| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
KP50
Validated Poster
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 526
Location: NZ
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 09, 2008 9:18 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| KP50 wrote: | | sam wrote: |
Go to work on Google Earth if you want the actual elevations, but you'll find it's stunningly *flat* in that manor, squire. A bit like most of Essex  The impact wall is the one facing directly up in that photo -- towards open country.
|
Yes correct wall but you may need to draw in the actual alleged flight-path for us. |
Any time soon will do, otherwise I may think you don't know your subject matter ...... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
sam
Wrecker
Joined: 29 Dec 2007
Posts: 343
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 10, 2008 10:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="KP50"] | KP50 wrote: | | sam wrote: |
Yes correct wall but you may need to draw in the actual alleged flight-path for us. |
Any time soon will do, otherwise I may think you don't know your subject matter ...... |
I'm noticing a tendency for you to ask other people to do these things for you. Draw it yourself.
Whether or not I can immediately draw the AA77 flightpath on the photo is irrelevant. It's on public record and I could work out an approximation of it on the photo above in a few minutes.
_________________
Cryin' won't help you, prayin' won't do you no good. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alex_V
Wrecker
Joined: 24 Sep 2007
Posts: 515
Location: London, England
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 10, 2008 11:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
KP50,
In terms of your theory about the plane being unable to level out after hitting the lamp-posts, I personally think the conversation has run its course. The area around the Pentagon is flat - it may not be totally flat, but the ball is in your court to prove otherwise. Also, you seem to have no actual precise data to go with your theory, which makes it virtually impossible to assess either way at this stage.
I don't quite understand why it's a topic for critics to debate with truthers. I think you need to debate it with other truthers, come to an actual decision about what your theory actually is, and then try and prove it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zennon
Moderate Poster
Joined: 28 Nov 2006
Posts: 161
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 11:11 pm Post subject: Re: The Truther Challenge |
|
|
| NorthernSoul wrote: | Ok bare with me here, perhaps this has been done before, I used search and couldn't find an example.
I've browsed this forum for a couple of days now, on and off, and have found very few examples of Truthers presenting evidence for their claims.
So I'm going to challenge the Truthers here, present one piece of evidence that you feel supports your claims. I'm only asking for one piece at the moment and references would be appreciated.
For now I'm posting this in the Critics Corner in order to keep the peace, I have been greeted with some E-Hostility here.
So, Truthers, one piece of evidence that supports your claim...it's that simple. Expect to be questioned, contradicted, and proven wrong, I plee with Truthers and Debunkers/Critics/Skeptics a like to keep Ad Hominem out of this. |
I've followed developments with these theories relatively closely since 2003 where I first heard about these alternative theories in any credible way.
I think it's unlikely that it was an "inside job". I just don't think there is just not enough evidence, as of now anyway, to implicate the US government, or any other government for that matter.
Of course we can only go on the information we have, and there could be some information to come out in the future that could implicate the US government.
For example with JFK (which I believe was a conspiracy) the Zapruder film came out a whole 12 years after the murder. If you're not familiar with this film, it was a video which eventually surfaced and showed JFK moving back and to the left when being shot; this is consistent with a shooter at the grassy knoll, Zapruder himself contends that he heard shots from the grassy knoll (along with about 50 others).
Who knows, in 5 years time maybe a video will surface of someone planting explosives in the building, or some document will leak authorising the attacks from within the government.
However, there are some holes in the official account that require further inspection. For example there were 20 people who heard explosions in the North Tower before any plane even struck. See:
| Quote: |
Szymanski describes how Rodriguez usually clocked in at eight a.m. and rode an elevator to the 106th floor, where Latino employees of Windows on the World fed him a free breakfast. On 9/11, however, he was a half hour late. While checking in at an office on sub-level one, he heard and felt, along with 20 others, a massive explosion--from below. Seconds later, he heard another--from above (Flight 11). |
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0512/S00291.htm
The fact that there were 20 people who say there was a pre-plane explosion speaks volumes, and of course it needs to be investigated. If it were just the one it may be written off, but 20 people testify to these explosions.
