| Welcome! You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| RKOwens4, up for no-plane @ Shanksville debate? | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Feb 6 2008, 07:55 PM (895 Views) | |
| Killtown | Feb 6 2008, 07:55 PM Post #1 |
Childish Hypocrite
|
I was having a no-plane at Shanksville debate with Chippy, but he withdrew because of "time constraints" (i.e. he was getting spanked). It will be a moderated debate just between you and me. Choose a neutral place, or we can have it right here since I'm not very popular either at this forum. Game? |
 |
 
|
| Terral | Feb 7 2008, 08:56 AM Post #2 |
|
911Truther
|
Hi Killtown with Dylan mentioned:
This sounds funny coming from a guy that gags more 911Truthers than perhaps everyone else combined. When Killtown runs out of Pentagon arguments, then he deletes threads and hides arguments against his nonsense and stupidity. Killtown’s growing sandbox, purgatory, banning list is here, where I have been setting in purgatory (heh) since last November. Killtown deleted my equivalent of this LC “Two Attack” Post from his 911Movement Pentagon Forum, which you can verify by simply clicking on the link he posted in his ridiculous sand box post. This guy plays Site Developer, Admin, Moderator, Debating Opponent, Judge, Jury and Executioner all at the same time, then wonders why he is not a very popular guy around here. I have not seen such overbearing nonsense and stupidity from two supposed 911Truthers (these guys are a joke) than Killtown and Webfairy who must micromanage every sliver of member content to make their nonsense halfway believable. These jerks forbid members to have signatures, so they simply deleted the signature of everyone to control member content like in a Nazi prison. Zoomer had to ask the question, “Where have all the threads gone for this forum?,” because Killtown and Webfairy constantly delete/move/alter member posts anytime they wish. That means any ‘links’ we place in other posts to our work there simply become broken, because these 911Truth pretenders have no regard for member content at all. NONE. When I start a Pentagon thread in the LC Pentagon Forum, then that thread continues to have the same URL identity assigned from the very beginning, because these LC visionaries ‘do’ respect member content and allow all sides to present their cases on a level playing field. Hashem Yeshua had to ask a question about “Signature Censorship,” to which Killtown replies,
Can anyone here imagine Dylan sending the message to his moderators to delete the signature of every LC registered member, because someone might flame someone else? :0) And then this Killtown character has the gall to pretend someone has their hand over HIS MOUTH with is stupid avatar? ? :0) The date on the complaining post is November 4, 2007, as my sandboxing (heh) was done on November 1, 2007 and this picture was linked inside my signature. The reason for all of this activity is explained here on a Loose Change Thread that Killtown could not delete. This Killtown guy is one of the most despicable hypocrites parading himself as a leader of the 911Movement, when the truth is that he cares nothing about what really hit the Pentagon any more than our do-nothing Congress. We already know Flight 93 Never Crashed Anywhere Near Shanksville, but instead of simply posting his thesis paper, Killtown comes to this Skeptics room to play his foolish games. This empty hole tells the story, so pretending you are in possession of some magnanimous revelation about Flight 93 is just more Killtown nonsense. He must come over to the LC Board to play these games, because anyone with opposing views on his board is silenced, sandboxed, sent to purgatory forever or shown the cotton picking door. Hey Killtown! What really hit the Pentagon at 9:32 AM? Where is your rebuttal to one word of my Opening Post? :0) I challenge you to put up or shut up, IF you even have the gonads to show up to the debate (which I doubt). You should crawl back into your 911Movement hole where you ‘can’ micromanage member content to hide your own embarrassment and shame. GL, Terral Edited by Terral, Feb 7 2008, 09:00 AM.
|
|
|
|
| Gideon524 | Feb 7 2008, 02:52 PM Post #3 |
Oh, you didn't know?
