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.

 

Poor debunker illogical generalisations - why?

page: 11
21
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 04:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by jthomas
You see? The "Official Story" is used routinely by your 9/11 Denial Movement to mean anything you want it to mean. Now you have expanded the definition to include tens of thousands of people all of whom you believe were "in on it" to tell us a "story."


Huh? You must have picked the wrong quotes from me then because none of what you posted makes the point it seems like you are trying to make. You really want to argue over what is or is not an 'official story' fine, go for it. I hope that gets you somewhere. In the meantime, I will continue to refer to the narrative explained to the world by Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Bushg -the official story.


Thanks for illustrating my point by giving the term "Official Story" a new, meaning, the "official" meaning you tried to deny at the beginning of your post, that it's all just an expected explanation by "officials in charge of this country."


You are losing it man. Get some help. Go read about UFOs or Tesla for a while. All I see here is a man cracking up and getting angry and more obnoxious and speaking from some place of great pride in pointing out the word 'official.' Ok, whatever you think you proved, good for you. Now either go away or add something that makes sense or leads somewhere or is worth .... anything.


You can no longer hide behind your canard, evil incarnate, as we have told you for 8 years. Don't even try that ploy again.


Really?I did not even know you 8 years ago, or 4 for that matter so you have been telling me nothing. I still do not at all understand what it is that you think you have proven. I do not get what your point is. You know as well as anyone else that there is ONE single version of events that was given to us by our government. Yes, the government. Did all the evidence originate with them? Unless Bush builds airplanes and fathered everyone aboard those planes then of course not. That is your own silly little catch. You say I cannot call anything an official story because officials did not crash the planes. Your word of the day calendar is stuck on'canard.' Flip a page and see if the word 'official' is in there anywhere too because you do not seem to even understand what that word means.

I did ask a question that was apparently troubling for you. I notice that you and roscoe ravioli have a hard time actually addressing questions posed to you because of all the busy insulting going on.

Let me try it this way for you ok. Bush got on television and told the world what happend onm september 11, 2001. He did not say according to his findings or that he handled all or even any of the evidence. He did present a narrative though. The mainstream news (Canoli look - a whole word and not an abbreviation, see how easy it is) followed suit and has been repeating that same story for 8 years.

So again I ask, what would you like me to call that story then? The word 'official' really gets your gander so by all means - correct me. What should I be calling the story I was told by our government?




posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Joey Canoli
Do you know what the OP is?

Fine, I'll stick to that then.

Why do we use poor generalizations -


Hey canoli. I could really care less what any of your posts say from this point on. You go ahead and ramble all you want about how you and no one else cares. Keep coming back, day after day, to remind me that NO ONE AT ALL CARES. You are obviously confused by the word 'care.' You care. You have been here all week telling me how you do not care. It is sweet that as much as you pretend not to care, you keep coming back for me. How sweet. Why do we use poor generalizations? Why do you abbreviate 30 percent of each post. Whatever, anyway. You, like you dim friend, are just avoiding answering for yourself and just being rude for no reason. Most people on these boards rise above that and carry on. Me, I have no problem stooping to your level. If you just want to exchange personal attacks and obnoxious sidesteps, I can do that.

You - on the otherhand are boring. You have not even tried to answer anything I have put to you. You ignore easy questions only to post some other attack on me as a person. If you want me to care about any other thing that you post, you are going to need to at least respond to my earlier post to you in full. I will help by reposting my questions again.

"Did the manifest list them as terrorists or hijackers? This way I will know what to be on the lookout for.

You will have to try a lot harder than this.

What does the manifest actually tell you?

19 men with these names may or may not have been on these 4 planes.

That is it. Even if you have each orignal manifest in your posession, what on the manifest would tell you that any of the people on it were terrorists or potential terrorists? What exactly would tell you anything above and beyond who had a ticket and seat on that plane?"

