Started By
Message
re: Anybody ever see 911:In Plane Site?
Posted on 11/20/13 at 8:37 pm to Vols&Shaft83
Posted on 11/20/13 at 8:37 pm to Vols&Shaft83
quote:
I think you need to take a break from Infowars, lil fella
I despise infowars. If you'd like to contest something I said or shared, please do so.
I think you should take a break from all the superficial stuff that creates your cotton candy reality.. but I don't tell you that, I leave you be.
Posted on 11/20/13 at 8:44 pm to Rodeonaut
quote:
I think you should take a break from all the superficial stuff that creates your cotton candy reality.. but I don't tell you that, I leave you be.
You learned your lesson the last time you engaged me on here, back when you were going by MoGrayback.
Posted on 11/20/13 at 8:45 pm to avondale88
quote:
He graduated from Catholic High
When did he graduate?
Posted on 11/20/13 at 8:50 pm to Vols&Shaft83
quote:
You learned your lesson the last time you engaged me on here, back when you were going by MoGrayback.
I doubt you ever taught anyone a lesson on this subject. Again, you're free to engage in the discussion if you wish.
Posted on 11/20/13 at 9:07 pm to We_Need_Cam
So, where are all the passengers that were on the plane which hit the Pentagon now? Are they all just living in the witness protection program? For Christs sake, a Fox News Reporter was on that flight.
Please stop with the idiotic conspiracy and cover-up bullshite. Just because people weren't there, a conspiracy is always the reason.
I'm willing to bet that a high majority of 9/11 conspiracy theorists also do not subscribe to the Aurora movie theater story or believe the SandyHook school shooting.
Please stop with the idiotic conspiracy and cover-up bullshite. Just because people weren't there, a conspiracy is always the reason.
I'm willing to bet that a high majority of 9/11 conspiracy theorists also do not subscribe to the Aurora movie theater story or believe the SandyHook school shooting.
Posted on 11/20/13 at 9:11 pm to East Coast Band
I'm not much on consipiracy theory either. Primarily for reasons already stated--just like with the "faked" moon landing.
Someone, somewhere would talk.
Still: FRICK WTC 7.
That one bugs me.
Someone, somewhere would talk.
Still: FRICK WTC 7.
That one bugs me.
Posted on 11/20/13 at 9:37 pm to East Coast Band
quote:
For Christs sake, a Fox News Reporter was on that flight.
Are you referring to Barbara Olson?
If so, that case is quite interesting.
I'm sure you're familiar with the term 'box cutters'. Anyone that was paying attention in the days that followed 911 is familiar with the story that the hijackers used box cutters to take over the planes.
There is one, and only one, source for this box cutter narrative. Barbara Olson's husband, Ted Olson, the US Solicitor General under George W Bush.
The problem is he was eventually caught in a series of lies regarding the source of Barbara's phone call. The US government officially lists that call as never happening. In a court document from 2007 the call in question was listed as 0:00, because it never actually happened.
Just a nice little tid-bit regarding the reporter you brought up.
Posted on 11/20/13 at 11:29 pm to Rodeonaut
Umm, I'm not interested in twisted facts about phone calls and box cutter terminology origins, id just simply like to know where she is now, if she was never on a plane that never hit the Pentagon.
Ill hang up and listen.
Ill hang up and listen.
Posted on 11/20/13 at 11:48 pm to We_Need_Cam
Oh boy.
You know man, someone with a little imagination could make a "documentary" on why the "Illuminati" are really former residents of Mars, and millions would believe it.
You know man, someone with a little imagination could make a "documentary" on why the "Illuminati" are really former residents of Mars, and millions would believe it.
Posted on 11/21/13 at 12:22 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
You know man, someone with a little imagination could make a "documentary" on why the "Illuminati" are really former residents of Mars, and millions would believe it.
Except in 911 documentaries actual facts are brought to light that are not apart of the narrative that the mainstream has been fed.
The documentary in your analogy would involve no facts, it would be pure speculation.
So I'm gonna have to say that was a really poor analogy.
Posted on 11/21/13 at 1:04 am to Rodeonaut
Meh. United 93 people mentioned knives and bombs. I don't know why the phone call was falsified, if that was the case at all, but assuming the box cutter thing is false what's the alternative?
