IPB




POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

6 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
We All Know Now Corley Never Had A Clue What Became Of United Airlines Flight 175, A detailed analysis of corrupted UA175 evidence.

DoYouEverWonder
post Jul 6 2011, 04:58 PM
Post #41





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 770
Joined: 1-February 09
Member No.: 4,096



QUOTE (amazed! @ Jul 6 2011, 02:12 PM) *
As I tried to tell you before Q, I substantially agree with what you say.

If 3 exhibits prove that the pieces were not there, what makes you suspect they were subsequently placed there?

That is, how can you tell the difference between something that was actually (placed) there, and a photo that has been manipulated to make it appear that something was in the picture when it really was not?

I'm sorry if I missed this information before, and have not seen the pictures in a few months, but could you provide the approximate dimensions of the planted objects we're talking about?

And a word of unsolicited advice, if I may: don't hold your breath waiting for the federal government to investigate anything related to the events of the day, or to prosecute ANYBODY for any crimes committed.

It would have been easy to deliver crates of parts before 9/11 that could be salted throughout the buildings. All of these buildings had easily accessible freight elevators, that you could drive into. Nobody would even notice a truck unloading boxes, because there are always trucks unloading stuff all over Manhattan.


Since nothing with a serial number has ever been discovered, there is no evidence that Boeing jets hit these buildings.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
questionitall
post Jul 6 2011, 11:45 PM
Post #42





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 98
Joined: 5-October 10
From: Canada
Member No.: 5,337



QUOTE (Tamborine man @ Jul 5 2011, 08:22 AM) *
questionitall, please learn something here:

Amazed is an avowed cynic and dedicated provocateur, but deep down got a heart of gold.

Being an american, he's a little bit ashamed of this fact (having that kind of heart), as he

has been told over and over again throughout his upbringing, that this would appear as a

sure sign of 'weakness'.

We who know better, we who knows that having a heart of gold is the sign of true strength,

are simply taking his musings with the little bit of humour they sometimes deserve! wink.gif

So cheer up, questionitall, and know that i too think the fuselage was planted, and think

you have done a sterling job proving this fact. smile.gif



With all due respect I believe you give Amazed far too much credit and where none is due might I add - this individual has made nothing but demands on others here all tyhe while never having made the slightest effort to educate themselves...this individuals latest reply says it all...a typical American by your definition.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tamborine man
post Jul 7 2011, 01:35 AM
Post #43





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 892
Joined: 1-July 07
From: Australia
Member No.: 1,315



QUOTE (amazed! @ Jul 3 2011, 07:28 PM) *
Thanks for the kind words TM. Perhaps you know me better than I know myself.

I tried to make it clear that I appreciated the work that Questionitall has done, but somehow could not quite communicate that to him. Don't know why.

I appreciate the work that ALL researchers have done regarding the events of the day, and have stated that many times.

Maybe that's the grounds for my 'heart of gold' appellation. cheers.gif

Seriously though, Q's posts were a bit on the verbose side, and where I failed to communicate my appreciation to him, he failed to communicate his exact point to me, at least regarding this matter of the fuselage atop WTC5.

Personally, I am very skeptical that any fuselage was up there, for several reasons. First, assuming that real airplanes struck the towers as depicted, the fuselage was shredded and there would not have been any piece that large left to be resting on the rooftop. Or so it seems to me.

Secondly, while I can see where it would be possible for the bad guys to place some landing gear and engine parts around on Manhattan sidewalks, I find it most difficult to place a fuselage section up on the roof without SOMEBODY have seen that operation going on. It seems to me that either a very large crane or a helicopter would have been required to accomplish that, and either one would have been the talk of the town as it was going on.

So, as it stands right now, it seems to me that the picture we're discussing was faked somehow or the other.



".... Perhaps you know me better than I know myself."

I should certainly hope not! smile.gif


If you carefully study the two photo's DSC00478 and 12390, then besides the obvious discrepancies, you'll also find that the fuselage

on photo DSC00478 is placed behind the railing, and in photo 12390 the fuselage is placed in front of railing.

It is the fuselage in photo 12390 that so blatantly, ridiculously and amateurishly have been manipulated and photo-shopped to indicate

it's a part of UA175, by the insertion of the badly painted half letter and number N6 (signifying N612UA), on the badly blue painted part.

