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.

 

Gage, Asner, Hicks, Griffin, etc. endorse Pentagon Investigation

page: 1
13
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 03:14 PM
link   
Here is a very good compilation of quotes that was just published of people giving their opinions/endorsements of the new video National Security Alert, which is basically a summary of the most important eyewitness evidence proving that the plane that was seen in Arlington on 9/11 (allegedly AA77) flew on a drastically different flight path than what the government reports, did not hit the light poles or building, continued on over/past the building as the deadly explosion went off, and flew away. This evidence was compiled by Citizen Investigation Team (CIT) over the course of a three year investigation during which they repeatedly flew out to Arlington and interviewed dozens of witnesses, often on camera.

Some of the people on the list include Richard Gage (AIA, Architect, Founder of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth), Dr. Peter Dale Scott (Former Canadian diplomat, Professor Emeritus of English at the University of California, Berkley, Author, The Road to 9/11: Wealth, Empire, and the Future of America), Edward Asner (Emmy Award Winning Actor, Former President of the Screen Actors Guild), Dr. David Ray Griffin (Author of The New Pearl Harbor Revisited: 9/11, the Cover-Up, and the Exposé), and more.

I think the quote by Lt. Col. Shelton Lankford (Pilot, United States Marine Corp., Ret., 10,000+ Hours Total Flight Time, 303 Combat Missions) says it well:


... National Security Alert does not present conjecture. It presents carefully documented eyewitness evidence which establishes beyond a reasonable doubt that American Flt. 77 did not fly into the Pentagon on 9/11. Citizen Investigation Team’s landmark research joins the scholarly work of Harrit, Jones, et al. in destroying the widely-held myth that 9/11 was masterminded by foreign terrorists. Government and media figures who dare ignore evidence this conclusive do so at their own peril, and the peril of us all. 9/11 is a stain upon our honor as a nation and it is imperative that justice is done.


It's great to see these people all getting behind this video. I personally feel that this is the strongest evidence proving that 9/11 was an "inside job" -- specifically a military false flag operation of the "MIHOP" variety (although I agree that it is rivaled by the evidence for controlled demolition of the twin towers and WTC7 as Lankford says).

Two of the reasons I think the evidence presented in National Security Alert is so effective:

1) The destruction of the WTC buildings stirs up strong emotions for everyone. The video of that event was played over and over again on the news for days and it traumatized us all. Accordingly, there is often a very large emotional and psychological hurdle to clear to be able to accept that they were demolished by controlled demolition (I know there was for me). The Pentagon attack, on the other hand, is much more nebulous, which often allows people to view the evidence much more objectively.

2) You don't get bogged down in "expert wars" where one side brings out their experts and the other side brings out their experts and they fight it out over scientific data that some people have a hard time understanding. It's much harder to cast doubt on this evidence since any layman can watch the interviews and see that there is no way that all of these witnesses are so drastically mistaken in the same way about the plane flying over the Navy Annex and north of the gas station, especially consider how adamant they all are about it. This is plain to see for virtually anyone who watches it, and I'm yet to encounter anyone in real life who watches the video and disagrees.

[edit on 27-7-2009 by Ligon]




posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Ligon
 


I have to watch the video in its entirety. There is no doubt in my mind, that there is something wrong with the Pentagon story that was sold. Thanks for the link and the quotes.



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ligon
Here is a very good compilation of quotes that was just published of people giving their opinions/endorsements of the new video


All you've done is highlighted the fact that the usual suspects on the Troother side are just as dumb and gullible as they have ever been. When a 9/11 Troother expresses support for another 9/11 Troother - that's news?

Give me a break.

As far as Lankford goes, US Marine or not, veteran or not, the man is a disgrace to his service and if Chesty Puller were alive he's kick his sorry backside. If he has wrapped himself around those PfT tools, he is just as much a moron as the rest of them. The Marines have an undeserved reputation at times of having dull-witted dunderheads in their ranks - Lankford proves that.

[edit on 27-7-2009 by trebor451]



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by trebor451
 


Oh, trebor.


Call people names all you want. I am confident that most people who watch the video will agree with these distinguished scholars, military veterans, entertainers, media people, etc., and find your insults wholly unfounded.



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by trebor451
All you've done is highlighted the fact that the usual suspects on the Troother side are just as dumb and gullible as they have ever been. When a 9/11 Troother expresses support for another 9/11 Troother - that's news?

Give me a break.

As far as Lankford goes, US Marine or not, veteran or not, the man is a disgrace to his service and if Chesty Puller were alive he's kick his sorry backside. If he has wrapped himself around those PfT tools, he is just as much a moron as the rest of them. The Marines have an undeserved reputation at times of having dull-witted dunderheads in their ranks - Lankford proves that.


What a fantastic, detailed and even-handed rebuttal of the evidence. [/sarcasm]

One ad hom directed at "troothers" (is it meant to sting more if you misspell it? If so, it doesn't work, it just makes you look foolish) followed by another against Lankford.

