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.

 

FLIGHT 93 - The Biggest 911 Smoking Gun!

page: 90
24
<< 87  88  89    91  92  93 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 11:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by jackinthebox
reply to post by snoopy
 



Yeah kid, like the FBI is going to come to your parents house, up to your bedroom and show you this info.


You obviously have no idea who you are talking to. Your weak personal attacks will get you no closer to the truth.



My personal attacks are simply paying you the same respect you pay others. So let's stop pretending you are someone of some importance here. your rhetoric and childish antics will keep pushing you further from any truth. Or are you going to sit here and pretend that it's acceptable for the FBI come and bring you the evidence from an investigation? Are you going to sit here an pretend it's acceptable to demand that the airlines go take pictures of all the wreckage in order to appease you?

If you are going to claim that these people are wrong or lying, then you need to prove it. We have provided you the evidence and articles that show things such as 95% of the wreckage being found. If you want to claim these sources are wrong, then please do so.

Until then calling people inexperienced and other such personal attacks is not acceptable.




posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 12:00 AM
link   
reply to post by snoopy
 



My personal attacks are simply paying you the same respect you pay others.


Let's not forget who started with the personal attacks here kiddo, and get to the topic.



Or are you going to sit here and pretend that it's acceptable for the FBI come and bring you the evidence from an investigation?


Yes, the FBI should provide the evidence. More specifically, if you are going to argue the point, you should have come prepared.



Are you going to sit here an pretend it's acceptable to demand that the airlines go take pictures of all the wreckage in order to appease you?


It is not a matter of appeasing anyone. It is a matter of conducting a proper investigation.



If you are going to claim that these people are wrong or lying, then you need to prove it. We have provided you the evidence and articles that show things such as 95% of the wreckage being found.


I have seen no such evidence. An article from CNN is proof of nothing. There is a BBC article that sais nine of the hijackers are still alive. So what does that tell you?



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 12:02 AM
link   
So you cannot provide any evidence that there wasn't really a plane? You can't provide any evidence to refute all the witnesses and the experts and all the physical evidence? You have nothing to offer what so ever?

That's what I thought.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 12:09 AM
link   
reply to post by snoopy
 



So you cannot provide any evidence that there wasn't really a plane?


And how would you propse that someone prove a negative.


If there were in fact a plane crash, it shouldn't have been too hard to prove. Perhaps it would have looked like a plane crashed in the field? Call me a skeptic, but I am not willing to see what is not there.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 12:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by jackinthebox
reply to post by snoopy
 



So you cannot provide any evidence that there wasn't really a plane?


And how would you propse that someone prove a negative.


If there were in fact a plane crash, it shouldn't have been too hard to prove. Perhaps it would have looked like a plane crashed in the field? Call me a skeptic, but I am not willing to see what is not there.


Prove a negative? No you are claiming that all these sources are wrong. please show us. You are claiming that a plane didn't crash despite all this evidence. So please show us your proof. It's not a negative at all. You are dismissing the evidence and saying it doesn't exist.

No you're right it shouldn't be too hard to prove and it was proven.


But if you are so sure there isn't a single piece of evidence of a plane despite the long lists of it provided to you, then why don't you sue the government? Why don't you take this to court? I mean clearly no plane crashed right? That would constitute fraud right? So if you are so sure about it, why not get off the computer an take it to court? Why don't you ask the defense lawyers in the last trial why they didn't use the same arguments? Please enlighten us.


if you give up, I can tell you why.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 12:32 AM
link   
reply to post by snoopy
 



You are claiming that a plane didn't crash despite all this evidence.


Show me the evidence. Better yet, show me the proof.

So far, all I've seen is a hole in the ground with some metal scraps laying around.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 01:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by jackinthebox
reply to post by snoopy
 



You are claiming that a plane didn't crash despite all this evidence.


Show me the evidence. Better yet, show me the proof.

So far, all I've seen is a hole in the ground with some metal scraps laying around.



Which threads in the forum have you checked so far? Can you list them for me? because there are threads on this very forum with 100s of pictures of debris. Threads with the witness quotes and everything else. Which ones have you looked at so far?



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 01:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by snoopy
Or better yet, try filing a lawsuit against the government an try using those arguments.

You mean something like this lawsuit?



You can't simply claim everyone is wrong because you don't believe it. You have to prove they are wrong.

Where is the forensic evidence that shows 95% of the alleged plane being recovered? Where is the forensic evidence that matches the alleged wreckage by serial numbers to the alleged plane that was allegedly flight UA93?



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 02:45 AM
link   
Since operation northwoods was blown wide open there is no doubt in my mind that there is something more to flight 93. For example if it were empty, where would have all the passengers went? Say a drone for example?