Pure circus for "children", performed by the mentally immature, and nothing else!




Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Jul 7 2011, 09:23 AM
Post #44





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 3,885
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



Thanks very much for the specifics TM.

So then you are saying that indeed the photos were manipulated, and that in your opinion there were no fuselage pieces on the roof of WTC5?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tamborine man
post Jul 7 2011, 11:40 AM
Post #45





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 892
Joined: 1-July 07
From: Australia
Member No.: 1,315



QUOTE (amazed! @ Jul 5 2011, 12:23 PM) *
Thanks very much for the specifics TM.

So then you are saying that indeed the photos were manipulated, and that in your opinion there were no fuselage pieces on the roof of WTC5?



No, amazed!!! I said that it was the fuselage part in photo 12390 which had been manipulated and photo-shopped.

If, as you seems to hypothesize, the fuselage part(s) were added to an existing photo, then please explain to me

why you think they would go to the rather idiotic trouble of adding two markedly different fuselage parts to two

different photos, in order to falsely 'prove' the existence of only one plane, namely N612UA?

So far, i can see no sense whatsoever in such a scenario!


As i see it, they took a photo of a planted fuselage part as shown in photo DSC00478. Afterwards somebody got

the 'bright' idea of taking another photo of the same fuselage part, whereupon they could add some identification

markings onto it.

The fuselage part was subsequently dragged forward and placed a bit more to the right past the railing, and the

second photo was taken, and now shown as photo 12390; whereon the half 'N' and the half '6' together with the

badly painted parts thereafter were added, by some kind of inapt photoshop technique by an inapt sort of person!

Cheers

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Jul 7 2011, 04:24 PM
Post #46





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 3,885
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



My opinion is that there were no fuselage parts on the roof of WTC5, but I could be persuaded otherwise. It's not a hard and fast opinion.

Thus IMO any pictures taken of fuselage parts on that roof were heavily manipulated.

So, you're saying that there were indeed fuselage parts up there, but they were arranged thus and so, and then rearranged, with pictures taken of each arrangement?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
questionitall
post Jul 7 2011, 08:14 PM
Post #47





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 98
Joined: 5-October 10
From: Canada
Member No.: 5,337



QUOTE (amazed! @ Jul 6 2011, 03:12 PM) *
As I tried to tell you before Q, I substantially agree with what you say.

If 3 exhibits prove that the pieces were not there, what makes you suspect they were subsequently placed there?

That is, how can you tell the difference between something that was actually (placed) there, and a photo that has been manipulated to make it appear that something was in the picture when it really was not?

I'm sorry if I missed this information before, and have not seen the pictures in a few months, but could you provide the approximate dimensions of the planted objects we're talking about?

And a word of unsolicited advice, if I may: don't hold your breath waiting for the federal government to investigate anything related to the events of the day, or to prosecute ANYBODY for any crimes committed.



To answer your first question, by virtue of the simple fact a minimum of 3 NIST Cumulus dataset exhibits show no sign of the large piece of fuselage there on the rooftop of WTC 5 and soon after the attack against WTC 2 it goes without saying the wreckage in question didn’t fall from the sky in the immediate aftermath of the attack. Therefore it must have been “planted” sometime after the fact. Agreed, or do I need to explain the definition of planted evidence to you yet again?

Why I bother to explain this to you is beyond me because you made it quite clear in your second question/statement you now propose the large piece of fuselage wreckage never existed, period, let alone had it been photographed thereon the rooftop of WTC 5. In fact, despite all the analysis I’ve put forward you’ve now intimated the fuselage wreckage in FEMA’s image I.D 12390 could just as easily have been a total Adobe Photoshop fabrication pure and simple. As Tambourine man explained to you here most recently that is not the case at all and why you fail to comprehend the evidence is beyond me. Most insulting then is the fact you made it incumbent upon me to otherwise convince you that piece of FEMA fuselage had existed.

Rather then I suggest you go back and reconsider all my research and specifically then what the other 3 exhibits show and having done so feel free to get back to me with your revelations, because the evidence speaks for itself and I’m done explaining myself to you on this point! What's more it is NOT incumbent upon me to defend my opinion on why the FEMA photograph I.D. 12390 was falsified! However, It is the responsibility of those directly involved inthe counterfeiting of that United Airlines flight 175 evidence to defend their actions and reasons for doing so!!!

