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.

 

How do "non-believers " explain the passport?

page: 3
13
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 07:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by john124
Thus proving that low probability random events, such as consecutive lottery draws and passports surviving, does occassionally happen.


You do know that an incriminating passport was found at at least 2 sites right?

How is that "low probability"? 2 out of 4 is good probability to me.

[edit on 23-9-2009 by Nutter]

[edit on 23-9-2009 by Nutter]




posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 07:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by Orion7911
 


I could have posted a much longer explanation of the gentleman earlier but, just didnt have the time.




Excuse to avoid answering very simple questions and evasion noted...

as usual.

Do you ever get tired of using the same page of your script over and over swamp?



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 08:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by waypastvne

This is how I explain it



[edit on 22-9-2009 by waypastvne]


AIR PRESSURE?????



that has to be one of thee worst debunker videos to date.

Hey Preston... Can you believe these duhbunkers theory??? I haven't laughed this hard since,, well.. since 3 posts ago...

they're actually claiming that punch out hole was created by air pressure... Are they serious? Really? waypastvne?? You believe that?

And just when you think the fairy tale and duhbunkings can't get more insane... they go on to compare the punch-out hole in the C ring to the Alfred P Murrah buildings damage.

How can anyone suggest that a perfectly round hole is comparable to the chaotic damage over at the APM?

I have never in my life seen this level of such incredible denial from so many of such a blatant conspiracy.

America is truly doomed



[edit on 23-9-2009 by Orion7911]



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 08:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Kryties
 


I understand the sentence, however, am I to assume that anything that is posted in bold capital letters is now to be uncontestable fact?



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 09:01 AM
link   
Hello again ATS'ers.

I have not recieved any feedback regarding the "suicide note" that was found from a passenger's air sickness bag:


The FBI found a USAir employee who said Burke had borrowed the gun from him last month. Most incriminating was a note, written in Burke's hand, on the outside of an air-sickness bag. It read:

"Hi, Ray. I think it's sort of ironical that we end up like this. I asked for some leniency for my family, remember. Well I got none. And you'll get none."


www.time.com...

Just as interesting is this:


Two days later, an FBI Agent working the scene found what appeared to be the barrel and trigger of a handgun. Forensic Analysists examined the pieces, and found a small peice of skin wedged between the trigger and the barrel. By matching the skin prints to the passenger manifest, investigators were able to conclude that the gun had been in the hand of USAir employee David Burke at the time of impact.


www.airdisaster.com...

This plane was traveling pretty fast too:


Several seconds later, the CVR picks up increasing windscreen noise as the airplane pitches down and begins to accelerate. A final gunshot is heard as Burke fatally shoots himself. Airspeed continues to build until 13,000 feet, when traveling at a velocity of 1.2x Mach, the aircraft breaks apart and the Flight Recorders cease functioning.


www.airdisaster.com...

I believe Mach 1 = over 760 MPH

So, what we have here is a murder - suicide in an aircraft that crashes at a very fast speed. Not only is a part of the murder weapon found with skin fragments found, there is a suicide note found written on an air sickness bag.

The found passport, in my opinion is not a strong point for the Truth community to hold on to regarding evdience of an inside job.

Thank you.



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 09:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by Kryties
 


I understand the sentence, however, am I to assume that anything that is posted in bold capital letters is now to be uncontestable fact?



news.bbc.co.uk...

Mistaken identity

Abdulaziz Al Omari, another of the Flight 11 hijack suspects, has also been quoted in Arab news reports.

He says he is an engineer with Saudi Telecoms, and that he lost his passport while studying in Denver.

Another man with exactly the same name surfaced on the pages of the English-language Arab News.

The second Abdulaziz Al Omari is a pilot for Saudi Arabian Airlines, the report says.


guardian.150m.com...

Abdul Aziz Al-Omari (Flight 11) (Trained Pilot)

The identities of two men with the same name have been cobbled together to create an FBI "terrorist". Both are Alive!

The first has the same name, the same birth date as one of the FBI "terrorists" but has no idea how to fly.

The second has the name Abdul Rahman Al-Omari and a different birth date, but is the person pictured by the FBI and is a pilot for Saudi Arabian Airlines.

Here are some quotes from the world's media concerning them.

