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: 74
215
<< 71  72  73    75  76  77 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Wave
I have watched your argumentation with a certain bewilderment.

You must not have been watching it too closely or accurately though, for you state this:


Originally posted by The Wave
As has been stated ... it points more towards a plane hitting the Pentagon and unfortunately, your repettivie and boring tirades do little to pursuade me otherwise.

Please show me where in this thread I have been concerned about a plane hitting the Pentagon?

For the most part, I have concentrated on asking two people, who believe that the light pole hit the taxi, to prove it. Both of them have failed to do so.

You need to read my posts a little more closely if you think that I have been concentrating on the plane hitting the Pentagon.




posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Wave
Sorry, forgot - Mmichael provided a long list of witnesses who saw a plane.

So - what's your point?

Did you read my reply to mmiichael's post?

None of those witnesses saw the light pole hit the taxi.


Originally posted by The Wave
By your own 'method' of argumentation please provide a list of people who saw the CIA, FBI, Men in Black or whoever remove the lamposts and stage the 'accident?'

It appears that you also fail to read my posts, despite claiming to have followed them. How many times have I stated to mmiichael, and now another time for you, that I never made that claim.

Why should I supply a list of people for something that I did not claim? Your anti-logic here is astounding. Perhaps you should have remained a lurker and refrained from posting your erroneous information.


Originally posted by The Wave
I mean it - you ignore anyhting that doesn't fit your view but provide precious little to substantiate your claims.

Please quote me to where I made a claim about anything related to the Pentagon. Your failure to do so will be your admission that your above comment is not factual.



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 04:05 PM
link   


Great video...



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 07:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw


Originally posted by pteridine
How would this effect the overall plane strike on the Pentagon, anyway?

Think about it and get back to me with your findings.


As you are completely unaware of anything outside of arcane video games, it doesn't effect it at all, of course. There are no spells or magic in this world. Get back to me with an original thought on the Pentagon attack, if you can work one up.

You have failed to support your previous statement and continue to keep your double standards.



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 12:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
As you are completely unaware of anything outside of arcane video games, it doesn't effect it at all, of course.

Pointless, off topic speculation.


Originally posted by pteridine
There are no spells or magic in this world.

Pointless, off topic speculation.


Originally posted by pteridine
Get back to me with an original thought on the Pentagon attack, if you can work one up.

It is not encumbant upon me to pose a theory about what happened at the Pentagon. I was not assigned an investigative role. Besides, I don't have all of the facts in my possession.

You posed a theory that the light pole hit the taxi. You have spent your time in this thread failing to prove your theory. You were caught out on your extremely poor research when you failed to properly quote McGraw.

You have not shown that passenger bodies were found strapped to airline seats. Another of your claims that you fail to support.



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 12:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by mappam
What happened to the plane?

Eye-witnesses say that a plane DID fly over them heading toward the pentagon.

The plane didn't hit the building.

Where is the plane? What about the passengers?

I have read all kinds of 'findings' and evidence of - no plane parts, hole not large enough for a plane etc... But I can't find any theories on what happened to the plane?

Thought or links?


I figure if they had no compunction about murdering citizens on the ground, then nose-diving the planes into deep dark water somewhere would present them with no moral dilemmas.



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 08:38 AM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


pteridine
"As you are completely unaware of anything outside of arcane video games, it doesn't effect it at all, of course."

Tezzajw
"Pointless, off topic speculation."

Please re-read "it doesn't effect it at all, of course" and explain why it is pointless off-topic speculation. This was in reference to earlier exchanges where I questioned whether light poles were causal or an effect of the event. You have still failed to support your previous statement. Feel free to do so or call on the muse of the casual readers to try and excuse you.



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
pteridine
"As you are completely unaware of anything outside of arcane video games, it doesn't effect it at all, of course."
Tezzajw
"Pointless, off topic speculation."
Please re-read "it doesn't effect it at all, of course" and explain why it is pointless off-topic speculation.

Pointless, off topic speculation. This thread is not about video games.


Originally posted by pteridine
This was in reference to earlier exchanges where I questioned whether light poles were causal or an effect of the event.

Your theory is that a light pole struck the taxi. You have failed to support this theory. You misquoted your key witness, McGraw and completely stuffed up his testimony. So much for researching your own theory, pteridine.

You still have not supported your theory that passenger bodies were found strapped to airline seats.



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 02:55 PM
link   
Unfortunatly, this investigative team went in biased and had no previous investigation experience.



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


HI,

So still the boring negative/destructive approach to the topic? No alarming new information that I can see? Just your repesentative juvenillle vitriole and positional debate?

Ah well - thanks for opeining my eyes - if this is represntative of 'truthers' maybe I need to assess my original ideas, as from this thread, the OS argumentation for me wins hands down. Measured, positive...

