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: 43
215
<< 40  41  42    44  45  46 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 11:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by jthomas
I have no reason to believe Lillydale's claim "there were no passenger bodies at the crash scene."

Do you?


Until I see evidence of passenger bodies I don't believe the claim that they were found...

You just don't get the issue of a negative...

I don't have any proof that a Unicorn wasn't at the pentagon...but that doesn't mean I believe a Unicorn was at the pentagon...




posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by jthomas
 


Since you refuse to do it, I'll show bodies found at the pentagon. As for them being bodies from passengers that is unknown, but Jthomas its sad that you didn't even bother, you just dismissed. Warning: Graphic Pictures Notice none are straped to their seats though.

[edit on 9/22/2009 by TheAntiHero420]



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 09:08 AM
link   
reply to post by jthomas
 


I know the answers to the questions I asked you and I know the explanations that have been offered by the government. I was asking YOU those questions. Not surprisingly you failed to address even one.

All you are doing is dodging and denying jthomas. It's time for you to step up rookie. Back yourself up for once with something. Surely you can see how weak your posts are.........

The questions remain. Answer just one. Show us some evidence of the passengers on flight 77. Show us something.

Or do you want to be known as a pesky little troll here at ATS?
?

Peace



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by jthomas

Originally posted by Lillydale

Originally posted by jthomas
Stop being a chump. Just show us how Liliydale KNOWS "there were no passenger bodies at the crash scene."

If she knows it, she can demonstrate it.

Stop being ridiculous and answer the question.


Say it isn't so. Is this what I will be saying goodbye to? Someone else completely asks you to back up your claim. You cannot back up your claim. You tell them to show you that I cannot back up my claim?????????? LOL. Did you fall on your head?


Mumbling incoherently isn't helping you present your evidence that "there were no passenger bodies at the crash scene."


Did you really have a hard time understanding what I wrote?

How can I simplify this.

Someone else that is NOT me asked you to back up your claim.

With me?

Some other person, I believe it was Jezus, asked you to prove what you were saying.

Got that?

I was not involved at all. I was not in the question nor did I ask it. That was entirely between that person and you. NOT ME. I WAS NOT IN THERE AT ALL.

Instead of doing the respectable thing and showing your evidence you went another way. You were handed an opportunity to educate someone on what really happened on 9/11. You had the perfect chance to teach someone the truth that you know. Instead of that....

...you told them to prove to you how I know there were no bodies. Your response to being asked for proof or evidence was to tell that person to prove to you how I knew something.

If you are still confused, go back and read the post with the cowardly reply you brought me into it with. If you are still confused, I cannot talk any more slowly and any more simply than this.



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by jthomas

Originally posted by Jezus
A negative belief is the default position...until someone provides evidence of something I have no reason to believe it.


I have no reason to believe Lillydale's claim "there were no passenger bodies at the crash scene."

Do you?



This is not about me, still. Why are you afraid to answer the question you were asked? If you want to argue with me, that is one thing. To argue about me simply shows that you will use almost any excuse to hide from actually having to provide any kind of evidence at all.

Why do you believe this story when it is so hard for you to even back up? I have friends like you; friends that had mean tough daddies that showed their love at the end of a hand. They learned discipline, respect, order, authority, and that they should always seek it, trust it, know that it is the best care you will ever get so love it no matter what. They believe the OS and they believe our government would never do anything like stage it, carry it out, or simply allow it to happen. They know daddy will take care of them. Northwoods, Gulf of Tonkin, Lusitania, all mean nothing. Just because daddy hit me before and had plans to hit me more, does not mean he wants to hurt me. He just wants me to fall in line. Just be good, repeat the OS, blind yourself with empty patriotism, and whatever you do, do not think about any of this for even a second because you might realize you are abused, were abused, and will always be abused.

You can run away from other people's questions all you like by hiding behind. I am starting to just feel so sorry for you for believing this story which you cannot even find a way to prove to yourself. It's ok, hide little rabbit; poor, ignorant, scared little rabbit.

Thank you for showing us all just how little you really care about the truth. Even though another person is asking you for the truth, you would rather argue about whether or not I can prove something I said.

[edit on 23-9-2009 by Lillydale]



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 10:33 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


Lloyde doesn't concern me. I didn't see his interview called out specifically. I'm sure that many witnesses were not named. Why are you worried about him? He didn't fly the plane. He didn't dynamite the Pentagon or set it on fire. His cab was struck by debris. Yes, it looked odd but how does that fit a conspiracy? If you were in charge of planning a conspiracy, would you throw a lightpole through a windshield to prove that the lightpoles were struck by a plane? Use your head.



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 10:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
Lloyde doesn't concern me. His cab was struck by debris.

pteridine, you repeat this as though it happened.

You have not proven it.

Please, refrain from making these kinds of statements until you can prove them.



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 10:51 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


How do you think the light pole ended up in Lloyde's cab? Is there some alarming information you want to share?



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 10:56 PM
link   
Casual readers to the thread, note carefully the game that pteridine is playing.

Earlier in this thread, he accused me of being a CIT/P4T drone. When challenged, he failed to prove it and he has not offered a retraction. His disinfo was noted and exposed for being the crap that it is.

Now, follow pteridine's next line of spin with the following comment:

Originally posted by pteridine
How do you think the light pole ended up in Lloyde's cab? Is there some alarming information you want to share?

pteridine, please prove that the light pole was ever inside the taxi.

