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.

 

Jason Ingersoll pics in high resolution.

page: 2
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 5 2009 @ 02:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by NIcon
reply to post by jthomas
 

I would love to go interview all those witnesses and look further into the details of 911. But I would need someone to take care of all my clients while I'm away. I would also need travel expenses, hotel accommodations, meals, etc. Also, I would need someone to take care of my mortgage and other bills while I'm gone and also take care of my wife, kids, and dogs. Do you know anyone who will do this, JThomas?

Will YOU, JThomas?

Otherwise I think I'll just muddle along when and if I have the time.....



hahaha........I don't know you, but that has to be a joke......right?




posted on Jan, 5 2009 @ 12:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by NIcon
reply to post by jthomas
 

"Why on earth me?" was what I thought when you asked if I was going to contact the thousand or so witnesses. And yes everyone has the burden of proof when they make a claim, but only so far as to satisfy the listeners of such claims.


I asked you if you would. Obviously, there is no reason for you to ask me to do CIT's investigation, is there?



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 10:14 AM
link   
reply to post by jthomas
 

no, no, no...that was my facetious attempt to get you to take care of all my personal and financial matters while I'm off interviewing all those witnesses. I wasn't asking if you would go interview them.

I must have misunderstood your original post, so I went back and read it again. And all I can say is thank you so much. I see now that your post was really not directed towards me at all, but was rather just a potshot taken at Craig and his arguments using me as an unaware, disinterested third party. So, thank you, again for treating me with so much integrity and respect as to use me in your ongoing discussion with CIT, jthomas. I do appreciate it. Please feel free to drag me into in any of your ongoing discussions of which I'm no part whenever you feel the need.



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 10:34 AM
link   
hmm i dont know how long after these pictures was taken but the only picture where i see something just slightly looks like a wreckage from a plane and its this one:





S/F from me to you for bringing these pictures on board ATS.

Best regards.

Loke.

[edit on 6-1-2009 by Loke.]



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by NIcon
reply to post by jthomas
 

no, no, no...that was my facetious attempt to get you to take care of all my personal and financial matters while I'm off interviewing all those witnesses. I wasn't asking if you would go interview them.

I must have misunderstood your original post, so I went back and read it again. And all I can say is thank you so much. I see now that your post was really not directed towards me at all, but was rather just a potshot taken at Craig and his arguments using me as an unaware, disinterested third party. So, thank you, again for treating me with so much integrity and respect as to use me in your ongoing discussion with CIT, jthomas.


Thank you, I'm happy to warn anyone about CIT's standards.


I do appreciate it. Please feel free to drag me into in any of your ongoing discussions of which I'm no part whenever you feel the need.


Asking you a question should never be interpreted as dragging you in.



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 12:18 PM
link   
reply to post by jthomas
 

jthomas, it is dragging me in when you totally disregarded my inquiry and decided to bring up arguments of other aspects of their work, such as, "changing the flight path", "why CIT refused", and "never helped CIT's case." And then somehow you associate me with their work by stating "if you want to keep the CIT flame burning" as if I have some sort of stake in what they do. I do appreciate their work and read their posts here, but I also read your responses to them. To me it's all food for thought which I need to weed through. But there is one thing you didn't consider in your original response to me... I'm not part of the discussion of the flight path. Nor have I ever interjected myself into that discussion of the flight path.

But for now, here's the one and only concern I have in this thread:

Here's the area of DSC_0411 at 100% that I'm looking at.




And here is the same area at 300%



And for reference here's that same area in DSC_0410



To me there seems to be a problem with those pair of legs.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 10:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT
 


Well if you take a look at photo dm-sd-02-03896 you will see a man right next to the building taking pictures.

I sure would like to see the photos he took that day...this is another piece of evidence that proves the pentagon has taken a "release only what needs to be" and keep everything else out of the public record.


Another thing one notices while looking at all of these photos you start to realize that it appears as if something was exploded with enough force to create ALOT of debris that is extremely small and its everywhere. I see alot of things in these photos i have never actually noticed before.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 10:19 PM
link   
Also in this picturewww.dodmedia.osd.mil... picture 03879 the famous CIT photo that he uses alot.

Maybe someone else could display this photo and circle what I am talking about but it appears to be a rather large piece of debris or airplane that is in the far right hand bottom corner. It also appears to be before the impact of the generator. Maybe someone else could give a opinion of this I thought maybe it is that (what appears to be a door) large piece of debris that there is already a photo of. Anyways, thought I'd bring it up.



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Stillresearchn911
 

Is this what you're talking about?



I'm looking in the other photos to see if I can find it in them.



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by NIcon

To me there seems to be a problem with those pair of legs.


That is bizarre.

I can't think of a reason on earth why that would have been doctored in or out of any image though.



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by NIcon
 


If that is what he is talking about, it looks to me like like a minivan or suv hatch that is open. And the legs that you are talking about just look strange where the body should be, is it smudged/blurred or what?



