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.

 

Open letter to Adam Larson AKA Caustic Logic

page: 2
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 2 2007 @ 08:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by seanm
So there's no confusion, let's look at what the compilation of all the evidence from numerous sources demonstrates in animated form.

www.youtube.com...




Numerous sources?



That is is a low level cartoon made by a single individual based on zero official data.

Mike Wilson is not "numerous sources".

Are you deliberately lying or is the so called "evidence" that you cite to support the official story really so flimsy?

Mike Wilson was not there and did not see the plane.

These people were and did:






The plane was not anywhere near where Mike Wilson says it was.

Mike Wilson's cartoon is not "evidence".

Here is a REAL animation based off government data depicting the actual topography which Mike Wilson ignored:

watch here

Of course this is based off government provided data and proves the official story a lie.

Please let me know when you have any real evidence for me to address.




posted on Oct, 2 2007 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
So there's no confusion, let's look at what the compilation of all the evidence from numerous sources demonstrates in animated form.

www.youtube.com...
Numerous sources?



Why, yes, Craig, NUMEROUS sources - eyewitnesses (remember the hundreds you desperately tried to deny ever existed?) - physical evidence, - you know, the thousands of Americans you think were hushed up by the government.


[That is is a low level cartoon made by a single individual based on zero official data.


Actually, as anyone can see with their own eyes, a far better "cartoon" than you provided.


Mike Wilson is not "numerous sources".


Ah, another Craig Ranke "Desperate Evasion" sets in. You'll note what I actually DID write, Craig: "let's look at what the compilation of all the evidence from numerous sources..."

OUCH! I feel your pain, Craig.


Are you deliberately lying or is the so called "evidence" that you cite to support the official story really so flimsy?


I keep asking you to refute the evidence. You refuse and decide to evade doing so instead. As always.


Mike Wilson was not there and did not see the plane.


Damn! I didn't see the Titanic sink.


These people were and did:






The plane was not anywhere near where Mike Wilson says it was.


What plane??? You said a plane didn't hit the Pentagon. I did notice the pictures of people pointing into empty sky, but didn't see what they said, did you?


Mike Wilson's cartoon is not "evidence".


Dear me, do you always have such reading comprehension problems, Craig?


Here is a REAL animation based off government data depicting the actual topography which Mike Wilson ignored:

watch here

Of course this is based off government provided data and proves the official story a lie.


Let me get this straight so no one here is left confused:

What you are really claiming, Craig Renke, alias Lyte Trip, is that government provided data was provided freely and without court order or any coercion of any sort by the United States Government to prove to all of us beyond any shadow of doubt that ITS very own "story" that a 757 hit the Pentagon is completely and utterly false.

Why would the government blow its own cover, Craig? That's kind of kooky for a 9/11 Truther to claim, isn't it, Craig?




[edit on 2-10-2007 by seanm]



posted on Oct, 2 2007 @ 10:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by seanm


Why would the government blow its own cover, Craig? That's kind of kooky for a 9/11 Truther to claim, isn't it, Craig?




The evidence is what it is.

I can not help if you do not have the mental capacity to understand it or if the government lies are so complexly woven that they contradict themselves nor is it my responsibility to explain why they would do so but Joseph Goebbels gave a pretty good explanation regarding a lie of this magnitude.

So far you have brought zero evidence to this discussion and have only succeeded in exposing yourself as a fool.

Follow me around in this forum with your empty declarations all you want but you will be ignored unless you have a relevant point concerning evidence.





[edit on 2-10-2007 by Craig Ranke CIT]



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 07:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT

Originally posted by seanm


Why would the government blow its own cover, Craig? That's kind of kooky for a 9/11 Truther to claim, isn't it, Craig?




The evidence is what it is.

I can not help if you do not have the mental capacity to understand it or if the government lies are so complexly woven that they contradict themselves nor is it my responsibility to explain why they would do so but Joseph Goebbels gave a pretty good explanation regarding a lie of this magnitude.

