It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
GenRadek
Now how would old Rob know you were here and contributing?
If this is how their message is suppose to go across, it is not helpful in the least bit.
SkepticOverlord
GenRadek
Now how would old Rob know you were here and contributing?
Based on the content of the very first email -- and the email address copied -- it looks as though the thread author alerted him to this thread once staff started became involved. Apparently because it's not okay for our staff to have opinions and care about subjects.
If this is how their message is suppose to go across, it is not helpful in the least bit.
I tried banging that drum at more than one meeting of the NYC 9/11 Truth group at St. Mark's church in Manhattan several times, many years ago. I don't understand why it doesn't stick.
soulwaxer
I'm not doubting you, I'm just interested in the exact and full content of the messages.
SkepticOverlord
Based on the content of the very first email -- and the email address copied -- it looks as though the thread author alerted him to this thread once staff started became involved. Apparently because it's not okay for our staff to have opinions and care about subjects.
SkepticOverlord
soulwaxer
I'm not doubting you, I'm just interested in the exact and full content of the messages.
Sorry, but I won't.
I'm one of the (increasingly rare, apparently) people that believes there is an expectation of privacy when someone sends an email. So I'd never share the content of an email from someone on a public forum. That's incredibly bad Internet manners.
Sorry.edit on 9-1-2014 by SkepticOverlord because: (no reason given)
NewAgeMan
reply to post by soulwaxer
Please just leave it alone...
Moving on...?
There's no need for this thread or it's content to be derailed by this.
Thanks for your understanding.
NAM
JuniorDisco
reply to post by soulwaxer
If you haven't already seen Balsamo in action I assure you, it's a sight to behold. And I doubt you'll be wanting him on your team even if you consider yourself part of the broadest of churches.
soulwaxer
There's no need for this thread or it's content to be derailed by this.
SkepticOverlord
soulwaxer
There's no need for this thread or it's content to be derailed by this.
As is the case with any extraordinary claim, the credibility of the claimant must be a determining factor.
Tactics speak to ethics (or lack thereof)… which speaks to integrity… which speaks to credibility.
NewAgeMan
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
People are, for the most part, fundamentally good and well intentioned, and are simply doing the very best they can and know how to do with the resources available to them. In that I have great faith, and it's not even about me, or you, or anyone else in particular, just the common good for the sake of what i like to call.. our enlightened mutual best interest.
Best Regards,
NAM
P.S. Let's move on now if we could, in a spirit of relative good will..?
edit on 9-1-2014 by NewAgeMan because: (no reason given)
soulwaxer
If you are going to accuse me of a lack of ethics,
ETA: I am claiming that 911 (definitely one of the most advanced attacks ever) was carried out by the most advanced power in the world. Nothing extraordinary about that, unless you allow your personal views to get involved.
SkepticOverlord
There's an extraordinary spectrum of plausible, believable, and manageable speculative theories that run counter to the accepted "story line" of 9/11, yet still include the probable conclusion that hijackers did indeed take over control of normally scheduled passenger jets; as it's the most simple to execute.
Hello BenReclused (btw are you really a government shill?)
The text you sourced, is from the Navy.
navyflightmanuals.tpub.com...
How many Civilian Commercial Boeing 767-222's are operated by the US Navy?
From what i've been able to gather, the Navy is not regulated under the Federal Aviation Regulations. The Military have their own rules and modify civilian aircraft as they see fit ie: in the conversion/modification of civilian aircraft like the 767 series for tanker operations, etc.
It also appears from that source, that it's dealing with predominantly structural G-force issues, as well as operations at altitude, not near sea level.
With that said, from what i've found, the text is right, there is a 150% margin set, based on G limits.
Look up FAR 25.1505 and the associated FAR's (Federal Aviation Regulations) referenced in 25.1505.
SkepticOverlord
soulwaxer
If you are going to accuse me of a lack of ethics,
I wasn't referring to you. Sorry you took it that way.
ETA: I am claiming that 911 (definitely one of the most advanced attacks ever) was carried out by the most advanced power in the world. Nothing extraordinary about that, unless you allow your personal views to get involved.
There's an extraordinary spectrum of plausible, believable, and manageable speculative theories that run counter to the accepted "story line" of 9/11, yet still include the probable conclusion that hijackers did indeed take over control of normally scheduled passenger jets; as it's the most simple to execute.