9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom :: View topic - CENTCOM Sergeant Details Traitorous Stand Down Orders

FAQ

Memberlist

Chat

Usergroups

Calendar

Profile

CENTCOM Sergeant Details Traitorous Stand Down Orders
Goto page Previous 1, 2

9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> Critics' Corner

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

TimmyG
Validated Poster

Joined: 04 Apr 2006
Posts: 489
Location: Manchester

Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2006 12:37 pm Post subject:

JREF . stop jumping to conclusions with your assumptions of our opinions as a group. i was skeptical of this guy soon as i read the story. something about seems a bit too convenient. but i don't know so i shall wait and see what happens with it. he may very well be real. he may also be a disinfo agent. i am not taking this as confirmation of anything at the moment _________________ "During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act"

aggle-rithm
Moderate Poster

Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 557

Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2006 12:43 pm Post subject:

chek wrote:

Judging by the jubilation over here at the moment anybody would think a major plank of the 911 cover-up trail had just disintegrated.
You wish.

There are major planks to the 911 cover-up trail?

What are they?

Jay Ref
Moderate Poster

Joined: 20 Jul 2006
Posts: 511

Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2006 1:34 pm Post subject:

TimmyG wrote:

JREF . stop jumping to conclusions with your assumptions of our opinions as a group.

i was skeptical of this guy soon as i read the story. something about seems a bit too convenient. but i don't know so i shall wait and see what happens with it. he may very well be real. he may also be a disinfo agent. i am not taking this as confirmation of anything at the moment

Why don't you explain to me how he could possibly be real when he was supposedly stationed to CENTCOM and saw the shadowy "stand down" orders issued to NORAD?? The guy got a zillion things wrong, but even if his DD214 and everything else checked out perfectly he still was not at NORAD. CENTCOM is Central Command. They command the ME theatre of operations. They have absolutely nothing at all to do with North American Air Defenses.

-z
_________________
"Knowledge is good"
-Emil Faber

"God in heaven. Here's the hard-headed, evidence-only freak who will not, like we CTers, indulge himself in self-inflating, utterly misconceived fantasies." -kbo234 (who is NOT a nazi) briefly makes sense

TimmyG
Validated Poster

Joined: 04 Apr 2006
Posts: 489
Location: Manchester

Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2006 1:50 pm Post subject:

you could well be right JREF. i've not looked into properly yet. which is why i don't have an opinion on it either way yet. i was just telling you to stop assuming we all believe whatever is put in front of us without a 2nd thought. so if he's not real. what do you think his motivating is for 'speaking out'? _________________ "During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act"

chek
Mega Poster

Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland

Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2006 1:59 pm Post subject:

aggle-rithm wrote:

chek wrote:

Judging by the jubilation over here at the moment anybody would think a major plank of the 911 cover-up trail had just disintegrated.
You wish.

There are major planks to the 911 cover-up trail?

What are they?

You mean apart from:
the cod non-investigation by NIST and FEMA,
the 911 Commission cover up,
the inability of NORAD to defend US airspace,
the not connected to Al Qaeda put option profiteering,
the Cheney lies about when he was in the bunker,
that whole Pet Goat episode....
how many planques can a simple troll want or need?

Jay Ref
Moderate Poster

Joined: 20 Jul 2006
Posts: 511

Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2006 2:55 pm Post subject:

TimmyG wrote:

you could well be right JREF. i've not looked into properly yet. which is why i don't have an opinion on it either way yet. i was just telling you to stop assuming we all believe whatever is put in front of us without a 2nd thought.

so if he's not real. what do you think his motivating is for 'speaking out'?

I think he inadvertently bit off more than he could chew...and then kept eating. His story starts with him being upset about a news article that slammed the truthy crowd. So he writes this letter to the editor with all these wild claims in support of "teh troof". Like the song goes; "Next thing you know old Jed's (Lauro's) a millionaire (official whistleblower)!" Lauro apparently had little idea how badly teh troof needed to find themselves an honest to god whistleblower...when they contacted him he dummies up a DD214 and hangs on for the ride.

Kind of a Dylan Avery type story.

-z
_________________
"Knowledge is good"
-Emil Faber

"God in heaven. Here's the hard-headed, evidence-only freak who will not, like we CTers, indulge himself in self-inflating, utterly misconceived fantasies." -kbo234 (who is NOT a nazi) briefly makes sense

DeFecToR
Moderate Poster

Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Posts: 782

Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2006 6:24 pm Post subject:

Jay Ref wrote:

DeFecToR wrote:

lol.

Geez Jay Lord. You really needed that eh?

No, you really needed him...and you still do. Re-read the title you picked for this thread. It's hyperbole, inflamatory, sensational....and it all turned to nonsense in a couple hours.

Er Jay Boy, i copied the title of the thread from the title of the story itself. But it was "inflamatory"? Ooooooohhh.

Jay Ref wrote:

You still need your whistleblower so you can use that thread title don't you? You have displayed your credulous double standard for the world to see. But don't despair, it's not just you. The entire troof movement needed this guy to be real so badly that not a damned one of them looked critically at his credentials.