So far you have brought zero evidence to this discussion and have only succeeded in exposing yourself as a fool.

Follow me around in this forum with your empty declarations all you want but you will be ignored unless you have a relevant point concerning evidence.



Yes, the government made it more complex by contradicting itself - according to your convoluted, twisted, "theory" which has come back to bite you on your butt, Craig Ranke.

You can run away all you want. You won't ever be able to get to the real evidence because you know you can't, Craig.



posted on Oct, 20 2007 @ 12:02 AM
link   
You guys keep arguing your non-factual secondary questions as answers to his facts, rather than facing them straight on. This is ridiculous. All of the evidence you can present to me in the form of a website, whether it's about DNA or whatever, can all be manufactured. As far as eye-witnesses which can also be manufactured, much more easily with money or credibility which is what people at USA TODAY are looking for. Do you think any of those guys would get promoted if they didn't go along with the official story? Don't you think that goes the same with anyone in the position of prominence? It's the real people who told the truth that day. Just like the people Craig's interviewed. On top of that, some damning statements that were made by anyone with prominence have been reversed. Statements like how the bomb went off in the basement before the plane hit the trade center get completely dismissed because the person doesn't have any prominence. F*** prominence, it seems to only breed lies. Then your prominent sellout whores make some statement that goes against the official story and they have to make up and twist-turn their statements to fit better with the official story and they rarely even make any sense.

By the way, so far the illegal wars have made "them" at least $60 billion dollars, and that is very conservative. That's 3,000 $20 million dollar payoffs. You get a new identity, you get to travel around and live in foreign countries like a king. DNA evidence? can't you get that from a living person's hair? Again, all secondary theories that don't need to be proven. All we have to do is show a plane didn't hit the pentagon. In fact, I already know that the plane didn't hit the poles, which means something else broke them. Why would they do that? Why wouldn't they release the tape of it hitting the Pentagon? You can't just say "they didn't need it". You don't need it because you are vested in the system. Everybody here who supports the official story at all costs has extreme vested interest in the system in some way, whether it is business, government, monetary or a family who they would feel threatened if this were actually true. That is the source of your denial. Any free-thinking individual who has not emotionally vested themselves into the system can clearly see what is going on.

[edit on 20-10-2007 by drannno]



posted on Nov, 1 2007 @ 05:32 AM
link   
well put previous poster.

to those who ask what happened to the passenger if it didnt hit:

not to be rude or anything, but is that REALLY what you are asking?

we are discussing the cold blooded murder of 3000+ US citizens to justify killing hundreds of thousands of foreign ones and HARD evidence is being given to show that this happened...

AND THE ONLY ARGUMENT YOU CAN GIVE IS A LOGISTICAL ONE? this psyop was not a school project, we are not talking about a community volunteer project here, we are talking about some of THE most powerful people in the world, carrying out a plan designed to net them literally billions and billions of dollars. IF the plane had those passengers on it in the first place, they are most likely dead and buried, after extraction of suitable DNA evidence IF IT WAS NECESSARY AND NOT EASIER TO JUST BUY OFF THE INVESTIGATORS/USE THEIR OWN PEOPLE

you can not deny hard evidence with logistical problems. Logistical problems are insignificant and solvable, physical laws cannot be broken and conveniently portable size scraps of unburned sheet metal are not proof of a plane crash.


actually I just remembered something I had discovered years ago while researching this: MANY of the people who "died" in the pentagon "crash" were accountants/bookeepers for the pentagon. Considering that only one day before it had been announced that literally more than a TRILLION dollars was missing from the pentagon budget, by rummsfeld (Obviously timed to be buried by the 9/11 story), who bettter to kill off than those who might have known or been able to trace where it went....

so theres your "passengers". You want a logistical problem: how do you stop a car thats been hit with a flying pole, get out, find someone to help you ALL IN THE 1-2 SECONDS BEFORE THE PLANE HITS THE BUILDING as the loyd guy claimed at one time? now THATS a logistical problem!




top topics
 
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join