You don't play this game too well, pteridine. You make claims that you fail to prove and then you invite comment about them. Why?

[edit on 25-9-2009 by tezzajw]



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 11:33 PM
link   
Casual readers will note that Tezza never seems to take a position on anything. Is this because he lacks the ability to state and defend a position or is it because he is still trolling?
Take a position Tezza. Take all the evidence you have and propose what happened. Turbofan has a position. SPreston has a position. Impressme has a position. They state it and defend their positions. Why can't you? Your ploy of stalling while "getting all the evidence" while you troll just doesn't work any more.
If you don't have the ability and self-confidence to develop a working hypothesis based on all the evidence at hand, you might want to wait until you have all the evidence before you post again.



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 11:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw

You don't play this game too well,


There's your answer pteridine. It's just a game to this guy.

His sig proves it. (the troll in me.....)



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 11:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
Casual readers will note that Tezza never seems to take a position on anything. Is this because he lacks the ability to state and defend a position or is it because he is still trolling?

Casual readers to the thread will note that pteridine is intentionally trying to make me the subject of this thread. Why? The thread topic is about CIT's Pentagon investigation. I don't need to have a position to discuss this.

pteridine's disregard for ATS forum rules is fairly obvious.


Originally posted by pteridine
Take a position Tezza. Take all the evidence you have and propose what happened.

I don't know what happened, pteridine. I'm not the subject of this thread.

Casual readers will note that pteridine has made a claim that I am a CIT/P4T drone, but he has failed to support it.

Casual readers will note that pteridine has claimed that the light pole hit Lloyde's taxi and was inside it, but he has failed to support it.



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 11:51 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


Isn't there some sort of rule against trolling, Tezza?

As you have no position on the Pentagon events and do so love to prove things, why don't you provide evidence that an airplane didn't strike the Pentagon? You could claim NOC, shock and awe, explosives, cruise missiles, or some other alarming information recently yielded.

That will give you something to discuss and an extra benefit is that it is opposed to my view that an airplane did strike the Pentagon.



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 11:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
As you have no position on the Pentagon events and do so love to prove things, why don't you provide evidence that an airplane didn't strike the Pentagon?

Casual readers should note that pteridine has lost the plot - again.

Instead of providing proof for his claims that I am a CIT/P4T drone and that the light pole hit the taxi, pteridine wants me to provide evidence for something else?

Wow... you really do lack the common sense to follow-up your illogical claims, pteridine.



posted on Sep, 26 2009 @ 12:05 AM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 

"The troll in me must inform you that what I type may or may not reflect what I actually think or believe, then again - maybe it does. Don't quote me on that." --Tezza.

The casual reader will note that Tezza still has nothing to contribute.

The alarming information was not alarming at all. So far the best explanation of the Pentagon attack is that Flight 77 struck the Pentagon and all passengers, crew, and hijackers were killed along with Pentagon employees.



posted on Sep, 26 2009 @ 12:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
The alarming information was not alarming at all.

Staying on topic...

pteridine made the claim that the light pole hit the taxi and was lodged inside it.

Casual readers, in each and every one of your posts to pteridine - demand him to prove this happened.

So far, you will have witnessed that pteridine has avoided all responsibility of trying to prove this claim.

It's not so alarming that pteridine made a claim that he can't support.



posted on Sep, 26 2009 @ 12:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by tezzajw
 

"The troll in me must inform you that what I type may or may not reflect what I actually think or believe, then again - maybe it does. Don't quote me on that." --Tezza.

The casual reader will note that Tezza still has nothing to contribute.

The alarming information was not alarming at all. So far the best explanation of the Pentagon attack is that Flight 77 struck the Pentagon and all passengers, crew, and hijackers were killed along with Pentagon employees.


How is that even remotely "the best" explanation? I would think that the best explanation would have some evidence or proof. As of yet, no wings, no passenger bodies. I do not know about this cab/lightpole incident completely but I do know that you were asked to back it up about 6 posts back. I am usually pretty eager to see what people present to back up their claims but all you have done is attack another poster since being asked to back it up. I would like to see your evidence as well. Are you going to attack me for asking as well?



posted on Sep, 26 2009 @ 12:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lillydale
I do not know about this cab/lightpole incident completely but I do know that you were asked to back it up about 6 posts back.

Here's a thread that I started about Lloyde, his taxi and the light pole.

You can also search for similar threads by SPreston or CIT - Craig Ranke. They all contain similar material in them.

The basic premise is that the alleged Flight AA77 hit a light pole and then that light pole allegedly hit Lloyde's taxi. It's part of the alleged damage pattern caused by the alleged Flight AA77.

Yet, the whole incident is never mentioned in any official government story report and the only witness who can verify the event is Lloyde.



posted on Sep, 26 2009 @ 12:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 


Lloyde England, the Taxi driver and star witness for CIT, said that a part of a light pole hit his taxi.

Father Stephen McGraw -- "The plane clipped the top of a light pole just before it got to us, injuring a taxi driver, whose taxi was just a few feet away from my car. "I saw it crash into the building," he said.
www.debunk911myths.org...



posted on Sep, 26 2009 @ 12:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 


Here are witnesses to the imact of the plane at the same site.

www.debunk911myths.org...



new topics

top topics



 
215
<< 40  41  42    44  45  46 >>

log in

join