Okay, pay attention Jay Lord. Please have a read of my posts concerning this issue, particularly the first.

Note my doubt about him;

Quote:

How are you guys going to rubbish this possible 'whistle-blower'?

Quote:

Well, if this guy is for real then he certainly would be considered a whistle-blower.

I did doubt this guy and i am glad to have the facts on this issue. Check the post in the General section if you dont believe me.

But seriously, you really have betrayed the level of your childish behaviour here. You claim to want to 'educate' people on 911, which we all know is *; you're here for the egospank and this thread shows it. But if you were here to enlighten us lowly morons then shouldnt you really be encouraging people like me to admit when they've made mistakes? Isnt that what someone who's sole concern of spreading the 'truth' would do?

But no, instead you roll around like a pig in turd with a neck brace for the size of your head.

I have absolutely no problem in putting my hands up when shown to be wrong, its a consequence of being genuinely interested in truth.
You however have obviously been waiting for a chance to vent your frustrations and if i have to be the target of that, great!

Now run along and get yourself a tattoo of todays date then phone a rent-a-party.
_________________
"A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices."
-William James

High Cheese
New Poster

Joined: 28 Sep 2006
Posts: 1

Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2006 9:36 pm Post subject:

telecasterisation wrote:

Why not? I know a couple of pilots who supposedly made two very large skyscrapers disappear in just a few seconds.

The towers? Disappeared? Ooooh, goody. Maybe soon, they will reappear.

aggle-rithm
Moderate Poster

Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 557

Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2006 10:51 pm Post subject:

chek wrote:

aggle-rithm wrote:

There are major planks to the 911 cover-up trail?

What are they?

If those are your major planks, then your theory is in serious trouble.

Speaking of which, would you mind telling me in detail what you believe happened on 9/11? I know that no "truther" has ever taken me up on this, but you may be the first to actually do it. Can you, without sounding like a mental patient?

chek
Mega Poster

Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland

Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2006 10:59 pm Post subject:

aggle-rithm wrote:

chek wrote:

aggle-rithm wrote:

There are major planks to the 911 cover-up trail?

What are they?

Normally I'd be only too happy to but frankly, life's too short.
But in your case I can only advise keep an open mind.
You know it makes sense.
Evenin' all.

DaveyJ
Minor Poster

Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 94

Posted: Fri Sep 29, 2006 12:32 am Post subject:

like trying to catch smoke, aggle-rithm. or maybe thats it, maybe thats the conspriacy "right guys, we have no clue what happened on 9/11, not even slightly, i havnt even done a minutes worth of research, but i have watched a documentary....by people who have done no research, But thats irrelevant. Sure, we have no evidence, witnesses, logic or even a vauge idea of what happened or how we can prove it happened. but maybe, just maybe.....if we keep an open mind......well who knows" ________ herbal vaporizer forum Last edited by DaveyJ on Tue Feb 01, 2011 9:24 am; edited 1 time in total

chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster

Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833

Posted: Fri Sep 29, 2006 12:38 am Post subject:

aggle-rithm wrote:

chek wrote:

aggle-rithm wrote:

There are major planks to the 911 cover-up trail?

What are they?

In the fine words of Matt Taibbi:

Quote:

There obviously is such a theory, but it has to be pieced together by implication, by paying attention to the various assertions of 9/11 lore (the towers were mined, the Pentagon was really hit by a cruise missile, etc.) and then assembling them later on into one single story. But the funny thing is, when you put together all of those disparate theories, you get the dumbest story since Roman Polanski's Pirates.

or, almost as good:

Quote:

I challenge a 9/11 Truth leader like Loose Change writer Dylan Avery to come up with a detailed, complete summary of the alleged plot -- not the bits and pieces, but the whole story, put together -- that would not make any fifth grader anywhere burst out in convulsive laughter.

chek
Mega Poster

Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland

Posted: Fri Sep 29, 2006 12:40 am Post subject:

DaveyJ wrote:

like trying to catch smoke, aggle-rithm.

or maybe thats it, maybe thats the conspriacy

"right guys, we have no clue what happened on 9/11, not even slightly, i havnt even done a minutes worth of research, but i have watched a documentary....by people who have done no research, But thats irrelevant. Sure, we have no evidence, witnesses, logic or even a vauge idea of what happened or how we can prove it happened. but maybe, just maybe.....if we keep an open mind......well who knows"

My 'theory' is that you're unwittingly describing your own position fairly accurately. Except for that last part... but maybe that's a good sign.

Ignatz
Moderate Poster

Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918

Posted: Fri Sep 29, 2006 8:07 am Post subject:

chek wrote:

aggle-rithm wrote:

Speaking of which, would you mind telling me in detail what you believe happened on 9/11? I know that no "truther" has ever taken me up on this, but you may be the first to actually do it. Can you, without sounding like a mental patient?

Normally I'd be only too happy to but frankly, life's too short.
But in your case I can only advise keep an open mind.
You know it makes sense.
Evenin' all.

Why not type it up as a document? Half a page of A4 should do as a summary.
Then you have it to hand whenever anybody asks.

