NSA Document Flight 93 intercepted coming soon

[ElMondoHummus]

And off he goes. Hey Ultima? Change that fryer grease and do hurry back. You've got some interesting questions to answer here.

What in God's name makes you think they trust him around the fryer??

 

[TJM]

What in God's name makes you think they trust him around the fryer??

He uploaded a transcript from McDonald University so it's gotta be true.

 

[Sparky]

(Believe it or not, I have read your old "journal" comments and so I know how this all began. But don't worry, I won't tell.)

Is this "journal" publicly available?

 

[The Big Dog]

The information on the NSA critic can be found on the internet with little research.

Also the letter from the FOIA office states the document does exist.

Also you can ask No Such Agency to look up the document in the NSA critic archives to verify the document does exist.

Oh, it is on the internet! That settles that.... rolls eyes.

Hey champ, I know something exists, if you has bothered to read anything I have freaking posted in this thread, you would see that I issued my own FOIA.

Now, why don't we all shut up until we actually get the response from the NSA, capiche?

 

[ElMondoHummus]

He uploaded a transcript from McDonald University so it's gotta be true.

Conceded.

 

[funk de fino]

So he was/is a security guard?

Or dad is.

 

[beachnut]

So wrong.

The 9/11 commission report states that no fighters were near any of the plane on 9/11.

The NSA document states that at least 1 plane was intercepted by fighters.

AS YOU CAN CLEARLY SEE THE NSA DOCUMENT COMPLETLY CONTRIDICTS THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT.

Please quote the 911CR and the NSA document.

Why did you lie about being an analyst at the NSA when you are a guard?

Please quote the 911CR and include the page number and please quote directly the NSA document.

 

[jaydeehess]

The information on the NSA critic can be found on the internet with little research.

Authors opining that such a doc exists can be found on the internet. So can authors who believe that they have created perpetual motion devices.

Also the letter from the FOIA office states the document does exist.

Once again I, and others, point out that the letter does not state that. It states that there is(are) documents pertaining to your FOIA inquiry. Once again I point out that the doc(S) may in fact describe fighter missions that failed to get any where near the aircraft in question.(flt 93 for eg.)

Also you can ask No Such Agency to look up the document in the NSA critic archives to verify the document does exist.

But YOU said it exists, you said you KNOW it exists. why then do you now demand that someone else prove your statements correct?

Fact is you do not know what is or isn't in any docuement until it is made public, and neither do any of the other internet denizens who claim they do.

 

[Checkmite]

So he was/is a security guard?

Or dad is.

I have a relative who is a security guard; specifically, he works for a security company contracted by the US Marshal Service to guard the Federal courthouse in Cleveland. In point of fact, he also had to attend FLETC in Georgia.

I remember him bringing back a binder with a photo section on improvised and concealed weapons that have been confiscated by agents recently; some of them were pretty wild.

 

[T.A.M.]

SO Ultima is back proclaiming news that will rock the world as we know it again..blah blah blah.

Put up or shut up Ultima. If you still do not have your authentic, proven to be valid document, then why are you here?

TAM

 

[ElMondoHummus]

Hell, there's nothing he can say, T.A.M. He only has room to demonstrate that a jet dodged radar and missed UA93. And like I've been telling him, that would presume that his information is indeed correct, which at this point is ridiculously far from being established.

He's got nothing that changes the overall narrative at all. The only thing he can do is add an interesting note about what the radar coverage didn't catch, nothing more. Sure as hell can't establish that FL93 was shot down, not by a long shot.

 

[T.A.M.]

He has done nothing to prove he is who he says he is, or to prove that the document he claims he will provide is valid (which i know he can not, and therefore will not).

Like I said many times before, if he is able to provide VALID (with legitimate documentation proving said validity) evidence that UA93 was shot down, i will leave the JREF, never to return.

I think my days here are not at risk.

TAM

 

[Gravy]

I haven't been following this idiocy, so can anyone tell me:

1) If Mr. Misner (Ultima1) has explained why he lied and claimed to be an "analyst" who works for the Office of Weapons and Space?

2) If Mr. Misner has explained how he came across this "classified document" that contains evidence that a major part of what we've been told about 9/11 is false? Why does he think the conspirators would let anyone, much less a security guard, see the document?

3) If Mr. Misner has explained why he did not seek protection under whistleblower statutes? After all, if true, this evidence and its cover-up is important, the conspirators need to be brought to justice, the pilot and crews involved in this mission need to be un-gagged, and this should be front-page news worldwide.

