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.

 

Independent Investigation Into Pentagon Attack Yields Alarming Information

page: 32
215
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by jthomas
Nope. The only thing we have is someone who claims there wasn't passenger bodies and can't demonstrate how they know that.

Just like you can't.

But you knew that. And you've painted yourself into a corner from which you have no escape.


Interesting. So you claim there were bodies and wreckage from the plane? Why have you not gone to Lilly's thread about the wings to explain to her where the wings of the plane went?

Why have you not substantiated this claim yet?

Where were the bodies again?

This is easy, the coroner has all the answers. Anyone else is just a witness and seeing as how we already know that witness reported many different things on 9/11, I.E. flight path, these witness are barely credible. The coroner is the only one who would actually have the answer as to where the bodies were.
What did the coroners office say again, exactly?

I will not get an answer. You are a coward who hides behind the false concept that opponents must prove negatives to you and the word "canard" which I count about 30 or so uses of so far by you in less than 3 weeks but hey, whatever.

You will not go to the thread about the wings and give a credible answer because you have none for that either.

When are you going to stop hiding behind all this false logic and just prove your point. You and your friends keep saying this has all been proven over and over.

Cool, show me where.




posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by SPreston

There was no burning jet fuel splashing through the Pentagon alleged damage area, because alleged passenger DNA was allegedly found throughout the area where thousands of gallons of alleged burning jet fuel should have been splashing and burning up the fragile DNA.


We all get a hoot out of your "should have" claims.



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jezus

Originally posted by jthomas
There was lots of concrete. And remains of AA77, a Boeing 757. And passenger bodies.


Cool...can you post the photos or videos or eye-witness accounts?


What's the matter with the existing evidence you refuse to refute, including the eyewitness accounts?

Why are you incapable of interviewing anyone?



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by K J Gunderson

Originally posted by jthomas
Nope. The only thing we have is someone who claims there wasn't passenger bodies and can't demonstrate how they know that.

Just like you can't.

But you knew that. And you've painted yourself into a corner from which you have no escape.


Interesting. So you claim there were bodies and wreckage from the plane?


Try reading above carefully this time. You understand the Lilydale claimed there were no passenger bodies at the Pentagon but won't demonstrate how he/she knows that, or do you also need new eyeglasses?

Try again.



[edit on 15-9-2009 by jthomas]



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by K J Gunderson
 


No passenger bodies;

No passenger bodies strapped into aircraft seats;

No aircraft seats;

No aircraft wings - broken up or whole;

One steel aircraft wheel - 9 steel aircraft wheels missing;

No tail stabilizer or mark of a 44 ft tail stabilizer on the 70 ft Pentagon facade

No turbofan engines;

No jet fuel burning up April and Elijah;

No sign of jet fuel or burning building debris out in the A&E Drive;

No heavy steel landing gear; (the undocumented pic from Italy is worthless)

No baggage or luggage from an airplane;

Alleged DNA which should have been destroyed by the raging jet fuel fires;

Authentic eyewitnesses placing the actual aircraft Over the Naval Annex far from staged light poles;

Censored area videos and ignored area videos proving true or false the official tale;

Alleged black boxes with no serial numbers allegedly found in contradictory places;

One of the alleged black boxes proves the aircraft was much much too high to possibly hit the Pentagon 1st floor;

All they have is denial after denial after denial, unprovable ridiculous claims, and demand after demand after demand that we prove negatives.



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 01:49 PM
link   

posted by K J Gunderson

Interesting. So you claim there were bodies and wreckage from the plane?


posted by jthomas

Try reading above carefully this time. You understand the Lilydale claimed there were no passenger bodies at the Pentagon but won't demonstrate how he/she knows that, or do you also need new eyeglasses?

Try again.



No evidence whatsoever that there were passenger bodies inside the Pentagon.

No photos of passengers;
No photos of aircraft passenger seats;
No photos of passengers still strapped into aircraft passenger seats;
No photos of aircraft passenger luggage;
No evidence of aircraft passengers, seats, nor luggage whatsoever;

So we have to prove there were no passengers even though there is no evidence of passengers? The evidence is on our side, but we still have to prove a negative?

Is this a game with you jthomas? Do you mock the dead by making a stupid game out of their deaths jthomas?