|
Terral, take it down a notch, man. We're not going to turn this into a forum bashing. As long as people behave themselves and abide by the rules, they will be treated respectfully. |
|
|
|
| Killtown | Feb 7 2008, 03:02 PM Post #4 |
|
Childish Hypocrite
|
Terral, feel free to call me out on your own thread. Then we'll see who's really stupid. |
|
|
|
| Killtown | Feb 7 2008, 04:09 PM Post #5 |
|
Childish Hypocrite
|
Btw, I heard a rumor that the reason Chippy isn't debunking anymore is because he doesn't believe Flight 93 crashed in Shanksville anymore. (Shhh.) |
|
|
|
| Killtown | Feb 8 2008, 01:46 AM Post #6 |
|
Childish Hypocrite
|
Oh RKOwens4? |
|
|
|
| Killtown | Feb 8 2008, 03:54 PM Post #7 |
|
Childish Hypocrite
|
Is RKOwens4 running? |
|
|
|
| RKOwens4 | Feb 8 2008, 06:56 PM Post #8 |
|
I would love to have a debate with you. I was already having a debate with Terral, who failed to discredit a single piece of evidence I gave to him and abruptly left the debate some days ago (ie, because he was getting spanked). I'll present the same points to you that I presented to him: 1.) 95% of the plane was recovered in Shanksville. 2.) 37 calls were made from the plane by passengers telling their loved ones that the plane had been hijacked and that they were going to try to retake the plane. Despite the fact that it is indeed unlikely for cell phone calls to work above 30,000 feet, only 2 of the calls were made from cell phones (the rest were from airphones), and both cell phone calls were made at 9:58 when the plane was less than 2,000 feet above the ground, and both were abruptly dropped less than 2 minutes later when the hijackers made a sudden ascent up to 10,000 feet. 3.) The cockpit voice recorder recorded the sounds of the passengers attempting to break into the cockpit and the hijackers' decision to put the plane into the ground. 4.) The flight data recorder details the plane's flight path all the way from the airport in Newark to its crash in Shanksville. 5.) The DNA of every passenger and all 4 hijackers was recovered at the crash scene. 6.) Air traffic controllers tracked the plane all the way until it crashed in Shanksville and heard several transmissions from Flight 93 by the pilots yelling "Mayday" and "Get out of here" and from the hijackers that there was a bomb on board. 7.) Hijacker ID documents as well as drivers licenses from two of the passengers were recovered at the crash scene. 8.) The main body of the impact crater was measured at about 20 feet wide, consistent with Flight 93's (a 757) body of 12 feet, 4 inches wide impacting the ground at a steep angle, and has indentations from the wings and tail. 9.) The interior of the crater was scorched black from burned jet fuel. The wing indentations are also scorched black ending at the exact points where the wing fuel tanks came to an end. The trees overhead were also stripped of their limbs and blackened. Several of the investigators described picking up the smell of jet fuel immediately upon arriving at the scene. 10.) Dozens of reliable eyewitnesses saw the plane crash in Shanksville. One of them, Val McClatchey, photographed the resulting mushroom cloud of black smoke, which was certified by the FBI as authentic after analyzing her camera's memory card. These are my ten points. In order for you to support your position (which I'm assuming is that the plane did not crash in Shanksville), the burden of proof is on you to prove beyond a reasonable that ALL ten of these points are invalid, and then provide evidence proving your theory beyond a reasonable doubt. Let me make it very clear from the beginning, before we get into this debate, that simply saying "I believe the FBI is lying. I believe the air traffic controllers were lying. I believe the eyewitnesses were lying." WILL NOT suffice as evidence. You can have this opinion, but without evidence it's JUST an opinion. You can make the claim that the FDR data was faked, but without evidence backing up this theory, it's just a theory. This thread was started by you asking for a logical debate, and I'm happy to have as long as you stick to using logical forms of evidence in support of your claims, and not just saying "Well that person was a government shill and such and such was faked." If you're going to say that something was faked, you are required to give proof. I can accuse you of being a government shill, but without evidence it would just be a opinion of mine. If you begin using these arguments, saying that my evidence was lies or faked but without evidence, it will become immediately clear that you're just another conspiracist with plenty of theories but no evidence. In order to win a debate you need more than just theories and accusations. So in closing, DO NOT simply tell me that the eyewitnesses were lying and the evidence was faked unless you have evidence of it. |
|
|
|
| Killtown | Feb 8 2008, 08:23 PM Post #9 |
|
Childish Hypocrite
|
Sweet. I was envisioning the same kind of debate I had with your boy Chippy (say, where is he these days?). We have our own thread with a selected moderator. One person presents a piece of evidence and we'll debate that piece of evidence until it gets resolved and agree to move on to the next which the other person gets to present. You can choose where you'd like to hold it, as long as it not at a forum where they allow constant personal attack. Sound good? |
|
|
|
| RKOwens4 | Feb 8 2008, 09:30 PM Post #10 |
|
I thought we'd agreed to just have the debate here. I presented my argument and am waiting for your rebuttal. |
|
|
|
| Reddawn | Feb 8 2008, 10:07 PM Post #11 |
|
You started the thread Killtown. Do it here. The mods here aren't under your thumb like where you usually choose to debate. What are you afraid of? |