Omari Number 1

"A Saudi man has reported to authorities that he is the real Abdul Aziz Al-Omari, and claims his passport was stolen in 1995 while he studied electrical engineering at the University of Denver. Al-Omari says he informed police of the theft." - ABCNews

"I couldn't believe it when the FBI put me on their list. They gave my name and my date of birth, but I am not a suicide bomber. I am here. I am alive. I have no idea how to fly a plane. I had nothing to do with this." - Telegraph 23rd September 2001

"The name (listed by the FBI) is my name and the birth date is the same as mine, but I am not the one who bombed the World Trade Center in New York," Abdul Aziz Al-Omari told the London-based Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper.

"Al-Omari has since been found in Saudi Arabia and is apparently cleared in the case" - New York Times

"Saudi Embassy officials in Washington have challenged his identity. They say a Saudi electrical engineer named Abdul Aziz Al-Omari had his passport and other papers stolen in 1996 in Denver when he was a student and reported the theft to police there at the time." - BBC

"Abdel Aziz Al-Omari and Saïd Hussein Gharamallah Al-Ghamdi, are well in life, the first in Saudi Arabia and the second in Tunisia for nine months." - Wal Fadjri 21st September 2001 (translate)

Omari Number 2

Mr. Al-Omari, a pilot with Saudi Airlines, walked into the US embassy in Jeddah to demand why he was being reported as a dead hijacker in the American media.

"Abdul Aziz Al-Omari is a pilot for Saudi Arabian Airlines" - BBC 23rd September 2001

"A pilot with Saudi Airlines, was astonished to find himself accused of hijacking ­ as well as being dead ­ and has visited the US consulate in Jeddah to demand an explanation." - Independent 17th September 2001

This Al-Omari lives with his wife and four children in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.


Happy to oblige



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 09:26 AM
link   
reply to post by ImAPepper
 


That's easy.

When the plane BROKE APART at high altitude the note was set free to drift down with the lighter wreckage while the fuselage hit the ground.

And nowhere does it mention anything about fire or an explosion which is part of the main difference between this note and the passport.



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 10:25 AM
link   
Wow I am really starting to beleive debunkers are on a payroll.... I can understand the WTC collapse being arguable, and even (if barely) the pentagon... but this passport thing should be a no go zone for you guys LOL



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 10:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kryties

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by Kryties
 


I understand the sentence, however, am I to assume that anything that is posted in bold capital letters is now to be uncontestable fact?



news.bbc.co.uk...

Mistaken identity

Abdulaziz Al Omari, another of the Flight 11 hijack suspects, has also been quoted in Arab news reports.

He says he is an engineer with Saudi Telecoms, and that he lost his passport while studying in Denver.

Another man with exactly the same name surfaced on the pages of the English-language Arab News.

The second Abdulaziz Al Omari is a pilot for Saudi Arabian Airlines, the report says.


guardian.150m.com...

Abdul Aziz Al-Omari (Flight 11) (Trained Pilot)

The identities of two men with the same name have been cobbled together to create an FBI "terrorist". Both are Alive!

The first has the same name, the same birth date as one of the FBI "terrorists" but has no idea how to fly.

The second has the name Abdul Rahman Al-Omari and a different birth date, but is the person pictured by the FBI and is a pilot for Saudi Arabian Airlines.

Here are some quotes from the world's media concerning them.

Omari Number 1

"A Saudi man has reported to authorities that he is the real Abdul Aziz Al-Omari, and claims his passport was stolen in 1995 while he studied electrical engineering at the University of Denver. Al-Omari says he informed police of the theft." - ABCNews

"I couldn't believe it when the FBI put me on their list. They gave my name and my date of birth, but I am not a suicide bomber. I am here. I am alive. I have no idea how to fly a plane. I had nothing to do with this." - Telegraph 23rd September 2001

"The name (listed by the FBI) is my name and the birth date is the same as mine, but I am not the one who bombed the World Trade Center in New York," Abdul Aziz Al-Omari told the London-based Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper.

"Al-Omari has since been found in Saudi Arabia and is apparently cleared in the case" - New York Times

"Saudi Embassy officials in Washington have challenged his identity. They say a Saudi electrical engineer named Abdul Aziz Al-Omari had his passport and other papers stolen in 1996 in Denver when he was a student and reported the theft to police there at the time." - BBC

"Abdel Aziz Al-Omari and Saïd Hussein Gharamallah Al-Ghamdi, are well in life, the first in Saudi Arabia and the second in Tunisia for nine months." - Wal Fadjri 21st September 2001 (translate)

Omari Number 2

Mr. Al-Omari, a pilot with Saudi Airlines, walked into the US embassy in Jeddah to demand why he was being reported as a dead hijacker in the American media.

