Title: Wizard of Oz Verified by using New Testament Verification Methods Source:
yt URL Source:[None] Published:Feb 13, 2011 Author:. Post Date:2011-02-13 08:25:16 by PSUSA Keywords:None Views:3828 Comments:63
Look how nice and neat and tidy my tagline is. Then look at yours. It's all big and messy and sloppy and reads like gobblydegook. Good heavens man, get a hold of yourself.
Notice how the Tinman didn't vanish or shape-shift much into mismatched parts when he crashed, like the "9/11 Fantastic Four planes" did? Here's where you'll probably want to say something pseudo-scientific to explain that like they just didn't make metal for those particular flying machines like they used to.
Notice how the Tinman didn't vanish or shape-shift much into mismatched parts when he crashed, like the "9/11 Fantastic Four planes" did? Here's where you'll probably want to say something pseudo-scientific to explain that like they just didn't make metal for those particular flying machines like they used to.
I have no idea what you are trying to say, but when you crash at about about 400-500 mph, there isn't much left of the parts, either of the plane or of the people aboard. It would be pseudo-scientific of me if I claimed otherwise.
I have no idea what you are trying to say, but when you crash at about about 400-500 mph, there isn't much left of the parts, either of the plane or of the people aboard. It would be pseudo-scientific of me if I claimed otherwise.
Are you trying to say that the Tinman would have vanished into the ground and/or morphed into some mismatched parts like the alleged planes in NY, D.C., and PA if he crashed at 400-500 mph? I hope not. Barbara Olson and Mark Bingham reportedly didn't mostly vanish like the alleged planes. In an investigation, they could be exhumed as evidence but that would be like spooky. I'm guessing that you don't want to reconsider that you could be mistaken about your faith- based planer belief-system and don't want to pursue any investigation into the black-market underworld of trafficking in dual-use plane parts, such as the QRS11 gyroscope for guided missle systems and whatnot that may have been "disappeared" there by the 9/11 "official" storyline. I do wonder why the planers (who are so sure of what they think they saw and have been told "from on high") haven't made any moves at all in nearly a decade to charge suspect perps with any criminality. Why waste more time sneering and jeering at No- Planers? It's not our job to perform the impossible and "prove a negative" 4 times, then race you to court in order to be "deemed" a serious and valid membership of the 9/11 Truth Movement. Truth and Justice aren't really the goal of planers. "Most Popular Narrative" is their goal and -- Newsflash -- we don't require their approval of our research and work to have a case that's on a different trail. It would be nice if we could do our investigations in peace but if your members can't be so courteous then I'd have to say that it doesn't help your so-called case any.
I'm guessing that you don't want to reconsider that you could be mistaken about your faith- based planer belief-system
There are any number of things that I could be mistaken about. This isn't one of them.
I do wonder why the planers (who are so sure of what they think they saw and have been told "from on high") haven't made any moves at all in nearly a decade to charge suspect perps with any criminality.
Interesting comment. You remind me of someone else here that will remain nameless. When you said "from on high", that tells me something. The people that saw the planes hit were not "elites".
And why haven't the "no planers" done this? You blame the "planers" for the lack of charges?
No one will be charged with this IN THE CURRENT POLITICAL SYSTEM. It is studiously ignored, and ignoring it is very effective.
Why waste more time sneering and jeering at No- Planers?
You seem to equate disagreement with "sneering and jeering". If you "no planers" want to believe this stuff, no problem. I'm not looking to convert anyone to different beliefs. All I did was point out why I don't believe it.
Truth and Justice aren't really the goal of planers.
But it is the goal of the "no planers"?
What's true can be obvious, but truth is much more elusive. Justice and truth are in the eye of the beholder.
There are any number of things that I could be mistaken about. This isn't one of them.
Maybe you didn't see one of my early posts here about the Military not going to DEFCON 1 that day -- meaning Imminent Attack or Attack In-Process. How would you explain that? All the big Brass there are corrupt?
Me: I do wonder why the planers (who are so sure of what they think they saw and have been told "from on high") haven't made any moves at all in nearly a decade to charge suspect perps with any criminality.
You: Interesting comment. You remind me of someone else here that will remain nameless. When you said "from on high", that tells me something. The people that saw the planes hit were not "elites".
I don't know what you think it tells you but I'm pretty sure I've used that phrase here before in 9/11 discussions and a number of times through the years outside of this forum. Do you know of someone who has like a monopoly claim to it? Overly generous of you, imo, to be so trusting of all alleged witnesses and presumptive of their social status too. I hope you don't really think that 9/11 hoaxers wouldn't go so far as to plant false testimonials about planes to advance their cover story and other plots like wars abroad. That would be naive. The planes meme serves as vehicles to designate Arabs as the enemy, for fraudullent insurance purposes, and so on. No Planes doesn't mean no heinous criminal insiders here. It could mean even more criminal insiders here that have been going unidentified and should be charged. I think they are using the planes congregants as unbeknownst getaway drivers.
