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: 70
215
<< 67  68  69    71  72  73 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 6 2009 @ 01:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw

You'll need to substantiate that claim. I never required pictures as definitive proof. You can verify that by reading through the thread. You're probably confused, as other members have asked you for pictures. I've stated in other threads and probably this thread as well, that signed coroner's reports should be sufficient to record the manner in which a body was recovered.

By the way, you retracted your claim that passenger bodies were found strapped to airline seats. Don't you remember? You admitted in your own words that you lied about it. Note clearly that you were specific when you stated that you lied. I never called you a liar, you called yourself a liar. I can link you again, if you can't remember where you stated so.

mmiichael, when you make a claim that McGraw saw the light pole hit the taxi, you shoud expect that your error will be pointed out to you.

mmiichael, when you make a claim that the light pole hitting the taxi was recorded everywhere across the internet and the world, you should expect that you will be asked for the links to prove the incident.

So far, you have offered nothing to prove your claim. You have failed to substantiate your claim that the light pole hit the taxi.


If I said I was ever lying it was in some offhand mocking post like where I confess to be a CIA agent. I never make statements I don't consider to be true, except maybe in jest.

After a while these 9/11 threads blend into each other. Same Usual Suspects, same scripts. More interesting as studies of the extreme length believers will go to trying to protect their inner fantasy worlds.

Some tragic old black guy having a lamp pole smash his windshield is like the most trivial aspect of 9/11. Fascinating to see how all the attention he gets in succeeding years warps his tenuous connection to reality. Suddenly instead of just watching the news he is the news.

The Truther syndrome is interesting as a phenomenon. A video game using real people and real events.

The parasites like Griffin, Jones, Balsamo, Ranke, Bollyn, who feed off this suspension of rationality the ones I dislike. Carrer losers cultivating a loser sub-culture just to sell a few videos, make convention appearances in cheap hotels , or get a one minute interview with some bored local news outlet. They'd be hawking some other brand of snake oil like Roswell cover-ups or chemtrails if the 9/11 goldmine hadn't appeared out of the skies.




[edit on 6-11-2009 by mmiichael]




posted on Nov, 6 2009 @ 01:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael
If I said I was ever lying it was in some offhand mocking post like where I confess to be a CIA agent.


Yes, mmiichael, here it is:

Originally posted by mmiichael
I retract them. I lied. I can't fool a genius.

There were no passengers. It was a repainted missile. The lamp posts were pulled out of the pavement. The witnesses lied. Ditto the lab technicians.



Originally posted by mmiichael
After a while these 9/11 threads blend into each other. Same Usual Suspects, same scripts.

Perhaps you should take a break for a while, if you're not able to keep track of what you post on the threads.


Originally posted by mmiichael
Some tragic old black guy having a lamp pole smash his windshield is like the most trivial aspect of 9/11.

Perhaps for you, but not others. You've failed to prove that it happened, so it still remains an interesting puzzle.

mmiichael, you also made this claim:

Originally posted by mmiichael
The plane took off in sight of thousands,

I'm just checking in with you for an updated count of the number of witnesses who you can provide to support that claim?

[edit on 6-11-2009 by tezzajw]



posted on Nov, 6 2009 @ 01:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by mmiichael
If I said I was ever lying it was in some offhand mocking post like where I confess to be a CIA agent.


Yes, mmiichael, here it is:

Originally posted by mmiichael
I retract them. I lied. I can't fool a genius.

There were no passengers. It was a repainted missile. The lamp posts were pulled out of the pavement. The witnesses lied. Ditto the lab technicians.



Sorry, I'm going to have to call you dense. Would prefer a stronger adjective. That was so obviously making fun of Truther fantasies it doesn't justify further elaboration.

I recommend turning off your computer, going outdoors, talking to people. There's a big world out there. Things are very different in reality land. People exchange ideas, talk about their own experience, make jokes. It helps immensely with self-awareness and perspective. Give it a try.



posted on Nov, 6 2009 @ 02:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael
Sorry, I'm going to have to call you dense. Would prefer a stronger adjective.

mmiichael, in this thread you have already been warned by the Moderators for using insults. Your warning was in this post where you called me 'deaf dumb and blind'.