"Abdul Aziz Al-Omari is a pilot for Saudi Arabian Airlines" - BBC 23rd September 2001

"A pilot with Saudi Airlines, was astonished to find himself accused of hijacking ­ as well as being dead ­ and has visited the US consulate in Jeddah to demand an explanation." - Independent 17th September 2001

This Al-Omari lives with his wife and four children in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.


Happy to oblige


I couldn't help but notice that the references date to shortly after 9/11. Any updates on the information?



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 11:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by SPreston

Therefore we have good reason to suspect the paper passport of Satam al-Suqami was planted, especially sence it was not damaged by the fireball it was allegedly inside, and especially since it was supposedly inside the pocket of a supposedly crushed man allegedly trapped inside the burning fuselage of an aircraft inside the fireball 96 floors above the street.

I do not accept such nonsense as this discovered passport. Why do you?



This is the biggest FLAW in the theories that a passport could survive. In a plane crash in a field or in the water? Yes. In a plane crash where the entire vehicle imbeds into a steel structure? No way. Not when it is in a pocket or in luggage. Now, if there was charred luggage found and it was pulled from the luggage, well, then we have a story.

It's just AWEFUL convenient that the only paper object to survive from that impact just happened to be a passport for one of the 'terrorists'. And that it was undamaged.

Sorry guys, but you will not ever sell that to me!



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by ImAPepper
Hello again ATS'ers.

I have not recieved any feedback regarding the "suicide note" that was found from a passenger's air sickness bag:


The FBI found a USAir employee who said Burke had borrowed the gun from him last month. Most incriminating was a note, written in Burke's hand, on the outside of an air-sickness bag. It read:

"Hi, Ray. I think it's sort of ironical that we end up like this. I asked for some leniency for my family, remember. Well I got none. And you'll get none."


www.time.com...

Just as interesting is this:


Two days later, an FBI Agent working the scene found what appeared to be the barrel and trigger of a handgun. Forensic Analysists examined the pieces, and found a small peice of skin wedged between the trigger and the barrel. By matching the skin prints to the passenger manifest, investigators were able to conclude that the gun had been in the hand of USAir employee David Burke at the time of impact.


www.airdisaster.com...

This plane was traveling pretty fast too:


Several seconds later, the CVR picks up increasing windscreen noise as the airplane pitches down and begins to accelerate. A final gunshot is heard as Burke fatally shoots himself. Airspeed continues to build until 13,000 feet, when traveling at a velocity of 1.2x Mach, the aircraft breaks apart and the Flight Recorders cease functioning.


www.airdisaster.com...

I believe Mach 1 = over 760 MPH

So, what we have here is a murder - suicide in an aircraft that crashes at a very fast speed. Not only is a part of the murder weapon found with skin fragments found, there is a suicide note found written on an air sickness bag.

The found passport, in my opinion is not a strong point for the Truth community to hold on to regarding evdience of an inside job.

Thank you.



I doubt you'll get any feedback. Lots of posters on here tend to overlook things that explain away their arguments. They just keep arguing as though your post doesn't exist. Why? Makes too much sense.



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 11:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by dariousg

Originally posted by SPreston

Therefore we have good reason to suspect the paper passport of Satam al-Suqami was planted, especially sence it was not damaged by the fireball it was allegedly inside, and especially since it was supposedly inside the pocket of a supposedly crushed man allegedly trapped inside the burning fuselage of an aircraft inside the fireball 96 floors above the street.

I do not accept such nonsense as this discovered passport. Why do you?



This is the biggest FLAW in the theories that a passport could survive. In a plane crash in a field or in the water? Yes. In a plane crash where the entire vehicle imbeds into a steel structure? No way. Not when it is in a pocket or in luggage. Now, if there was charred luggage found and it was pulled from the luggage, well, then we have a story.

It's just AWEFUL convenient that the only paper object to survive from that impact just happened to be a passport for one of the 'terrorists'. And that it was undamaged.

Sorry guys, but you will not ever sell that to me!


