Proof that UAL175 didn't hit the south tower?

Originally posted by RockHound757
You are now here turning a blind eye to lies being spread regarding P4T

Once again and for the last time, I'm not associated with P4T and could care less who spreads lies about P4T. It is neither my job nor responsibility to correct others' lies about P4T.

Being a member of Architects and Engineers, if someone was spreading lies about that organization, I'd be all over it.

I'm not a member or associated with P4T, so if you have a problem with what others are saying about P4T, take it up with them. That's not my problem.

[edit on 15-3-2009 by _BoneZ_]

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
You're starting to sound more and more like Rob.

Thats not what you said in your U2U...

Make up your mind BoneZ.

BoneZ, just please, in the future, if someone makes a mistake regarding your source and other members jump on that bandwagon, you may want to think about setting the record straight. Certainly its not your responsibility, and considering what happened to you at P4T forum, you probably have no problem turning a blind eye to such mistakes, even if coming from a JREFer, but it really only hurts your credibility when you let such lies develope based on your OP and then shown in fact that people are lying.

I know, you dont feel jthomas is lying. Well, i do, either that, or he is incompetent at observing source. He is claiming P4T thinks they discovered the radar anomaly and that P4T thinks its meaningful. jthomas assumed the source of your OP was P4T. Due to that statement, another ATS member thought the source of your OP "came from" P4T. Certainly if jthomas made the same gross error regarding say.. AE911truth, i would hope you would jump on it?

Edit to add: just saw your post above. I guess AE911T is all that matters to you. Other organizations of professionals researching 9/11 can be dragged through the mud.. huh? Especially on threads you start which you know for a fact are inaccurate regarding source claims made by others? Ok, thanks for letting us know BoneZ.


[edit on 15-3-2009 by RockHound757]

Originally posted by RockHound757

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
You're starting to sound more and more like Rob.

[edit on 15-3-2009 by _BoneZ_]

Thats not what you said in your U2U...

You changed my mind when you posted priviledged information from a non-public part of the P4T forums.

Originally posted by RockHound757
He is claiming P4T thinks they discovered the radar anomoly and that P4T thinks its meaningful. jthomas assumed the source of your OP was P4T.

Still nowhere close to being my problem. Deal with them, not me.

Originally posted by RockHound757
I guess AE911T is all that matters to you.

If someone lied about AE911T, being a member I would be obligated to correct that lie. I am NOT a member of P4T, not registered there, nor associated with P4T. And I don't see the lies you keep making up.

If you think someone is lying about P4T, take it up with THAT PERSON. It has NOTHING to do with ME.

I think you've made your "point". Time to move along.

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
If someone lied about AE911T, being a member I would be obligated to correct that lie.

I tried looking for you here...

Cant seem to locate you. Can you help out with that?

And yes BoneZ, We get the point that if anyone mistakes your sources, other than AE911T, you will not correct it.

You do realize many members of AE911T are also members of P4T, right? Steven Jones being one of them?

Anyway, If i find or make a post regarding DEW or Micronukes taking down the WTC, and others mistake/lie about the source being AE911T. I'll be sure to set the record straight. Its just the type of person I am..

[edit on 15-3-2009 by RockHound757]

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
If someone lied about AE911T, being a member I would be obligated to correct that lie.

Forgive the off topic post, but Bonez, can you please forward some information to Richard Gage?

His "Info Item" written on February 21,2008 has not been updated(regarding the Mandarin fire):

Researchers at AE911Truth are very interested in making more detailed comparisons between these two buildings, the fires, and the aftermaths. Check back for the latest information.

www.ae911truth.org...

If they are so interested in making "detailed comparisons" why have they left out the most important detail?

The 34-storey TVCC, which required 92,000 sq m of external and internal Rheinzink cladding, consists of a 1,500-seat theatre, audio recording studios, digital cinemas, news release and a five-star hotel with ballroom and function facilities and a generous spa. The hotel tower was designed as a reinforced concrete frame plus core.

www.gulfconstructionworldwide.com...

"Thread locked due to original question being resolved and additional conversation being contentious and off-topic."