Posted on 11/21/13 at 1:31 am to Mizzeaux
quote:
Meh. United 93 people mentioned knives and bombs. I don't know why the phone call was falsified, if that was the case at all, but assuming the box cutter thing is false what's the alternative?
I'm not sure what you're asking?
The term box cutter was the main term thrown at the public by the media in regards to what the hijackers used as weapons.
It's just a trivial tidbit that the source of that information turned out to be insincere. It's not a major point in the case against the official story, not at all.. it's just something I said in response to a post about a news reporter who was onboard.
Posted on 11/21/13 at 1:44 am to Rodeonaut
Oh, I thought saying the only call mentioning box cutters apparently being false was implying that box cutters weren't used.
I like to question stuff, but when someone tells me box cutters weren't used I wonder why I was told box cutters were used by the media/the powers that be if they weren't and what would someone/something gain by saying box cutters were used instead of whatever was the truth?
I can't think of an answer for either, so I just wondered why it was brought up. I assumed you had an alternative view on what happened and was interested to find out what it was.
I like to question stuff, but when someone tells me box cutters weren't used I wonder why I was told box cutters were used by the media/the powers that be if they weren't and what would someone/something gain by saying box cutters were used instead of whatever was the truth?
I can't think of an answer for either, so I just wondered why it was brought up. I assumed you had an alternative view on what happened and was interested to find out what it was.
Posted on 11/21/13 at 2:07 am to Mizzeaux
quote:
Oh, I thought saying the only call mentioning box cutters apparently being false was implying that box cutters weren't used.
I like to question stuff, but when someone tells me box cutters weren't used I wonder why I was told box cutters were used by the media/the powers that be if they weren't and what would someone/something gain by saying box cutters were used instead of whatever was the truth?
I can't think of an answer for either, so I just wondered why it was brought up. I assumed you had an alternative view on what happened and was interested to find out what it was.
I think reading the thread would bring to light why it was brought up.
Someone said that there was a news reporter onboard a flight. I said, here is a little tidbit about that reporter.. Her husband, who was the US Solicitor General under Bush, was caught being insincere about the call that spawned all the box cutter talk.
Posted on 11/21/13 at 2:09 am to Rodeonaut
Yeah, I read. I just wondered what the implication of the US Solicitor General's wife's call apparently not happening meant in your mind as it related to box cutters.
I understand now that it was just an opportunity to share your knowledge.
I understand now that it was just an opportunity to share your knowledge.
Posted on 11/21/13 at 2:15 am to Mizzeaux
quote:
I just wondered what the implication of the US Solicitor General's wife's call apparently not happening meant in your mind as it related to box cutters.
It was the only call that specifically mentioned box cutters, which turned into a narrative that still remains in the minds of the public. Which is kind of interesting because it turned out the call didn't happen. That's all. For a man of your intelligence this shouldn't of been unclear if you read the thread, which you may have. You're just doing this to be.. how should I put it, a dick.
Posted on 11/21/13 at 2:46 am to Rodeonaut
As you think back through all our encounters I think you'll find I'm generally only a dick in response to dick shite directed at me. Dick shite generally comes from you in the form of Chicago comments or Cubs quips. I'll respond, but will never fire the first shot at someone. In this case, no shots were fired until recently, and, as such, I didn't respond in kind.
I wasn't trying to be a dick at all. I was genuinely interested in a theory. Since you don't have one, I'll go to bed.
I wasn't trying to be a dick at all. I was genuinely interested in a theory. Since you don't have one, I'll go to bed.
This post was edited on 11/21/13 at 2:48 am
Posted on 11/21/13 at 3:02 am to Mizzeaux
Ahh, bull. I give you a tough time because you're from Chicago.. for one it's actually just 'locker room' type ribbing. If you can't take some jabs about being a cubs fan, I don't know what to say. I will admit that I give a little harder because I know it bothers you so much. But there was none of that in this thread, you have a grudge against me because I give you a little shite from time to time on here.. without that grudge this dialogue would have gone differently.
