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: 6
13
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 2 2009 @ 08:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by jthomas
Isn't it remarkable that after years of claiming a "flyover" and repeated questions to CIT of why they refuse to do a proper investigation, that CIT STILL can't find numerous eyewitnesses to a flyover out of the hundreds in a position to see one if one had occurred?

Casual readers to this thread might like to consider how jthomas has previously debunked his own poor logic.

Despite his contstant denials - here are his words taken from this thread:

Originally posted by jthomas
Do you understand that neither you nor anyone else has the magical power to claim what an unknown number of people in a position to see a jet fly over the Pentagon would or would not see and you cannot guarantee that NO ONE would see the jet?


So, there you have it, jthomas has previously admitted that no one has the 'magical power' to know what an unknown people would or would not have seen. jthomas admitted that it is not possible to determine how many people would have seen a flyover.

Now, sit back and watch him try to deny his own words... it cracks me up every time.


Previous readers are smarter than you and can easily see you how you spinned what I actually wrote in full and now see how deceitful 9/11 Deniers like you are.

And previous readers also see how you refuse to be intellectually honest.




posted on Aug, 2 2009 @ 08:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Leo Strauss
Congrats to CIT!!
After all your hard work you deserve to be heard.

Thanks for the post

North of Citgo...I'm convinced by CIT's EVIDENCE.

The other side has nothing to offer except the same old lame tactics of ridicule and character attacks. That's not enough anymore. You guys need to come up with something new.


Is that why you and CIT can't provide any flyover eyewitnesses, Leo?




posted on Aug, 2 2009 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Soloist
You are the one who has either "missed the point" or have simply not been following this thread.

Once again remember we are talking about the CIT's "flyover" nonsense. This does not allow for anything happening outside of the frame of those shots. They are locked into their theory now, and to stray from that makes them look like fools to the people they already have fooled.

You are wrong, I am not trying to "win" anything. I think what the CIT does is disgusting, deceptive, and they prey on the likes of many who are willing to accept anything other than what the witnesses report. Sure, they will try and twist it, but it all boils down to one thing, the plane impacted the building.


Whatever you need to tell yourself to sleep at night. I can most certainly ask about the possibility of the plane being out of frame. For one thing, I am not here supporting any specific theory put forth by anyone (including you and government spooks.) My question also does nothing to take away from CIT's story anyway. You need to get a new line.



posted on Aug, 2 2009 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by jthomas

Originally posted by Leo Strauss
Congrats to CIT!!
After all your hard work you deserve to be heard.

Thanks for the post

North of Citgo...I'm convinced by CIT's EVIDENCE.

The other side has nothing to offer except the same old lame tactics of ridicule and character attacks. That's not enough anymore. You guys need to come up with something new.


Is that why you and CIT can't provide any flyover eyewitnesses, Leo?




How about the several witnesses on video stating they saw the plane
on a different path AND BANKING?

How about the guy that ran out of the Pentagon and saw a commercial
jet between 50-100 feet over the south parking lot IMMEDIATELY after
the EXPLOSION?

Musta been seeing things huh Jt?



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 08:47 PM
link   
reply to post by turbofan
 


How about the people that saw it hit, the people who recovered the remains of the passengers and military personnel, and the families of the dead.
Tell me again how there was a flyover? Tell me why I should care what a has-been actor and the others wanting some attention who had nothing to do with the event think or want?

As soon as CIT takes all of their evidence to Congress and uses it to get a reinvestgation, I'm sure all will be explained.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 12:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by turbofan
 


How about the people that saw it hit, the people who recovered the remains of the passengers and military personnel, and the families of the dead.


What remains of passengers? You are going to have to be more specific than that.

p.s. the families of the dead??????? How would being related to a dead person give you any more insight as to how they died than anyone else that was not there?



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 09:55 AM
link   
reply to post by evil incarnate
 


What part of "Remains of passengers" don't you understand?

As to the families of the dead, that was there for the disinfo people who say it was a missile or flyover with demolitions and no passengers were involved. They think everything was faked and that the people who pulled off the greatest deception in history were then too disorganized to properly cover their tracks. Of course, the foil hat sleuth brigade would then make astounding discoveries while casually surfing the net and expose all. Only they would sniff out anomolies and proudly post them for the world to admire.
I am patiently waiting for the testimonies on cspan. Surely, the cast of luminaries collected so far will convince Congress to reinvestigate based on their incisive logic and vast experience in similar matters. Asner, Hicks, Griffin, and certainly Etc should do the trick.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by evil incarnate
 


What part of "Remains of passengers" don't you understand?


Um....the part that has anything to do with plane crashes on 9/11.

I tried asking, as in giving you the chance to show me. Instead you just get rude. So far there are more than a few places to find statements that there were no bodies recovered and I am having trouble finding any actual record of remains being found from the plane that crashed into the pentagon. You can either keep being an ass and prove my point more, or you can educate me. You pick.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine

As to the families of the dead, that was there for the disinfo people who say it was a missile or flyover with demolitions and no passengers were involved.


...and that does not answer my question. You claimed that we know because of proof that the OS of 9/11 is what really happend because, among other things, the families of the vicitims. I still fail to see how the families of the victims could testify as to how anyone died unless they were actually with said victim.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by evil incarnate
 


Are you saying that the families of the dead have been deluded and that the passengers are still alive?



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 04:51 PM
link   

What's really funny is that CIT and Cap'n Robby Balsamo even illustrated what a flyover would look like but were such dodos to forget completely that people all around the Pentagon - on the freeways, bridges, in the parking lots - would have seen a bloody jet flying over the Pentagon.