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 01:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by NIcon
reply to post by Stillresearchn911
 

Is this what you're talking about?



I'm looking in the other photos to see if I can find it in them.



This is exactly what I am talking about...This appears to be a piece of debris that was either blown out very far from the impact in the opposite direction OR this could be something that was knocked off the plane by the LP's. Just a guess...



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 02:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT
 

Craig, I can't think of any reason either. But I'm still hoping to find another source to see if it's just a glitch in the version you posted on your site.



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 02:42 PM
link   
reply to post by PplVSNWO
 

That's a possibility that it's a hatch back. Below is the next clear shot of that area (using the wire hanging down on the fence as reference) from DSC_0429:



And here's a wider shot after the roof collapsed from DSC_0457:



I don't see a large piece like that in these shots... unless they already moved it.

Not sure if the leg shot is blurred or is just a glitch. I'm looking for another source to see if it shows up in that version but it doesn't look like that pic was released anywhere else.



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 05:26 PM
link   
I do not see any airplane debris in any of the photos can someone show me where this airplane is. I do not see any airplanes parts laying anywhere at the so call impact zone (NOTHING!)



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 06:04 PM
link   
the missing legs look like the pic was taken 20 or so seconds after the first 2, and he has jumover a barrier, or or a waiste high ledge, look at the two figures on the right of the tree to his right, in the last photo, thier legs are "seem"missing at the waist as well.

It is very blurry...

but..looks fairly innocent to me.

[edit on 15-1-2009 by Nola213]



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 09:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Nola213
 

Nola213, is this the people you were talking about:



I had questions about that, too. That looks to me like it's some sort of crime scene tape.



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 09:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Nola213
 

Also, I thought that it might be a guard rail that was blocking out the guy on the left but I couldn't place where that rail is. It seems to me the guy is standing in the middle of the grass next to the road so it couldn't be next to the road. And it couldn't be next to the inside of the parking lot because it looks like it would be too high, then. Along with the fact it would just happen to have ended behind the van, because you don't see any railing behind the van, Also, I can't make out any railing there on an overhead map on google.

My next thought is that it might be a ladder or something on the top of the white van.



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 10:24 PM
link   
Also, Nola, I'm glad you mentioned the times between the pictures because that's what originally started me looking into these photos. Photos DSC_0409, DSC_0410, and DSC_0411 looked way too similar to me even though they are drastically different in zoom and center of focus.

In the cropped sections of the pictures below notice how the leaves line up exactly with the poles below:

Cropped from image DSC_0409:



Cropped from image DSC_0410 and enlarged to match size of above photo:



And here is DSC_0409 (the lighter section) superimposed on DSC_0410 to show the difference in zoom and center of focus. (Also notice that DSC_0409 is tilted slightly)




Is this possible to do with a camera on consecutive shots? Was he using a tripod? And if he was, why the slight tilt on DSC_0409? Maybe I'm obsessing too much on these three photos.



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 04:57 AM
link   
The more I look at these photos up close , especially paying attention to the confetti like debris that is everywhere and also keeping in mind the damage to the building the more I seem to coming up with a better hypothesis as to what happened to the 757 jet.

Keep in mind this is just a idea of a better explanation of what we see here.

It appears that as the 757 entered the building that the entire outside of the plane was sheared off as if it was squeezed through a hole that was to small for it. While doing this the outside of the plane was blown out in tiny confetti like pieces. I think that the larger piece of the outside skin will most likely trace back to the back of the jet which is why they crunched up but stayed in tact due to the loss of speed.

One thing I haven't figured out though is it is obvious based on where the majority of bodies were found and the direction of the impact damage that all of the heavy pieces of the jet kept going through the building.

So even going off of the known f175 video you see the jet enters the building and the explosion comes from inside out and is initially shaped by the floors befored the explosion clouds expanded.

So why didn't this happen at the pentagon, everything is going inside the building the only thing we see outside IMHO is the "skin" of the 757 jet. Why then does it seem that the explosion originated at the very outside of the building and a large circular explosion cloud follows. Why don't we see a explosion that is originating from inside the building like we see with south tower impact. Like is also seen in the north tower impact still photos that look at it from a side view, it clearly originates from inside the building.

One thing it makes me think of first is that the videos that the pentagon released may be doctored other than that I cannot understand how this would happen with the available debris that was left behind. You would think that if this explosion occurred outside of the building that more of the plane would have been left outside the building especially when you factor in that the jet was entering the building at a angle and this large explosion would have been created by the fuel tanks which in all likely hood would of split the plane into or at least like I said left more of the jet outside of the building.

My thinking may be off on this I'm no expert but trying to understand what the pentagon could easily solve by releasing a video of the entire impact.

(Sorry I cannot illustrate this here through photos but it should be very apparent what I'm talking about)




top topics



 
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join