[edit on 8/13/09 by evil incarnate]



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by jthomas
admit you cannot make any legitimate claim that AA77 did not hit the Pentagon. But if you decide to continue to pretend that you aren't making claims as you clearly have done, and use sources and their claims for support,




Soooo...anyone that says there were no planes at all but agrees that Osama Bin Laden was still behind means that anyone who also agrees that Osama was behind it also must believe that there were no planes? That is quite a stretch. There are many scientists, experts, investigators, that get somethings one way and other things another way. I have no reason to believe in a flyover but I certainly have a hard time believing a plane was flown into the pentagon. So you and I agree that something hit the pentagon so does that mean you have to deal with all the other implications of what I think or say????

Your logic is flawed at best. You want to demonize people on this thread over things that not only were never stated by them but do not even have anything to do with this thread. Where in the OP does it say there was a flyover? What about subsuquent posts by said person?

You seem pretty stuck on that old canard about a flyover. There are plenty of flyover threads. Why do you not take that argument there, to them.

This thread has two main characters that have done nothing but prove the derision stated in the OP. Each and every new post shows how they dodge questions and facts stated at them to try and glom onto some other argument that they think they can win. You think you have the flyover premise all locked up. Good for you. There are many many other questions about that day that have nothing to do with a flyover. The plane left radar in Ohio. There is no evidence that plane hit the pentagon. It is that simple. Even you admitted there is no plane in your precious security footage. I guess I should play by your rules and then say that you have proven that the pentagon would be easily accessed by any nefarious person who just gets closer to that camera and runs. See, stretchin is easy. Dealing with truth, facts, and actual evidence is not.

I asked you why I should believe that plane was flown into the pentagon on another thread and you could not. Now you are hear railing about a flyover. You are not even good at this.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 05:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by evil incarnate

Keep coming back, day after day, to remind me that NO ONE AT ALL CARES. You are obviously confused by the word 'care.' You care.



Sure I care. I care when the degenerates of the TM accuse the FDNY of being "in on it", since they obviously "pulled" 7 at Silverstein's request. Or when the TM accuses the professional SE's, FE's, etc are part of the "cover up" since they don't publish contrary papers, since it's obvious to you investigooglers. Or when the media is accused of being the propaganda arm of the "perps". And I also told you why. Cuz I find those claims disgusting, and proves to any fence sitter reading this that the TM, as a whole, is a bunch of delusional idiots. There's the generalization that you find so puzzling.

The thing I DON'T care about is to answer any of your questions. They have been answered. They are part of the record here on ATS. My experience with other TMerz is that they ignore answers, so why go to the effort of trying to educate ANOTHER ignorant fool? You are demonstrating the same behavior by even asking about the flight manifests, so I see no difference between you and the clueless herd of TMerz that you associate with.

So no, I don't care that you personally remain in ignorance.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 05:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Joey Canoli
 


Like I said before...ahem

-Did the manifest list them as terrorists or hijackers? This way I will know what to be on the lookout for.

You will have to try a lot harder than this.

What does the manifest actually tell you?

19 men with these names may or may not have been on these 4 planes.

That is it. Even if you have each orignal manifest in your posession, what on the manifest would tell you that any of the people on it were terrorists or potential terrorists? What exactly would tell you anything above and beyond who had a ticket and seat on that plane?

If you cannot answer this, then I have no reason to care about anything else you have to say. Your post will go unread by me as will every new post that refuses to answer these questions. Either you cannot read or you cannot admit when you have no answer. Let me know when you have an answer.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 05:43 PM
link   
reply to post by evil incarnate
 



Any counterpoint to your question will be in the numerous "19 hijacker" threads.

Go educate yourself.

Like I said, I don't care if you choose to remain ignorant of those answers.

Why don't you address the fact that virtually no SE's or FE's support the TM cause now.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 06:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Joey Canoli
 


Did the manifest list them as terrorists or hijackers? This way I will know what to be on the lookout for.

You will have to try a lot harder than this.

What does the manifest actually tell you?

19 men with these names may or may not have been on these 4 planes.

That is it. Even if you have each orignal manifest in your posession, what on the manifest would tell you that any of the people on it were terrorists or potential terrorists? What exactly would tell you anything above and beyond who had a ticket and seat on that plane?

