I just found this link and have not yet watched it.
As for you Hutch... I hope you approve of the video being shown on Goggle Videos or are they also inappropriate for me to be posting here???
Note... I don't know why the # symbol at the end of the link seems to NOT be part of the link. It IS but when I copy and pasted it(several times)... it paste as black and looks seperate. If you have problems just copy and past the entire link into your browser.
I'll watch this later today.
You want another investigation because something doesn't seem right, but you don't know why....or you can't articulate it. That is fine.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Skubishack:
Here is a link to those family members OTHER video called
" IN THEIR OWN WORDS: THE UNTOLD STORIES OF THE 9/11 FAMILIES "
I just found this link and have not yet watched it.
As for you Hutch... I hope you approve of the video being shown on Goggle Videos or are they also inappropriate for me to be posting here???
Note... I don't know why the # symbol at the end of the link seems to NOT be part of the link. It IS but when I copy and pasted it(several times)... it paste as black and looks seperate. If you have problems just copy and past the entire link into your browser.
I'll watch this later today.
You want another investigation because something doesn't seem right, but you don't know why....or you can't articulate it. That is fine.
Wow... to find anything hilarious about the suffering of these families is quite shocking.
Broad term that includes your "hilarious" comment.
You find it hilarious that the families have not found one lawyer to take the case for them.
"I find it hilarious. Not one lawyer has taken on this case for one of the victims' relatives."
There is a difference which you obviously choose to ignore. On the one hand you have people who have lost loved ones. On the other, you have a choice by a lawyer to pursue a case.....that apparently many in this thread feel worth pursuing.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Skubishack:
Wow... to find anything hilarious about the suffering of these families is quite shocking.
Broad term that includes your "hilarious" comment.
You find it hilarious that the families have not found one lawyer to take the case for them.
"I find it hilarious. Not one lawyer has taken on this case for one of the victims' relatives."
There is a difference which you obviously choose to ignore. On the one hand you have people who have lost loved ones. On the other, you have a choice by a lawyer to pursue a case.....that apparently many in this thread feel worth pursuing.
You're a liar. You haven't even come close to answering all my questions.....yet you expect me to watch a 2 bit video for an hour that has an agenda?
I have read testimony of people who were covered with jet fuel. I believe them. I've seen verified pictures of plane parts...engines....landing gear......wheels. I believe it. I've read testimony from INVESTIGATORS who verified body parts....and uniforms. I believe them.
You believe the same thing as the Loose Change people do. And that video has been shown to have over FOUR HUNDRED errors...including flat out lies....mis-representations......half assed research. You name it.
If that's the team you want to go to battle with, I can't help you.
You can't answer my question. I asked 1 simple question, and you can't and won't answer it.
You're just proved my theory on you is correct, Hutch. You are deathly afraid that the accusations I am making can be true. I bet you didn't even watch that video.
Thanks for clarifying
0
Quote Originally Posted by HutchEmAll:
You're a liar. You haven't even come close to answering all my questions.....yet you expect me to watch a 2 bit video for an hour that has an agenda?
I have read testimony of people who were covered with jet fuel. I believe them. I've seen verified pictures of plane parts...engines....landing gear......wheels. I believe it. I've read testimony from INVESTIGATORS who verified body parts....and uniforms. I believe them.
You believe the same thing as the Loose Change people do. And that video has been shown to have over FOUR HUNDRED errors...including flat out lies....mis-representations......half assed research. You name it.
If that's the team you want to go to battle with, I can't help you.
You can't answer my question. I asked 1 simple question, and you can't and won't answer it.
You're just proved my theory on you is correct, Hutch. You are deathly afraid that the accusations I am making can be true. I bet you didn't even watch that video.
I asked him to provide me with a quote from one person who was a relative of a person who died on flight 93 or flight 77 who thought it was an inside job.
He sent me a quote from a next door neighbor from one of the people who died who requested one of their videos. That's it.
I asked him if he thinks Flight 93 crashed in PA and if Flight 77 crashed into the pentagon.
His response: "I don't talk about flight 93 and flight 77 anymore." And that is a direct quote....you can ask him.