Now you're calling me 'dense'?

Also in this thread, you retracted three claims and stated that you lied about them... but now you're trying to claim that you were only joking about it?

Your obvious confusion is surely noted. It permeates through your posts and your failure to prove your claims.

Remember, you were confused with what McGraw stated and you made an error falsely attributing words to him that he never stated.

I'll believe that for now, you have retracted three of your claims, admitting that you lied about them (your words).

Which still leaves you to either prove or retract your following two claims:
1 - the light pole hit the taxi.
2 - the plane departure was witnessed by thousands of people.



posted on Nov, 6 2009 @ 03:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw
Which still leaves you to either prove or retract your following two claims:
1 - the light pole hit the taxi.
2 - the plane departure was witnessed by thousands of people.



I don't look back at old messages to see what people have written. But one excuse you have for not doing a simple Google check was you aren't being paid.

No one is. This is voluntary. We exchange lesser known, controversial, or not immediately accessible information around here.
Anything available from multiple independent sources is a given. Germany lost WWII, a Muslim psychiatrist just went on a killing spree at Forth Hood military base. I don't need to provide proof to anyone questioning these things.

We know Flight 77 took off routinely with 64 people onboard from Dulles because aside from family and friends who left them off, there were hundred of others in the departure area, many people watching out the windows onto the airfield, staff at checked in counters, baggage handlers, security, etc. All recorded on security cameras in the airport and later tracked by air traffic controller in the sky. Communication with the ground by crew and passengers the first leg of the trip. All tapes replayed and examined in the investigations afterward.

Nothing unusual until the hijacking occurred. All those people disappeared off the face of the earth at 9:37 AM, Sept 11, 2001. Body parts of many found in the Pentagon wreckage, DNA retrieved and identified as the same people.

No serious question they all boarded the plane and continued to their deaths in the crash.

Similarly, the taxi was on a busy highway intact one minute and with a smashed windscreen the next. A plane flew past it and knocked down light poles. One was seen after near the vehicle and the driver said it was what hit it.

If there is a plausible different scenario, nothing supporting it has materialized in 8 years. It would need to be something very fantastical. What has been determined is 100% consistent with all other evidence and testimonies.

The complete absence of anything contradicting these facts inherently confirms them.

If someone brings forward material evidence of wrongdoings by thus far persons unknown, the matter will need re-examining. So far, with thousands searching for years trying to find new evidence of something different, nothing has surfaced.

We accept the established facts because they are validated by many sources and nothing conflicts with them.



posted on Nov, 6 2009 @ 03:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael
Anything available from multiple independent sources is a given.

Casual readers, this is mmiichael stating that just because multiple news media formats cover a story - then it must be true.

Ahhh-huh.


Originally posted by mmiichael
We know Flight 77 took off routinely ... there were hundred of others in the departure area, many people watching out the windows onto the airfield, staff at checked in counters, baggage handlers, security, etc.

mmiichael, you seem to be altering your claim. You claimed that there were thousands of people who witnessed the deparure of the plane. Now you seem to be modifying it to only be hundreds of people?

Ok, fine. Give me the names of the hundreds of people who saw the plane depart. So far, you haven't given me a single name.


Originally posted by mmiichael
Similarly, the taxi was on a busy highway intact one minute

You have not proven this. You have assumed it.


Originally posted by mmiichael
A plane flew past it and knocked down light poles.

You have not proven that the plane knocked down the light pole that you allege hit the taxi.


Originally posted by mmiichael
One was seen after near the vehicle and the driver said it was what hit it.

Yes, a light pole was seen near the vehicle. Yes, the driver said that it hit his taxi. In follow up interviews with the driver, he has given extremely contradictory testimony about the whole event. He is an unreliable witness.


Originally posted by mmiichael
The complete absence of anything contradicting these facts inherently confirms them.

Ahhhh-huh.

How many other casual readers would also like to inform mmiichael how illogical and plain wrong this statement is?

mmiichael, the fact that you even typed that statement reflects upon your inability to understand basic logic.

