911 Commission Senior Counsel: Report is a lie

page: 15
68
<< 12  13  14    16 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 08:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 


Tell me, what part of www.rewardsforjustice.com is a website operated by the U.S. State Department, do you not understand?




posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 



You should do a better job of checking things before you slam someone. The contact information on that site leads you to.............the U.S. State department.


What, he was only giving his opinion, he wasn’t slamming anyone, however what would one expect when one is being hysterical.


The reality is that there is no such interview on the Discovery Channel page link you provided, nor on any of the pages that you can go to from the links on that page. I did find it interesting, however, that they show the passenger list from Flight 93 on one of the linked pages and none of the alleged hijackers' names or on it. Weren't they also passengers listed on the manifest? Don't they think we want to know the bad guys' names, too, so we can properly vilify them?

I like to know the names of all the actors on a show, especially the bad guys. Or does it serve some psychological purpose by just making the villains men of indiscernible Middle-Eastern decent?


Nope, I don’t see him slamming anyone.



[edit on 21-1-2010 by impressme]



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 08:38 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


Why am I not surprised that you failed to look at the post I was replying to? This one.....




Rewardsforjustice.net is not a US State Department site, nor a US government site at all. And the FBI does not have any mention of bin Laden being wanted for any crimes except deaths that occurred OUTSIDE the United States.

I think you need to be a little more careful in vetting the arguments you want to use, or risk being called the pot who called the kettle black.




posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 


Why am I not surprised that you failed to look at the post I was replying to? This one.....


Why am I not surprised that you fail to read the OP?


The 9/11 Commission Rejects own Report as Based on Government Lies
Gordon Duff Salem-News.com


SOURCE: SALEM NEWS



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 08:54 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


Got busted screwing up once again, so you divert. Typical.

Not to mention, the OP has already been demolished.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 09:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by Lillydale
 


Tell me, what part of www.rewardsforjustice.com is a website operated by the U.S. State Department, do you not understand?


The simple fact that it is a .NET page you are linking to that can say anything it likes. It links back to the Dept. of State. So does my blog that you can find at xxxxxxxxxxxxx.net.

What part of NO GOVERNMENT WEBSITE STATES HAVING ANY EVIDENCE TO LINK OBL TO 9/11 do you not understand?

Give me all the .nets you like, swampfox. When you get a GOVERNMENT webpage that actually says it, get back to me.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 09:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 



Got busted screwing up once again, so you divert. Typical.


Got busted screwing up once again, so you divert. Very typical


Not to mention, the OP has already been demolished.


In your dreamy fantasies, I haven’t seen you disprove one single thing against the OP.

So far, the OP stands correct the 911 commissars are proven lairs.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 09:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
Not to mention, the OP has already been demolished.


Demolished?????? The best you could do was claim that even though some testimony was faulty, the report based on faulty testimony is the truth.

That is demolished?

Why does it seem that all of the OS lovers here on ATS just make up their own meanings for the words in their native language?

Where and when was it demolished exactly? Was it some webpage that links back to some government page?
Apparently that passes as something for some people here. Now I have a link to it in two of my blogs. I guess that makes me doubly credible.

The demolishing please? Just a link to the post that does it is all I am asking for.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 09:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 





Not to mention, the OP has already been demolished.


Your quick to claim premature victory when the OS (or TOL = the Official Lie) can't even stand up to scruitny by it's own panel members who call it a lie. And they created the darn thing!

Fact: The OS is not complete.
Fact: The OS panel refused to accept evidence collected & presented to the panel. Why? because it (the panel) was not intended to be a evidence fact finding committee.
Fact: The OS is not evidentuary in it's findings.
Fact: The OS was not intended to place blame nor be used as evidence as many of those who support falsely claim it is.
Fact: If the OS were presented as "evidence" in a courtroom it would be rejected as hearsay because nothing contained in it follows the proceadures required by a court of law guideline for evidence collection & presentation requirements. Even though again, the report is not and was not intended to be a source of evidence.

While many who support the OS continue to say its the final word, thats true in one context. And that is its the final word of the administration who was forced to throw some form of explanation together as a result of their own initial story regarding what happened on 911. The result of that pressure is a panel report that is flawed beyond words.

OS'ers who support the official story are backing the government that has failed to provide evidence they say they have, but have refused to release it for any examination by anyone. The "evidence" as the FBI says, "is classified" and that begs the question of why is it classified if it were nothing more than an act of terorism by 19 hijackers against the United States?

Question: if flight 93 was not shot down then why can't we hear the recording from the military jets who intercepted it?

Question: If 911 was nothing more than a terrorist attack on the US by 19 hijackers then why can't the evidence be released to prove it once & for all and stop any conspiracy theoirys to the contrary?

Question: Why did the FBI refuse to believe that any debris was in Indian lake and only after hearing additional reports of such, go there and look the day after?

Question: Why is the recording played at ZM's trial of flight 93 being kept from the public?

Question: Why did they remove all of the WTC rubble in NYC before anyone could examine it when claims were made as to the use of demolitions? *they did the same thing in OKC also**

Question: Why did the FBI discount the second plane in PA after multiple witnesses stated they saw it? Then they recanted after several news storys ran in the national media showing the plane?