LMAO. Why do you think that is? Because he has been getting his ass kicked by the victims' relatives and he has no leg to stand on.
I asked him where the people are who died on these two flights. No answer.
I said, "'Loose Change 2' has been shown to contain over 400 errors......how come you never responded to those questions?"
His response: "A lot have changed since then."
He told me that he no longer talks about flight 93 and flight 77.....he is focusing on his belief that there were problems with the 9/11 commission investigation.
The old bait and switch.
1.) Every single family from Flight 93 victims were forced to sign a document which limited them to talk about any events on 9/11. He didn't answer your question because he couldn't. He has no quote from any Flight 93 family member because if he did, those family members could be tried for Treason. I've mentioned this way earlier in this thread, but you only choose to read what you want.
2.) I have provided you proof that Flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon, but you won't even watch my video. You are a fraud and a "kook". How can you possibly participate in this debate without viewing the opposing sides evidence? I've viewed all of yours. You won't view any of mine and just dismiss it with "Nah that's impossible". You are a fraud, period.
0
Quote Originally Posted by HutchEmAll:
Continuing (trying to make this short):
I asked him to provide me with a quote from one person who was a relative of a person who died on flight 93 or flight 77 who thought it was an inside job.
He sent me a quote from a next door neighbor from one of the people who died who requested one of their videos. That's it.
I asked him if he thinks Flight 93 crashed in PA and if Flight 77 crashed into the pentagon.
His response: "I don't talk about flight 93 and flight 77 anymore." And that is a direct quote....you can ask him.
LMAO. Why do you think that is? Because he has been getting his ass kicked by the victims' relatives and he has no leg to stand on.
I asked him where the people are who died on these two flights. No answer.
I said, "'Loose Change 2' has been shown to contain over 400 errors......how come you never responded to those questions?"
His response: "A lot have changed since then."
He told me that he no longer talks about flight 93 and flight 77.....he is focusing on his belief that there were problems with the 9/11 commission investigation.
The old bait and switch.
1.) Every single family from Flight 93 victims were forced to sign a document which limited them to talk about any events on 9/11. He didn't answer your question because he couldn't. He has no quote from any Flight 93 family member because if he did, those family members could be tried for Treason. I've mentioned this way earlier in this thread, but you only choose to read what you want.
2.) I have provided you proof that Flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon, but you won't even watch my video. You are a fraud and a "kook". How can you possibly participate in this debate without viewing the opposing sides evidence? I've viewed all of yours. You won't view any of mine and just dismiss it with "Nah that's impossible". You are a fraud, period.
No evidence. No mention of facts. Nothing. This is the leader of the CT's.
This guy has changed his story 34 times. Even HE doesn't believe that a missile hit the pentagon.
But he sure did 5 years ago.
And this is a guy who supposedly is most interested in claiming the government was in on it.
smidio, even this guy doesn't belive you.
The leader of the CT's? No, absolutely not. Our leader, in my opinion, is named Craig Ranke. He would destroy you in a debate or question/answer session, Hutch. I dare you to contact him.
But you won't. Know why? Because you're a fraud, and you're petrified of the truth.
0
Quote Originally Posted by HutchEmAll:
No evidence. No mention of facts. Nothing. This is the leader of the CT's.
This guy has changed his story 34 times. Even HE doesn't believe that a missile hit the pentagon.
But he sure did 5 years ago.
And this is a guy who supposedly is most interested in claiming the government was in on it.
smidio, even this guy doesn't belive you.
The leader of the CT's? No, absolutely not. Our leader, in my opinion, is named Craig Ranke. He would destroy you in a debate or question/answer session, Hutch. I dare you to contact him.
But you won't. Know why? Because you're a fraud, and you're petrified of the truth.
I find it hilarious. Not one lawyer has taken on this case for one of the victims' relatives. I would think an amulance chaser would jump at the chance pro-bono for the pub. if they thought they had ghost of a chance.
And once again, not one comment on why the guy who spearheaded the conspiracy movement now won't even talk about flight 93 or flight 77. Why is that?