|
|
|
| Killtown | Feb 9 2008, 03:01 AM Post #12 |
|
Childish Hypocrite
|
I was thinking of having an exclusive thread between you and I here (or where ever) without LIeHOPers like Reddawn butting in. Each of us presents one piece of evidence at a time. Game? |
|
|
|
| outside | Feb 9 2008, 11:58 AM Post #13 |
|
Need a referee? |
|
|
|
| Terral | Feb 9 2008, 03:02 PM Post #14 |
|
911Truther
|
Hi RK:
Bullony. This guy points to an empty hole with grass growing on all the inclines and calls that a crashed 100-Ton Jetliner. How does this Jetliner fit into that little hole? :0) Does RK have a Flight 93 Thread started on the Shanksville Forum where he is defending his "Flight 93 Crashed Into This Empty Hole" explanations? No. If this guy was serious, then he would have done that before now. Waste time on this RK character if that makes you happy. GL, Terral Edited by Terral, Feb 9 2008, 03:03 PM.
|
|
|
|
| Domenick DiMaggio | Feb 10 2008, 02:53 PM Post #15 |
|
We'll go point by point. Since you've made the first extraordinary claim it is upon you to provide extraordinary evidence. 1) Proof? 2) Where was the "95%" of the plane" taken to? 3) Photos or Video showing "95% of the plane" in a hangar somewhere? |
|
|
|
| RKOwens4 | Feb 10 2008, 05:12 PM Post #16 |
|
This is getting weird. You asked for a debate, Killtown, so I presented my argument and have been waiting for 2 or 3 days now for you to respond. It should have been obvious when I presented my case here that I was intending to have the debate here (this is as good a place as any), then you asked if I was sure and I said yes, then you asked me again if I was sure I wanted to have the debate here. This has been going on for days and is getting silly. Do you have response to my argument or not? As for you Terral, you've demonstrated in your last thread that you have no intention of rationally defending your claims, even when I've disproven them, and instead resort to name calling and repeating that "the hole is too small!" (even though I've given you the exact diameter of the plane's body, 12 feet 4 inches, which is entirely consistent with the plane hitting at a steep angle as it did and creating a 20 foot wide hole, minus the wing and tail imprints) and other debate loser tactics. I've presented these same ten claims to you in your other thread. You haven't responded to a single one of them. You're asking me over and over again "how does this jetliner fit into that tiny hole?" even though I've shown you again and again that it not only fits, but with room to spare. I'm done repeating simple facts and elementary math to you. I'll debate Killtown here, but you have lost your debate, so please keep your kindergarden math (and pre-school spelling of "bullony") out of this thread. Domenick, thanks for a logical response. 1.) The FBI announced it upon the completion of their field investigation in Shanksville in late September, 2001. Here's a CNN report: http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/24/inv.pennsylvania.site/index.html 2.) The debris was examined by the FBI for signs of explosives (they determined there were no signs), and then handed over to United Airlines, except for the two black boxes which went to the NTSB. The victims' personal effects went to their family members. 3.) Below are some of the individual pieces collected together. We will never see Flight 93 pieced back together again in a hangar somewhere, as we did with TWA 800. That plane crashed into the ocean remained in big enough pieces for intestigators to piece back together. As we can see from the photos of Flight 93, which crashed at a steep angle into the ground, it would be impossible to piece it back together.   I won't turn this post into a picture gallery by overwhelming it with photos, but there are literally hundreds of photos of debris from all parts of the plane. If you're going to say "Why not photos of it in a hangar?", then why don't photos of it in the field where it originally ended up suffice? Wouldn't it be easier for the debris to have been "planted" in a secure hangar than out in the open? |
|
|
|
| Killtown | Feb 10 2008, 07:34 PM Post #17 |
|
Childish Hypocrite
|
Yes it is getting silly because you never agreed to the conditions of my proposed debate, you just started debating. Here are my conditions again: 1) A restricted thread between just you and me. 2) A moderator. 3) One piece of evidence presented at a time and that piece debated until it is resolved, or both agree to move on to the next piece of evidence. Do you agree to those conditions, or not? |
|
|
|
| Domenick DiMaggio | Feb 10 2008, 09:54 PM Post #18 |
|
1) An announcement from the FBI isn't suffice for me. Over the years I have seen many different Federal sources tell me something was so only in time to find something was not (i.e. WMD) to just take someone's word. That is an amazing claim that they recovered over 95% of the plane. There to date is not enough evidence to support that amount of a plane was actually recovered though. 2) Oh, that's fascinating. Please explain this then for the rest of us : What did UA do with the 95% of the recovered Flight 93? 3) You can't "overwhelm" this thread with debris photos because it is impossible to. The fact of the matter is that the FBI set up stations in Shanksville, Indian Lake, & New Baltimore. In fact, they closed off the town of New Baltimore on 9/11. Sommerset Hospital was told to be prepared to receive possible victims from 2 separate plane crashes. Many residents of Indian Lake collected the type of debris shown in the second photo you posted. There was a trail of debris spread for miles..... Source
Ron lives in Freidens, PA. His property is nearly 3 miles southwest of the crash site.
