely re-reading his way of talking, then that is your business. But if you want to know why the rest of the world doesn't pay attention to such claims, then this is why. You guys claim I am making excuses, yet you guys are the ones going out of your way to turn it into what you want. If you took his wording that literal on all his speeches, then none of them would make sense. Yet as I keep stated, they are constantly overlooked except for this case.



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 08:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by 2smooth4ya

I've "saw"(heard) it all.


Past tense. "I've seen it all". Does that mean I have seen everything that exists? You would agree that statement would mean anything I heard on the radio right? But I clearly can't see the radio. So it must be a conspiracy. I must have some live TV feed that shows me everything that exists. Yes, my circular logic.



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 08:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Koka

Originally posted by dstarsfan879905
This is stupid. I heard about it too. I'm not going around saying I "saw" it hit. That's retarded. Snoopy is desperate to keep his side of the argument going so he'll sink to any level to try and prove his point. Give up.


Quit the name calling thats twice you've reffered to Snoopy as retarded, its completely unnecessary....


Debate the subject not the poster.


calling it how i see it.



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 08:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by dstarsfan879905

This is stupid. I heard about it too. I'm not going around saying I "saw" it hit. That's retarded. Snoopy is desperate to keep his side of the argument going so he'll sink to any level to try and prove his point. Give up.


You're right. In paste tense you wouldn't say "saw". you would say "seen". how would you describe watching TV? Would you say you heard the TV?

This is real basic common sense people. But if all you want to see is some conspiracy, then that's all you are going to see no matter what I sy. Even though this is common southern talk that millions of people use every day, it's never going to make sense if all you want is to see a conspiracy. But man, this is by far the weakest one of them all. I can't claim he didn't lie. But to say that he did is a huge leap in logic.

but again, that's because we're a country working on a new top secret energy called 'nuclar'. Afterall, that's what he said.



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 08:43 PM
link   
Bush didn't say we were researching a top secret new energy called "nuclar."

He did say, twice, that he saw the first plane impact on TV. It's not very complicated.

Either the man is suffering from senile dementia, lying, or hiding something. None of the three are good.



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 08:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by dstarsfan879905

Debate the subject not the poster.


calling it how i see it.

Name calling stems from a lack of ability to debate on an intelectual level. Some people fight because they aren't smart enough to debate, others online insult. Calling it like I see it.



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 08:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
Bush didn't say we were researching a top secret new energy called "nuclar."

He did say, twice, that he saw the first plane impact on TV. It's not very complicated.

Either the man is suffering from senile dementia, lying, or hiding something. None of the three are good.


He has never used the word Nuclear. he always says Nuclar.So what do you do? You know he means nuclear.

What you are doing is interpreting what he is saying literally because it fits your pre determined conclusion. It's no dementia. It's jsut how some people talk, especially in the south. Read any of his speeches and you will see the same thing. You're right, it's not complicated at all. It's almost laughable. Like I said, it helps if you hear it as opposed to read it because you can hear where is is stumbling between thoughts.



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by snoopy
He has never used the word Nuclear. he always says Nuclar.So what do you do? You know he means nuclear.


So he must also mean that he saw the first plane hit. After all, he said so twice.


What you are doing is interpreting what he is saying literally because it fits your pre determined conclusion.


You would rather me pretend that he said something different, so that it would confuse me and make me wonder why he said it?



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 10:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
You would rather me pretend that he said something different, so that it would confuse me and make me wonder why he said it?


No, I would rather you use the same interpretations you use with everything else he says and not make an exception the one time it makes for a good conspiracy story. Especially when many people talk the same exact way, especially from his area of the country. Just like you would with Arnold Schwatzenager, or someone from Australia.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join