Oh, really? REALLY? Not 1 lawyer has taken this case?
That just made me fall off my chair laughing, it really did.
Myself and 59 other family members of victims from 9/11 have obtained a team of over 35 legal representatives. Keep watching the national news for word of our lawsuit. I'd say give it another 12 months before it gets announced formally.
I'll still be here when you try sooooo very hard to remove the foot from your mouth.
0
Quote Originally Posted by HutchEmAll:
I find it hilarious. Not one lawyer has taken on this case for one of the victims' relatives. I would think an amulance chaser would jump at the chance pro-bono for the pub. if they thought they had ghost of a chance.
And once again, not one comment on why the guy who spearheaded the conspiracy movement now won't even talk about flight 93 or flight 77. Why is that?
Oh, really? REALLY? Not 1 lawyer has taken this case?
That just made me fall off my chair laughing, it really did.
Myself and 59 other family members of victims from 9/11 have obtained a team of over 35 legal representatives. Keep watching the national news for word of our lawsuit. I'd say give it another 12 months before it gets announced formally.
I'll still be here when you try sooooo very hard to remove the foot from your mouth.
Oh, and smdio did PM me for those of you who were wondering regarding his lawsuit for treason against the government. I got some more details, and I don't think that smdio really understands what he is talking about to be honest. He still thinks that criminal charges will be brought against Cheney and his cronies by private litigants. He refused to tell me the names of his attorneys, just that they are "well known" and I will be "hearing about it soon"
I also told him that even if we disagree, I don't like seeing people being taken advantage of, and that whoever is telling him he can do this and get this lawsuit in front of a judge is a liar, a thief, stealing his money, and giving my profession a bad name.
Thanks for "keeping that between us" kap, I appreciate it. Guess I'll never tell you anything again
I failed to tell you that we haven't paid them a nickel. Care to change your view on the subject now, jackass?
0
Quote Originally Posted by kaponofor3:
Oh, and smdio did PM me for those of you who were wondering regarding his lawsuit for treason against the government. I got some more details, and I don't think that smdio really understands what he is talking about to be honest. He still thinks that criminal charges will be brought against Cheney and his cronies by private litigants. He refused to tell me the names of his attorneys, just that they are "well known" and I will be "hearing about it soon"
I also told him that even if we disagree, I don't like seeing people being taken advantage of, and that whoever is telling him he can do this and get this lawsuit in front of a judge is a liar, a thief, stealing his money, and giving my profession a bad name.
Thanks for "keeping that between us" kap, I appreciate it. Guess I'll never tell you anything again
I failed to tell you that we haven't paid them a nickel. Care to change your view on the subject now, jackass?
"1.) Every single family from Flight
93 victims were forced to sign a document which limited them to talk
about any events on 9/11. He didn't answer your question because he
couldn't. He has no quote from any Flight 93 family member because if
he did, those family members could be tried for Treason. I've
mentioned this way earlier in this thread, but you only choose to read
what you want."
You gotta be fucking kidding me, smdio. Where the hell are you getting this one from?
0
"1.) Every single family from Flight
93 victims were forced to sign a document which limited them to talk
about any events on 9/11. He didn't answer your question because he
couldn't. He has no quote from any Flight 93 family member because if
he did, those family members could be tried for Treason. I've
mentioned this way earlier in this thread, but you only choose to read
what you want."
You gotta be fucking kidding me, smdio. Where the hell are you getting this one from?
Thanks for "keeping that between us" kap, I appreciate it. Guess I'll never tell you anything again
I failed to tell you that we haven't paid them a nickel. Care to change your view on the subject now, jackass?
I didn't let out any information that could be used against you, smdio. Don't trip. You still don't understand WTF you are talking about.
You claiming that you haven't paid them a nickel doesn't change my views -- it just makes me believe that you are full of shit, especially if you won't provide us with their names or even their firm name if you don't want to give individual names. Show me "a team of 35 legal representatives" that will have worked for free for the past, what did you say, 8 years? 5 years or something?