Why are you having so much trouble with this? You keep responding and yet - no answers. I do not understand what you hope to gain. Nothing you say matters. You want to attack me over things that other people have said or points other people made and on and on. Let me try to make this clear

I do not care. Shhhhhhh. Stop. I only want to read the answers to those questions. You have had your chances to say something worth reading to me. You sqandered each and every one of them. If you cannot answer the questions then you cannot come at me as if you know what you are talking about. You repeated to me the same empty words that Fox news kept telling me. I already heard that story. I want it cleared up because it has some pretty big holes in it. If you believe that story, then you must be smart enough that something convinced you. I would like to be convinced. Repeatedly ignoring that little fact and just being a little jerk is not getting you anywhere with me and certainly not helping whatever cause it is you claim to have.

Now I have asked how many times? How many of those times did you provide any answers? Got it yet? I skim your first two lines and move on when I realize there is no answer coming. You really should just give up. You do not know why you believe the Official Story (see that thomas?) but you believe it. All I wanted was a few details. The kind of details any thinking person would need to counteract any doubt. You do not have them. Neither of us knows why you bought it, but you did. I am flattered that you keep replying though even though you never intend to anwer these simple questions.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 06:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by evil incarnate

All I wanted was a few details. The kind of details any thinking person would need to counteract any doubt.


You just disqualified the entire TM.


You do not have them.



Sure I do. I've read both sides of the argument. Professionals agree with the NIST report, etc. Only unqualified buffoons try and refute it.

This fact is one that you cannot address without exposing the whole deck of cards that the TM has built for itself.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 06:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Joey Canoli
 


Did the manifest list them as terrorists or hijackers? This way I will know what to be on the lookout for.

You will have to try a lot harder than this.

What does the manifest actually tell you?

19 men with these names may or may not have been on these 4 planes.

That is it. Even if you have each orignal manifest in your posession, what on the manifest would tell you that any of the people on it were terrorists or potential terrorists? What exactly would tell you anything above and beyond who had a ticket and seat on that plane?

last time before you just go on ignore.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 06:40 PM
link   

I'm tired of your weaseling. I have demonstrated that you claim of not making claims is FALSE. I have demonstrated that you are trying to have your cake and eat it too by relying on the claims of sources whose claims require a flyover taking place. But, oh no, you just want to leave out the flyover claim and keep the rest that sounds good.


So since I used evidence presented by one or more persons that claim there was a flyover, I am claiming there was a flyover?

Theres your fallacy.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by evil incarnate
reply to post by Joey Canoli
 


Did the manifest list them as terrorists or hijackers? This way I will know what to be on the lookout for.

Y


the names were on the manifest. They were id'd by the stews. This is in the threads that you choose to remain ignorant about.

Now, what about those SE's and FE's, etc not taking anything the TM says to heart?

Why do they ignore you?



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 06:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Joey Canoli
the names were on the manifest. They were id'd by the stews. This is in the threads that you choose to remain ignorant about.


I said - "Did the manifest list them as terrorists or hijackers? This way I will know what to be on the lookout for"

I already acknowledged names on the manifest. That is not what I asked you. I understand that names were on the manifest. Can you read? How does the manifest tell you these men hijacked and crashed the planes. That is what I asked you. You had your chances. Go talk to a wall. Bye bye.

Not only did you not answer my question, you apparently cannot even read what you quote. Your answer has nothing to do with what I asked, especially the quote you used. If only someone with some brains and info believed what you believe and could engage in a coherent conversation about it. You cannot even read. Seeya.

[edit on 8/13/09 by evil incarnate]



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by evil incarnate
How does the manifest tell you these men hijacked and crashed the planes. That is what I asked you. You had your chances. Go talk to a wall. Bye bye.


LOLZ....

As i stated, the stews id'd the guys. But hey, you missed that. Color me surprised.... NOT.

Looks like yet another TMer doesn't want to address just WHY SE's ignore them.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 07:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Joey Canoli
LOLZ....

As i stated, the stews id'd the guys. But hey, you missed that. Color me surprised.... NOT.

Looks like yet another TMer doesn't want to address just WHY SE's ignore them.

Did not miss it, it does not answer my question. You said you knew who hijacked the plane and why because of the manifest and only the manifest. Now you want to answer with dead steward's testimony?