There is also the issue of suspicious stock market activity before the attacks. See: | Quote: |
Examination of the option trading leading up to September 11 reveals that there was an unusually high level of put buying. This finding is consistent with informed investors having traded options in advance of the attacks |
http://www.business.uiuc.edu/poteshma/research/poteshman2006.pdf
These are the main anomalies with the official explanation, and think form the strongest argument for an independent investigation, and for prior knowledge from people outside "Al Qaeda" respectively. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alex_V
Wrecker
Joined: 24 Sep 2007
Posts: 515
Location: London, England
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 12, 2008 8:12 am Post subject: Re: The Truther Challenge |
|
|
| zennon wrote: | I think it's unlikely that it was an "inside job". I just don't think there is just not enough evidence, as of now anyway, to implicate the US government, or any other government for that matter.
Of course we can only go on the information we have, and there could be some information to come out in the future that could implicate the US government. |
That's a very reasonable position to take.
| Quote: | However, there are some holes in the official account that require further inspection. For example there were 20 people who heard explosions in the North Tower before any plane even struck. See:
| Quote: |
Szymanski describes how Rodriguez usually clocked in at eight a.m. and rode an elevator to the 106th floor, where Latino employees of Windows on the World fed him a free breakfast. On 9/11, however, he was a half hour late. While checking in at an office on sub-level one, he heard and felt, along with 20 others, a massive explosion--from below. Seconds later, he heard another--from above (Flight 11). |
The fact that there were 20 people who say there was a pre-plane explosion speaks volumes, and of course it needs to be investigated. If it were just the one it may be written off, but 20 people testify to these explosions. |
If 20 people did unequivocally say that, then I'd agree.
I have seen a lot of hot air on that topic before though. Rodriguez has been thoroughly inconsistent on what he heard and saw - considering he now says he felt an explosion from below, he took a considerable time to decide that meant there was something amiss with the OT. I'd like to know exactly what the initial impact would have sounded like from the sub-basement. There's also the problem of witness irregularities, described in one of my other recent threads - if a group of people witness an event, they will doubtless remember it differently from each other. These accounts of explosions seem to be anomolies that can be reasonably explained, especially as once the plane hit the fireballs did travel down the elevator shafts to the low levels of the building.
| Quote: | There is also the issue of suspicious stock market activity before the attacks. See: | Quote: |
Examination of the option trading leading up to September 11 reveals that there was an unusually high level of put buying. This finding is consistent with informed investors having traded options in advance of the attacks |
http://www.business.uiuc.edu/poteshma/research/poteshman2006.pdf |
The 9/11 commission looked into it and found nothing unusual. Of course some would say that's hardly surprising, but it does already complicate the issue - were the 9/11 commission part of the cover-up? Well then why did they make life so difficult for the administration and NORAD etc. Their report is very readily available and little-criticised in its details by the truth movement, yet they are not to be trusted on put options?
Of course foreknowledge in the financial markets could be just as likely with the OT as with the conspiracy theory. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zennon
Moderate Poster
Joined: 28 Nov 2006
Posts: 161
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 12, 2008 12:56 pm Post subject: Re: The Truther Challenge |
|
|
| Alex_V wrote: | | There's also the problem of witness irregularities, described in one of my other recent threads - if a group of people witness an event, they will doubtless remember it differently from each other. These accounts of explosions seem to be anomolies that can be reasonably explained, especially as once the plane hit the fireballs did travel down the elevator shafts to the low levels of the building. |
I agree However, all 20 seem to agree that there were pre-impact explosions. They may disagree with the magnitude, or the length etc. but they would be able to distinguish between two separate explosions.
| Quote: | | The 9/11 commission looked into it and found nothing unusual. Of course some would say that's hardly surprising, but it does already complicate the issue - were the 9/11 commission part of the cover-up? Well then why did they make life so difficult for the administration and NORAD etc. Their report is very readily available and little-criticised in its details by the truth movement, yet they are not to be trusted on put options? |
Yes the 9/11 Commission covered it, but does that necessarily make their finding true? If I remember correctly they used a circular arguments when dealing with this particular issue, something along the line of: 'those who seemingly had foreknowledge did not have an links to Al Qaeda, therfore are not suspect'. Of course this reasoning is ridiculous because it presupposes that Al Qaeda were the perpetrators. It used selective findings to reinforce the official conspiracy theory.