You are in dreamland, smdio
0
Quote Originally Posted by smdio:
Thanks for "keeping that between us" kap, I appreciate it. Guess I'll never tell you anything again
I failed to tell you that we haven't paid them a nickel. Care to change your view on the subject now, jackass?
I didn't let out any information that could be used against you, smdio. Don't trip. You still don't understand WTF you are talking about.
You claiming that you haven't paid them a nickel doesn't change my views -- it just makes me believe that you are full of shit, especially if you won't provide us with their names or even their firm name if you don't want to give individual names. Show me "a team of 35 legal representatives" that will have worked for free for the past, what did you say, 8 years? 5 years or something?
Also, for the record, I have never once condoned or agreed with the views of the video Loose Change. Although there is some parts of the video that have been confirmed through the years and years of research I've done personally, along with my team, there are also many holes and incorrect reports in the video. Hutch seems to think by disproving the views in the Loose Change video, he is disproving my thoughts and views as well. I have never once cited Loose Change in this thread directly because of it's errors and omissions.
If you want to watch a true video from much more intelligent people on my team, please go here. It's everything you need to know about how the government is lying to us, and has likely lied to us about the entire course of events on 9/11/2001.
If you would like to know much more about the events of 9/11/2001 and what REALLY happened, please go here to our forums, and read away. I will be available to answer any and every question you may have regarding any post on the forum link above.
Unlike Hutch, who avoids all questions that are directly towards him out of fear.
0
Also, for the record, I have never once condoned or agreed with the views of the video Loose Change. Although there is some parts of the video that have been confirmed through the years and years of research I've done personally, along with my team, there are also many holes and incorrect reports in the video. Hutch seems to think by disproving the views in the Loose Change video, he is disproving my thoughts and views as well. I have never once cited Loose Change in this thread directly because of it's errors and omissions.
If you want to watch a true video from much more intelligent people on my team, please go here. It's everything you need to know about how the government is lying to us, and has likely lied to us about the entire course of events on 9/11/2001.
If you would like to know much more about the events of 9/11/2001 and what REALLY happened, please go here to our forums, and read away. I will be available to answer any and every question you may have regarding any post on the forum link above.
Unlike Hutch, who avoids all questions that are directly towards him out of fear.
"1.) Every single family from Flight
93 victims were forced to sign a document which limited them to talk
about any events on 9/11. He didn't answer your question because he
couldn't. He has no quote from any Flight 93 family member because if
he did, those family members could be tried for Treason. I've
mentioned this way earlier in this thread, but you only choose to read
what you want."
You gotta be fucking kidding me, smdio. Where the hell are you getting this one from?
Directly from the litigants on my team. The documents will be shown in our case. I have a copy in my left hand right now (typing with my right hand, slowly, just to make this sentence true) as we speak.
But I love doubters. Always have. Keep watching, kap
0
Quote Originally Posted by kaponofor3:
"1.) Every single family from Flight
93 victims were forced to sign a document which limited them to talk
about any events on 9/11. He didn't answer your question because he
couldn't. He has no quote from any Flight 93 family member because if
he did, those family members could be tried for Treason. I've
mentioned this way earlier in this thread, but you only choose to read
what you want."
You gotta be fucking kidding me, smdio. Where the hell are you getting this one from?
Directly from the litigants on my team. The documents will be shown in our case. I have a copy in my left hand right now (typing with my right hand, slowly, just to make this sentence true) as we speak.
But I love doubters. Always have. Keep watching, kap
Some day I'm gonna watch that 81 minute video smdio -- I'll watch it with an open mind, I promise. But I'm also gonna watch it with a critical eye. If there are unsupported assertions, I'm gonna right them down along with the time they are seen. If there are outright misrepresentations, I'm going to write them down. Then I'll post them in this thread for all to see my analysis.
0
Some day I'm gonna watch that 81 minute video smdio -- I'll watch it with an open mind, I promise. But I'm also gonna watch it with a critical eye. If there are unsupported assertions, I'm gonna right them down along with the time they are seen. If there are outright misrepresentations, I'm going to write them down. Then I'll post them in this thread for all to see my analysis.