Don’t take this personally pup but I think your motive here is to complicate matters and not to actually solve any of the mystery at hand, yet answer your questions I did but only to make my point very clear...that I don’t like that sort of individual one bit! Contrary to what Tambourine Man thinks of you I don’t believe for a second you’re merely an avowed cynic with a heart of gold who’s riddled with guilt for their government’s crimes against humanity. Call me paranoid but I suspect you have your own agenda here and are fully aware of the potentially damning evidence I continue to disclose here at P4T. Is that not why you ask such absurd questions of me and all the while misrepresenting and distorting the facts I’ve presented throughout my research? As such I will not be so kind when responding to any such questions and mind-numbing rhetorical debate you instigate in the future. I’m not saying don’t ask questions of me...what I am saying is come down from your high-horse, show yourself and some manners when you correspond with me the next time because I don’t tolerate insolence very well as you can see.

What’s more I insist you keep all unsolicited advice to yourself from now on as I don’t put much stock in the advice given to me by strangers I do not trust or respect. Truthfully then for having said “don't hold your breath waiting for the Federal government to investigate anything related to the events of the day, or to prosecute ANYBODY for any crimes committed.” well I find that apologist attitude repugnant and what’s more it simply begs the question “why in the hell are you even here if you’re not fighting tooth and nail for justice to one day be served on those who murdered your countrymen on the morning of September 11, 2001?” Dare explain that one for my obtuse mind if you will and while you’re at it Amazed please explain how it is you can say you agree with my UA175 findings yet simultaneously you downplay and exhort the fact the WTC investigator’s might not have salted the WTC site crime scene with any physical evidence but rather then you say they may have simply outright falsified their photographic evidence of it...Treason by any other name is still Treason and very much a crime that warrants a new criminal investigation to look deeper into 9/11. But who’s paying attention to semantics?

Lastly then, at this juncture in my life I’m not seeking accolades from anyone and especially not from you “the great pretender” so please cease and desist kissing my ass by occasionally reminding me you essentially agree with my UA175 findings...it’s shameful. Quite frankly then I don’t consider your toadying to be flattering or complimentary and I couldn't give a rats-ass whether you agree with me or not on the 9/11 research I've done, because the evidence speaks for itself and I feel it will make a difference one day.

As for me providing you with the approximate dimensions of the planted objects “we're talking about” how about you take the initiative for once and do some research of your own instead of free-loading here. In other words stop wasting my time and figure it out for yourself pup then convince me it's not your intention to dissuade people from looking deeper into that highly suspicious yet official UA175 evidence!

Better yet might I suggest you watch all of Tami Michael’s videos therein ABC NIST Dub #7 and find it within yourself to care even just a little bit for the lives of others you see needlessly devastated therein that horrific footage. My point is you should learn to give a shit, dude, otherwise you might find yourself being slaughtered in kind by your government one day and all because you were too busy being apathetic and complacent!
So now that the air has been cleared Amazed it’s up to you to explain yourself and convince me you’re worth getting along with.



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
questionitall
post Jul 7 2011, 08:16 PM
Post #48





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 98
Joined: 5-October 10
From: Canada
Member No.: 5,337



QUOTE (Tamborine man @ Jul 7 2011, 11:40 AM) *
No, amazed!!! I said that it was the fuselage part in photo 12390 which had been manipulated and photo-shopped.

If, as you seems to hypothesize, the fuselage part(s) were added to an existing photo, then please explain to me

why you think they would go to the rather idiotic trouble of adding two markedly different fuselage parts to two

different photos, in order to falsely 'prove' the existence of only one plane, namely N612UA?

So far, i can see no sense whatsoever in such a scenario!


As i see it, they took a photo of a planted fuselage part as shown in photo DSC00478. Afterwards somebody got

the 'bright' idea of taking another photo of the same fuselage part, whereupon they could add some identification

markings onto it.

The fuselage part was subsequently dragged forward and placed a bit more to the right past the railing, and the

second photo was taken, and now shown as photo 12390; whereon the half 'N' and the half '6' together with the

badly painted parts thereafter were added, by some kind of inapt photoshop technique by an inapt sort of person!

