Mobertermy's Pentagon Evidence

Well now that he has been suspended he will have time to go back and correct his PPT

Anyone betting that he does?
 
Mobertermy said:
They said they were set up to fail.
Click to expand...

I'm not aware of any quote in which they say, without qualification, that "The 9/11 Commission was set up to fail". As you can see from the quote I posted, they said that other people thought they were set up to fail, and I'm aware of them having said that it felt as if they'd been set up to fail. You may choose to ignore the distinction, but it is real, and we are all aware of it.

Dave
 
sheeplesnshills said:
Well now that he has been suspended he will have time to go back and correct his PPT

Anyone betting that he does?
Click to expand...

No public notice yet. I hope he doesn't get more than a week. He hasn't replied to some posts yet where his attention was requested.
 
Oystein said:
No public notice yet. I hope he doesn't get more than a week. He hasn't replied to some posts yet where his attention was requested.
Click to expand...


yeah I want him to post the statements that prove that McGraw saw the Poles NoC. Not holding my breath though :D
 
Mobertermy - Suspended

:dl:

I warned him!

Mobertermy, I know you're reading this, even though you got yourself suspended.

All I can say is: I TOLD YA SO! :p
 
Dave Rogers said:
I'm not aware of any quote in which they say, without qualification, that "The 9/11 Commission was set up to fail". As you can see from the quote I posted, they said that other people thought they were set up to fail, and I'm aware of them having said that it felt as if they'd been set up to fail. You may choose to ignore the distinction, but it is real, and we are all aware of it.

Dave
Click to expand...

That reminded me of something. Truthers aren't big on understanding simile. It sounded like a bomb went off. It's looked like an intentional demolition, like you see in Las Vegas. It sounded like a freight train. It's as if the plane dropped off its passengers before it hit the ground.

As ever.

Someone could spend time learning about simile, or perspective while on suspension. That would be useful.
 
 
Obviousman said:
Here we go - typical twoofer behaviour from that intellectual peon, Jim Fetzer: if it refutes you, claim it is faked.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=17284

If you can't see the images, they are here (CAUTION - Graphic images)

...
Click to expand...
.
The dumb sumbitch is another no-planer.
ISTR he's equally at sea about JFK.
Captions on those images would be proper, pointing to passenger seats, etc.
With possibly DNA information confirming those corpses were passengers on AA 77.
 
Mobertermy said:
All of the witnesses they interviewed were also interviewed by the military and Library of Congress...all interviewees essentially said same thing to CIT and mainstream gov't sources. So that would mean all these witnesses would have to be lying to put the plane somewhere other than the Official flightpath...what would the purpose of such a disinfo operation be?
Click to expand...
Mobertermy said:
CIT interviewed all known the witnesses in the area...they didn't just pick and choose. You are trying to bring in witnesses that were pretty far from the Citgo...why stop there? Maybe you can find some West Virginian SoC witnesses too.
Click to expand...

DGM said:
Then why did the settle on just the ones they did? You are aware there was many more witnesses then they feature.
Click to expand...

Mobertermy said:
If you want to talk about this could we move it to the other thread?
Click to expand...

OK, Can you answer the question?
 
Last edited:
Yea, I forgot we have this thread. I have a similar question for Mobertermy: are the list of NoC witnesses that you and CIT present the ONLY witnesses to have seen the plane that day? If not, did CIT interview them? If so, why aren't they on CITs witness list?
 
There of course is a fatal flaw in CITs dismissal of the impact witnesses due to CITs imagined "shock and awe special effect explosion" designed to "fool the witnesses" and "disguise a flyover". There is nothing forward of the wings and fuselage tanks that can explode, This can be compared to the many flight 175 WTC impact videos, And can be confirmed by Pentagon witness testimony describing the plane as sliding into the Pentagon wall up to the wings and then exploding. I also have to laugh at CITs dismissal of south of citgo witnesses who couldn't actually see the impact due to a tree off route 27 blocking their view of the facade. Do they expect us to believe a vertical take off and flyover when flight 77 reached the lawn? Are there trees that tower over the pentagon in that area? :dl:
 
twinstead said:
Yea, I forgot we have this thread. I have a similar question for Mobertermy: are the list of NoC witnesses that you and CIT present the ONLY witnesses to have seen the plane that day? If not, did CIT interview them? If so, why aren't they on CITs witness list?
Click to expand...

I hate to bump threads, but I'm honestly curious about this
 
twinstead said:
I hate to bump threads, but I'm honestly curious about this
Click to expand...

To the question - no many people saw the plane...including people when it took off...should we interview them too?

As far as I can gather they interviewed all known witnesses to its final moments.

I keep seeing people bring up 395 witnesses and use them as SoC witnesses. They are neither SoC or NoC witnesses anymore than someone in West Virginia can be an NoC or SoC witness.
 
DGM said:
And you believe this because..........................?

You really need to learn how to complete a thought.
Click to expand...


Um, you asked me if I thought everyone involved in that report was in on it. My answer is no, I don't think everyone involved in that report had to be in on it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom