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.

 

911 Truth Will Never Fade, Only Grow!

page: 4
10
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 07:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by ashamedamerican

Originally posted by jthomas
2) Serial numbers are not needed to identify an aircraft when the identification of that aircraft is readily apparent:

3) As we know, the crashes of all four planes were not accidents. Therefore, the use of serial numbers for the purpose of identifying flawed parts is moot.

4) It is readily apparent from all the available evidence that all four flights were identified on 9/11.


The CFM56 engine 3 blocks from the WTC, and the JT8D engine on the front lawn of the pentagon site proves that these aircraft were either wrongly identified, or that some kind of lie HAS been told to us.


First, you've committed the fallacy of false alternatives. Second, you are ignoring all of the other conclusive evidence that demonstrates AA77 hit the Pentagon and didn't go anywhere else.


Originally posted by jthomas
You have to support your own claims. As much as you wish to shift the burden of proof, you will be called on it. Now, demonstrate where the evidence of what happened on 9/11 came from, cashlink.

Now, cashlink, we're waiting for you to demonstrate to us where the evidence of what happened on 9/11 came from. If you are going to continue to repeat that it all came from the government and therefore the government must defend itself against your claims, than you are required to back up your assertion and document it.



If the government was being honest, than it would have no problem discussing these supposed facts.


For seven years you have failed to demonstrate that the "government" is even a suspect, despite your pre-supposition that it is.


However they pretty much tell us "here's the story, we refuse to comment on it, or discuss it in any way shape or form, and if you question this you are unpatriotic."


Actually, all of the evidence from the thousands of independent sources and eyewitnesses demonstrates what happened on 9/11 no matter what the government says about it. Just because you desperately want the government to be the "suspect" doesn't mean you can ignore the evidence and claim the government is a suspect just because you want it to be.


The 9-11 commission report didn't even mention WTC 7.


If you understood the purpose of the 9/11 Commission you would never have made that statement. How is it that you don't understand that NIST was in charge of the WTC towers' investigation, not the 9/11 Commission, and that the WTC 7 investigation wasn't even completed at the time of the 9/11 Commission report?


How about the total lack of mention of Edna Cintron (and others) standing in the "thousand degree holes" in the WTC tower, which PROVES that at least one of THEIR CLAIMS (in the 9-11 report) is at the very least false, if not a direct attempt to lie and cover something up.


There you go with the fallacy of false alternatives again. And just because you don't want to understand why it was possible for Edna to be standing there is no excuse for you to claim it hasn't been answered or someone is lying.

You really need to learn the facts and take a course in critical thinking.


We don't have to prove exactly what happened that day.
All we have to do is prove that what the government says is false.


It's quite clear that for the last seven years you have been unable to refute all the evidence from all the independent sources; that you want the government to magically be a "suspect"; and that you haven't proven anything except that your burning desire to keep any inconvenient evidence at bay.


Once ANY of their claims has been proven false, (which they have) then their WHOLE story becomes suspect.


Too bad you all fell for the canard that their is some mystical "official story" and that, magically, the government is supposed to be suspect. Therein lies the clue to your first step to freedom from 9/11 Denial.


Once proven that the government is either wrong or lying, the burden of proof is once again on the government.


If you want to believe in your fairy tale that the government is a suspect without demonstration of why or how but because you want it to be, and as long as you believe the government is the source of all the evidence of what happened on 9/11, then the burden of proof will remain on your shoulders forever.

You could, however, take some courses in critical thinking and begin to question how and why you choose to believe in irrational things that other 9/11 Deniers told you.




posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by ashamedamerican
reply to post by jthomas
 

Mods Please Take Notice

We have brought forward evidence, refrences, testimony, etc.


You are not exempt from the requirement to answer questions about your claims or rebut challenges to your claims.


You have spewed rhetoric, and bent and twisted people's sentences to make it appear that we were stating things that we weren't.


Demonstrate that claim, please.


Instead of attacking the facts, (because you know you can't) you simply state "oh that was debunked years ago" as if that is some form of magic bullet to end all conspiracies.


I don't attack "facts". I challenge claims and assertions. If you want to make claims, you are obligated to support them with evidence.


Until you can refute ANYTHING we have brought forward, you have no place here.


Until you can support your claims and address challenges to them you should state they are provisional claims and not "fact."


Until you can explain how humans stood in holes supposedly hot enough to melt steel, ...


Until you can demonstrate anyone stood in holes "hot enough to melt steel", no one has any reason to accept your claim of having any evidence of such a feat. So, go ahead, show us the human beings who magically stood in "holes hot enough to melt steel."


...or how the WRONG engines were PLANTED,...


Again we have no reason to accept your claim without evidence. Demonstrate what "wrong" engines there were and your evidence that they were "planted." We have NO reason to accept that claim.


....or how first responders are on film saying there are bombs,...


They thought what they "heard" were bombs. NO one ever saw a bomb. This is a subject beaten to death for seven years and shown to have no basis in fact. And because you bring up debunked nonsense again, someone is obligated to debunk it again? That is arrogance, my friend. But go ahead, please, and demonstrate that there were "bombs."


...or the audio evidence of explosions...
Go ahead, present your evidence. Better check if it hasn't already been debunked a hundred times, however. You have to present evidence for your claims.

Present you evidence, please.



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 08:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by jthomas
So, you're saying that " there is some "official story" and the government magically is the source and possessor of ALL of the evidence of 9/11."?

I'm not saying anything, jthomas. I don't make statements that I can't support, unlike you.


If you misread them, I can't help that.


You claimed that the government is not the possessor of all evidence.
pinch claimed that the government (FBI) does have possession of the alleged Flight AA77 parts and serial numbers.

You contradict each other.