David Scott who lives on Causway Dr also in Freidens, Pa is over 3.5 miles south of the crash site.
Indian Lake is 2.5 miles from the crash site to the southeast. How could people that far away witness the event?
What could be the cause of the flickering lights pre-impact? How could they have heard the plane overhead if the plane had never flown that far southeast of the crash site?
How is it possible for so much debris to be blown over such a large area and yet no debris whatsoever is present in the air during the initial explosion as photographed by Val McClatchey? If debris was blown there why would it be "raining down" on Indian Lake moments later? And how far could the debris have blown in less than a minute given the weather conditions of that day?
How could human remains turn up at Indian Lake? And if you don't believe human remains were recovered from Indian Lake then what was Coroner Wally Miller photographing there at the second site he mentions in the phone call with Jeff Hill? Edited by Domenick DiMaggio, Feb 10 2008, 09:56 PM.
|
|
|
|
| RKOwens4 | Feb 12 2008, 05:09 PM Post #19 |
|
You never created any condition in your original thread about presenting one piece of evidence at a time, nor would I have agreed to that if you had. That's something you came up with later after reading my argument and, I'm guessing, realized it was a solid argument hard for you to respond to. In a court case, the prosecutor or defendant present whatever and every piece of evidence he/she has. Even if we only spent a few days arguing about one piece of evidence, it would take a month to get through all ten points I listed, which is ridiculous. Just number your rebuttals 1-10 so it'll be clear which point you're responding to. Quick, easy. Why can't you defend you claims? Secondly, you asked if I'd like to have it here or in a private forum, and I chose here. Why would you want to have it in a private thread between just me and you? So no one else can see your shortcomings? Let me remind you that YOU private messaged me "challenging" me to a debate. I agreed and presented my side of the argument. Nearly a week later and you've yet to challenge a single piece of evidence I've presented. Can you or not? If I don't hear some kind of response from you concerning this United Flight 93 debate, I'll take that as a forefeight. |
|
|
|
| Killtown | Feb 12 2008, 06:11 PM Post #20 |
|
Childish Hypocrite
|
1) Ok then, a simple decline to my offer is all you had to say. Don't know why it took you so long to say that. 2) It's was the same format as my debate with Chippy, so next time I recommend you don't guess about these things in order to prevent yourself from looking ignorant. 3) Um, no dumbass. I never said to have it on a private forum where non-registered people couldn't view our debate. If you could read, I suggested we have our own exclusive thread that we could only post on. 4) You agreed and started without even wondering if I had any conditions of the debate. A person with common courtesy (something sorely lacking in most JFERs) would have asked the person offering the challenge if there were any conditions. 5) First of all, get off your high-horse. You've declined my challenge, so I'll respond to your posts at my leisure. |
|
|
|
| Killtown | Feb 12 2008, 06:20 PM Post #21 |
|
Childish Hypocrite
|
Tell you what RKOwens4, why don't you start a separate thread in this Skeptics section with your 10-point presentation since this thread is now moot. |
|
|
|
| RKOwens4 | Feb 12 2008, 06:47 PM Post #22 |
|
Then where's your evidence? Like I said in my original post, having an opinion or personal belief that someone is a liar without backing it up counts for nothing. If this were a court case and an eyewitness gives a testimony, and then the judge calls on you to give your response, and your only response to point your finger and say "I have a funny feeling about this person. You're a liar!" then you're just going to get laughed at and you're going to lose the case. That might work on the Loose Change forums, but it's not going to work in the real world. Until you can back up your claim that the FBI is lying WITH EVIDENCE, then your personal belief counts for nothing. I was going to post a link to this video but couldn't find it. The video really speaks for itself that this is where the debris from Flight 93 ended up for safe and permanent storage. As the report says, only some of Iron Mountain's clients are federal companies and if I were United Airlines, I couldn't think of any place better to store the debris. Did you expect United to store the debris in an airplane hangar somewhere? Permanently? Since the report doesn't say specifically who its client for the debris is and exactly what debris is held, it's possible the NTSB is a client and stores the black boxes there. Or maybe United Airlines and the NTSB are both clients. The report doesn't tell us much one way or the either, so we can only guess, but it sounds like United is one of their clients.