The 9/11 Commission to my understanding made quite a few mistake and commissions, and were not immune to human error. Therefore we cannot not take their findings as objective truth.
| Quote: | | Of course foreknowledge in the financial markets could be just as likely with the OT as with the conspiracy theory. |
As far as I can remember, the 9/11 Commission essentially let of the hook with that circular argument. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NorthernSoul
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 22 Mar 2008
Posts: 100
Location: Grimsby
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 12, 2008 8:13 pm Post subject: Re: The Truther Challenge |
|
|
(Note: Other projects have kept me away from here for a couple of weeks and probably will again, so that's why I've not checked this thread for a while, KP50 still no closer to proving anything? Shocking...well, not really.)
| zennon wrote: | | I agree However, all 20 seem to agree that there were pre-impact explosions. They may disagree with the magnitude, or the length etc. but they would be able to distinguish between two separate explosions. |
How many of these people were above basement level? That is to say, how many of these people saw the actual impact or can definatively identify the impact explosion. Moreover why would the government mess up so badly by making explosives go off before impact?
| zennon wrote: | Yes the 9/11 Commission covered it, but does that necessarily make their finding true? If I remember correctly they used a circular arguments when dealing with this particular issue, something along the line of: 'those who seemingly had foreknowledge did not have an links to Al Qaeda, therfore are not suspect'. Of course this reasoning is ridiculous because it presupposes that Al Qaeda were the perpetrators. It used selective findings to reinforce the official conspiracy theory.
The 9/11 Commission to my understanding made quite a few mistake and commissions, and were not immune to human error. Therefore we cannot not take their findings as objective truth. |
Put options? Oh dear, I thought the Truthers had dropped this long debunked.
A nice debunking of that claim is available here
http://www.911myths.com/html/put_options.html
(my time is short)
I'd like to add that the total amount of money made from the put options was around 5,000,000 USD.
Hardly a huge sum of nowadays, to claim these put options are sinister is to claim that a bunch of people, who are known though of course there names have not been made public for obvious reasons, knew about 9/11 and kept it to themselves so that they could share just 2,500,000 GBP...
edit: *deleted final part of quote from zennon
_________________
NorthernSoul
Super Secret NWO Agent
Lt in charge of FEMA Death Camp Delta 2
Call 0800 310 310 to find out where there is an NWO recruitment center near you! Join Today. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alex_V
Wrecker
Joined: 24 Sep 2007
Posts: 515
Location: London, England
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 12, 2008 8:29 pm Post subject: Re: The Truther Challenge |
|
|
| I would certainly be interested to see the accounts of these 20 witnesses to pre-impact explosions in the basement, if such information is readily available. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zennon
Moderate Poster
Joined: 28 Nov 2006
Posts: 161
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 12, 2008 9:13 pm Post subject: Re: The Truther Challenge |
|
|
| NorthernSoul wrote: |
How many of these people were above basement level? That is to say, how many of these people saw the actual impact or can definatively identify the impact explosion. |
There were two seperate booms. The first on one of the basement levels. Then a much bigger one when the plane impacted.
| Quote: | | Moreover why would the government mess up so badly by making explosives go off before impact? |
Speculating the cause of the pre-impact explosion is foolish. I only want an investigation into it, and I refuse to jump to conclusions.
I haven't got time to trawl through the seven pages in all of that link, so I'll get back to you on this point. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NorthernSoul
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 22 Mar 2008
Posts: 100
Location: Grimsby
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 12, 2008 11:23 pm Post subject: Re: The Truther Challenge |
|
|
| zennon wrote: | | There were two seperate booms. The first on one of the basement levels. Then a much bigger one when the plane impacted. |
...According to a minority of witnesses, some of whom (Rodriguez) have made a fair sum of money out of claiming so.
| zennon wrote: | | Speculating the cause of the pre-impact explosion is foolish. I only want an investigation into it, and I refuse to jump to conclusions. |
Allow me to correct you..."supposed pre-impact explosions" (a source of some witness statements would be nice by the way, I myself produced witness statements earlier in this thread on different issues)
| zennon wrote: | | I haven't got time to trawl through the seven pages in all of that link, so I'll get back to you on this point. |
Please do.