Not at all. You just misread read what I wrote. That's why I repeated it for you a second time. Language is precise and I am precise in it's use.


Other people can see it too.


You understand that I said "ALL", correct? Let me repeat again: "...the source and possessor of ALL of the evidence of 9/11."

Is it the "source and possessor of ALL of the evidence of 9/11"? If you believe it is, please demonstrate.



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 09:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by cashlink
reply to post by jthomas
 


What we know about 9/11 did not come from the government. We never needed the government or the media to know what happened on 9/11. But you need your debunked canards so you can pretend that all the evidence you cannot debunk is being "hidden" by the government.


Really!


Of course, really.


If your evidences did not come from the Government, then where did it come from?


It's not "my" evidence. It is "the" evidence.

Let's start with an easy one. Are the thousands of eyewitnesses to all of the events of 9/11 part of the "government?" How about the people in NYC - civilians, policemen, rescue workers, firemen,picking up wreckage from AA11 and UA 175 after witnessing the crashes? All government employees? Or how about the employees of American Airlines and United Airlines, those hundreds of people with direct physical contact with each of the four planes before they left on their flights? All government employees?


You never needed the government and media to know what happened then where are you getting your information from?


I guess from your surprise at that means that the only information you get about 9/11 is from the government and the media. Am I correct?


But you need your debunked canards so you can pretend that all the evidence you cannot debunk is being "hidden" by the government.


What are you talking about “Pretend”?


So you don't have to deal with the evidence that is so inconvenient for you.


Is it any wonder your 9/11 Denial Movement is still stuck in the mud of its own self-deception after seven years of accomplishing absolutely nothing?


The Truth Movement is alive and well and not stuck in the mud. We are why NIST, after 7 years, had to come out with a new cover up report.


I see. A new "coverup report." See my sig for more information.



The fact that the government was not the source of the evidence and had no ability to control it from the beginning is a no-brainer for critical thinkers. But, for 9/11 Deniers, it is the only way they can foist the canard on newbies that the government has something it is supposed to answer for. It is amazing that you don't realize your canard was debunked in early 2002 and has been ever since.

Please provide proof to back your statements with sources, and save your snide remarks for your self.



I asked you to demonstrate that the sources of ALL the evidence about 9/11 came from the government. You keep evading you responsibility.


This just reveals that you are a newbie at this and haven't a clue what your are talking about and never have. It is also the reason your 9/11 Denial Movement has failed to produce any evidence for its claims in the seven years that it has been in existence.


Newbie? Where? I have been here since 4/17 2006.


I've been debunking 9/11 Deniers since early 2002. Trust me, you need to start asking questions about your own 9/11 Denial beliefs, where they came from, why they are only repetitions of what we have seen and debunked for seven years, and why you don't understand why you aren't taken seriously.

Start with questioning your own beliefs and claims about serial numbers that I showed were not needed to know AA77 hit the Pentagon. Do you now understand what errors in thinking you made?



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 09:18 PM
link   
reply to post by jthomas
 




The following e-mail was provided by a Susan Stevenson of the NTSB on 12/26/2007, in response to a 12/16/2007 public correspondence e-mail inquiry:

Yes. NTSB investigators rarely encounter a scenario when the identification of an accident aircraft is not apparent. But during those occasions, investigators will record serial numbers of major components, and then contact the manufacturer of those components in an attempt to determine what aircraft the component was installed upon.”


- gunnyg.wordpress.com...


Why don’t you post the rest of your true story? You are right about the above statement but you left the rest of the TRUTH out! So lets post the rest of the facts.

9/11 Aircraft ‘Black Box’ Serial Numbers Mysteriously Absent
9/11 Aircraft ‘Black Box’ Serial Numbers Mysteriously Absent Aidan
Monaghan
9/11 Blogger
Wednesday, February 27, 2008

Of all major U.S. airline crashes within the U.S. investigated and published by the National Transportation Safety Board during the past 20 years, the 9/11 ‘black boxes’ are virtually the only ones without listed serial numbers.

The United States government alleges that 4 registered Boeing commercial passenger aircraft were used in the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, yet has failed to produce any physical evidence collected from the 3 9/11 crash scenes positively tied to these federally registered United and American airlines aircraft. Despite the release of abundant information regarding the 9/11 flights and the aircraft reportedly used, specific information that would confirm official allegations regarding the identity of these aircraft has been mysteriously withheld or denied upon request.
A 11/26/2007 Freedom of Information Act request of the Federal Aviation Administration for the last known serial numbers of the flight data recorders and other components contained by the aircraft said to have been used during the 9/11 attacks, was unlawfully denied.
A 1/3/2008 e-mail reply from a Loren Cochran, a FOIA specialist with the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, regarding the FAA FOIA denial reads as follows:
“It is unusual and unlawful for them to not cite an exemption. “[W]e are not in a position to release the said records at this time,” certainly isn’t an exemption any where in the Freedom of Information Act, and I can’t think of any case law that supports that answer either.”
The RCFP site:
Because of the criminal nature of the 9/11 attacks, the FBI became the lead investigative agency into the 9/11 aircraft mishaps, along with the requested aid of the NTSB. It is possible that the FBI seized FAA 9/11 aircraft records containing component serial number data for aircraft identification purposes and that the FAA no longer possesses them.
www.ntsb.gov...
By document labeled “Testimony of Marion C. Blakey, Chairman National Transportation Safety Board before the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation United States Senate”, it is indicated that the NTSB assisted the FBI with the process of “aircraft parts identification” regarding the said aircraft.
www.ntsb.gov...
Flight data recorder information provided by the NTSB, for all major U.S. commercial passenger aircraft crashes within U.S. territory, involving major aircraft and/or loss of life, since 1988, with noted FDR serial numbers:
gunnyg.wordpress.com...