Sorry pal but you just contradicted yourself and then repeated it. I was trying to be nice and let it slip but you had to push the issue. Go back to what I originally asked and read your answer. There is nothing in their about stewards or their testimony. You said you knew it all from the manifest. No wonder people in the HJD think you are UI and PK.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 07:04 PM
link   
reply to post by evil incarnate
 


Semantics then.

The refuge of the defeated.

And still no response about SE's.

Wow.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Joey Canoli
reply to post by evil incarnate
 


Semantics then.

The refuge of the defeated.

And still no response about SE's.

Wow.



It is not semantics, it is what you said. I asked you how you knew, you said the manifest. I asked how the manifest id'd them as terrorists, you said the stewards did. That is you moving the goal post to fit the new scenario because I smashed your old one to bits.

And...yes no response about SE's. I have not brought any abreviations into this so you go find someone who did and ask them about your lack of capability to type entire words. You cannot answer without backtracking and completely changing your first answer. You cannot type out words. Why should anyone be listening to you again? I asked more than one question in that post that I repeated. It took you 5 times before you even tried to answer and you still did not anwer. I asked about the manifest because that is what you said gave you the info. Now you want to include airplane staff. Sorry but you should have included them the first time, or even the second, third, or fourth time. You are not even trying. You have no credibility. You have earned no respect. You still think that I care about anything else you have to say. You are the one that keeps coming back to tell me nobody cares what I have to say so ignore me. Find a friend that can answer my questions for you or just stop being a nuissance. I am not sure how many times your mom let you get things wrong before correcting you but more than 5 times is more than 4 times too many for me. I am definitely done with you.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 07:28 PM
link   
evil
Check it out. Compliments of big bad joe. He said this on his last three posts. Just his last THREE!!

"remain ignorant about. unqualified buffoons remain ignorant you and the clueless herd here ANOTHER ignorant fool degenerates in ignorant "

And he said nothing of substance. He has no info no point. Joe = blank .
People need answers, closure and at least a little trust in the Gument.
Joe don't knoW!!! Trust me.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 07:47 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


Thanks for this thread. Sorry that I asked one of these official story supporters easy to understand straightforward questions about their particular story. It wasted many more pages than I could have ever imagined but then again, if they had the truth on their side, answering these simple questions would not have been so hard.

Your thread gave these two jokers the perfect forum in which to prove the premise in the opening post. It has been far more entertaining and enlightening than I would have guessed it would be. I hope more people come and read the opening post and then the subsequent attempts at debate.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 07:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
And he said nothing of substance. He has no info no point. Joe = blank .
People need answers, closure and at least a little trust in the Gument.
Joe don't knoW!!! Trust me.


For some reason pity overcame me and I thought that if I gave him enough chances he would say something informative or true or factual. I thought, he got his insults out, now he will say something real. I guess I should have stopped after the first two pages.

It is nice to know that I am not the only person that thought he had nothing to say but I did not even read down far enough to see how obnoxious it really got. Apparently he is stuck on the word ignorant as thomas is to the word canard. Thanks for pointing out that he is doing nothing but sitting there calling me ignorant. Glad I did not miss anything in my skimming.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 08:20 PM
link   
Originally posted by Joey Canoli








Sure I do. I've read both sides of the argument. Professionals agree with the NIST report, etc. Only unqualified buffoons try and refute it.

This fact is one that you cannot address without exposing the whole deck of cards that the TM has built for itself.


Professionals didn`t notice the complete absence of WTC7 details? at the omission oops commission, pro`s for sure


Kinda hard to refute cause unknown events.

There`s not many causes for a complete building collapse, pancake collapse - not guilty, fire and damage induced collapse - not guilty, a day terrorists were bombing the f*** out of America with hijacked Jets and not one NIST guy thought `Uhm hold on, terrorists + WTC (again) + buildings going down quicker than a $2 crack whore + explosions, maybe just maybe those bastids have planted bombs again`.

Seriously lmfao, have a think and ask yourself why the hell they completely ignored the only feasible option open to them, on how 3 buildings collapsed in near free fall times, on a day of high terrorist activity.

Jesus wept, it may have been the same guys planting bombs as those flying planes into buildings.

It beggars belief.

NIST and professionals in the same sentence!?!?, gimme some of what you`re smoking dude
.



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join