_________________
NorthernSoul
Super Secret NWO Agent
Lt in charge of FEMA Death Camp Delta 2
Call 0800 310 310 to find out where there is an NWO recruitment center near you! Join Today. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zennon
Moderate Poster
Joined: 28 Nov 2006
Posts: 161
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2008 8:37 am Post subject: Re: The Truther Challenge |
|
|
| NorthernSoul wrote: |
...According to a minority of witnesses, some of whom (Rodriguez) have made a fair sum of money out of claiming so. |
Even if they were in the minority does that matter? 20 people say they felt it, to come up with your own conspiracy that they're all lying to make money is deliciously ironic.
| Quote: | | Allow me to correct you..."supposed pre-impact explosions" (a source of some witness statements would be nice by the way, I myself produced witness statements earlier in this thread on different issues) |
As above. Do you think 20 civilians exploited the situation to make money, when there is no evidence of this? Only Rodriguez has been travelling and giving his account, the other 20 which my earlier Scoop article mentions have stayed quiet, and thus have not been paid anything. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NorthernSoul
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 22 Mar 2008
Posts: 100
Location: Grimsby
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2008 11:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ah I didn't see that link originally, sorry about that, the thing is just because somebody claims 20 others (perhaps Rodriguez) doesn't make it so, unless you can provide some actual statements I'm inclined to ignore that article.
Now I know there are a number of people who do make this claim, however without transcripts or recordings of these claims it's hard to say what they meant at the time. We have seen on more than one occasion how the "Truth" movement distort quotes to fit their agenda.
I'm also sure that many of these witnesses of which we are talking specifically used the words bomb, or explosion, of course this doesn't mean to say they actually thought a bomb went off
This is a particularly interesting quote:
| Quote: | "The noise was horrendous. It was like nothing I've ever heard. Our fridge was flipped on its side, a heavy three-seater sofa was thrown across the lounge, ceilings were ripped open, windows exploded out of their frames, cupboards were completely emptied, and broken ornaments and crockery littered the floor....
It was like an explosion underneath us. The house was shunted up in the air and then it shook violently. A lot of houses were knocked clean off their piles"
http://www.gns.cri.nz/news/release/may24inang.html |
If I took these quotes, edited them a little, I could claim that the pecan tree was brought down by controlled demolition. I could chip and chop at the last quote to make it sound as if the earthquake in New Zealand was actually a bomb.
What I'm trying to say is, things have to be in context, and full witness statements would be nice.
Also people may use the words bomb, or explosion, when they mean nothing of the sort.
As for Rodriguez...
Why would there be a bomb in the basement and why would it go off before the plane impacted? Why would the conspirators risk blowing the lid on the whole thing by planting a bomb in the basement for no apparent reason?
Remember, the basement floors were all that was left standing following the collapse.
Lets consider Rodriguez's numerous statements though
Sept 12, 2001
| Quote: | William Rodriguez worked on the basement level of the north tower and was in the building when the first plane struck his building.
"We heard a loud rumble, then all of a sudden we heard another rumble like someone moving a whole lot of furniture," Rodriguez said. "And then the elevator opened and a man came into our office and all of his skin was off."
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/11/new.york.terror/ |
A couple or rumbles, no mention of his heroics.
A year later
Sept 11, 2002
Rodriguez is UNIDENTIFIED MALE
| Quote: | On the subject of your friends, one of them is with you, a relatively new friend I know, William Rodriguez (ph). If Mr. Rodriguez (ph) is actually close enough, we've got a mike on him, just tell the story of how -- William, tell the story of how the two of you met.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, no, we knew each other for many years. We work at the -- I work at the building. I personally in charge of all the stairs, of all the maintenance of the stairs in the building. And I knew David for probably 15, 16 years.
And at that terrible day when I took people out of the office, one of them totally burned because he was standing in front of the freight elevator and the ball of fire came down the duct of the elevator itself, I put him on the ambulance. And I came back running into the building. And the only person that I found there was Officer David Lim. And the first thing that he told me was, Willie (ph), do you have the key. Meaning if I had the master key to the building, which I have and I still have. It's over here. This is the key that opened all the doors on the staircase. It's called a T2 (ph) key. And he said let's go.