If you seriously think you've added to the argument, you are sorrily mistaken.



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by trebor451

Originally posted by Ligon
Here is a very good compilation of quotes that was just published of people giving their opinions/endorsements of the new video


All you've done is highlighted the fact that the usual suspects on the Troother side are just as dumb and gullible as they have ever been. When a 9/11 Troother expresses support for another 9/11 Troother - that's news?

Give me a break.

As far as Lankford goes, US Marine or not, veteran or not, the man is a disgrace to his service and if Chesty Puller were alive he's kick his sorry backside. If he has wrapped himself around those PfT tools, he is just as much a moron as the rest of them. The Marines have an undeserved reputation at times of having dull-witted dunderheads in their ranks - Lankford proves that.

[edit on 27-7-2009 by trebor451]


I know there is no point in actually responding to posts like this since what you are saying is NOTHING NEW either. Every 9/11 thread has people claiming the Truth movement is wrong. Did you explain why? No. Did you offer any supporting facts, witnesses, evidence? All you did was waste a paragraph mocking a Marine. Shame on you for claiming you have heard all of this before. Guess what? You said NOTHING NEW. Go and do some research. Turn off O'Reilly and Miller and go actually look into this stuff and come back and explain exactly why they are wrong.

I have a feeling that is not going to happen because, like many of your ilk, you cannot even spell the word "truth."



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 04:33 PM
link   
I won't press the alert button just yet.
Calling a vetran Marine a moron is the a$# kickin offence here.
You must do better if you intend to have anyone listen to your hype.
Are the Truther's gettin to ya?

[edit on 27-7-2009 by Donny 4 million]



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 04:35 PM
link   
Thanks for posting the news, Ligon.

You'll have to excuse people like "trebor". They can't debunk the evidence, so all they can do is attack and call names. If they can't beat you, they fight you, then you win.



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 05:12 PM
link   
Thanks for posting Ligon.

I'll be discussing the evidence and this newly published endorsement list live on Jeff Farias' show today at 4:00 pm pacific (in about 45 minutes).

www.thejefffariasshow.com...

Feel free to call in with any questions or um, complaints!



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 05:23 PM
link   
Put those trolls on [color=gold]IGNORE! don’t waste your time with the likes of them. These trolls have proved to all of us time and time again that the truth is not important. They could careless what evidences you produce and try to get one to answer your questions truthfully, they won’t! This is a game to them, so don’t feed the trolls, they want to have the last words and it is always an INSULT to you.



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Donny 4 million

I won't press the alert button just yet.
Calling a vetran Marine a moron is the a$# kickin offence here.
You must do better if you intend to have anyone listen to your hype.
Are the Truther's gettin to ya?

[edit on 27-7-2009 by Donny 4 million]


Are you telling me that by simply being a "US Marine" insulates you from all idiocy and stupidity? Are you telling me that no US Marine can be an idiot? Are you trying to tell me that there has never, ever been a dumb US Marine?

Give me a break. There are just as many members of the armed services out there who are morons as there are in the real world. Being a "decorated" service member doesn't make you safe from being called a moron when you say moronic stuff. Some of the dumbest people I have ever met in my life have been service academy graduates.

Get off your high horse. I'll call it how it is, and if Lankford sidles up with the CIT/PfT lunatics, he deserves every bit of derision that can be heaped on him.

And based on the reactive posts to my comment, it looks like *I'M* the one getting on YOU people.

As far as hitting the alert button, go ahead if you want, then be prepared to defend your position and prove that Lankford is not a moron as demonstrated by supporting the Gallop lawsuit which is one of the most studiously idiotic things ever filed in the history of jurisprudence..

[edit on 27-7-2009 by trebor451]



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 05:59 PM
link   
reply to post by trebor451
 


I think you are out of line and afraid of the truth because it underminds your preconceived ideas of loyality and you can only express it by disrespecting others opinions. Give us your facts not your heat.



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by trebor451
Being a "decorated" service member doesn't make you safe from being called a moron when you say moronic stuff.

Just because people believe in a conspiracy regarding 9/11, doesn't mean they're morons. The problem with people with denial disorder like you, trebor, is that since you don't want or can't handle the real truths of a conspiracy, you believe that every single person no matter how decorated they are or how many PhD's are after their name or how many Nobel prizes they have, they're all morons and idiots because they believe in a conspiracy.

Here's a news flash for you: people don't believe in a conspiracy because they're morons; they believe in a conspiracy because that's what all available evidence suggests.

Those people with PhD's after their name that believe in a conspiracy are a whole lot smarter than you, so I'd suggest at least entertaining the notion that they might know what they're talking about and you might not. So please, don't attack others because of your denial. It makes you look so very foolish.



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 06:27 PM
link   
Why is it... Whenever there is someone even remotely official whom don`t agree with the OS, they are a fruitcake, retard, have mental problems, liar, attention ho, selling something. Does it never dawn on these people that maybe, just maybe, there is just cause for them to doubt the OS.