This is the information that “you” left out you have now proven yourself as using disinformation tactics . This is “your” link that you cherry pick your information from.
You are breaking ATS rules, making up statements and spinning the truth to fit your beliefs.

The truths about the missing aircraft serial numbers are in this thread and it has now been proven the US Government will not give them up.

My opinion is that these airplanes are not what were used on the morning of 911, but some other aircraft instead. It is clear our Government is hiding something here is the proof folks!


3) As we know, the crashes of all four planes were not accidents. Therefore, the use of serial numbers for the purpose of identifying flawed parts is moot.


Accidents or not! This has nothing to do with missing serial numbers furthermore, all airplanes serial numbers have to be recorded.

.

4) It is readily apparent from all the available evidence that all four flights were identified on 9/11. .


Really! By whom?





5) As a crime, the crash investigations were taken over by the FBI with the NTSB assisting.


So! What is your point here?



6) No one here possesses the knowledge that serial numbers were not collected and reported


F.B.I. Counsel: No Attempt Made By F.B.I. To Formally Identify 9/11 Plane Wreckage

Aidan Monaghan
03/18/08
Contained within a March 14, 2008 "DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO RESPOND TO AMENDED COMPLAINT" with the Nevada District U.S. Court, concerning a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by Mr. Aidan Monaghan (Case #: 2:07-cv-01614-RCJ-GWF) to order the production of Federal Bureau of Investigation records concerning the 4 aircraft involved in the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, Assistant U.S. Attorney Patrick A. Rose has indicated on behalf of the FBI, that records indicating the collection and positive identification of recovered wreckage created by these federally registered aircraft, do not exist.
Defendants motion reads in part:
"Since being served with the Summons and Amended Complaint, Federal Defendant, with assistance of its attorneys, has analyzed Plaintiff's request and conducted a search for responsive records. Federal Defendant has determined that there are no responsive records. The identities of the airplanes hijacked in the September 11 attacks was never in question, and, therefore, there were no records generated "revealing the process by which wreckage recovered by defendant, from aircraft used during the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, was positively identified by defendant . . . as belonging to said aircraft . . . (Amend Compl. Inj. Relief #15 at 1.)"
However, this claim is directly contradicted by public comments offered by Carol Carmody, Vice-Chairman National Transportation Safety Board and Marion C. Blakey, Chairman National Transportation Safety Board, who both indicated in 2002 that FBI director Robert Mueller requested NTSB assistance with 9/11 aircraft wreckage identification and that the NTSB did perform 9/11 aircraft wreckage identification analysis. Full Article
pilotsfor911truth.org...




Once again, a 9/11 Truther claims what happened on 9/11 is magically a "government allegation." I don't think I need to repeat the absurdity of such nonsense. It is evident on the face of it and 9/11 Truthers have failed miserably on reliance of this canard.


Your snide remarks severs no purpose here, please stay on topic.


The evidence of what happened to the planes and their identification came from multiple, independent sources. The government was neither the source of the evidence nor could it prevent the identification of all the aircraft.


FAA is part of the Government, thank you. You really do not know what you are doing do you?


from multiple, independent sources


Oh really! Please show your proof with reliable sources to support your claim?


So, cashlink and others, you need to start thinking rationally about what you are writing and stop repeating those canards that have already been debunked long ago.


The only person who is doing the repeating is you, any one reading these post can clearly see who is posting nonsense.

Have a nice day.
TTFN cashlink.



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 12:05 AM
link   
reply to post by jthomas
 



I've been debunking 9/11 Deniers since early 2002. Trust me, you need to start asking questions about your own 9/11 Denial beliefs, where they came from, why they are only repetitions of what we have seen and debunked for seven years, and why you don't understand why you aren't taken seriously.

Start with questioning your own beliefs and claims about serial numbers that I showed were not needed to know AA77 hit the Pentagon. Do you now understand what errors in thinking you made?



I think you need to question your beliefs that’s why you have 88 points, and you have been a member sense 11/4/2007.

Speaking of repetitions that is something the truth never needs. However looking at all your past post in this thread that is all you have done “repetitions”.

I disagree with all your statements and I have my own opinion thank you.

I tried to prove the Government was telling the truth, however there is no evidence to support their claim.

You are spinning your self in circles using disinfo tactics and you are wasting your time.





[edit on 11/1/2008 by cashlink]



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 09:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by cashlink
reply to post by jthomas
 




The following e-mail was provided by a Susan Stevenson of the NTSB on 12/26/2007, in response to a 12/16/2007 public correspondence e-mail inquiry:

Yes. NTSB investigators rarely encounter a scenario when the identification of an accident aircraft is not apparent. But during those occasions, investigators will record serial numbers of major components, and then contact the manufacturer of those components in an attempt to determine what aircraft the component was installed upon.”


- gunnyg.wordpress.com...


Why don’t you post the rest of your true story?


Clearly, it is irrelevant to your claim that one needs serial numbers to know that AA77 hit the Pentagon.


9/11 Aircraft ‘Black Box’ Serial Numbers Mysteriously Absent
9/11 Aircraft ‘Black Box’ Serial Numbers Mysteriously Absent Aidan
Monaghan
9/11 Blogger
Wednesday, February 27, 2008

Of all major U.S. airline crashes within the U.S. investigated and published by the National Transportation Safety Board during the past 20 years, the 9/11 ‘black boxes’ are virtually the only ones without listed serial numbers.


How do you know they don't have serial numbers?


Despite the release of abundant information regarding the 9/11 flights and the aircraft reportedly used, specific information that would confirm official allegations regarding the identity of these aircraft has been mysteriously withheld or denied upon request.


Why has Monaghan changed the story? Above he states that the serial numbers are "mysteriously absent" from the black boxes. Now he is backing off and claiming that they are being "withheld."