Cheers


Thank you Tambourine man, for partially restoring my faith at least! I can't tell you how gratifying it was to read your explanation of the evidence to Amazed and just the way I've been explaining it to that individual. Clearly you are a reasoning individual who thinks for them self and actually comprehends what the evidence reveals, just as I'd written about it. As for Amazed I believe you're wasting your time there because I've tried repeatedly to explain the facts as you understand them to that individual but clearly they are incapable of reasoning the evidence. Just as they're oblivious to why I take great exception to their person, not because I disagree with their opinion necessarily but more so then because his/her abrasive online demeanour rubbed me the wrong way right from the get-go.

I assumed that individual had read and understood my research thoroughly but shame on me for assuming they’re clever and self-motivated. Quite frankly their constant niggling and obstinate take on the evidence as I've presented it is why I won’t entertain their self-imposed ignorance any longer - I’m simply the messenger bearing information that comes my way from elsewhere.

With that said I can't fathom his/her having asked “If 3 exhibits prove that the pieces were not there, what makes you suspect they were subsequently placed there?” Surely no-one (who’s presumably followed my research and professes to be savvy) can be that ignorant of the facts and the logical argument I’ve put forward! As for their second question “how can you tell the difference between something that was actually (placed) there and a photo that has been manipulated to make it appear that something was in the picture when it really was not?” let me just say that is not a moot point for which I’m prepared to answer yet again. Based on the evidence my research speaks for itself.

What's more his/her argument amounts to pure semantics plain and simple as it matters not whether the fuselage wreckage was real or falsified - either way he/she tries to slice and dice the official evidence the fact remains that UA175 evidence came to exist by nefarious means. Why they cannot figure that out is beyond me...the evidence doesn’t lie and with respect to aviation related crime scene investigations EVIDENCE TAMPERING OF ANY KIND IS A FEDERAL OFFENSE!!!

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tamborine man
post Jul 8 2011, 07:34 AM
Post #49





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 892
Joined: 1-July 07
From: Australia
Member No.: 1,315



QUOTE (amazed! @ Jul 5 2011, 07:24 PM) *
So, you're saying that there were indeed fuselage parts up there, but they were arranged thus and so, and then rearranged, with pictures taken of each arrangement?


No, amazed!!! Again, that is not what i'm saying exactly. I'm of course saying exactly what i'm saying in my post.

Why do you think that i mean something different to what i'm actually writing in the post?

Have you ever heard about the advantages of quoting people verbatim?

Were you a bit stoned when you wrote the above - or perhaps 'slightly' inebriated?

Have you actually looked carefully at the two photo's in question?

Are you desperately trying to disprove that you "got a heart of gold"? blink.gif
(And which, if you had one, naturally would indicate that you would be a man of honour, honesty, integrity, fairness
and, of course, noble ethics!)

Cheers






Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Jul 8 2011, 01:52 PM
Post #50





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 3,885
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



Cheers to you too TM. I loved my brief time in Sydney back in 1971, and have always a high opinion of Australia and its people.

I apologize for asking so many questions, and I apologize more for not quite getting what you're trying to say.

Because the truth is, I come to this forum for the exchange of ideas and to learn things, and more of the truth is that I moved past this trivia about 2 years ago.

Which is to say that while the subject still intrigues me, I understand that it is in the same category as the JFK assassination--an inside job whose perpetrators will never be brought to justice. I reached that conclusion a few years back. Frankly I do not care who doctored photos or not, who planted evidence or not, whether there were Boeings at WTC or not. It's fun to discuss, but I have no skin in the game.

As for Q, he comes across as a petulant juvenile who thinks he has found the Holy Grotto, or Holy Something Else. I'm glad he's done his work and I'm glad he speaks out, however childish that speaking might be. I wonder if he will still be analyzing photos 10 years from now.

Now that it's 10 years after, I'm much more interested in provoking and attacking those in the media who participate in the coverup. That I have provoked Q is amusing, nothing more.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tamborine man
post Jul 9 2011, 02:48 AM
Post #51





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 892
Joined: 1-July 07
From: Australia
Member No.: 1,315



QUOTE (amazed! @ Jul 6 2011, 04:52 PM) *
Frankly I do not care who doctored photos or not, who planted evidence or not, whether there were Boeings at WTC or not. It's fun to discuss, but I have no skin in the game.