And we went up, he opened the door on the lobby. We went on the basement, number one. And there when we opened the door, the fire department was there waiting in front of the 50 car elevator, which was already gone, because the airplane, when he came through the building, broke all the cables and practically destroyed the elevator because the elevator went down seven flights of floors. And, he said to the -- to the firemen, follow me, we know the best way to go up and we have the access key. So we started going up the stairs and opening all the doors.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0209/11/se.48.html |
no mention of explosions or bombs...
In 2004 however Rodriguez took out a lawsuit against an array of persons, including but not limited to, George Bush, Marvin Bush, Dick Cheney etc etc etc
In his testimony he cites pre-collapse explosions NOT pre-impact explosions. See:
http://www.911forthetruth.com/pdfs/Rodriguezvs.Bush%20.pdf
I contend that Rodriguez is not a trustworthy witness, whose story has changed and morphed over time and who has continually sort monetary gain.
I do not doubt he felt rumblings, the plane hit the building, exploded, at the same time Rodriguez felt the shaking of the building before the sound from 80+ floors up reached him. It's as simple as that.[/b]
_________________
NorthernSoul
Super Secret NWO Agent
Lt in charge of FEMA Death Camp Delta 2
Call 0800 310 310 to find out where there is an NWO recruitment center near you! Join Today. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bushwacker
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 1628
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2008 1:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
To revert to KP50's point about the topography, Pilots For 9/11 Truth have now admitted that they got their maths wrong in the calculations they did to substantiate the claim that the final section of the flight path was impossible for AA77.
"Arlington Topography, Obstacles Make American 77 Final Leg Impossible
By Rob Balsamo, Pilots For 9/11 Truth
03/20/08 - Update: For those who have been following the thread linked in the right margin, this will be redundant. The calculations below used for the purpose of this article are in error. We are currently reviewing the calculations and will publish a revision with the proper formula(s)/calculations consistent with the premise of this article. We apologize for any confusion and thank you for your understanding."
Strange how they already knew that their revised calculations would still support the premise of their article! One would almost think they were trying to make the calculations fit the conclusions.............Anyway, it is obviously difficult, three weeks now and not a word. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pepik
Banned
Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 591
Location: The Square Mile
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2008 5:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Any time soon will do, otherwise I may think you don't know your subject matter ...... |
Any evidence that the Pentagon is well hidden and in a well built up area yet? Its been two weeks since I last asked, but it seems you spent most of the time sneering at people and providing nothing to back up your silly claims.
_________________
"could it be that ww2 and the extermination of jewish people was planned as a way of creating a race of people who it would be difficult to blame for anything, a cover race for the illuminati?" - a quote NOT from the 'controversial theories' section. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NorthernSoul
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 22 Mar 2008
Posts: 100
Location: Grimsby
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2008 11:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Where did all the truthers go?
_________________
NorthernSoul
Super Secret NWO Agent
Lt in charge of FEMA Death Camp Delta 2
Call 0800 310 310 to find out where there is an NWO recruitment center near you! Join Today. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KP50
Validated Poster
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 526
Location: NZ
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| KP50 wrote: | | pepik wrote: |
Now go on and outline your theory of what happened on 911, and try to imagine some evidence which I couldn't instantly reject using troofer logic. You wouldn't want to prove me right by not answering would you? |
It isn't really important what my theory is. What I want you to do is prove that Flight 77 could actually hit the light-poles, fly horizontally into the Pentagon at almost ground level without touching the ground and then cause the damage as shown. As you know this actually happened, how hard can it be to prove it. Feel free to use the real topography of the area. Now I don't think you have any interest in doing that. You wouldn't want to prove me right by not answering would you? |
This is my original post which sparked everything. So far I have not seen any critic take on this issue and address it. Obviously we are only interested in the official flightpath so any photos of the water the other side of the Pentagon have no relevance. Due to the alleged speed of the aircraft, we are also interested in the topography a little distance from the Pentagon. All clear? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KP50
Validated Poster
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 526
Location: NZ
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| pepik wrote: | | Quote: | | Any time soon will do, otherwise I may think you don't know your subject matter ...... |
Any evidence that the Pentagon is well hidden and in a well built up area yet? Its been two weeks since I last asked, but it seems you spent most of the time sneering at people and providing nothing to back up your silly claims. |
This is tiresome. You have made no attempt to address the real issue that I raised other than calling me a weasel. Your move. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KP50
Validated Poster
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 526
Location: NZ
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="sam"] | KP50 wrote: | | KP50 wrote: | | sam wrote: |
Yes correct wall but you may need to draw in the actual alleged flight-path for us. |
Any time soon will do, otherwise I may think you don't know your subject matter ...... |
I'm noticing a tendency for you to ask other people to do these things for you. Draw it yourself.