4) If Mr. Misner has explained why he chose to reveal on the internet what he believes to be the contents of this classified document, without having the document itself? Does he think the conspirators are so dumb that they won't destroy the evidence that he believes exists?

5) Has Mr. Misner indicated that he feels that he is in danger for attempting, however ineffectually, to reveal this cover-up?

 

[ihaunter]

So wrong.

The 9/11 commission report states that no fighters were near any of the plane on 9/11.

The NSA document states that at least 1 plane was intercepted by fighters.

AS YOU CAN CLEARLY SEE THE NSA DOCUMENT COMPLETLY CONTRIDICTS THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT.

I believe for accuracy this should read: (Additions in bold)

The 9/11 commission report states that no fighters were near any of the four hijacked planes on 9/11.
There were many planes in the air on 9/11
The NSA document supposedly states that at least 1 plane was intercepted by fighters.

AS YOU CAN CLEARLY SEE THE NSA DOCUMENT DOESN'T COMPLETLY CONTRIDICTS THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT.
​

Unless this document actually identifies the plane intercepted as one of the 4 hijacked planes, there is no contradiction.

 

[Sabrina]

I haven't been following this idiocy, so can anyone tell me:

1) If Mr. Misner (Ultima1) has explained why he lied and claimed to be an "analyst" who works for the Office of Weapons and Space?

2) If Mr. Misner has explained how he came across this "classified document" that contains evidence that a major part of what we've been told about 9/11 is false? Why does he think the conspirators would let anyone, much less a security guard, see the document?

3) If Mr. Misner has explained why he did not seek protection under whistleblower statutes? After all, if true, this evidence and its cover-up is important, the conspirators need to be brought to justice, the pilot and crews involved in this mission need to be un-gagged, and this should be front-page news worldwide.

4) If Mr. Misner has explained why he chose to reveal on the internet what he believes to be the contents of this classified document, without having the document itself? Does he think the conspirators are so dumb that they won't destroy the evidence that he believes exists?

5) Has Mr. Misner indicated that he feels that he is in danger for attempting, however ineffectually, to reveal this cover-up?

The answers to all five of your questions can be summed up in one short word. That being "no". He basically dodges the question every time we ask and refuses to understand that his actions have violated operational security and would, in many circumstances, be enough to completely revoke his security clearance, if he even has one, not to mention send him to jail for violating his nondisclosure agreement. But then, he only chooses to see what he wants to see.

 

[ULTIMA1]

I did not lie about being a analyst.

If you would have read and followed along any of the post i have made concerning my employment you would know that i was a federal police officer first and then an analyst.

Just proves my point that believers do not know whats going on.

 

[TJM]

We believe you have nothing.

 

[ULTIMA1]

I haven't been following this idiocy, so can anyone tell me:

1) If Mr. Misner (Ultima1) has explained why he lied and claimed to be an "analyst" who works for the Office of Weapons and Space?

I did not lie about being a analyst.

If you would have read and followed along any of the post i have made concerning my employment you would know that i was a federal police officer first and then an analyst.

Just proves my point that believers do not know whats going on.

2) If Mr. Misner has explained how he came across this "classified document" that contains evidence that a major part of what we've been told about 9/11 is false?

I have stated several times(if you wree following along) that the document is talked about on the interent and i have seen it and read the document. I have also sent a FOIA request for the unclassified version of the document.

3) If Mr. Misner has explained why he did not seek protection under whistleblower statutes? After all, if true, this evidence and its cover-up is important, the conspirators need to be brought to justice, the pilot and crews involved in this mission need to be un-gagged, and this should be front-page news worldwide.

Why do i need to seek protection? I am not a whistleblower just someone seeking the truth of what actually happened that day.

4) If Mr. Misner has explained why he chose to reveal on the internet what he believes to be the contents of this classified document, without having the document itself? Does he think the conspirators are so dumb that they won't destroy the evidence that he believes exists?

Sorry to disapoint you but there are no conspirators, only actual facts and evidence from the NSA citic document.

5) Has Mr. Misner indicated that he feels that he is in danger for attempting, however ineffectually, to reveal this cover-up?[/QUOTE]

WHAT COVER-UP?

 

[T.A.M.]

Put up or shut up Ultima. We have heard your claims, so unless you have something new to add, why don't you get busy getting your presentation of said document (with appropriate verification) ready.

Is there a reason why you continue to warn us of the impending documents, rather then just providing them?

And while you are at it, Mr. NSA Analyst, please obtain a dictionary, spell checker, and learn how to use the quote function properly.

TAM

 

[TJM]

Keep editing G-man, sooner or later you'll write the truth.