I didn't let out any information that could be used against you, smdio. Don't trip. You still don't understand WTF you are talking about.
You claiming that you haven't paid them a nickel doesn't change my views -- it just makes me believe that you are full of shit, especially if you won't provide us with their names or even their firm name if you don't want to give individual names. Show me "a team of 35 legal representatives" that will have worked for free for the past, what did you say, 8 years? 5 years or something?
You are in dreamland, smdio
7 years, actually. And their reasoning is something along the lines of "the national publicity we will receive from this case will far outweigh the Pro Bono losses that we have incurred over the years"
I found out your name, Kap. I've also found out that you know plenty of the representatives on our team. They didn't clarify if they know you personally or professionally. But you're really going to shit your pants. I can't wait.
0
Quote Originally Posted by kaponofor3:
I didn't let out any information that could be used against you, smdio. Don't trip. You still don't understand WTF you are talking about.
You claiming that you haven't paid them a nickel doesn't change my views -- it just makes me believe that you are full of shit, especially if you won't provide us with their names or even their firm name if you don't want to give individual names. Show me "a team of 35 legal representatives" that will have worked for free for the past, what did you say, 8 years? 5 years or something?
You are in dreamland, smdio
7 years, actually. And their reasoning is something along the lines of "the national publicity we will receive from this case will far outweigh the Pro Bono losses that we have incurred over the years"
I found out your name, Kap. I've also found out that you know plenty of the representatives on our team. They didn't clarify if they know you personally or professionally. But you're really going to shit your pants. I can't wait.
Some day I'm gonna watch that 81 minute video smdio -- I'll watch it with an open mind, I promise. But I'm also gonna watch it with a critical eye. If there are unsupported assertions, I'm gonna right them down along with the time they are seen. If there are outright misrepresentations, I'm going to write them down. Then I'll post them in this thread for all to see my analysis.
I anxiously anticipate that day.
0
Quote Originally Posted by kaponofor3:
Some day I'm gonna watch that 81 minute video smdio -- I'll watch it with an open mind, I promise. But I'm also gonna watch it with a critical eye. If there are unsupported assertions, I'm gonna right them down along with the time they are seen. If there are outright misrepresentations, I'm going to write them down. Then I'll post them in this thread for all to see my analysis.
Directly from the litigants on my team. The documents will be shown in our case. I have a copy in my left hand right now (typing with my right hand, slowly, just to make this sentence true) as we speak.
But I love doubters. Always have. Keep watching, kap
PDF a copy and put it on your website. Or PDF a copy and send it to me, I'll give you my e-mail address. Or PDF a copy and upload it to a file sharing site so we can all look at.
If this is the truth and a legitimate document, there's no reason for you not to disclose it. I mean, your goal in all of this is to search for the truth, right? Why not publish the document that would clearly help meet your goal?
0
Quote Originally Posted by smdio:
Directly from the litigants on my team. The documents will be shown in our case. I have a copy in my left hand right now (typing with my right hand, slowly, just to make this sentence true) as we speak.
But I love doubters. Always have. Keep watching, kap
PDF a copy and put it on your website. Or PDF a copy and send it to me, I'll give you my e-mail address. Or PDF a copy and upload it to a file sharing site so we can all look at.
If this is the truth and a legitimate document, there's no reason for you not to disclose it. I mean, your goal in all of this is to search for the truth, right? Why not publish the document that would clearly help meet your goal?
7 years, actually. And their reasoning is something along the lines of "the national publicity we will receive from this case will far outweigh the Pro Bono losses that we have incurred over the years"
I found out your name, Kap. I've also found out that you know plenty of the representatives on our team. They didn't clarify if they know you personally or professionally. But you're really going to shit your pants. I can't wait.
I'll make you a deal, smdio -- you PM me my real, actual full name (first and last) and if you are right, I'll post that you were right in this thread and will never step food in it again. Deal?
0
Quote Originally Posted by smdio:
7 years, actually. And their reasoning is something along the lines of "the national publicity we will receive from this case will far outweigh the Pro Bono losses that we have incurred over the years"
I found out your name, Kap. I've also found out that you know plenty of the representatives on our team. They didn't clarify if they know you personally or professionally. But you're really going to shit your pants. I can't wait.