Below are links to photo galleries showing fields of wreckage, individual pieces, personal effects, and human remains. Many pieces of paper, clothing, and insulation were indeed found at Indian Lake and in New Baltimore after being blown there by the wind. By bringing this up, are you (like many others) implying that Flight 93 was shot down? You've been claiming in this thread that the plane didn't even crash in Shanksville, so which is it? If you do believe that Flight 93 was shot down, then why was absolutely no debris found along Flight 93's flight path prior to the impact crater? As shown below, all of the "debris" that was found at Indian Lake and New Baltimore was lightweight insulation and other material and was found in exactly the direction the wind was blowing, in an area the plane never flew over.  This also wasn't the first time that lightweight material blew far distances on the wind after a plane crash. After the crash of Flight 427, pieces of insulation and business cards rained down onto a golfcourse 2 miles away and was collected by golfers who also witnessed the crash. Was this plane shot down? Links to photos: http://killtown.911review.org/flight93/gallery.html http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/flight93page3 I find it funny that you post links to people who witnessed or at least heard the crash as if it's evidence of YOUR claim. I've read every one of the reports of the eyewitnesses at Indian Lake. So are you conceding now that Flight 93 did crash in Shanksville as reported by countless eyewitnesses, but you believe it was shot down? If so, you're still wrong. The marina that the witnesses were in is just under two miles from the crash site (not 2.5 miles). At this distance, they would have still heard the engines and then the explosion from the crash 9.6 seconds after it occured. How would you expect the shockwave from such a massive explosion to effect nearby electrical circuits (yes, there was electrical lines near the crater, and as with a thunderstorm, if a line is effected in one place it'll affect the power for miles around). This happened at the WTC after each crash. So to recap, because electricity travels much faster than sound, the lights would have flickered (the true time of the crash), and then they'd hear the engines and the crash 9.6 seconds later. Think of a lightning strike causing your lights to flicker and then many seconds later you hear the strike. This doesn't mean the plane crashed after the lights flickered, it's simple laws of physics. Sound travels at 1100 feet per second. Many of the eyewitnesses even report seeing the material raining down like confetti, indicating that it was lightweight. This material would have been blown upward during the explosion, lifted even higher by the ensuing heat, and then carried off in the high altitude winds. The wind was blowing at 10.4 mph, which calculates out to about 40 mph in the high altitude winds. At this speed, it would have taken only about 2-3 minutes to begin raining down over the lake.
Nowhere do the eyewitness say that the debris began raining down in less than a minute. You're putting words in their mouths. |
|
|
|
| Domenick DiMaggio | Feb 13 2008, 04:44 PM Post #23 |
|
Where's my evidence? Exhibit A : Click Exhibit B (Corroborating Witnesses to Susan's UAV): Lee Purbaugh Dennis Decker Rick Chaney Viola Saylor John Fleegle Robin Duppstadt Susan Custer Jim Brandt
I can back up the claim with eyewitnesses that the man claiming to have flown a small corporate plane over the area is a treasonous liar actively participating in a cover up against the American people in any court of law. I can then call to the stand the 8 people I currently know who are under gag orders and prove beyond all shadow of a doubt the official story is a fabrication.