And why haven't the "no planers" done this? You blame the "planers" for the lack of charges?
Dr. Judy Wood has filed legal cases against NIST, et al, and all the way to the Supreme Court from what I've read. Many No Planers support her. How many Planers do? About zero?
No one will be charged with this IN THE CURRENT POLITICAL SYSTEM. It is studiously ignored, and ignoring it is very effective.
See the comment above about Dr. Judy Wood.
You seem to equate disagreement with "sneering and jeering". If you "no planers" want to believe this stuff, no problem. I'm not looking to convert anyone to different beliefs. All I did was point out why I don't believe it.
I don't equate disagreement with sneering and jeering. It was your proclamation of our quests for 9/11 Truth and Justice as "100% unverifiable crap" that gave me that impression.
Me: Truth and Justice aren't really the goal of planers.
You: But it is the goal of the "no planers"?
The No Planers who are sincere about it and not deceptive infiltrators. What with all the extra flack in our direction, I'd estimate that there are many more who are sincerely with us than not and some who are but quietly.
What's true can be obvious, but truth is much more elusive. Justice and truth are in the eye of the beholder.
At a glance, that sounds eloquently philosophical and like a topic in itself but I have a less relativist view of those matters.
Overly generous of you, imo, to be so trusting of all alleged witnesses and presumptive of their social status too.
One thing I'm not, and that's being overly generous.
They're not "alleged witnesses". They're witnesses.
Interesting comment. You remind me of someone else here that will remain nameless. When you said "from on high", that tells me something. The people that saw the planes hit were not "elites".
I don't know what you think it tells you but I'm pretty sure I've used that phrase here before in 9/11 discussions and a number of times through the years outside of this forum.
Here's what it tells me. It tells me that you are evidently the type that would call for the date/time, and not believe what you're told because it's the "official" date and time.
Dr. Judy Wood has filed legal cases against NIST, et al, and all the way to the Supreme Court from what I've read. Many No Planers support her. How many Planers do? About zero?
And you say that I'm "presumptive"? lol
I don't equate disagreement with sneering and jeering. It was your proclamation of our quests for 9/11 Truth and Justice as "100% unverifiable crap" that gave me that impression.
Saying it is unverifiable crap is not sneering and jeering. It's stating a fact. When pressed for any proof, all you have are motives that you assign to others. You have presented no proof that there were no planes.
The No Planers who are sincere about it and not deceptive infiltrators.
I don't doubt the sincerity. But being sincere about something, and being RIGHT, are 2 different things. You can be sincerely wrong. You HAVE been sincerely wrong in the past, haven't you??? Or maybe you're one of those lucky few that are always right?
Saying it is unverifiable crap is not sneering and jeering. It's stating a fact. When pressed for any proof, all you have are motives that you assign to others. You have presented no proof that there were no planes.
It's not a fact, just your opinion. Have you answered any of my questions yet? I have, despite your presumptuous and unreceptive banter, presented you with verifiable evidence examples on important issues: 1. Dual-use plane parts, which Boeing has been charged with illegal-trafficking in more than 100 times and I have no problem to date with the official reports about that, as you suggested. 2. DEFCON status that day. 3. Dr. Judy Woods' legal cases. It is you who has shown no actual evidence. What you call proof is just a guv- issued story with some mismatched plane parts, a cast of supposed testimonials that you believe because they and some "bigwigs" say so, and some pics and videos that have largely been debunked numerous times -- in short, a faith-based belief system. If 9/11 Truth and Justice were of real concern to you, further investigations by No Planers that might find perps and more perps and other crimes like Insurance Fraud that your group isn't pursing at all shouldn't rile you so to slurs like "crap" and "idiocy" and such.
I don't doubt the sincerity. But being sincere about something, and being RIGHT, are 2 different things. You can be sincerely wrong. You HAVE been sincerely wrong in the past, haven't you??? Or maybe you're one of those lucky few that are always right?
What do those 3 questions have to do with the 'no planes' hitting the WTC? Nothing. Not one thing.
The pentagon and WTC 7 are a different story. But WTC 1 and 2 were hit by planes, and none of you have presented any proof that they weren't.
What you call proof is just a guv- issued story with some mismatched plane parts, a cast of supposed testimonials that you believe because they and some "bigwigs" say so, and some pics and videos that have largely been debunked numerous times
What I call proof? OK, what do YOU call proof? Your just saying it does not make it so.
However, do feel free to start a thread on this. I'd dearly love to see how these pics and vids were 'debunked numerous times'. It should make for some lively conversation.