Had you stated this a week ago, you would have saved me wasting precious time, spend for no good reason it seems! thumbdown.gif

(To other posters - beware!)

Feel i should take a sneaky and cunning revenge on you, when you least expect it .....(eye for an eye, and all that) .....


QUOTE
Now that it's 10 years after, I'm much more interested in provoking and attacking those in the media who participate in the coverup. That I have provoked Q is amusing, nothing more.



Perhaps Q and i should give it a diabolic try, provoking you to your utmost?

As we would be much better at it, than you were, we would undoubtedly derive far

greater mirth and amusement from this little exercise than you could ever dream of!


Fact of life: 'Criminals' of all sorts will sooner or later, inevitably become 'victims' themselves. whistle.gif


Cheers

This post has been edited by Tamborine man: Jul 9 2011, 09:33 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Jul 9 2011, 01:16 PM
Post #52





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 3,885
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



TM

Judging from his posts, Q seems to think I was trying to provoke him. I was not. Perhaps you think the same. I am not.

I asked questions of him and you NOT to provoke, but to clarify what it was exactly he was trying to say. He took offense where none was intended. We could go on for days as to why he took offense, but it doesn't really matter. He has thin skin, and/or he is somehow unsure of exactly what conclusion may be drawn from his research.

If he, and you, are so sensitive about questions being asked, well....

And TM--I stated probably more than a year ago that the game Trivial Pursuit is fun to play, but it is, after all, just a game. I stated a long time ago, on several threads here, that there will be no more formal investigations of the events of the day, no matter what esoteric evidence might be revealed. Arguing about precisely how various pieces of physical evidence were arranged or photographed is tantamount to arguing about what color underpants Oswald or Jack Ruby were wearing that fateful day.

The perps of the attacks at WTC succeeded beyond their wildest dreams, is my guess.

The world has moved beyond that historic event. The game now is the continued coverup, and that's where my personal efforts are made, attempting to expose the coverup on a case by case basis.

By all means TM, if it is revenge that drives you, feel free to have yours any way you like it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
questionitall
post Jul 9 2011, 09:22 PM
Post #53





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 98
Joined: 5-October 10
From: Canada
Member No.: 5,337



QUOTE (Tamborine man @ Jul 9 2011, 02:48 AM) *
Had you stated this a week ago, you would have saved me wasting precious time, spend for no good reason it seems! thumbdown.gif

(To other posters - beware!)

Feel i should take a sneaky and cunning revenge on you, when you least expect it .....(eye for an eye, and all that) .....





Perhaps Q and i should give it a diabolic try, provoking you to your utmost?

As we would be much better at it, than you were, we would undoubtedly derive far

greater mirth and amusement from this little exercise than you could ever dream of!


Fact of life: 'Criminals' of all sorts will sooner or later, inevitably become 'victims' themselves. whistle.gif


Cheers



Too late - I've been doing just that all along and "The great Pretender" showed his hand! I wouldn't piss on this individual if he was on fire and I certainly won't entertain them for a second more here Tambourine man!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
questionitall
post Jul 9 2011, 10:14 PM
Post #54





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 98
Joined: 5-October 10
From: Canada
Member No.: 5,337



QUOTE (amazed! @ Jul 9 2011, 01:16 PM) *
TM

Judging from his posts, Q seems to think I was trying to provoke him. I was not. Perhaps you think the same. I am not.

I asked questions of him and you NOT to provoke, but to clarify what it was exactly he was trying to say. He took offense where none was intended. We could go on for days as to why he took offense, but it doesn't really matter. He has thin skin, and/or he is somehow unsure of exactly what conclusion may be drawn from his research.

If he, and you, are so sensitive about questions being asked, well....

And TM--I stated probably more than a year ago that the game Trivial Pursuit is fun to play, but it is, after all, just a game. I stated a long time ago, on several threads here, that there will be no more formal investigations of the events of the day, no matter what esoteric evidence might be revealed. Arguing about precisely how various pieces of physical evidence were arranged or photographed is tantamount to arguing about what color underpants Oswald or Jack Ruby were wearing that fateful day.

The perps of the attacks at WTC succeeded beyond their wildest dreams, is my guess.

The world has moved beyond that historic event. The game now is the continued coverup, and that's where my personal efforts are made, attempting to expose the coverup on a case by case basis.