You dishonest little troll. Everyone can see in my previous response that you thought United Airlines was in possession of the Shanksville debris and I clearly showed you your error. Instead of being a man and owning up to it you lie and act as if you didn't watch the video and were already aware of this information. Then you completely lie and say United Airlines stores it there when in the report it clearly states it is the location the US Government uses to keep the "charred remains of Flight 93". You're a dishonest little fraud who's relatively new to 9/11 "research" (I use that word loosely because you're "best" at copying and pasting and making youtube videos) and you'll find that you are way out of your league if you further attempt debate at these forums.
Do you believe that those links clearly show 95% of a recovered 757? Yes or No. You're reciting what you read on the internet again in regards to Indian Lake and New Baltimore. Indian Lake residents called 9/11 and reported a plane flying over Indian Lake raining down debris. Jim Stop was fishing on the Lake in his boat at the time and saw the plane fly overhead breaking apart in the sky. Plane debris, such as the type in the images you linked to [small, tiny, shiny, metallic pieces (NO BLUE ONES)] was all over Indian Lake. Gerry Lowery collected 3 big garbage bags full of it. New Baltimore was closed on 9/11. The media all ran to get there and were blocked from the town. No one was allowed in or out. This is the information you, RKOwens, isn't going to learn on the internet. Unlike you I travel to the area quite frequently over the last 18 months and have learned more information than you can ever dream of with your copy and paste techniques. Also the Indian Lake debris raining down was raining down when the people who were inside the marina heard the explosion and ran out to see what had happened. Nothing is shown that contradicts my claims. Of course the media is going to report what they are told, thats why newspapers have editors. If you were remotely right about Flight 93 I wouldn't know the names of so many people who have gag orders placed on them in regards of it. There is never no need to silence someone from telling a story that will further corroborate your claims.
What is MY claim RKOwens? My only claim is that the official story is untrue or partially true.
I am not "conceding" Flight 93 crashed or was shot down anywhere.
The problem with that is the Mayor of Indian Lake, Barry Lichty, "conceding" Flight "93" flew over Indian Lake if you watch LCFC although then he said what he was told and that Flight 93 never flew over Indian Lake on 9/11 and he doesn't know what plane they heard. But they heard it fly over Indian Lake shortly before the crash of Flight "93". You should really pick one general area of 9/11 and focus on it for your "research skills" as the amounts of evidence available clearly shows you haven't learned much of the information that has come out over the last 2 years.
That sucks for you RKO because the people who report flickering lights also live real close to the crash site. In fact, everyone who was in doors that day will tell you about the light anomaly before the crash regardless of how close or far away they were for it. And if the crash somehow severed power it would have done so permanently and not caused a "flickering".
No, this indicates that there was a lot of it and it was falling down from the sky not being blown along the ground from miles away. Or is your claim that all this debris blew up into the sky and spread out and fell back down to Earth and if so how come nothing is present in Val McClatchey's photo indicating airborne debris?
Well the problem with your scenario is you say the explosion took 9 seconds to get there. This would mean that all the eyewitnesses would have to sit in their houses wondering what the hell blew up outside for over 2 and close to 3 minutes before walking out to see the debris raining down. Ouch....that didn't happen. And you also ignored Wally Miller's damning admittance of photographing the debris field at Indian Lake and failed to explain why the coroner of record would be photographing "paper" (your claims, not mine) at a Federal Investigation Scene for the FBI. Spending time responding to you gives you more credibility than you truly deserve. Anyone can link and quote the corporate mainstream media word for word and think they are an authority on any given subject and get a lot of foolish people to believe them. I've seen a thousand "RKOwens" come and go over the last 5 years. You won't last either....... |
|
|
|
| Aldo Marquis CIT | Feb 13 2008, 05:04 PM Post #24 |
|
Dom, you should see the e-mail exchanges RK and myself are having. I am waiting to hear back from him. He is very uninformed about the Pentagon attack and the recent developments. Something tells me it is too much for him to handle because he hasn't written back and seems shy about the fact that he clearly doesn't understand the FDR or the implication of north side witnesses. |
|
|
|
| Domenick DiMaggio | Feb 13 2008, 07:04 PM Post #25 |
|
It's obvious. He's copying and pasting outdate "debunks"......lol I'm not surprised by his lack of response at all...... |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Skeptics · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
1:00 PM Nov 23