Whats really funny about that is there was a CNN producer on the scene when it happened who did not see a plane, and had witnesses who also did not see a plane but a helicopter. And there was another CNN corespondent across the highway who did not see or hear a plane. These people would have seen a "bloody jet crash into the pentagon".



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by evil incarnate
 


Are you saying that the families of the dead have been deluded and that the passengers are still alive?


Now you are just adding your own little conspiracy fantasies. I never said anyone was still alive. I asked you what remains were collected from the plane that was supposed to have crashed into the pentagon? Simple questions really throw you off huh?



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 06:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by evil incarnate

Now you are just adding your own little conspiracy fantasies. I never said anyone was still alive. I asked you what remains were collected from the plane that was supposed to have crashed into the pentagon? Simple questions really throw you off huh?


Your questions don't bother me at all. This link should help you in your quest for truth. If you know how to press the buttons you can learn more than you can imagine. If you need any help understanding this, just ask.

www.debunk911myths.org...

[edit on 8/9/2009 by pteridine]



posted on Aug, 25 2009 @ 02:55 AM
link   
We had another endorsement added to the unprecedented list of praise and support we have received for our latest presentation National Security Alert.

Although this one won't come as a surprise to anyone it's the substance of the claim and importance of the message that everyone should ponder:



"A conventional fixed wing aircraft, 757 or otherwise, cannot maneuver from north of the former Citgo gas station to cause the physical damage to the light poles, generator trailer, or the Pentagon without structural failure of the airframe itself. The maneuver would require G forces exceeding aircraft capabilities and that of the human body. Physics and math do not lie. If you accept the placement of the plane as independently and unanimously reported by the witnesses presented in CIT's video National Security Alert, science proves that it did not cause the physical damage at the Pentagon on 9/11/2001."


Robert Balsamo, FAA Certified Pilot
Founder of Pilots for 9/11 Truth



posted on Aug, 25 2009 @ 10:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT
 


Let us not forget the unanimous agreement that the plane hit the building.



posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 


Seriously? You come at me with the orange jumpsuit pics? Yep, there were a couple of bodyes of people who were in the pentagon found. Something did hit the building and cause a big explosion and lots of damage. You want me to believe that it was orange jumpsuit day on that plane?
I ask again, where are the remains of the passengers on the plane?

Let's see what was found now...
Some random plane parts that were NOT ever identified by serial number as is standard operating procedure. There are four bodies of people that were in the pentagon. The terrorists documents???? OK.



posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 02:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
We had another endorsement added to the unprecedented list of praise and support we have received for our latest presentation National Security Alert.

Although this one won't come as a surprise to anyone it's the substance of the claim and importance of the message that everyone should ponder:



"A conventional fixed wing aircraft, 757 or otherwise, cannot maneuver from north of the former Citgo gas station to cause the physical damage to the light poles, generator trailer, or the Pentagon without structural failure of the airframe itself. The maneuver would require G forces exceeding aircraft capabilities and that of the human body. Physics and math do not lie. If you accept the placement of the plane as independently and unanimously reported by the witnesses presented in CIT's video National Security Alert, science proves that it did not cause the physical damage at the Pentagon on 9/11/2001.


Robert Balsamo, FAA Certified Pilot
Founder of Pilots for 9/11 Truth


Are you serious? You are touting Balsamo as a positive endorsement? If that is a positive move, I'd hate to see the kiss of death!

And if you are going to tout someone, it would be nice, Craig, if you would tout a) someone who has at least a smidgen of credibility on these issues and b) someone who does not have such a deep-seated bias, which is quite apparent where all this is coming from.

Same goes for you with regards to credibility and the deep-seated bias.

Bottom line is nobody outside your coterie of slavish strap-hangers trusts you or Balsamo or anyone else in your "organization". The fact that you do nothing of significance outside of spending hours and hours on end arguing on Internet chat boards, for crying out loud, - ATS, CIT, PfT, LCF, etc is evidence enough of the fact you don't believe any of your own BS. You can't.

Hey Everyone!!! Look at US!! Rob Balsamo has endorsed us!!! Yay!!!!!!


[edit on 26-8-2009 by trebor451]



posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by evil incarnate
I still fail to see how the families of the victims could testify as to how anyone died unless they were actually with said victim.


I'm sorry, but this has to rank up there as one of the most incredibly XXXXXXX comments ever posted on the Internet - ever.



posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by trebor451

Originally posted by evil incarnate
I still fail to see how the families of the victims could testify as to how anyone died unless they were actually with said victim.


I'm sorry, but this has to rank up there as one of the most incredibly XXXXXXX comments ever posted on the Internet - ever.


Yeah well I think you are going to have to show the post you got this from because I do not remember every typing any such thing. Either it is taken out of context or you mixed me up with someone else.



posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by evil incarnate
reply to post by pteridine
 


Seriously? You come at me with the orange jumpsuit pics? Yep, there were a couple of bodyes of people who were in the pentagon found. Something did hit the building and cause a big explosion and lots of damage. You want me to believe that it was orange jumpsuit day on that plane?
I ask again, where are the remains of the passengers on the plane?

Let's see what was found now...
Some random plane parts that were NOT ever identified by serial number as is standard operating procedure. There are four bodies of people that were in the pentagon. The terrorists documents???? OK.


Actually, the link showed the locations of all remains. No one I know has access to all of the gory photos or DNA evidence to satisfy your innate curiousity but, then again, you wouldn't know what to make of them anyway. As no passenger listed has shown up anywhere in the public eye, I'll just conclude that they were on the plane, as stated.

How do you know that the parts were never identified by serial number? Maybe you weren't on the expert witness list and were never told.

Where do you think the passengers are now and how do you think they got there?

[edit on 8/26/2009 by pteridine]



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join