By all means TM, if it is revenge that drives you, feel free to have yours any way you like it.



Amazed, in your arrogance what you failed to realize from the beginning is why I've needled you all along here. I never took offense to you asking questions but I did resent your obvious manipulation of the conversation - I picked up on your condescending attitude and con from the onset and like any typical borderline anti-social you played right into the that, because you can’t resist playing the one-upmanship "game" can you. Weak and puny cowards don’t like to lose do they punk and you would know!

Like I said, you’re “the great pretender” punk and clearly without conscience to, so thank you very much for proving me right and yourself to be the Agent Provocateur I’d suspected you were all along, you sorry excuse for a human being! As for what you think and say about anything related to 9/11 here at P4T it doesn't matter anymore now does it, because you've all but admitted you don't give a shit about the victims of 9/11 and you’ve blown your cover here.

It's all about you isn't it and your Trivial pursuit “game” of proving you’re smarter than everyone else. You say the game now is the continued cover-up and that’s where you’re concentrating your personal efforts, attempting to expose the cover-up on a case by case basis – not according to you here and your previous posts!
Let me give you a little unsolicited sage advice now punk...when you put the cart ahead of the horse all you get by it is to be made to look like the ass you clearly are! In other words without any understanding of the trivium and quadrivium you’re simply just another fool who opens his mouth all too often but nothing of any great importance spews from it!

I’d bet dimes to dollars you’ve not done a minutes research delving into 9/11 and that’s because you’re not really looking for the truth now are you? Like I said punk, you’re motive here is to complicate matters and not to actually solve any of the mystery at hand. In fact you are a predator posing as a house pet here, or in others words a bought and paid for government Fraud yourself and as such my time spent on you has run its course. Say wahtever you will from here on out but your admission here says it all.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tamborine man
post Jul 10 2011, 04:59 AM
Post #55





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 892
Joined: 1-July 07
From: Australia
Member No.: 1,315



QUOTE (amazed! @ Jul 7 2011, 04:16 PM) *
TM

Judging from his posts, Q seems to think I was trying to provoke him. I was not. Perhaps you think the same. I am not.


Yes i think the same, and of course you tried to. Why otherwise would you find it 'amusing' that it was perceived this way!

QUOTE
I asked questions of him and you NOT to provoke, but to clarify what it was exactly he was trying to say. He took offense where none was intended.

If he, and you, are so sensitive about questions being asked, well....


None took any offense. It was more utter astonishment that you possessed the fooking audacity to keep asking questions
you already very clearly and succintly had been given answers to.

QUOTE
And TM--I stated probably more than a year ago that the game Trivial Pursuit is fun to play, but it is, after all, just a game.


So over a year ago you stated the bleeding obvious, and since you're now repeating it here, it must be because you think
it will make a deep impression on all of us!! amazed - people will rather think you have completely lost the plot, and of course
.....they're right .....you have.

QUOTE
I stated a long time ago, on several threads here, that there will be no more formal investigations of the events of the day, no matter what esoteric evidence might be revealed. Arguing about precisely how various pieces of physical evidence were arranged or photographed is tantamount to arguing about what color underpants Oswald or Jack Ruby were wearing that fateful day.


You can keep stating this until you're blue in the face. The fact is that this forum attracts new visitors and visitors from other
forums daily. It is for their benefit that all new evidence be scrutinized, analyzed and presented. One day the scales of justice
will balance, as is their want.

QUOTE
The perps of the attacks at WTC succeeded beyond their wildest dreams, is my guess.


The 'perps' will never 'succeed' in anything. Your "guess" sucks!

QUOTE
The world has moved beyond that historic event.


No it hasn't. The world is standing still, and wont move forward until 9/11, 7/7 and other nasty 'things' have been sorted!

QUOTE
The game now is the continued coverup, and that's where my personal efforts are made, attempting to expose the coverup on a case by case basis.


You're not fooling anybody amazed. You have never "attempted" to do anything regarding 9/11, and never will.
Your contradictions, your duplicity and your lack of honesty tells a different story!

QUOTE
By all means TM, if it is revenge that drives you, feel free to have yours any way you like it.


To be absolutely clear: I neither believe in 'revenge' or in 'an eye for an eye', of course. Nor do i believe that you got 'a heart of gold'.
This was all said with the tongue planted firmly in cheek (à la Benny Hill), to invite an intelligent response from you.