But, to do some work for you let's make it multiple choice. Which most accurately describes your theory of 9/11 :

a) Real terrorists hijacked real planes. The Govt. knew it was planned but squelched investigation to ensure the attacks went ahead. Perhaps they secretly assisted the terrorists. They wired WTC1,2+7 way in advance to make sure they collapsed totally, then covered up all evidence.

b) It was all a Govt. covert operation. There were no passengers or hijackers. The planes were drones and/or missiles. All evidence of outsiders was fabricated.

c) There were some hijackings plus some dromes/missiles to add dramatic effect.

d) ?

chek
Mega Poster

Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland

Posted: Fri Sep 29, 2006 10:05 am Post subject:

Ignatz wrote:

chek wrote:

aggle-rithm wrote:

Normally I'd be only too happy to but frankly, life's too short.
But in your case I can only advise keep an open mind.
You know it makes sense.
Evenin' all.

That's probably essentially not far from what I thought 3 years ago, but things have got much, much stranger since then.

However all that just relates to my efforts at putting events into some context, which doesn't get any peas shelled, and besides a narrative from me isn't necessary or even helpful at this stage.

For the moment it's about showing the official version to be false.
Which it undoubtedly is.

chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster

Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833

Posted: Fri Sep 29, 2006 1:45 pm Post subject:

chek wrote:

Ignatz wrote:

chek wrote:

aggle-rithm wrote:

Normally I'd be only too happy to but frankly, life's too short.
But in your case I can only advise keep an open mind.
You know it makes sense.
Evenin' all.

That's probably essentially not far from what I thought 3 years ago, but things have got much, much stranger since then.

That's what happens when you take the Rube Goldberg approach to theory-building.

Quote:

However all that just relates to my efforts at putting events into some context, which doesn't get any peas shelled, and besides a narrative from me isn't necessary or even helpful at this stage.

For the moment it's about showing the official version to be false.
Which it undoubtedly is.

The whole thing? Just the planes? Just the hijackers? Just the building collapses? What, specifically, is false?
The official version is a series of assertions. Finding one assertion false does not necessarily falsify the whole series.
So, in showing the official version to be false, be specific.

chek
Mega Poster

Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland

Posted: Fri Sep 29, 2006 1:57 pm Post subject:

chipmunk stew wrote:

chek wrote:

Ignatz wrote:

chek wrote:

aggle-rithm wrote:

Normally I'd be only too happy to but frankly, life's too short.
But in your case I can only advise keep an open mind.
You know it makes sense.
Evenin' all.

That's probably essentially not far from what I thought 3 years ago, but things have got much, much stranger since then.

That's what happens when you take the Rube Goldberg approach to theory-building.

Quote:

Airplanes, fires, and the total collapse theory?
All false.
The travelling troupe of Able Danger Hijackers theory?
All false.
The declaration of war on terror?
All false.
The 'nobody could have expected it' theory?
All false.
The 'knew, but did nothing about it' theory?
Ah - that one's true.

Further investigation I'm confident will follow from those.
And man, will it be forensic in its scope.

aggle-rithm
Moderate Poster

Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 557

Posted: Fri Sep 29, 2006 5:07 pm Post subject:

chek wrote:

That's probably essentially not far from what I thought 3 years ago, but things have got much, much stranger since then.

If any theory gets stranger and stranger as more evidence appears, that strongly suggests a major re-think is in order.

Quote:

However all that just relates to my efforts at putting events into some context, which doesn't get any peas shelled, and besides a narrative from me isn't necessary or even helpful at this stage.

I agree wholeheartedly. It certainly wouldn't help you to come across as a deranged psychopath, as you inevitably would in attempting such a narrative.

aggle-rithm
Moderate Poster

Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 557

Posted: Fri Sep 29, 2006 5:15 pm Post subject:

chek wrote:

This absolute certainty must be comforting.

I wonder if you would be willing to stick your neck out to this extent if there were actual consequences to you, personally?

For instance, if you were absolutely certain that Islamic extremism doesn't really exist, and would use this evidence to stroll through a hotbed of Middle Eastern extremism wearing Western clothing....

Jay Ref
Moderate Poster

Joined: 20 Jul 2006
Posts: 511

Posted: Tue Oct 10, 2006 7:49 pm Post subject:

So where's SGT Chavez now??? -z _________________ "Knowledge is good" -Emil Faber "God in heaven. Here's the hard-headed, evidence-only freak who will not, like we CTers, indulge himself in self-inflating, utterly misconceived fantasies." -kbo234 (who is NOT a nazi) briefly makes sense

utopiated
Validated Poster

Joined: 09 Jun 2006
Posts: 645
Location: UK Midlands

Posted: Wed Oct 11, 2006 12:23 am Post subject:

Thanks to the wonderfully supportive 9/11 movement, he got sacked. Obviously a shill and a fake then... or odds on some people online think the sacking was just another set-up. All those potential whisltleblowers big and small who were thinking of coming out are now vindicated in staying right where they are. _________________ http://exopolitics.org.uk http://chemtrailsUK.net http://alienfalseflagagenda.net --

Display posts from previous:

	9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> Critics' Corner	All times are GMT Goto page Previous 1, 2
Page 2 of 2

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum