2
   

Experts Claim Official 9-11 Story is a Hoax ! FINALLY!

 
 
Amigo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jul, 2006 02:12 pm
http://www.911proof.com/
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Jul, 2006 07:07 pm
General States Plane Did not Hit Pentagon

YouTube | July 24 2006

9/11 was an inside job, with many false and vicous things happening that day. Here we have a Retired General stating a plane did not hit the pentagon. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2VoUN-7RVU&eurl=
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Jul, 2006 08:45 pm
[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Stubblebine]Wikipedia, discussing Major General Albert Stubblebine III[/url] wrote:
Major General Albert Stubblebine III was the commanding general of the US Army Intelligence and Security Command from 1981 to 1984. He is known for his interest in parapsychology, and was a strong supporter of the Stargate Project.


[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parapsychology]Wikipedia, discussing Parapsychology[/url] wrote:
Parapsychology is the study of mental awareness or influence of external objects without interaction from known physical means. Most objects of study fall within the realm of "mind-to-mind" influence (such as extra-sensory perception, folie a deux and telepathy), "mind-to-environment" influence (such as psychokinesis) and "environment-to-mind" (such as hauntings). Collectively, these abilities are often referred to as "psionics".


From the Wikipedia article on the Stargate Project:

"Major General Albert Stubblebine: A key sponsor of the research internally at Fort Meade, he was convinced of the reality of a wide variety of psychic phenomena, leading him to even attempt to walk through walls."



Yes, I think he sounds like the perfect spokesman for your theories, BF. He is, after all a retired General ...... a retired General who believes in mind control and psychic powers over physical objects, and even attempted to walk through walls. Indeed, he sounds like someone we should all listen to.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jul, 2006 03:46 am
Laughing Seriously Tico: doesn't the good General seem a good bit more coherent than blueflame1, Amigo, Magginkat, JTT and/or freedom4freeĀ… combined?

http://www.danshistory.com/ah6.jpg
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jul, 2006 08:52 am
It's hardly a revelation that the DOD and American intelligence study parapsychology. And there's nothing new to the revelation that the hole in the Pentagon and the size of the airliner dont add up. But the question millions of Americans want answered is how come no scramble and how could the Pentagon get hit an hour after the WTC? Every General should demand an answer to that question.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jul, 2006 09:55 am
Blueflame, a few pages back was a very well crafted debunking of your "No plane hit the Pentagon" crap. If you live in such a fantasy world that no amount of evidence will suffice , then I submit you should be on Art Bells "Elvis is on a UFO" line.
I googled "9/11 timeline" and I was surprised at how many really hysterical 9/11 conspiracy sites there are. These have no idea what a timeline is . Heres one from National Geographic9/11 TIMELINE {WITHOUT ALL THE HYSTERIA}.
Youve apparently got no idea that, even if fighters from Otis were scrambled after the first plane hit WTC,
1they didnt know which direction to fly

2they didnt really know that it was a terrorist act until the second tower was hit.

# It would take almost a half our at afterburner speed to intercept anything over DC.

Now, I understand we keep interceptors at other bases like Dover and Oceana and Atlantic City. However thats Monday morning game playing
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jul, 2006 10:16 am
Ticomaya wrote:
and even attempted to walk through walls.
Laughing ah but does anyone know if he succeeded ?
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jul, 2006 10:37 am
farmerman, just because I post the General's statement dont mean I agree with him. His statement is news that's important enough to consider. More than anything it proves there are questions that need answering. I have no idea if a plane or a missile hit the Pentagon. I do know there are legit reasons to question the government's theory. Reasons raised by competent individuals. The one thing that's most obvious is the need for new investigations. And again I'll say one thing that bothers me most about the Pentagon hit is that there was such a long lapse between the WTC strikes and the Pentagon strike without a scramble. Mienta's testimony is troubling as is the way it was shuffled aside by the 911 Commission.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jul, 2006 10:52 am
blueflame1 wrote:
I have no idea if a plane or a missile hit the Pentagon.
I find this statement intriguing. Was it a plane or a missile that hit both wtc buildings? How is it possible to have any doubt? Do people not know the difference between a missile and a jet passenger aircraft? How is it possible for such apparant confusion to arise in the first place?
0 Replies
 
Amigo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jul, 2006 10:59 am
You guys are clowns.

--------------------------------------------

Major General Albert N. Stubblebine III (U.S. Army, Retired)

Bert is a graduate of the U.S. Military Academy (West Point, class of 52) who enjoyed a distinguished 32 year career in the U.S. Army. He retired as the Commanding General of the United States Army Intelligence and Security Command (INSCOM). Prior to this assignment he commanded the US Army Electronics Research and Development Command (ERADCOM). During his active duty career he commanded soldiers at every level. After his retirement he served as the VP for Intelligence Systems with BDM, a major defense contractor. He has brought these experiences to leading-edge medical research and development in collaboration with his wife Rima E. Laibow, M.D.

He is a long-term out-of-the-box thinker who redesigned the U.S. Army?s Intelligence Architecture while serving as the Commanding General of the U.S. Army?s Intelligence School and Center. This intelligence restructuring earned him his place in the Intelligence Hall of Fame.