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 11:35 AM
link   
reply to post by snoopy
 



Which threads in the forum have you checked so far? Can you list them for me? because there are threads on this very forum with 100s of pictures of debris. Threads with the witness quotes and everything else. Which ones have you looked at so far?


I must have missed all the threads you started that explain in detail how the official version of events is clear and accurate. I look forward to viewing them just as soon as you point them out to me.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 11:49 AM
link   
And so far no one has debunked the DNA facts proving 93 impacted in PA. All attempts have fallen short on facts and evidence. The smoking gun, is not there.

[edit on 7-4-2008 by beachnut]



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 12:18 PM
link   
reply to post by beachnut
 



And so far no one has debunked the DNA facts proving 93 impacted in PA. All attempts have fallen short on facts and evidence. The smoking gun, is not there.


DNA does not prove that Flight 93 impacted in Shanksville, unless you have proof that the DNA material was indeed recovered at the scene. I have yet to see a proper chain of custody report, but I must admit that I would even be skeptical of an easily falsified report at this point. This is why there must be a new and independent investigation, so that the photographic evidence can be confirmed. In any investigation, human remains will be photographed and their location marked, before being moved from the scene.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by snoopy
Or better yet, try filing a lawsuit against the government an try using those arguments.

You mean something like this lawsuit?



You can't simply claim everyone is wrong because you don't believe it. You have to prove they are wrong.

Where is the forensic evidence that shows 95% of the alleged plane being recovered? Where is the forensic evidence that matches the alleged wreckage by serial numbers to the alleged plane that was allegedly flight UA93?


Yeah a lawsuit claiming space beams were used on 9/11. And we wonder why the truth movement isn't taken seriously?

Are you claiming that the 95% of the wreckage that the FBI and airlines claim to have recovered is wrong? Can you present any other FBI cases or airline crashes where they presented to the public pictures of every piece recovered? Of course not, they simply tell us what they found because any more than that would be absurd and unrealistic.


If you would like to prove they are wrong or lying, please do so. If you would like to prove some motive for the airline to lie about their own airplane, please do so and back it up. Otherwise the whole argument of "well in order for me to believe anything I must personally be shown all the evidence myself" is not valid. And wat would it matter if you were shown all the picture? Your next argument would be that there's no way to prove they were from that actual plane.


But the bottom line is that flight 93 was seen on RADAR and it disappeared at said location form RADAR. The FDR from flight 93 was found at that spot. The data on its FDR shows it going to that exact spot. The wreckage from flight 93 was found at that spot. The remains of the passengers from flight 93 were found at that spot, the belongings of the passengers of flight 93 were found at that spot. Witnesses saw flight 93 hit that spot. Other planes saw flight 93 hit that spot. The voice recorder and phone calls all confirm what was going on with flight 93. The plane tickets, money trails, and other evidence all support the events that happened.


So are you going to claim that all this evidence which is an open shut case is wrong? And if so that despite all of that the plane didn't crash there? Do you have any evidence that is more compelling than this? Please share it with us. And again, why not take it to court if you have a compelling case? Going to court and claiming space beams were used is NOT a case, its absurd. For a case you need real evidence and can't simply say "well I don't believe it". When you go to court and all these experts testify, all these witnesses testify, and all this debris is presented, what are your arguments going to be? Because the ones you are using on this thread are going to get you thrown out.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 12:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by jackinthebox
reply to post by beachnut
 



And so far no one has debunked the DNA facts proving 93 impacted in PA. All attempts have fallen short on facts and evidence. The smoking gun, is not there.


DNA does not prove that Flight 93 impacted in Shanksville, unless you have proof that the DNA material was indeed recovered at the scene. I have yet to see a proper chain of custody report, but I must admit that I would even be skeptical of an easily falsified report at this point. This is why there must be a new and independent investigation, so that the photographic evidence can be confirmed. In any investigation, human remains will be photographed and their location marked, before being moved from the scene.


So when the coroner testifies to verify that he indeed got the samples from the crash site and handed them off to the next person who then verifies they received it from him and did the testing, what is your argument going to be? How are you going to prove that there was tampering? And how are you going to explain what happened to the people on the flight who are known to have left on that flight that according to you magically disappeared over the exact area that a crash took place. And how will you explain all of the plane ending up there at that exact moment? how are you going to explain the 1000s of people who would all have to be in on this conspiracy and for no reason?

you claim a falsified report, then prove it. Because otherwise your argument will NOT stand up in court. And how about you show us examples of photographs of all human remains from an accident scene and you show us the chain of command and everything else you require from any other accident? You can't do it. you know it. You're just trying to play a game by making the requirements impossible so you can pretend you have made a valid argument. But you haven't. And this is why your argument sits here on an conspiracy site and will never get past sitting on a conspiracy site.

tell you what, why don't you go to the presses with your argument and see how far it gets you.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 01:27 PM
link   
reply to post by snoopy
 



So when the coroner testifies to verify that he indeed got the samples from the crash site and handed them off to the next person who then verifies they received it from him and did the testing, what is your argument going to be?