But as we already know, and which you ignore, we do NOT need serial numbers to know that AA77 was the plane that crashed into the Pentagon. And no evidence is presented that serial numbers were being withheld.


A 11/26/2007 Freedom of Information Act request of the Federal Aviation Administration for the last known serial numbers of the flight data recorders and other components contained by the aircraft said to have been used during the 9/11 attacks, was unlawfully denied.


Still irrelevant to the point that we don't need the serial numbers to identify AA77 as the aircraft.


This is the information that “you” left out you have now proven yourself as using disinformation tactics . This is “your” link that you cherry pick your information from. You are breaking ATS rules, making up statements and spinning the truth to fit your beliefs.


I just showed you how you deviated from the discussion of not needing serial numbers to identify AA77, and you want to bring up a FOIA request that is meaningless to my discussion and irrelevant to the NTSB quote I gave you.

I'll ask you to retract your statement, please.


The truths about the missing aircraft serial numbers are in this thread and it has now been proven the US Government will not give them up.


You are committing the fallacy of false alternatives, as you will see.


My opinion is that these airplanes are not what were used on the morning of 911, but some other aircraft instead. It is clear our Government is hiding something here is the proof folks!


Your opinion are based on claims and beliefs instead of factual information.


4) It is readily apparent from all the available evidence that all four flights were identified on 9/11. .


Really! By whom?


First, for the record, do you actually think there is no evidence that AA77 hit the Pentagon?


6) No one here possesses the knowledge that serial numbers were not collected and reported.


F.B.I. Counsel: No Attempt Made By F.B.I. To Formally Identify 9/11 Plane Wreckage


OK, point conceded. So you believe the FBI. Good. That's a step forward. But given that all the evidence already converged on the conclusion that AA77 crashed into the Pentagon, therefore the wreckage didn't need to be "formally" identified. Certainly, serial numbers didn't need to be recorded for the purposes of knowing whether the aircraft was AA77 or not.



Aidan Monaghan
03/18/08
Contained within a March 14, 2008 "DEFENDANT'S MOTION

(snipped for lack of space)

And here is the response:


In addition to the search of the CRS, RIDS’ search also included verification by the responsible FBIHQ operational division that the identities of the four aircraft hijacked on September 11, 2001, have never been in question by the FBI, the National Transportation Safety Board (“NTSB”), or the Federal Aviation Administration. Id. ¶ 24. Despite these extensive and detailed search efforts, RIDS located no FBI records responsive to Plaintiff’s request. Id. The lack of documentation revealing the process by which the FBI identified the hijacked aircraft is unsurprising because the identity of those aircraft has never been in question and because other evidence collected after September 11, 2001, has corroborated the identity of the hijacked aircraft. Id.

3. Plaintiff has presented no countervailing evidence demonstrating that the FBI failed to engage in a reasonable search. See Perry, 684 F.2d at 127 (“[I]n the absence of countervailing evidence or apparent inconsistency of proof, affidavits that explain in reasonable detail the scope and method of the search conducted by the agency will suffice to demonstrate compliance with the obligations imposed by the FOIA.”). Rather, the exhibits attached to Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint support the FBI’s conclusion that the identity of the hijacked aircraft has never been in question. For example, the e-mail response sent from the NTSB to an inquiry from Plaintiff confirms that “NTSB investigators rarely encounter a scenario when the identification of an accident aircraft is not apparent.” Am. Compl., Ex. 7 (emphasis added).

Plaintiff’s Exhibit 10 purports to be “FAA documents identified as ‘Summary of Air Traffic Hijack Events.’” Am. Compl. ¶ 14. That document chronicles the loss of communications between air traffic control authorities and flights already positively identified as American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175. Am. Compl., Ex. 10. The public remarks of NTSB employees upon which Plaintiff relies indicate only that the NTSB recovered certain physical evidence from two of the aircraft, Am. Compl., Ex. 5, and assisted the FBI in its investigation of the September 11th attacks. Am. Compl., Ex. 6. Neither of these statements suggest that the identity of the hijacked aircraft was ever in question.

Similarly, the supplemental exhibits Plaintiff has submitted support the FBI’s conclusion that no records exist responding to Plaintiff’s request. Included among these exhibits are letters from the NTSB responding to a separate FOIA request from Plaintiff to the NTSB for the same information Plaintiff now seeks from the FBI. Ex. E (#36). In its initial response to Plaintiff’s request, the NTSB confirms that, like the FBI, “the NTSB doesn’t have any records” regarding the information. Id. Plaintiff appears to have appealed that decision and, in rejecting Plaintiff’s appeal, the NTSB explains that it “performed an adequate, reasonable search for any records within the scope of [the] request . . . and did not locate any records[.]” Id. Additionally, an email response from the NTSB to an inquiry submitted by Plaintiff confirms that NTSB Accident Reports obtain component or device serial numbers “from both the FAA and airline” and not from “examination of a given component or device[.]” Ex. A (#36).

4. As the declaration of David M. Hardy makes clear, the FBI has conducted a reasonable search in response to Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint. The failure of that search to produce responsive documents comports with the fact that the identities of the four aircraft hijacked on September 11, 2001, have never been in question by the FBI. Hardy Decl. ¶ 24. Thus, no documentation exists “revealing the process by which wreckage recovered . . . from the aircraft used during the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, was positively identified . . . as belonging to the said aircraft, presumably through the use of unique serial number identifying information contained by the said aircraft’s wreckage . . . .” Am. Compl. ¶ 1. Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment raises no substantive opposition to the adequacy of the FBI’s search and the exhibits Plaintiff submitted provide no countervailing evidence as to the adequacy of the search. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s FOIA claim has no merit.

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the Court should deny Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment and grant Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment.

Dated: October 16, 2008

www.911blogger.com...