I can go on and I know you don't have the answers to those questions because the agencys involved cannot even answer them, it demonstrates why this OS is full of holes and why all Americans need to ask the questions in the face of ignorance regarding the 911 OS.

added comment

[edit on 21-1-2010 by mikelee]



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 


I know someone is going to respond by simply telling you that you are wrong because there is no such thing as an "OS." These will be the same people that have repeatedly ignored my request for another name by which to refer to the story having been told to us by government officials. I just thought I would head them off so that they can concentrate on arguing the substance of your post and not imbecilic semantic pipe-dreams.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 09:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 


Oh now they are cliaming there's no "OS" uh? pathetic man, just pathetic.


I know man, one day its this and the next it's that and now its not the "official story" but I'll just call it this: TOL = The Official Lie

[edit on 21-1-2010 by mikelee]



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 09:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 


Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
Not to mention, the OP has already been demolished.


Architects & Engineers say the OS is a lie.

www.ae911truth.org...

Piolts for 911 Truth say the OS is a lie.

www.pilotsfor911truth.org...

911 Truth .org says the OS is a lie

www.911truth.org...

Citizens for LEGITIMATE Government say the OS is a lie.

www.legitgov.org...

Visibility 9-11 says the OS is a lie.

visibility911.com...

911 Research say the OS is a lie.

911research.wtc7.net...

I can go on and on with creditable websites with creditable experts who can prove the OS is a proven lie.
Your experts cant disprove it.



[edit on 21-1-2010 by impressme]



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 09:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikelee
reply to post by Lillydale
 


Oh now they are cliaming there's no "OS" uh? pathetic man, just pathetic.


I know man, one day its this and the next it's that and now its not the "official story" but I'll just call it this: TOL = The Official Lie

[edit on 21-1-2010 by mikelee]



LOL, oh that is an old trick. I wish I could remember where I saw it first. There are two posters that whip that out. One of them is on their third incarnation but that is all personal asides.

YES, I have been told more than once that anything and everything in my post is wrong simply because I said "OS" and there is no such thing as an official story. They have justifications as that different agencies were in charge of this and that and different stories were told by this person or that person. They forget that the President, Vice President, and SOD all told us a story and they are government officials. I have asked at least a dozen times now what to call it instead. The answer has been the same every time...

crickets.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 10:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 


Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
Not to mention, the OP has already been demolished.


Architects & Engineers say the OS is a lie.

www.ae911truth.org...

Piolts for 911 Truth say the OS is a lie.

www.pilotsfor911truth.org...

911 Truth .org says the OS is a lie

www.911truth.org...

Citizens for LEGITIMATE Government say the OS is a lie.

www.legitgov.org...

Visibility 9-11 says the OS is a lie.

visibility911.com...

911 Research say the OS is a lie.

911research.wtc7.net...

I can go on and on with creditable websites with creditable experts who can prove the OS is a proven lie.
Your experts cant disprove it.



[edit on 21-1-2010 by impressme]


Don't forget Farmer who also thinks the OS is a lie.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 10:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 


Well I love how they come into these threads with the switch & bait tactic. Ask a question that has nada to do with what the topic/thread and then when they get an answer change it again. But its all the same garbage though. The OS though, they NEVER say is right, ever noticed that?

They just ask the same old tired questions over & over like they can't read. I'll go and find the answer either in another thread or on the net but these cats can;t do that. they want us to find it for them and even when its right, its wrong!



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 10:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 


Don't forget Farmer who also thinks the OS is a lie.


LOL Farmer not only thinks it is a lie, he should know, he help construct the OS lie.
Then writes a book to profit from his gate keeping of the Truth.

What I find amazing is the 911 commission says the story that was told us, is not the story that was told to them. We would like to know what was the story they were told?

So, it is clear the 911 commissioners are helping the real terrorist who helped pull off a false flag operation in side the Bush administration.

It is clear we had a treasonous government.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 10:10 PM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 


You bring up a good point.

There are tons of threads attacking the OS.

There are very few promoting it.

These debunkers seem to spend most of their time here attacking, asking impossible questions, engaging in character assassination, deflection, etc.

If it is this simple honest and true little story, then why not just stand up and say 'Hey, the OS is true and here is why!'

Of course some of them do think they are playing a game and love to play defensively. I am sure that the loved ones of the dead love that.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 10:13 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


Have you noticed though, all of these TOL defenders in here never say the TOL is right. They just fuss & argue with us over OUR posts in which make a helluva lot more sense compared to the lies of TOL.

Must be depressing to believe in something when one knows its a lie



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 10:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 


I know. Well pretty much all of the US wants answers to 911 events and they also know its a bunch of manure. So it don;t matter what we say or post, someone will say or post something to the contrary regardless of if the proof has already been established. Look at the JFK assination, the government has already conceaded there were more than 3 shots because of all of the investigations, forensics into that OS.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 10:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 



There are tons of threads attacking the OS.

There are very few promoting it.


I have not seen a thread that supported the OS. I think it is because to many holes were punch through by to many expert in their field.

I think it, is mostly the debunkers that have the attitude problem when it comes to dealing with the Truth, I have seen very few none believers of the OS behave negative and rude responsive towards other posters.

Even with the proof of Farmer admitting he lied and the cant tell the truth even in his book. He has yet to the American people what the White house and the Pentagon told them, for all of the 911 commissioners to lie to the American people in their report.

We the people are still waiting and demanding an answers.





new topics

top topics



 
68
<< 12  13  14    16 >>

log in

join