Reminds me of those people with unfaithful partners, jeeez they could walk in and catch their wife sh4gging a whole football team, the crowd, and the guy selling burgers and still not believe it.



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 06:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Ligon
 


Wow! Compelling list of notables there. 2 guys who make their living off the gullibility of truthers, an 80-year-old poet and an actor.

What're you going to do for an encore?



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 06:30 PM
link   
Oh. Excuse me.

That should read "an 80-year-old actor".




posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 06:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fitzgibbon
reply to post by Ligon
 


Wow! Compelling list of notables there. 2 guys who make their living off the gullibility of truthers, an 80-year-old poet and an actor.

What're you going to do for an encore?



Get Moe, Larry, Curly, Shemp, and Joe to proclaim the need for a new investigation.

(Any selection of 5 troofers will do)



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
I think you are out of line and afraid of the truth because it underminds your preconceived ideas of loyality and you can only express it by disrespecting others opinions. Give us your facts not your heat.


I value cogent and logical positions reached by intelligent analysis of data.

It is very clear that Lankford either a) never read Gallop's lawsuit, b) is woefully ignorant of legal matters regarding the filed lawsuit or c) cares nothing about either of the former points.

By signing up with PfT in support of this legal monstrosity Lankford and the others at CIT and PfT have agreed to the following claims:


+ To cause the normal operation of ground and air defenses which guard the Pentagon from external attack to be altered, suspended or disrupted in such a way as to remove or negate the building's normal protections, and thus permit an airliner, believed to be hijacked by possible suicide bombers, and following a forbidden, descending flight path, to reach the Pentagon undeterred


No "ground and air defenses which guard the Pentagon from external attack" have existed since the mid 60's, and nothing had ever positioned in or in the immediate vicinity of the building even then. To agree to support this lawsuit in the face of this glaring error is ignorant.


+ To cause and arrange for high explosive charges to be detonated inside the Pentagon, and/or a missile of some sort to be fired at the building, at or about the time the wayward airliner supposedly arrived there, to give the false impression that hijackers had crashed the plane into the building, as had apparently happened in New York


Stating that "high explosive charges" were detonated at the pentagon is nothing but conjecture in its highest form. There is no evidence whatsoever of this happening and no matter how often you or Ranke or any of the others hand wave about this, it is indeed nothing more than an imagination gone wild. Ditto for a "missile". Nobody with any knowledge of what sort of damage a missile will do would ever claim a "missile" was fired (not to mention there is no evidence of a missile). To agree to support this lawsuit in the face of these glaring error is ignorant.


April Gallop is filing a lawsuit based upon the argument that Flight 77 was not hijacked and did not crash into the Pentagon on September 11, however in previous lawsuits, she asserted that Flight 77 was hijacked by terrorists, and did indeed crash into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. In the "September 11 Litigation" matter, her lawyers negotiated and she accepted a settlement for her damages and her son's damages based on the fact that Flight 77 was hijacked by terrorists and crashed into the Pentagon.


Gallop sued, negotiated for and was awarded damages based on a lawsuit claiming an AA 757 slammed into the Pentagon and injured herself and her son. She cannot be allowed to come back and file a lawsuit that states a plane was not involved in the event. To agree to support this lawsuit in the face of this glaring fact is ignorant.

I could go on and on, but anyone who signs on to this ugly baby of a lawsuit is, by definition, ignorant of the facts of the matter. Lankford, marine or not, pilot or not, veteran or not, 303 missions or not, deserves to be held up to vast and repeated ridicule for his demonstrated and intransigent ignorance of the facts - facts that as a military veteran, he should know better of.

If you want to hoist him up as your hero despite the proof of his ignorance of the aforementioned facts, go right ahead. He seems like your kind of hero.



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 08:35 PM
link   
reply to post by trebor451
 



Do not pat yourself on the back just yet. You may feel so proud that you made people angry but was that your goal? That is all you have tried to do in here. I called you out on your BS and you avoided answering to anything logical. Instead you went for the debate of whether or not people in the marines can be stupid. Uh huh. This thread is not about that is it? So I called you out on topic and you ran from that like a scared little girl, but you really want to debate that it is ok to call people in service to our country derrogotory names?????? What is wrong with you? Go start a thread with that in the title. You do believe what you say right? Well it is off topic and out of place here. If you truly believe it and you feel brave, go start that thread. Have that debate there.

This thread is about what happend at the pentagon on september 11th. Do you actually have anything to add about that particular subject? I did say add If all you have in insults and off topic blather, I guess ignore is the best place for you.



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 08:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by trebor451
Stating that "high explosive charges" were detonated at the pentagon is nothing but conjecture in its highest form. There is no evidence whatsoever of this happening and no matter how often you or Ranke or any of the others hand wave about this, it is indeed nothing more than an imagination gone wild.


The funny thing is that while I may bot back this lawsuit 100%, there is no evidence whatsoever that a plane crashed there, let alone the plane they claimed it was.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join