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by SPreston
reply to post by K J Gunderson
 


No passenger bodies;

No passenger bodies strapped into aircraft seats;

No aircraft seats;

No aircraft wings - broken up or whole;

One steel aircraft wheel - 9 steel aircraft wheels missing;

No tail stabilizer or mark of a 44 ft tail stabilizer on the 70 ft Pentagon facade

No turbofan engines;

No jet fuel burning up April and Elijah;

No sign of jet fuel or burning building debris out in the A&E Drive;

No heavy steel landing gear; (the undocumented pic from Italy is worthless)

No baggage or luggage from an airplane;

Alleged DNA which should have been destroyed by the raging jet fuel fires;

Authentic eyewitnesses placing the actual aircraft Over the Naval Annex far from staged light poles;

Censored area videos and ignored area videos proving true or false the official tale;

Alleged black boxes with no serial numbers allegedly found in contradictory places;

One of the alleged black boxes proves the aircraft was much much too high to possibly hit the Pentagon 1st floor;

All they have is denial after denial after denial, unprovable ridiculous claims, and demand after demand after demand that we prove negatives.


As always, we know that CIT Groupie, SPreston, will never support his claims.

He can't even demonstrate his claim that a jet "flew over and away from the Pentagon."

That's why the rest of the 9/11 Truth Movement pronounced CIT and its groupies a "complete distraction" this past weekend in New York City.




posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 01:56 PM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by jthomas
As always, we know that CIT Groupie, SPreston, will never support his claims.


As always, we know that Disinfo Flunky Thomas will NEVER support his claims.

See how that works?



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by jthomas

Originally posted by K J Gunderson


Interesting. So you claim there were bodies and wreckage from the plane? /quote]

Try reading above carefully this time. You understand the Lilydale claimed there were no passenger bodies at the Pentagon but won't demonstrate how he/she knows that, or do you also need new eyeglasses?

Try again.



Try reading what I wrote carefully. I could really care less what Lilly claimed. You claimed there were bodies.

PROVE IT.



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 03:13 PM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 


I believe they have greater capabilities than they let on--or should let on. I certainly would rather people underestimate my technologies if I were the military.

As for your question...my father was a retired Marine Corps officer, my mother worked for the military, my relatives are in the military. I was a college intern at a Navy Facility, so I am not speaking out my patootie. I've seen the security at some of these places and I just do not believe it was as relaxed and all "whatever" that some of you would have me believe.

I have great respect for the military and those in it enough to not insult their lack of preparedness and intelligence by insinuating that they run the Pentagon's security like Rentacops.



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by jthomas

Originally posted by Jezus

Originally posted by jthomas
There was lots of concrete. And remains of AA77, a Boeing 757. And passenger bodies.


Cool...can you post the photos or videos or eye-witness accounts?


What's the matter with the existing evidence you refuse to refute, including the eyewitness accounts?


existing evidence?

Jthomas: There was a Unicorn at the pentagon
Lilydale: No there wasn't...
Jthomas: Refute my evidence!
Lilydale: What evidence?
Jthomas: The burden of proof is on you!



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 03:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by SPreston
reply to post by jthomas
 


You reposted my list jthomas, but you as usual in a cowardly manner refused to address even one item off my list.


I asked you years ago to support your claims. I'm still waiting.

Gosh....



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by K J Gunderson

Originally posted by jthomas

Originally posted by K J Gunderson


Interesting. So you claim there were bodies and wreckage from the plane? /quote]

Try reading above carefully this time. You understand the Lilydale claimed there were no passenger bodies at the Pentagon but won't demonstrate how he/she knows that, or do you also need new eyeglasses?

Try again.



Try reading what I wrote carefully.


Of course, I did. You didn't.


I could really care less what Lilly claimed.


In that case, you should quote me instead of quoting Lily, don't you think? You 9/11 "Truthers" are weird.

Go a., quote me.



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 03:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jezus

Originally posted by jthomas

Originally posted by Jezus

Originally posted by jthomas
There was lots of concrete. And remains of AA77, a Boeing 757. And passenger bodies.


Cool...can you post the photos or videos or eye-witness accounts?


What's the matter with the existing evidence you refuse to refute, including the eyewitness accounts?


existing evidence?


I see you tightened your blinders. That's silly.