Among his other accomplishments, he participated in a special task force which defined the requirements of the U.S. Army for future conflict. Many of the innovations he developed helped the U.S. to conduct the First Gulf War effectively and swiftly with a very low casualty rate.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jul, 2006 11:06 am
Amigo wrote:
You guys are clowns.


If you have a problem with the Wikipedia entries, take it up with the Wikipedia folks.
0 Replies
 
Amigo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jul, 2006 11:16 am
Theres nothing wrong with the wikipedia entry.

I do see something wrong with somebody reducing a man with those credentials as somebody walking into walls. Not to mention the people that jump on the band wagon.

Here is another Wiki entry;

Character assassination

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Character assassination is an intentional attempt to influence the portrayal or reputation of a particular person, whether living or a historical personage, in such a way as to cause others to develop an extremely negative, unethical or unappealing perception of him or her. By its nature, it involves deliberate exaggeration or manipulation of facts to present an untrue picture of the targeted person. For living individuals, this can cause the target to be rejected by his or her community, family, or members of his or her living or work environment. Such acts are typically very difficult to reverse or rectify, therefore the process is correctly likened to a literal assassination of a human life. The damage sustained can be life-long and more, or for historical personages, last for many centuries after their death.

Character suicide; see Ticomaya
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jul, 2006 12:06 pm
Amigo wrote:
Here is another Wiki entry;

Character assassination

It's not character assassination when one relates the truth about someone else, even if that truth is particularly embarrassing. Rather, it's more along the lines of an ad hominem argument. Much like this:

Amigo wrote:
You guys are clowns


To be sure, the fact that General Stubblebine attempted to walk through a wall does not mean that he is necessarily wrong about his contentions regarding 9-11. Indeed, there is always the possibility that the general is one of those singular individuals who, despite the overwhelming weight of contrary evidence, can show that 9-11 was a government conspiracy and that people can walk through solid walls.
0 Replies
 
Amigo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jul, 2006 01:03 pm
I dissagree. You don't see a deliberate exageration by Tico? It is both character assasination and Ad hominem.

Particularly embarrassing to whom? Major General Albert Stubblebine?

Who here can speak on Parapsychology?

Yes, they are clowns.

------------------------

exaggeration 1. the act of making something more noticeable than usual 2. making to seem more important than it really is.

Character assassination is an intentional attempt to influence the portrayal or reputation of a particular person, whether living or a historical personage, in such a way as to cause others to develop an extremely negative, unethical or unappealing perception of him or her. By its nature, it involves DELIBERATE EXAGGERATION.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jul, 2006 02:11 pm
I understand that the parapsychology programs of the DOD were sort of shut down, why? cause they didnt produce anything.

AS far as the question whether the Pentagon was hit by a jet, somebody went through a lot of trouble(as youd have seen fdrom photos in the previous pages) to quickly "salt the ground and the interior od the building with 737 parts. Also, the hole in the building is big enough for a jetliner with most of its wings still intact. Two engines were found outside the building indicating that the engines and wings hit the ground. However the wheels and a number of other fuselage pieces (including the black boxes) were found inside the Pentagon.
Then there is the issue of all the "planted " witnesseswho all were lying (in going with your theory) because they all sawa 737 flying into the building.


PS they interviewed the Loiseaux family member who commented about the WTC dropping. He stated that his was not an opinion about what he thought happened, he merely stated that the building dropped the "way we always try to make em drop during a controlled implosion" Theres a big difference between that and what the "9/11FT" bozos want to publish.
Now we have 3 pieces of crap from them
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jul, 2006 02:44 pm
farmerman wrote:
I understand that the parapsychology programs of the DOD were sort of shut down, why? cause they didnt produce anything.

AS far as the question whether the Pentagon was hit by a jet, somebody went through a lot of trouble(as youd have seen fdrom photos in the previous pages) to quickly "salt the ground and the interior od the building with 737 parts. Also, the hole in the building is big enough for a jetliner with most of its wings still intact. Two engines were found outside the building indicating that the engines and wings hit the ground. However the wheels and a number of other fuselage pieces (including the black boxes) were found inside the Pentagon.
Then there is the issue of all the "planted " witnesseswho all were lying (in going with your theory) because they all sawa 737 flying into the building.


PS they interviewed the Loiseaux family member who commented about the WTC dropping. He stated that his was not an opinion about what he thought happened, he merely stated that the building dropped the "way we always try to make em drop during a controlled implosion" Theres a big difference between that and what the "9/11FT" bozos want to publish.
Now we have 3 pieces of crap from them
gosh farmer, you mean they found bits of a 737? thats proof for me. Which bits?
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jul, 2006 02:45 pm
ok you said engines. easily identifiable. Please relate some numbers.
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jul, 2006 02:52 pm
Somebody must have pictures. Anybody?
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jul, 2006 03:19 pm
Condi Rice, "No one could have imagined them taking a plane, slamming it into the Pentagon". Lies like that make a lot of people wonder. We had long been wary of such an attack. An exercise held on 911 to test our preparedness for a plane flying into a building is one reason given for a lack of a scramble.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jul, 2006 03:53 pm
joefromchicago wrote:
Indeed, there is always the possibility that the general is one of those singular individuals who, despite the overwhelming weight of contrary evidence, can show that 9-11 was a government conspiracy and that people can walk through solid walls.
Laughing Laughing Laughing
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 07/25/2021 at 12:25:59