I have seen no such evidence. If I did, I would follow the path where the evidence leads. Don't mistake me for someone who is trying to prove anything one way or the other. I have no agenda.



And how are you going to explain what happened to the people on the flight who are known to have left on that flight that according to you magically disappeared over the exact area that a crash took place.


Kindly refrain from attributing to me erroneous statements that you yourself choose to make up.

I have never said that anyone "magically disappeared over the exact area..." Do you have any proof that those people actually were over the exact area?



And how will you explain all of the plane ending up there at that exact moment?


You mean all of the plane that you have still failed to show me? I'll tell you what. Let's make it easy. Just show me the engine cores to start with.



how are you going to explain the 1000s of people who would all have to be in on this conspiracy and for no reason?


There is no reason to believe that thousands of people would have to have been "in on" any conspiracy. Misdirection and compartmentalization would absolve any such need.



And how about you show us examples of photographs of all human remains from an accident scene and you show us the chain of command and everything else you require from any other accident?


If you would like to see the accident scenes I have worked, or the homicide investigations I have been privy to, send me a U2U with your email address. Be advised, they are not for the squeamish.



You're just trying to play a game by making the requirements impossible so you can pretend you have made a valid argument.


I am doing no such thing. Perhaps you should learn how a proper investigation is carried out, before you go making wild accusations about me.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by jackinthebox





I have seen no such evidence. If I did, I would follow the path where the evidence leads. Don't mistake me for someone who is trying to prove anything one way or the other. I have no agenda.


That is because you have yet to look. Which threads did you look at so far? I have already asked you and you didn't respond. There are 100s of threads on this with all the info, which did you check so far?





Kindly refrain from attributing to me erroneous statements that you yourself choose to make up.

I have never said that anyone "magically disappeared over the exact area..." Do you have any proof that those people actually were over the exact area?


I am not making it up, you are making implications that leave NO other possibility. If what you are saying is correct, that's the ONLY remaining possibility. Unless of course you would care to give us your theory on what happened. yes we have proof the people were over that exact area. Tons of it. But you choose not to simply use the search function on this forum to find it.





You mean all of the plane that you have still failed to show me? I'll tell you what. Let's make it easy. Just show me the engine cores to start with.

Again, which threads id you check so far? Please list them. And yes you DO have an agenda. To pretend that well known facts never happened. And you wonder why no one outside of a conspiracy forum takes you seriously.





There is no reason to believe that thousands of people would have to have been "in on" any conspiracy. Misdirection and compartmentalization would absolve any such need.


OK, prove it. Prove that everyone involved was oblivious to everything going on. Prove someone tampered with everything and no one was able to notice anything. It's your claim that YOU made. Please back it up.






If you would like to see the accident scenes I have worked, or the homicide investigations I have been privy to, send me a U2U with your email address. Be advised, they are not for the squeamish.



Yes I would. Post them here. And I also want proof that those pictures came form the actual scenes you claim they did. I want proof that it wasn't planted by you from somewhere else. Until you can do so, you can't prove anything. And I want proof that due to compartmentalization that they haven't been tampered with.





I am doing no such thing. Perhaps you should learn how a proper investigation is carried out, before you go making wild accusations about me.


Oh you absolutely are doing just that and you clearly have no idea how a proper investigation is run. You have already proven it. You already haven't shown any proof of accidents you said you have been investigating. And then you expect people who weren't there to provide you the same evidence. Evidence that you can just as easily dismiss any way you want to. But you can't prove any tampering. You know very well that none of the accidents you may have seen have online documentation. And thus anyone can claim that none of them exist.

So please share with us what happened. Or just answer this question. Did flight 93 crash there or not? yes or no?



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 04:02 PM
link   
reply to post by snoopy
 


Could you please fix your post so we can read it properly?



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 04:15 PM
link   
Sure, as soon as you use the search function.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 04:22 PM
link   
reply to post by snoopy
 


Well, on that note. Have fun talking to yourself.

No Flight 93 in Shanksville people, try not to be distracted.



[edit on 4/7/0808 by jackinthebox]



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 04:23 PM
link   
Hey guys, I uderstand that things have gotten a bit heated between the two of you...but now you guys are acting like little kids. I you both need to take a quick breather.

No more bickering or I will be forced to nail you with that embarrasing little red badge.
Nobody wants that.

Keep it cool guys.



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 87  88  89    91  92  93 >>

log in

join