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 04:21 PM
link   
Here's to hoping this brings this particular issue to rest (been going on a while as can be seen ;-))

reply to jthomas' post #599
 



Originally posted by jthomas

Originally posted by Lillydale

Originally posted by scott3x

Originally posted by jthomas

Originally posted by scott3x

Originally posted by jthomas

Originally posted by Lillydale

Originally posted by jthomas

Originally posted by jthomas

Originally posted by Lillydale

Still waiting...

so far you cannot explain why there were no passengers bodies at the crash scene.


Demonstrate that you know no passenger bodies were at the scene.


Demonstrate that you know passenger bodies were at the scene.


See how this works?

1. You ask, "...explain why there were no passengers bodies at the crash scene."

2. I ask you to demonstrate the validity of YOUR claim that there were no passenger bodies at the scene.

3. Then you want me to prove your UNPROVEN claim is wrong.

What a great illustration of my point you given everyone, Lilydale!


Ummmmm NO. You could not be more wrong. Perhaps you need some sleep. I merely asked you to back up your claim.


You made this claim: "...explain why there were no passengers bodies at the crash scene."

Demonstrate that there were no passenger bodies at the Pentagon or withdraw your claim. It's as simple and straightforward as that.


jthomas, I believe you know what side of the debate that I'm on, but I agree with your assertion that what she said implies that she knows that no passenger bodies were found at the crash scene. I believe what she meant, however, was simply that there is no evidence that any passenger bodies were ever found. It is alleged that passenger DNA was found, but the thought that there is no evidence that the bodies themselves were found renders the claim that DNA of those same bodies was found to be highly questionable. Can you atleast agree to this?


Scott3x, I can only go by what Lilydale claims directly.


Fair enough. Guess we'll have to wait for her response on this one.


No bodies, no evidence of bodies. Whatever. I still never made the claim that bodies were found...


You already claimed there were NO bodies found at the Pentagon. What part of that do you STILL refuse to admit, Liliydale?


I think she just clarified her statement; as in, when she said "no passenger bodies", she meant "no evidence of passenger bodies". Again, I think we may have to wait for her to verify my theory on this one.



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by jthomas

Originally posted by Jezus

Originally posted by jthomas

Originally posted by Jezus

Originally posted by jthomas
There was lots of concrete. And remains of AA77, a Boeing 757. And passenger bodies.


Cool...can you post the photos or videos or eye-witness accounts?


What's the matter with the existing evidence you refuse to refute, including the eyewitness accounts?


existing evidence?


I see you tightened your blinders. That's silly.


You posted evidence in this thread?

Can you re-post it?

I can't find it...

So are my blinders tightened too much?



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 05:51 PM
link   
reply to post by jthomas
 



In that case, you should quote me instead of quoting Lily, don't you think? You 9/11 "Truthers" are weird.

Go a., quote me.


I will.

Do you not find it all a bit hypocritical that you are calling the 9-11 "Truthers" weird for believing that the government is not as inept as they appear, thus giving them more credit than you seem to feel they deserve, and yet, you have spent multiple pages arguing with them over what you feel is essentially a non-issue?

It's rather like me arguing with a five year old over why I feel that Santa is slacking off in his duties.

If you feel that this was just a colossal blunder on the part of the government and that there is no "truth" why come on here and debate what you feel is a fallacy to begin with? Is that not "weird"? How many posts now to iterate and validate the accepted version? One would think, if it is the truth, then it could rest on its own merits.

You are as weird as all of the rest of us. When you realize that you will be much happier.



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 07:10 PM
link   
Jthomas, just post the pics of the wings and all the stuff they found and all this could stop...



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheAntiHero420
Jthomas, just post the pics of the wings and all the stuff they found and all this could stop...


I would love pics but I would settle for anything. Any real explanation as to why they are not there, were not there, and were never recovered from there would suit me. Evidence of some kind would be spectacular. Photos would be gold!

Yeah tommy, just get this all over with or is 9/11 a game or a sport to you? Are you having fun at the expense of 3000 dead Americans? How about the thousands more that died overseas because of what happened on 9/11? Either you are having a grand old time or you want this case closed as we do. So, you know what really happened and all you need to do is educate us serfs and put this to rest, and yet you keep playing? Sick.



new topics

top topics



 
215
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join