It's clear that we all understand what you wish to deny: the identify of all four planes was known without the need for serial numbers. Since 9/11 Truthers are determined to prove their conclusion that "9/11 was an "inside job" and the government magically became their suspect without evidence, you guys have to seize on every little item to make erroneous claims about the evidence.

You've demonstrated nothing pertinent. You claimed that we need serial numbers to identify a crashed aircraft. We don't.

You claim that the government is hiding serial numbers and therefore it has "been proven the US Government will not give them up."

But, in fact, serial numbers were irrelevant to knowing which aircraft hit the Pentagon and is perfectly reasonable not to have any.

This just further demonstrates that 9/11 Truthers don't think carefully about what they are claiming



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by cashlink
reply to post by jthomas


I've been debunking 9/11 Deniers since early 2002. Trust me, you need to start asking questions about your own 9/11 Denial beliefs, where they came from, why they are only repetitions of what we have seen and debunked for seven years, and why you don't understand why you aren't taken seriously.

Start with questioning your own beliefs and claims about serial numbers that I showed were not needed to know AA77 hit the Pentagon. Do you now understand what errors in thinking you made?



I think you need to question your beliefs that’s why you have 88 points, and you have been a member sense 11/4/2007.


Why do I need to question that?


Speaking of repetitions that is something the truth never needs. However looking at all your past post in this thread that is all you have done “repetitions”.


I'll remind you that you are repeating the same material that has been repeatedly debunked over the last seven years and you have nothing to show for it.


I disagree with all your statements and I have my own opinion thank you.


Since you posted them, I replied


I tried to prove the Government was telling the truth, however there is no evidence to support their claim.


I've shown how you haven't demonstrated your claims.


You are spinning your self in circles using disinfo tactics and you are wasting your time.


Strawman. Reason and truth are not disinfo tactics. You only reveal why you can't address the facts.

As far as wasting my time, that's an open question. If it serves to educate others on the nature of the 9/11 conspiratorial mind where inconvenient evidence is discarded, debunked claims continue to be made, the burden of proof consistently evaded to prove your claims, then I don't consider it a waste of time.


"The mistaken belief that a handful of unexplained anomalies can undermine a well-established theory lies at the heart of all conspiratorial thinking (as well as creationism, Holocaust denial and the various crank theories of physics). All the "evidence" for a 9/11 conspiracy falls under the rubric of this fallacy. Such notions are easily refuted by noting that scientific theories are not built on single facts alone but on a convergence of evidence assembled from multiple lines of inquiry."

- "Fahrenheit 2777: 9/11 has generated the mother of all conspiracy theories"
By Michael Shermer

www.sciam.com...



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 10:19 AM
link   
What you are doing falls perfectly into what is descibed in this thread.
The moronic tyranny of the "there´s no proof" crowd
You refuse to look at the evidence layed out before you, and you have the nerve to demand more.
Why? You're not going to look at that evidence either.
You'll dance around it using semantics and rhetoric, and instead of attempting to discount that evidence you'll try to discredit the poster, in an attempt derail the thread.

This is not a court of law it is a place to debate topics.
If there was 100% irrefutable proof that even the government couldn't attempt to deny than it wouldn't BE a conspiracy.
The very nature of a conspiracy is that the evidence was supressed!

One example of your trolling, and refusing to attempt to look at the evidence layed out before you...

Originally posted by jthomas
Until you can demonstrate anyone stood in holes "hot enough to melt steel", no one has any reason to accept your claim of having any evidence of such a feat. So, go ahead, show us the human beings who magically stood in "holes hot enough to melt steel."


I DID demonstrate this, with a video of her waving from the "entry hole"
so here we have CLEAR evidence that you either
A. Haven't even bothered to look at the evidence.
B. Are just trolling, looking for someone to target and attack with rhetoric.

Until you can refute the EVIDENCE that has already been layed out before you, instead of trying to discredit and frustrate the poster posting that evidence, you have no place here.

You have no right to demand more evidence, when you ignore the evidence already clearly layed out before you.
Take your cointelpro/keyboard op rhetoric elsewhere.

Where is YOUR evidence that ANYTHING we have posted is wrong?
You're smoke and mirrors "that was debunked years ago" magic bullet does not work here.

I post...
"The CFM56 engine 3 blocks from the WTC, and the JT8D engine on the front lawn of the pentagon site proves that these aircraft were either wrongly identified, or that some kind of lie HAS been told to us."
You counter it with...

Originally posted by jthomas
First, you've committed the fallacy of false alternatives. Second, you are ignoring all of the other conclusive evidence that demonstrates AA77 hit the Pentagon and didn't go anywhere else.


"conclusive evidence?" The only conclusive evidence here is that the engine found on the lawn of the pentagon doesn't even belong to the same TYPE of plane that the government lies tell us crashed into the pentagon.
The only conclusive evidence here is that you are obviously dodging and dancing around the ACTUAL evidence, because of your preference to attempt to discredit the poster...
Classic disinfo tactic...

I will leave you with the words of a mod...

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Conducting an act of conspiracy, cover-up. a hidden-agenda or an act of ill-intent implies removing proof and evidence of it entirely.

A criminal who murders someone and wants to go undetected, will do his best to get rid of any evidence for the act.

A control-freak who monitors his employees will do his best to keep this hidden from them.

A government official who sees a leak of knowledge to the public as hazardous, will do everything in his power to conceal and never reveal.

And so, in case of cover-ups, we are left with very scant evidence...if any.
We have to do real detective work...speculate...extrapolate...connect dots... dismiss preconceptions...consider every angle...consider and re-consider...collect and discard information...

The work of the conspiracy-researcher is inhibited by what I´d here like to call The moronic tyranny of the "there´s no proof" crowd. This tyranny prevails in society, and on a smaller scale on this website.