Concerning 'the heart of gold' thing: An intelligent good person will take this kind of insidous "flattery" as it is, and respond accordingly.
An arrogant person with an inflated ego, unable to think for him/her self, will lap up such 'sycophantic praise', as it will further boost their
already very high self-conceit.
Your reaction as it was, amazed, clearly point to the latter as a more apt description of your 'good' self - sad as this is to witness.

I do not know whether you're an 'agent' or not, amazed! However, i find it very odd indeed, that you let yourself become vulnerable to
exactly this kind of suspicion. Am sitting on the fence at the moment leaning, but not 'yet' leaning in your favour; and the way it looks,
probably never will. Sorry!

This post has been edited by Tamborine man: Jul 10 2011, 06:04 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Jul 10 2011, 10:25 AM
Post #56





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 3,885
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



TM

I'm not here trying to win friends and influence people. I make no claims to being any sort of researcher, other than reading as many accounts as I can, for my own enlightenment, if I may use that word. I went 4 years more or less believing (with questions) the OCT. It seems not quite fashionable here to ask questions, at least certain questions. Unless, of course, one uses the handle "Questionitall". That's OK for himself, but not others, or so it appears.

It became amusing, mate, AFTER the initial questions on my part. It became amusing when Q's thin skin became so obvious. Sometimes on the internet, with a discussion with total strangers through the cyber filter, I become faced with the option of laughing or crying over the responses some make. I try to laugh more often than cry, but it's close.

No sir, I'm not trying to make a deep impression on you or anybody else. I am trying only to have an honest discussion, and in the process I ask questions.

That you insist that the perps did not succeed makes you appear to be in some sort of denial about the last 10 years. I think the evidence is clear that the operation was an astounding success. The only failure I can see is that Rudi did not get the gold and silver bullion into his hot little hands.

The world is standing still? Jeez, at the risk of drawing fire, may I ask how you might explain that?

Let's be honest TM, if we may--you don't know me and I don't know you, right? So your statement that I have never attempted to do anything is based completely on ignorance of me and my life in the real world, or even in the cyber world.

Should I take a statement based upon ignorance seriously? I won't hold my breath waiting for your answer to that. Such a statement from a guy who (apparently) ACTUALLY BELIEVES that the US government is going to suddenly, after 10 years of lies and coverup, become honest and diligent regarding the prosecutions of the guilty. Puhleeze mate, get a grip. "Scales of Justice" LOL

I think I asked, and have not yet seen it answered (how unusual here): have you served in the military in Australia? In the US. Again, not holding my breath.

Somehow between you and Q, I'm reminded of Huck Finn's observation about faith: "Faith is when you believe something you know ain't true." It seems to me you have 'faith' in the american system, from all the way Down Under. Luv ya, mate.

laughing1.gif

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tamborine man
post Jul 11 2011, 01:44 AM
Post #57





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 892
Joined: 1-July 07
From: Australia
Member No.: 1,315



QUOTE (amazed! @ Jul 8 2011, 01:25 PM) *
TM

I'm not here trying to win friends and influence people. I make no claims to being any sort of researcher, other than reading as many accounts as I can, for my own enlightenment, if I may use that word. I went 4 years more or less believing (with questions) the OCT. It seems not quite fashionable here to ask questions, at least certain questions. Unless, of course, one uses the handle "Questionitall". That's OK for himself, but not others, or so it appears.


I'm sure you can ask as many questions as you like! Where/why you so miserably fall down, is by your determination to ignore the answers given to you,
and your refusal to address these answers in an honest way.

QUOTE
I am trying only to have an honest discussion, and in the process I ask questions.


See above!

QUOTE
That you insist that the perps did not succeed makes you appear to be in some sort of denial about the last 10 years. I think the evidence is clear that the operation was an astounding success.


Apparently you and i must have a completely different and opposite understanding about the meaning of the word "success".
It appears from the quote above, that you would equally describe the murder of millions by the likes of hitler, stalin, mao, pot pol etc., as an "astounding success".

Success: Favourable outcome; - A thing or person that turns out well.

It never turns out "well" for murderers. If the courts don't get them, we can always rely on Batman, Chuck Norris or Mr. Bond, and others, to finish the job.
If some should be 'lucky' enough to slip through the net, there's always the hidden law of Karma, to take care of the rest!