Whether or not I can immediately draw the AA77 flightpath on the photo is irrelevant. It's on public record and I could work out an approximation of it on the photo above in a few minutes. |
If you don't know the flightpath, how do you know it is flat? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pepik
Banned
Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 591
Location: The Square Mile
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 4:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | This is tiresome. You have made no attempt to address the real issue that I raised other than calling me a weasel. |
But you are a weasel. You make claims and then you walk away from them.
_________________
"could it be that ww2 and the extermination of jewish people was planned as a way of creating a race of people who it would be difficult to blame for anything, a cover race for the illuminati?" - a quote NOT from the 'controversial theories' section. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KP50
Validated Poster
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 526
Location: NZ
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 8:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| pepik wrote: | | Quote: | | This is tiresome. You have made no attempt to address the real issue that I raised other than calling me a weasel. |
But you are a weasel. You make claims and then you walk away from them. |
Let's clarify for the viewing public shall we? You picked one sentence of mine and have banged on about it ad infinitum ignoring the actual issue that I raised. Now is this because you are uncertain about the issue? Or you can't be bothered? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pepik
Banned
Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 591
Location: The Square Mile
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 9:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, I picked a sentence in which you made a claim that I found to be completely ridiculous and asked you to back it up.
Several weeks later you are pretending that refusing to back up what you say is some sort of principled stand.
Yet you wonder why the truth movement is on the express train to nowhere.
_________________
"could it be that ww2 and the extermination of jewish people was planned as a way of creating a race of people who it would be difficult to blame for anything, a cover race for the illuminati?" - a quote NOT from the 'controversial theories' section. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KP50
Validated Poster
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 526
Location: NZ
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| pepik wrote: | Yes, I picked a sentence in which you made a claim that I found to be completely ridiculous and asked you to back it up.
Several weeks later you are pretending that refusing to back up what you say is some sort of principled stand.
Yet you wonder why the truth movement is on the express train to nowhere. |
It was a sentence that you seem to think was important - why is that? You must realise that the only area of interest is that of the flightpath - is that area built up around the Pentagon? Is it? Do you even know the flightpath? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pepik
Banned
Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 591
Location: The Square Mile
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| KP50 ways to avoid a question wrote: | | It was a sentence that you seem to think was important - why is that? |
What a new and clever way to avoid backing up what you say.
| KP50 ways to avoid a question wrote: | | You must realise that the only area of interest is that of the flightpath - is that area built up around the Pentagon? Is it? Do you even know the flightpath? |
Yes. Now can you please show how the Pentagon is "well hidden, in a built up area"?
_________________
"could it be that ww2 and the extermination of jewish people was planned as a way of creating a race of people who it would be difficult to blame for anything, a cover race for the illuminati?" - a quote NOT from the 'controversial theories' section. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KP50
Validated Poster
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 526
Location: NZ
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 8:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pepik wrote: | | KP50 ways to avoid a question wrote: | | It was a sentence that you seem to think was important - why is that? |
What a new and clever way to avoid backing up what you say.
| KP50 ways to avoid a question wrote: | | You must realise that the only area of interest is that of the flightpath - is that area built up around the Pentagon? Is it? Do you even know the flightpath? |
Yes. Now can you please show how the Pentagon is "well hidden, in a built up area"? |
You're hilarious. I already posted a photo that showed the view from along the flightpath, are you not paying attention? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sam
Wrecker
Joined: 29 Dec 2007
Posts: 343
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 8:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| KP50 wrote: | | pepik wrote: | | KP50 ways to avoid a question wrote: | | It was a sentence that you seem to think was important - why is that? |
What a new and clever way to avoid backing up what you say.