Someone will engage in speculative conspiracy theory, and someone will come in and say

"There´s no evidence. None whatsoever"
or

"There´s no proof"

and even

"There´s no point in making a thread about this, because there´s no proof"

and

"You´re crazy because there´s no proof for this"

This type of pointless comment can be seen here by the minute. While you are reading these words, some moron somewhere is telling a conspiracy-theorist: "There´s no proof of this".





How have hoards of people having been brainwashed into the idea that we should only talk about whats already known?

In predominantly focussing on whats already known we can never hope to find out that which is unknown.

Of course there´s a difference in the quality of various pieces of speculation. But the moronic tyrant who walks around calling himself a "skeptic" or "rational" will make no difference and simply go from place to place and thread to thread spouting nothing other than "There´s no evidence".

He will even do so when there is evidence, not grasping the difference between evidence (indicators of something) and proof (hard facts).

Most people here are smart enough to know there´s not much evidence for conspiracy-speculation. And most are smart enough to know that evidence is not forthcoming because its either a) non-existent or b) covered-up.

So the mantra "there´s no proof" becomes somewhat pointless on a Forum like this.

Next time someone visits your thread with nothing other than the comment "Where´s the evidence?", why not give him this metaphor:

The murderer just threw the body into the river. He turns around and grins: "There´s no evidence"

Source



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 10:34 AM
link   
Some more reading material for those who are not here to discredit ATS members.
rinf.com...
www.archive.org...
www.wethepeoplewethemedia.com...



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 11:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by ashamedamerican


If there was 100% irrefutable proof that even the government couldn't attempt to deny than it wouldn't BE a conspiracy.


You haven't demonstrated a conspiracy. After seven years of claiming there was a government conspiracy.


The very nature of a conspiracy is that the evidence was supressed!


Every claim presented to me that evidence was supposedly "suppressed" turned out not to be evidence but only a claim that turns out not to be true.


One example of your trolling, and refusing to attempt to look at the evidence layed out before you...


You haven't presented evidence, my friend. You keep making claims that are unsupported or previously debunked. And no one will present the necessary evidence I ask for to support your claims.


Originally posted by jthomas
Until you can demonstrate anyone stood in holes "hot enough to melt steel", no one has any reason to accept your claim of having any evidence of such a feat. So, go ahead, show us the human beings who magically stood in "holes hot enough to melt steel."



I DID demonstrate this, with a video of her waving from the "entry hole"
so here we have CLEAR evidence that you either
A. Haven't even bothered to look at the evidence.
B. Are just trolling, looking for someone to target and attack with rhetoric.


You can't be serious. A video of her waving from from the "entry hole" tells us that the steel was barely warm, much less not hot enough to melt the steel she was standing on and leaning on. Have you lost all reason to make such an obviously ridiculous claim?

Furthermore, you can't even come up with an explanation of why the steel should have been hot enough to melt anyway.

Your claim really is quite amazing.

(snip)

I won't even bother with the rest given that you have demonstrated beyond a doubt that you are off into fringe beliefs with your statement above and apparently have no understanding why.



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 01:18 PM
link   
I've reviewed just about every piece of information that I can in regards to the truth movement.





My suggestion, if you want to keep the movement alive,... All the truth movement needs to do is focus all their energy on demanding the video tapes that recorded flight 77 hitting the Pentagon.

They say 'National Security' is the reason why we can't see the tapes... I say our 'National Security' is more at risk if they don't release all the tapes that show flight 77 hitting the Pentagon.

Do those Five Frames really look like a Boeing hit it? Would you suggest to other people that it appears a plane caused the explosion if you knew nothing about the events of September 11th and only saw those five frames?

Regardless of what you believe in regards to 9-11... We (the public) should able to see those tapes.



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by ashamedamerican
 


FBI documents contradict 9/11 Commission report
Friday, February 29th, 2008

Larisa Alexandrovna Who is Bayoumi? Much has been reported about Omar al-Bayoumi and his alleged relationship with the government of Saudi Arabia. In his recent book, The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation, New York Times reporter Phillip Shenon discusses at length the questions surrounding Bayoumi and his ties to the Saudi government. “Bayoumi seemed clearly to be working for some part of the Saudi government,” Shenon wrote on ...


rinf.com...

Ashamedamerican, great post you just proved the government can’t keep their lies straight.

The government can only back up their lies, with more lies, and more lies.

The truth need to be told once and it supports it self.

Ya, 911 was an inside job! and you just proved it.





[edit on 11/1/2008 by cashlink]



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 02:21 PM
link   
reply to post by ashamedamerican
 


Great fine this is great!

The following from today's (October 28, 2004) Philadelphia Daily News:

"Election 2004
9/11 "black box" cover-up at Ground Zero? -- a Campaign Extra!/PDN exclusive
This is the more comprehensive version of our story appearing in today's Philadelphia Daily News.

Two men who worked extensively in the wreckage of the World Trade Center claim they helped federal agents find three of the four 'black boxes' from the jetliners that struck the towers on 9/11 - contradicting the official account.

Both the independent 9/11 Commission and federal authorities continue to insist that none of the four devices - a cockpit voice recorder (CVR) and flight data recorder (FDR) from the two planes - were ever found in the wreckage.

But New York City firefighter Nicholas DeMasi has written in a recent book -- self-published by several Ground Zero workers -- that he escorted federal agents on an all-terrain vehicle in October 2001 and helped them locate three of the four.

His account is supported by a volunteer, Mike Bellone, whose efforts at Ground Zero have been chronicled in the New York Times and elsewhere. Bellone said assisted DeMasi and the agents and that saw a device that resembling a 'black box' in the back of the firefighter's ATV.