QUOTE
The world is standing still? Jeez, at the risk of drawing fire, may I ask how you might explain that?


Repeat: "The world is standing still, and wont move forward until 9/11, 7/7 and other nasty 'things' have been sorted!"

QUOTE
Let's be honest TM, if we may--you don't know me and I don't know you, right? So your statement that I have never attempted to do anything is based completely on ignorance of me and my life in the real world, or even in the cyber world.


If you were an honest man, you would have quoted me correctly.
This is what you're referring to, and what i wrote:
"You're not fooling anybody amazed. You have never "attempted" to do anything regarding 9/11, and never will.
Your contradictions, your duplicity and your lack of honesty tells a different story!"

QUOTE
Such a statement from a guy who (apparently) ACTUALLY BELIEVES that the US government is going to suddenly, after 10 years of lies and coverup, become honest and diligent regarding the prosecutions of the guilty. Puhleeze mate, get a grip. "Scales of Justice" LOL


Never said anything of the sort.

Again you're broadcasting your dishonesty in bright neon light for all to see.

QUOTE
I think I asked, and have not yet seen it answered (how unusual here): have you served in the military in Australia? In the US. Again, not holding my breath.


No. You have never asked me that question. think again, but harder this time!

I did my military service in my homecountry, like everybody else had to do in those days.

QUOTE
Somehow between you and Q, I'm reminded of Huck Finn's observation about faith: "Faith is when you believe something you know ain't true." It seems to me you have 'faith' in the american system, from all the way Down Under. Luv ya, mate.
laughing1.gif


It seems to me that you're alone talking to, and addressing yourself above, and nobody else.

Take care





Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Jul 11 2011, 09:13 AM
Post #58





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 3,885
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



TM

I assume you follow sports to one degree or another. If so, you understand that one team loses and the other team wins. Unless there is a tie.

Point being sir, success depends upon one's perspective. Point being, for those who planned and executed the events of the day, and for those who benefited from them, it was an astounding success. Consider: 2 wars, now going on 10 years, 1 new cabinet level bureau (DHS), legislation (the Unpatriot Act) that nullifies the Fourth Amendment, etc etc. I could go on, but a foreigner might not understand all the implications, especially one who viewing from the outside looking in believes that the Scales Of Justice are somehow enshrined and operative here in Amerika.

And good luck, waiting for Batman, mate. whistle.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tamborine man
post Jul 11 2011, 12:11 PM
Post #59





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 892
Joined: 1-July 07
From: Australia
Member No.: 1,315



QUOTE (amazed! @ Jul 9 2011, 12:13 PM) *
TM

I assume you follow sports to one degree or another. If so, you understand that one team loses and the other team wins. Unless there is a tie.

Point being sir, success depends upon one's perspective. Point being, for those who planned and executed the events of the day, and for those who benefited from them, it was an astounding success. Consider: 2 wars, now going on 10 years, 1 new cabinet level bureau (DHS), legislation (the Unpatriot Act) that nullifies the Fourth Amendment, etc etc. I could go on, but a foreigner might not understand all the implications, especially one who viewing from the outside looking in believes that the Scales Of Justice are somehow enshrined and operative here in Amerika.

And good luck, waiting for Batman, mate. whistle.gif



The 'scales of justice' do not only work for your benefit my dear fellow, but for the whole world.

True to form, you "forgot" to mention our dear friends, Chuck and Bond - which is so typical of you!

Have a good day


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DoYouEverWonder
post Jul 11 2011, 03:36 PM
Post #60





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 770
Joined: 1-February 09
Member No.: 4,096



Amazed,

I'm not sure what your purpose is here? But you rarely bring anything new or positive to the forum. Instead of trying to expose the truth about 9/11 based on your own reliably sourced research, it seems you'd rather tear apart everyone else's work instead. That's why folks are getting fed up with you. No matter how many different ways something is explained to you, you will ignore everything that doesn't fit in your version of the truth. You've been doing this for too many years and it's getting old.

Despite the above, I still think you're a decent person, and I know how painful and difficult it is for most people to accept what our own government did to us on 9/11, and that's probably why you continue to try to defend the indefensible.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

6 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 19th April 2014 - 10:30 AM