| KP50 ways to avoid a question wrote: | | You must realise that the only area of interest is that of the flightpath - is that area built up around the Pentagon? Is it? Do you even know the flightpath? |
Yes. Now can you please show how the Pentagon is "well hidden, in a built up area"? |
You're hilarious. I already posted a photo that showed the view from along the flightpath, are you not paying attention? |
Well, you posted this :
Does this represent an in-line view of the flight path? If so, where was it taken from?
Incidentally the photo is from a PhotoBucket account which includes the path "/lytetrip/". Is that a public account, or are you in fact LyteTrip (of CIT and JREF fame)?
If it isn't, and you're hot-linking to an unaccountable image source, do you realise that the photo could tomorrow be exchanged for something that shouldn't be posted in public? Tomorrow it could be a horrific image of child abuse or somesuch. This is why hot-linking is not allowed on well organised forums.
_________________
Cryin' won't help you, prayin' won't do you no good. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sam
Wrecker
Joined: 29 Dec 2007
Posts: 343
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 8:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
<duplicate post>
_________________
Cryin' won't help you, prayin' won't do you no good.
Last edited by sam on Tue Apr 15, 2008 9:00 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KP50
Validated Poster
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 526
Location: NZ
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 8:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sam wrote: | | KP50 wrote: | | pepik wrote: | | KP50 ways to avoid a question wrote: | | It was a sentence that you seem to think was important - why is that? |
What a new and clever way to avoid backing up what you say.
| KP50 ways to avoid a question wrote: | | You must realise that the only area of interest is that of the flightpath - is that area built up around the Pentagon? Is it? Do you even know the flightpath? |
Yes. Now can you please show how the Pentagon is "well hidden, in a built up area"? |
You're hilarious. I already posted a photo that showed the view from along the flightpath, are you not paying attention? |
Well, you posted this :
Does this represent an in-line view of the flight path? If so, where was it taken from?
Incidentally the photo is from a PhotoBucket account which includes the path "/lytetrip/". Is that a public account, or are you in fact LyteTrip (of CIT and JREF fame)?
If it isn't, and you're hot-linking to an unaccountable image source, do you realise that the photo could tomorrow be exchanged for something that shouldn't be posted in public? Tomorrow it could be a horrific image of child abuse or somesuch. This is why hot-linking is not allowed on well organised forums. |
Now you're much happier aren't you? Now you can interrogate me without having to do an iota of work yourself. Which is of course the raison d'etre of the critic isn't it?
I repeat my challenge - if this event is meant to have taken place, prove that it isn't impossible. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sam
Wrecker
Joined: 29 Dec 2007
Posts: 343
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 9:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| KP50 wrote: | | I repeat my challenge - if this event is meant to have taken place, prove that it isn't impossible. |
<no text>
_________________
Cryin' won't help you, prayin' won't do you no good.
Last edited by sam on Tue Apr 15, 2008 9:24 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KP50
Validated Poster
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 526
Location: NZ
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 9:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sam wrote: | | KP50 wrote: | | I repeat my challenge - if this event is meant to have taken place, prove that it isn't impossible. |
<no text> |
Seems like we are at an impasse then doesn't it? Not really your problem as the challenge was for Pepik who so far hasn't refused to do it. He has, in his usual fashion, thrown out many insults but contributed nothing of value. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pepik
Banned
Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 591
Location: The Square Mile
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 4:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | You're hilarious. I already posted a photo that showed the view from along the flightpath, are you not paying attention? |
But you have yet to show a photo that proves the Pentagon is "well hidden, in a built up area".
Do you understand the concept of backing up what you say?
Does "well hidden" mean "plainly visible"?
Does "built up area" mean a tree?
_________________
"could it be that ww2 and the extermination of jewish people was planned as a way of creating a race of people who it would be difficult to blame for anything, a cover race for the illuminati?" - a quote NOT from the 'controversial theories' section. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