Their story raises the question of whether there was a some type of cover-up at Ground Zero. Federal aviation officials - blaming the massive devastation - have said the World Trade Center attacks seem to be the only major jetliner crashes in which the critical devices were never located.

A footnote to the 9/11 Commission Report issued this summer flatly states: 'The CVRs and FDRs from American 11 and United 175' - the two planes that hit the Trade Center - 'were not found.'

And officials for the FBI - which oversaw the cleanup at Ground Zero - and the New York City Fire Department repeated this week that the devices were never recovered.

The 'black boxes' - actually orange - could have provided valuable new information about the worst terror attack to ever take place on American soil.

The cockpit voice recorder uses two microphones to capture the sounds of the cockpit for the last 30 minutes of a doomed flight on a tape loop. In the case of the hijacked 9/11 jetliners, the devices should have captured any conversations or actions involving the hijackers, as well as radio transmissions.

The flight data recorder records things like airspeed, heading, and altitude. Both devices - located in the tail of the airplane - emit loud 'pings' so they can be located even in ocean jetliner crashes, like the 1996 explosion of TWA Flight 800 off Long Island.

They are built to survive an impact of enormous force - 3400 Gs - and a fire of 1100 degrees Celsius for one hour, somewhat higher than official estimates of the World Trade Center blaze.

'It's extremely rare that we don't get the recorders back. I can't recall another domestic case in which we did not recover the recorders,' Ted Lopatkiewicz, spokesman for the National Transportation Safety Board, told CBS News in 2002. However, officials said little of the jets was recovered.

DeMasi was with now defunct Engine Company 261 in 2001. He wrote up his recollections of the Ground Zero recovery in a glossy book self-published by a group that calls itself Trauma Recovery Assistance for Children, or the TRAC Team. The book was published in 2003 but received little notice.

(There's more on the book and how people can get it at this site.)
DeMasi, an all-terrain vehicles hobbyist - said he donated 4 ATVs to the clean-up and became known as 'the ATV Guy.'

'At one point, I was asked to take Federal Agents around the site to search for the black boxes from the planes,' he wrote. 'We were getting ready to go out. My ATV was parked at the top of the stairs at the Brooks Brothers entrance area. We loaded up about a million dollars worth of equipment and strapped it into the ATV...'

'There were a total of four black boxes. We found three.'

Efforts over several days to locate and interview DeMasi, who is now said to be with the FDNY's Marine Unit, were not successful.

But his account was verified by another member of the so-called TRAC Team, recovery site volunteer Bellone. He recalled FBI agents arriving for the search one day in early October, setting up their equipment near Brooks Brothers. He said he didn't go out with them on the ATV but observed their search.

At one point, Bellone said he observed the team with a box that appeared charred but was redish-orange with two white stripes. Pictures of the flight recorders on the NTSB and other Web sites show devices that are orange, with two white stripes.

'There was the one that I saw, and two others were recovered in different locations - but I wasn't there for the other two,' Bellone said. He said the FBI agents left with the boxes.

If the account by DeMasi and Bellone is true, it's not clear what motive federal authorities would have for claiming they weren't found.

By the same token, however, it's not clear what incentive either man would have to lie.

An FBI spokesman in New York, Jim Margolin, said after checking with the leader of the Ground Zero investigation that none of the boxes were recovered.

Frank Gribbon, the FDNY spokesman, also said 'no one in the Department is aware of the recovery of any of the airline "black boxes" at the WTC site.'

Bellone has encounted some unrelated problems in connection with the TRAC group, however. In April, the New York Post reported (story not available online) that TRAC owned money to a number of creditors, including the company that published the book. Fire officials also told Bellone, who was made an honorary firefighter by a New York engine company, that he couldn't wear an official uniform on school visits.

www.archive.org...

All I can say is WOW! As more and more “lies” are exposed, they cant their story straight!



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by jthomas
 


(Includes The 8 Traits of A Disinformationalist)
by H. Michael Sweeney
www.ominous-valve.com...
This is what you are doing; you need to take your lies elsewhere. No one is reading your rants, and sick lies. You are not debating anyone in here and “you” have railroaded my thread thank, for nothing!


Built upon Thirteen Techniques for Truth Suppression by David Martin, the following may be useful to the initiate in the world of dealing with veiled and half-truth, lies, and suppression of truth when serious crimes are studied in public forums. This, sadly, includes every day news media, one of the worst offenders with respect to being a source of disinformation. Where the crime involves a conspiracy, or a conspiracy to cover up the crime, there will invariably be a disinformation campaign launched against those seeking to uncover and expose the truth and/or the conspiracy. There are specific tactics which disinfo artists tend to apply, as revealed here. Also included with this material are seven common traits of the disinfo artist which may also prove useful in identifying players and motives. The more a particular party fits the traits and is guilty of following the rules, the more likely they are a professional disinfo artist with a vested motive. People can be bought, threatened, or blackmailed into providing disinformation, so even "good guys" can be suspect in many cases.

This is what you are doing .



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 03:17 PM
link   
reply to post by jthomas
 


Why don’t you spin your lies to these pilots?
Why don’t you do some reading?
Its seams these people disagree with you, as well as I do.

F.B.I. Counsel: No Attempt Made By F.B.I. To Formally Indentify 9/11 Plane Wreckage
www.911blogger.com...