Wow. Just wow.



posted on Nov, 6 2009 @ 03:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw
Ok, fine. Give me the names of the hundreds of people who saw the plane depart. So far, you haven't given me a single name.


Act like an adult. Assuming you're over 12.

No one assembled the names of all the people at Dulles airport that morning. But the family members have been listed in various memorial sources. Yuo can contact them, ask for other names, and get first hand accounts of how big the crowds were.

Then you can contact Dulles Airport and get names of employees from the Personnel Dept.

You won't do any of his because you have no interest in the actual names of these people.

You are a compulsive troll with about two tricks to your name. Shriek "Where's the proof" or "you are contradicting something in a previos message"

But you cannot contribute an iota of information to save your life.

The casual reader is probably turned off this thread by now. It's only morbidly fascinating as a study of obsessive denial and lame troll tactics.

Try getting outside more.



posted on Nov, 6 2009 @ 03:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael
Act like an adult. Assuming you're over 12.

Yes, yes, yes... enough with the off-topic nonsense and insults.


Originally posted by mmiichael
No one assembled the names of all the people at Dulles airport that morning. But the family members have been listed in various memorial sources. Yuo can contact them, ask for other names, and get first hand accounts of how big the crowds were.

See, that's where you get it all wrong, mmiichael.

You made the claim that there were thousands of people who saw the plane depart. Then you revised that claim to be hundreds of people.

Now, you're wanting me to find those people for you to prove your claim?

mmiichael, the burden of proof is upon you to collect the names of all the people who you alleged saw the departure of the flight.

You really need to enrol in a series of lessons on logic and proof.



posted on Nov, 6 2009 @ 07:45 AM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


All the evidence says that a plane full of passengers hit the Pentagon. The only plot was hatched by the hijackers. All the rest of the trivia, what you call "interesting puzzles," was put there for your personal amusement. If you disagree with the so-called official story, postulate an alternative, if you are capable of doing so.

You have failed to support your previous statement and continue to avoid it. Your double standard is becoming a burden to you. You speak to "casual readers" like a grade school teacher chiding a pupil by speaking to the class, a common tactic of the classroom tyrant. Class dismissed.



posted on Nov, 6 2009 @ 09:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw
You made the claim that there were thousands of people who saw the plane depart. Then you revised that claim to be hundreds of people.

Now, you're wanting me to find those people for you to prove your claim?

mmiichael, the burden of proof is upon you to collect the names of all the people who you alleged saw the departure of the flight.

You really need to enrol in a series of lessons on logic and proof.


In one way or other, thousands are involved with, observe, or track the takeoff and flight of all major airline flights out of busy airports. You can study up on the complexities of modern commercial flying to confirm that. The point you want to ignore is that American Airlines Flight 77 was boarded and took off with it's passengers routinely.

Any errors, miscalculations, lack of photographs, minor conflicting testimonies, will not change what is confirmed on multiple leves. Plane took off with 64 people onboard and was deliberately crashed into the Pentagon.

The overwhelming body of evidence confirms this. Nothing significant brings it into question.

You attempt to cast doubt but bring nothing to the discussion that in any way would alter the known facts.



posted on Nov, 6 2009 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
All the evidence says that a plane full of passengers hit the Pentagon.

It's your right to believe that, pteridine.

However, you've failed to prove your theory that the light pole struck the taxi. You made a huge error when you wrongly attributed comments to McGraw that he did not make. So much for researching your own theory, huh?

You've also failed to prove your that passenger bodies were found strapped to airline seats.



posted on Nov, 6 2009 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael
Any errors, miscalculations, lack of photographs, minor conflicting testimonies, will not change what is confirmed on multiple leves.

You've certainly made errors, mmiichael. You wrongly attributed statements to McGraw that he did not make. That didn't look too good for you when you tried to use him as a witness for the light pole striking the taxi.

You appear to have made an error with the number of people who you allege saw the plane depart. First you claimed it was thousands, now you claim it was hundreds. Yet you still have not provided me with even a handful of names.

Why would you make that claim if you were not prepared to research it and prove it?