Do you know for a fact that this is the only piece of paper (and passports are printed on material that is generally a little touhger than common copy paper) that survived or is it the only one mentioned or referenced on the internet? Just because you can't find something on the internet does not mean it does not exist.



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 12:54 PM
link   
reply to post by turbofan
 



You're still pushing the "air" BS?!

Why not? You're still telling the "paint chips are super magic nano therm*ite" joke.


Tell me, how does air accelerate itself out of a fuselage?

When a moving mass of air passes through a stationary mass of air, it undergoes a drop in pressure and an increase in velocity, just as it would when passing through any restriction. This effect is happening right now in the skies above your head. It's called the jet stream.



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 01:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Redneck from Hell
 


Ok then guys, let me get this straight. The passport belonged to no soul in the plane.


It belonged to Satam Al Saquami a hijacker on AA11.


Do the sources recognize that it DID belong to someone on the plane, or not?


Yes,it DID belong to someone on the plane.


And a response to the guy that osted the video on the 1st page. Well wouldn't the pilots also bust straight through the building with the passport.


If you watched the video you would note "the air from the cabin passed through the building and carried the passport with it". The air would be less likely to carry the weight of a body through the building.


Well it doesn't even matter because the passport that was found didn't belong to anyone in the plane so wth???


Wrong.



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 01:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Kryties
 


The passport belongs to Satam Al Saquami not Abdulaziz Al Omari

The only thing the "911 truth movement" has ever got right is the date.


And I'd bet some of them think it happened on November 9th.

[edit on 23-9-2009 by waypastvne]



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
Actually, the passport was not found in the rubble, it was found by an unidentified person and turned over to a NYPD detective a block or so from the WTC before the towers collapsed. Its in the 9/11 Commision Report.


How can anyone say "its in the 9/11 commission report" with a straight face...



[edit on 23-9-2009 by Copernicus]



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 01:48 PM
link   
reply to post by BRQuick
 


Nope. It doesn't explain away the argument. It's virtually irrelevant to the argument at hand. The plane in question crashed in a NORMAL fashion. It didn't completely imbed itself into a building and explode into a massive ball of fire. Plus, that gun was in the persons hand when they plane crashed. The passport wasn't. It was, as I explained above, either in his pocket or in some other type of carry on. That would mean that everything around it would need to be destroyed but miraculously this one piece of plastic and paper gets SHOT out of the side of the burning building to fall peacefully to earth with no burns.

AND it just happens to be the passport of a purported 'terrorist' found by an anonymous person and handed over as 'evidence'. Yup. We just don't want to hear anything that would disrupt those miraculous events.



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by thefreepatriot
but this passport thing should be a no go zone for you guys LOL


Especially when they cry foul about Dr. Jones' work, saying "where's the trail of evidence"?

Funny how they will accept the passport with no trail of evidence, but disregard Jones outright because of the same thing.



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 02:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by dariousg
reply to post by BRQuick
 


Nope. It doesn't explain away the argument. It's virtually irrelevant to the argument at hand. The plane in question crashed in a NORMAL fashion. It didn't completely imbed itself into a building and explode into a massive ball of fire. Plus, that gun was in the persons hand when they plane crashed. The passport wasn't. It was, as I explained above, either in his pocket or in some other type of carry on. That would mean that everything around it would need to be destroyed but miraculously this one piece of plastic and paper gets SHOT out of the side of the burning building to fall peacefully to earth with no burns.

AND it just happens to be the passport of a purported 'terrorist' found by an anonymous person and handed over as 'evidence'. Yup. We just don't want to hear anything that would disrupt those miraculous events.


Exactly how is it you determined the whereabouts of the passport before the impact? Or are you just guessing? Not neccessarily a bad guess, but a guess just the same.

How is it you determined that it had no blemishes on it?

It doesn't just "happen" to be the passport of one of the terrorists. How many other passengers would have been carrying passports on domestic flights, how many workers in the WTC would have brought their passports to work or stored them in the office?



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 02:52 PM
link   
Good grief. This is STILL going on?

For the hard of thinking... arguing over whether the passport could have survived the crash is irrelevant because all we have to go on is the word of an anonymous man in a suit.

Can anyone prove that this man in a suit was not planting evidence?

Can anyone prove that this man was not in the employ of the security services?

Because until you can, arguments about whether the passport could have survived or not are irrelevant.

It's pathetic, ignoring the same fatal flaw over and over again.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join