Carry on your great work - sorry would love to waste my time waiting for the alarming information but have a life to lead.... :-)

Peace! :-) :-) :-)



[edit on 11-11-2009 by The Wave]

[edit on 11-11-2009 by The Wave]



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by The Wave
 

Most of your post was off topic and not worth responding to.

However, I note that you have failed to quote me about the claims that you allege I made about the Pentagon. From my post at the top of this page, it is clear that you must have made up that false little tid-bit to pad out your post.

Do you have anything to add in this thread about the Pentagon attack and CIT's investigation?



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 03:32 PM
link   
Hi!

Do you?

When, and if you can provide 'evidence'for your view I'll certainly provide mine.

Meanwhile - still waiting to see the 'Alarming Information' as stated in the title of this thread..... Somehow we never seem to see this...?

Peace! :-) :-)

PS I love deep sea fishing :-)



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Wave
When, and if you can provide 'evidence'for your view I'll certainly provide mine.

Clearly, you have not read or understood any of my posts in this thread. This is now the second time that I am requesting you to quote my 'view'.

Again, your failure to do this will be your admission that you are wrong. Please be sure to correct yourself in future and be careful about what you claim to be true.

Throughout this thread I have clearly stated that I do not know what happened at the Pentagon. When people such as pteridine and mmiichael state as fact, that a light pole hit the taxi, it is my right to demand proof of this.

Left unchecked, these two members may influence others to believe that a light pole hit the taxi - without proof.

I have stated to mmiichael, that I will be more than happy to believe him, once he proves it to me. Thus far, he has failed to do so. Both mmiichael and pteridine tried to use their star witness, McGraw and both of them completely stuffed up McGraw's testimony. Both members showed their poor research about their theory and exposed their shortcomings.



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 07:01 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


I see that any bit of confusion or discomfort on your part results in a claim of "off topic." This is more prevalent that the "don't have all the facts" dodge. Now, as to your latest squirm, let's review the sequence.

pteridine - "How would this [taxi-light pole interaction] effect the overall plane strike on the Pentagon, anyway?"

Tezza (dismissively, unsuccessfully trying to establish dominance)- "Think about it and get back to me with your findings."

pteridine- "As you are completely unaware of anything outside of arcane video games, it doesn't effect it at all, of course."

tezza- "off topic..."

Well now that this has been explained to you, you may provide support of why it might make a difference or accept it as is. As a further exercise for the student, you may back up the statements you made previously and that you have failed, once again, to support.

Think about it and get back to me. I may even give you extra credit if you do well.



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 07:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
pteridine- "As you are completely unaware of anything outside of arcane video games,

Pointless and off topic speculation. Video games are not the subject of this thread.


Originally posted by pteridine
Well now that this has been explained to you, you may provide support of why it might make a difference or accept it as is.

Clearly you haven't thought about it, pteridine.

You and mmiichael have both alleged that the light pole hit the taxi. Both of you state that this has been covered in many media sources - which I do not dispute. There are media sources that report this incident. None of those sources try to prove the truth of the incident. When challenged, neither of you can confirm the incident with official government documents.

That poses an interesting puzzle, pteridine.

Your failure to prove that the light pole hit the taxi has been exposed, pteridine. You utterly failed to quote McGraw correctly, which demonstrated your shortcomings with your own theory.



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 07:54 PM
link   
Hi!,

There are media sources that report this incident. None of those sources try to prove the truth of the incident

What an interesting comment. Exactly what are they trying to prove then? Waiting with baited breath....

Sleep well.

Peace!
!



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 08:04 PM
link   
reply to post by The Wave
 

Where has a media source proven that the light pole hit the taxi?

The media reported that it happened, sure. So show me one media source that has proven that it happened. Show me one government source that documents the incident.



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 08:10 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 

You are really keeping the cut and paste keys busy, tezza. Here it is so even you can understand it:

The light pole-taxi interaction is a sideshow and unimportant. Prove otherwise.

Support your previous statements, as you demand of others.

Get back to me if you are able to do anything useful.



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 08:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
The light pole-taxi interaction is a sideshow and unimportant. Prove otherwise.

That's your theory, so you think about it and tell me why.

I've stated that the light pole-taxi incident is an interesting puzzle. I've given reasons why it is an interesting puzzle. It has only been documented by the media, not by any official government source. It has not been proven by anyone, including you.

Indeed, when you tried to prove it in this thread, you exposed the weakness of your own research. You utterly failed to quote McGraw accurately, which demonstrated your lack of facts about the incident.



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


You think about it.

When do you plan to support your previous statements?




top topics



 
215
<< 71  72  73    75  76  77 >>

log in

join