Contained within a March 14, 2008 "DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO RESPOND TO AMENDED COMPLAINT" with the Nevada District U.S. Court, concerning a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by Mr. Aidan Monaghan (Case #: 2:07-cv-01614-RCJ-GWF) to order the production of Federal Bureau of Investigation records concerning the 4 aircraft involved in the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, Assistant U.S. Attorney Patrick A. Rose has indicated on behalf of the FBI, that records indicating the collection and positive identification of recovered wreckage created by these federally registered aircraft, do not exist.
Defendants motion reads in part:
"Since being served with the Summons and Amended Complaint, Federal Defendant, with assistance of its attorneys, has analyzed Plaintiff’s request and conducted a search for responsive records. Federal Defendant has determined that there are no responsive records. The identities of the airplanes hijacked in the September 11 attacks was never in question, and, therefore, there were no records generated “revealing the process by which wreckage recovered by defendant, from aircraft used during the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, was positively identified by defendant . . . as belonging to said aircraft . . .” (Amend Compl. Inj. Relief #15 at 1.)"
However, this claim is directly contradicted by public comments offered by Carol Carmody, Vice-Chairman National Transportation Safety Board and Marion C. Blakey, Chairman National Transportation Safety Board, who both indicated in 2002 that FBI director Robert Mueller requested NTSB assistance with 9/11 aircraft wreckage identification and that the NTSB did perform 9/11 aircraft wreckage identification analysis.
"I ... assured FBI Director Mueller that we would assist in any way we could ... he called and said, "Could you send us some people to help find the black boxes and help identify aircraft parts."



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by jthomas
Until you can demonstrate anyone stood in holes "hot enough to melt steel", no one has any reason to accept your claim of having any evidence of such a feat. So, go ahead, show us the human beings who magically stood in "holes hot enough to melt steel."



I DID demonstrate this, with a video of her waving from the "entry hole"
so here we have CLEAR evidence that you either
A. Haven't even bothered to look at the evidence.
B. Are just trolling, looking for someone to target and attack with rhetoric.



Originally posted by jthomas
You can't be serious. A video of her waving from from the "entry hole" tells us that the steel was barely warm, much less not hot enough to melt the steel she was standing on and leaning on. Have you lost all reason to make such an obviously ridiculous claim?

Furthermore, you can't even come up with an explanation of why the steel should have been hot enough to melt anyway.

Your claim really is quite amazing.

(snip)

I won't even bother with the rest given that you have demonstrated beyond a doubt that you are off into fringe beliefs with your statement above and apparently have no understanding why.

And there you just proved my point for me...
"A video of her waving from from the "entry hole" tells us that the steel was barely warm, much less not hot enough to melt the steel she was standing on and leaning on."
Exactly... So if the "steel was barely warm, much less not hot enough to melt the steel she was standing on and leaning on." (as you just stated in your own words) then how was that steel weakened enough supposedly by jet fuel, to cause a catastrophic collapse of the entire building?
(which has never happened to a stell frame structure before, or after 9-11 in all of recorded history)
The 9-11 commission report (the governments official story of the events of 9-11) states that exactly this happened.
But in your ATTEMPT to debunk this, you admitted in YOUR OWN WORDS that this was impossible!

*he shoots, he scores!*
*swish*


[edit on 1-11-2008 by ashamedamerican]



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 03:58 PM
link   
Warning: The following videos are graphic and disturbing
These are a couple well layed out video's explaining 9-11 that I would like to share.
911 Ripple Effect

Google Video Link

Loose Change 2nd Edition Recut

Google Video Link

911 The War On Truth
(this one I mainly shared because I cannot find another video of the bush speech found in this video, which you will hopefully understand the importance of once you see it.)

Google Video Link

"The hijackers were instruments of evil, who died in vein.
Behind them is a cult of evil, which seeks to harm the innocent, and thrives on human suffering.
Theres is the worst kind of cruelty, the cruelty that is fed, not weakened, by tears.
Theres is the worst kind of violence, pure malice, while daring to claim the authority of god.
We can not fully understand the designs and power of evil, it is enough to know that evil, like goodness exists, and in the terrorists evil has found a willing servant. - George W. Bush


What he does not explain is who the cult of evil is.
I guess he was attempting to plead the fifth amendment...

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Hasn't anyone told him that he already destroyed the Constitution?

All Hail the thief! (woops I meant chief)

Is it possible that Osama bin Laden (Tim Osman) is the Lee Harvey Oswald "patsy" of our time?
I'm not stating the he's not a terrorist, but one has to wonder if he really was the mastermind, or patsy of operation northwoods, woops I mean the September 11th attacks. (Those darn freudian slips)


[edit on 1-11-2008 by ashamedamerican]



posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 06:07 AM
link   
If you think our government could never plan such a horrible thing, check this out.
Operation Northwoods March 13, 1962
Declassified Operation Northwoods Memorandum

A Report of the Project for the New American Century September 2000
Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century

A Report of the Project for the New American Century April 2005
Iraq: Setting the Record Straight

The Project for the New American Century.Org
The Project for the New American Century

*Cue Creepy Music*

The more you throw away your preconceived notions, and see through the lies you have been told publicly...
The deeper the rabbit hole goes.

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." - Hamlet

[edit on 2-11-2008 by ashamedamerican]



posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 06:53 AM
link   
Let's all play a game called "follow the money..."
A King's Ransom in Precious Metals Seems to Have Disappeared

Developer Sues to Win $12.3 Billion in 9/11 Attack

What's happening with the 911 Victim Compensation Fund?


The very nature and rules of the compensation fund, numerous families say, seem almost to promote discord.
Source



People who accept money from the fund must waive their right to sue U.S. entities for negligence.
Source
Great plan...
Wave millions of dollars in their faces, but make them waive their right to sue, and watch them rip eachother apart in the process...
Divide and conquer...

I'm sure glad Larry A. Silverstein is fighting for another $12.3 billion, ON TOP of the nearly $4.6 billion insurance settlement he already got.

Lord knows he needs another $12.3 billion for HIS pain and suffering, who cares if the families of the victims only got $7 billion to split between ALL OF THEM.

And people actually ask me why I chose "Ashamed American"



[edit on 2-11-2008 by ashamedamerican]



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join