It's clear that you've never written a formal report at University standard, otherwise you would know that specific claims, need to be proven.



posted on Nov, 6 2009 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw
However, you've failed to prove your theory that the light pole struck the taxi. You made a huge error when you wrongly attributed comments to McGraw that he did not make. So much for researching your own theory, huh?

You've also failed to prove your that passenger bodies were found strapped to airline seats.


Anything you consider an error made by some posters on this site doesn't change the fact that you are incapable of presenting any cohesive alternative scenario with appropriate evidence. Than no one has shown what has been established didn't happen.

If we're going to talk about failure we have to say you and the Truth Movement have failed completely in providing any evidence of wild suppositions.

Nothing you type to deflect from your abject failure can change that.



posted on Nov, 6 2009 @ 02:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael
Anything you consider an error made by some posters on this site doesn't change the fact that you are incapable of presenting any cohesive alternative scenario with appropriate evidence.

I don't have a theory. I wasn't commissioned to investigate the crime. It is not encumbent upon me to propose a theory.

The fact that you think this, demonstrates a flaw in your understanding about logic and the nature of proof.


Originally posted by mmiichael
If we're going to talk about failure we have to say you ... have failed completely in providing any evidence of wild suppositions.

You need to quote me on these alleged 'suppositions' that I have made. Your failure to do so will be your admission that you were wrong.

Indeed, on the topic of failure in this thread, you failed to accurately attribute statements to McGraw. You tried to use him as a witness to the light pole hitting the taxi, which McGraw did not see happen.

You have also failed to prove your claim that there were hundreds of people who saw the plane depart.



posted on Nov, 6 2009 @ 02:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw
I don't have a theory. I wasn't commissioned to investigate the crime. It is not encumbent upon me to propose a theory.


This isn't a class. You are nobody's appointed instructor.

You admit you have no explanation of events. So what can you possibly be using as a standard of comparison of correctness?

Yet you continue to pass judgements on people and the information they try to exchange. No one wants to read trollish running commentary.

You contribute nothing. Everyone can see that.

An intelligent person would know enough to keep quiet at this point.



posted on Nov, 6 2009 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


Again you have failed to support your statements. It is unfortunate that someone like you, of above average intelligence, chooses not to contribute to the thread but only to focus on trivia and harass those who have alternate theories.
The plane had passengers. People saw it strike the Pentagon. Everything else is in the noise.
Stop playing games.



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 12:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael
Yet you continue to pass judgements on people and the information they try to exchange. No one wants to read trollish running commentary.

You have barely tried to exchange information, mmiichael. When you have been requested to exchange your information to support your claims, you have baulked from doing so - each time. Many times you have told me that I should Google to support your claims for you.

You tried to exchange information about McGraw, however, you were in error. Your failure to correctly attribute quotes to McGraw showed that you were poorly research about the incident.

You have still failed to support your claim that the taxi hit the light pole by not exchanging the proof.

You have still failed to support your claim that there were hundreds (thousands?) of people who watched the plane depart by not exchanging their names and statements.



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 12:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
The plane had passengers. People saw it strike the Pentagon. Everything else is in the noise.

Nothing in that statement has shown that you're prepared to support your theory that the light pole hit the taxi.

The noise that you suggest is certainly loud enough to be distinguished, for it is presenting you with lots of problems trying to explain it. Remember the huge problem that you had when you misquoted McGraw? It showed how much that noise is deafening you, as you failed to properly research your own theory. You entirely screwed up McGraw's testimony, pteridine.

Some official government story believers choose to use red, white and blue ear plugs, with star spangled patterns on them, to filter the noise. Other people just want the truth.



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 12:32 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 01:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael
You are a revolting troll

Regardless of your off-topic, personal insult, it doesn't change the fact that you have failed to prove your claims, mmiichael.

You failed to properly quote McGraw when you claimed that he witnessed the light pole hit the taxi. That was a big stumbling block for you trying to prove that the light pole hit the taxi.

You have also shown much confusion with the number of people who you claimed witness the departure of the flight. First you claimed it was thousands, then you revised that to hundreds and finally, you told me that I have to Google the names for you.



new topics

top topics



 
215
<< 67  68  69    71  72  73 >>

log in

join