Where in this content would you think there was a theory involved? You're too smart to have been misguided by anything I said.
quote:
I was genuinely interested in a theory.
Where in this content would you think there was a theory involved? You're too smart to have been misguided by anything I said.
Posted on 11/21/13 at 4:24 am to Rodeonaut
You know how some people are on you because you're kind of odd and no matter what valid point you bring up it's always invalidated because someone mentions that you're kind of crazy/an alter/think you're smarter than everyone?
You know how that doesn't really bother you that much, but it's just annoying that it has to be addressed because some weak minded individual thinks they have to bring it up every fricking time you say something? That's you with the Chicago thing.
It doesn't bother me as much as it's hack material. If you were creative with your shite it wouldn't bother me, I'd even enjoy it. I'd just think you're a dick, but at least you put some thought into being a dick and the humor factor would be worth it. Instead you just choose to be a hack and repeat the same shite over and over like the people you don't like doing that to you.
Porker is obsessed with Missouri in a fairly unhealthy way but I enjoy him because he's always got a new way of looking at attacking Missouri and it always keeps people on their toes, it takes talent. You're the opposite.
To get back to the point. When you invalidate something there almost has to be a point to bringing up the fact that it's invalid. So the call that said box cutters apparently didn't actually occur, what's the point of bringing it up? Do you think they accomplished the feat of hijacking planes with guns, pepper spray, bomb threats?
Bringing up the point and then not following it up is pointless. It's like saying, "I know this tidbit of information, but I have no desire to put it into any context."
I just don't understand the reasoning for a Bush administration official to lie about box cutters. That's why I asked. I figured if you knew the guy lied that you had a theory as to why he would lie.
Go back and read, I was doing the normal thing and just trying to have a conversation. Just like every other time we've had an encounter.
Okay, bed time for real now.
Night.
You know how that doesn't really bother you that much, but it's just annoying that it has to be addressed because some weak minded individual thinks they have to bring it up every fricking time you say something? That's you with the Chicago thing.
It doesn't bother me as much as it's hack material. If you were creative with your shite it wouldn't bother me, I'd even enjoy it. I'd just think you're a dick, but at least you put some thought into being a dick and the humor factor would be worth it. Instead you just choose to be a hack and repeat the same shite over and over like the people you don't like doing that to you.
Porker is obsessed with Missouri in a fairly unhealthy way but I enjoy him because he's always got a new way of looking at attacking Missouri and it always keeps people on their toes, it takes talent. You're the opposite.
quote:
Where in this content would you think there was a theory involved? You're too smart to have been misguided by anything I said.
To get back to the point. When you invalidate something there almost has to be a point to bringing up the fact that it's invalid. So the call that said box cutters apparently didn't actually occur, what's the point of bringing it up? Do you think they accomplished the feat of hijacking planes with guns, pepper spray, bomb threats?
Bringing up the point and then not following it up is pointless. It's like saying, "I know this tidbit of information, but I have no desire to put it into any context."
I just don't understand the reasoning for a Bush administration official to lie about box cutters. That's why I asked. I figured if you knew the guy lied that you had a theory as to why he would lie.
Go back and read, I was doing the normal thing and just trying to have a conversation. Just like every other time we've had an encounter.
Okay, bed time for real now.
Night.
This post was edited on 11/21/13 at 4:32 am
Posted on 11/21/13 at 11:52 am to gatorrocks
I have a copy of the DVD. IMO there are several "smoking guns" but here's 2:
All those cell phone calls that were made on a plane doing 300 to 500 mph; didn't happen because the technology didn't exist.
The plane that hit the pentagon; how come they've never released video of it (trust me, there are hundreds of video cameras around the Pentagon)? And don't bring up the 5 still photos they released because those pics don't show a 757/767 or that it's National Security because it ain't.
Do I know what happened? No but the official story is BS.
All those cell phone calls that were made on a plane doing 300 to 500 mph; didn't happen because the technology didn't exist.
The plane that hit the pentagon; how come they've never released video of it (trust me, there are hundreds of video cameras around the Pentagon)? And don't bring up the 5 still photos they released because those pics don't show a 757/767 or that it's National Security because it ain't.
Do I know what happened? No but the official story is BS.
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News