I'll make you a deal, smdio -- you PM me my real, actual full name (first and last) and if you are right, I'll post that you were right in this thread and will never step food in it again. Deal?
PDF a copy and put it on your website. Or PDF a copy and send it to me, I'll give you my e-mail address. Or PDF a copy and upload it to a file sharing site so we can all look at.
If this is the truth and a legitimate document, there's no reason for you not to disclose it. I mean, your goal in all of this is to search for the truth, right? Why not publish the document that would clearly help meet your goal?
If you're an actual attorney, which I'm told that you are, you would understand the ramifications that providing that document to a gambling forum could possibly have on a Federal case, especially with the charges being brought. On top of that, I'm told that this document should not and cannot be seen by absolutely anyone outside of the people who have already seen it.
You have no idea what we went through and how long it took to obtain this 12 page document, Kap.
And I not only know your name, I know the city you work in and also live in. Don't think that I have any intention on doing jack shit with that information, I'm not a stalker or psycho path. It just came up in a dinner conversation and snow balled from there.
I have no intentions on proving to you that I know your name. That's not the intended directly of this thread. No one cares if I know your name or don't, or if you admit that "I'm right and will never step foot in this thread again". I actually kinda like you here, except for the fact that you are siding with a known and obviously scared-to-death HutchEmAll.
0
Quote Originally Posted by kaponofor3:
PDF a copy and put it on your website. Or PDF a copy and send it to me, I'll give you my e-mail address. Or PDF a copy and upload it to a file sharing site so we can all look at.
If this is the truth and a legitimate document, there's no reason for you not to disclose it. I mean, your goal in all of this is to search for the truth, right? Why not publish the document that would clearly help meet your goal?
If you're an actual attorney, which I'm told that you are, you would understand the ramifications that providing that document to a gambling forum could possibly have on a Federal case, especially with the charges being brought. On top of that, I'm told that this document should not and cannot be seen by absolutely anyone outside of the people who have already seen it.
You have no idea what we went through and how long it took to obtain this 12 page document, Kap.
And I not only know your name, I know the city you work in and also live in. Don't think that I have any intention on doing jack shit with that information, I'm not a stalker or psycho path. It just came up in a dinner conversation and snow balled from there.
I have no intentions on proving to you that I know your name. That's not the intended directly of this thread. No one cares if I know your name or don't, or if you admit that "I'm right and will never step foot in this thread again". I actually kinda like you here, except for the fact that you are siding with a known and obviously scared-to-death HutchEmAll.
If you're an actual attorney, which I'm told that you are, you would understand the ramifications that providing that document to a gambling forum could possibly have on a Federal case, especially with the charges being brought. On top of that, I'm told that this document should not and cannot be seen by absolutely anyone outside of the people who have already seen it.
You have no idea what we went through and how long it took to obtain this 12 page document, Kap.
And I not only know your name, I know the city you work in and also live in. Don't think that I have any intention on doing jack shit with that information, I'm not a stalker or psycho path. It just came up in a dinner conversation and snow balled from there.
I have no intentions on proving to you that I know your name. That's not the intended directly of this thread. No one cares if I know your name or don't, or if you admit that "I'm right and will never step foot in this thread again". I actually kinda like you here, except for the fact that you are siding with a known and obviously scared-to-death HutchEmAll.
OK smdio -- again, you are not bringing CHARGES against anyone. This is lawyering 101. Charges are criminal, causes of action are civil. Charges can only be brought by US Attorneys, Attorneys General, and/or District Attorneys, who do not take private clients. They represent the federal (US Attorneys), state (Attorneys General), or county (District Attorney) government entities. Also, if you are bringing a case against people, the documents will likely be public record, so there is no harm in releasing them. Hell, you can even redact some of the information if it would make you feel better or protect a source. But I must say smdio, failing to produce such a document -- one that would CLEARLY give credence to your point of view that we aren't being told the whole story -- really hurts your credibility.
The fact that you will not confirm my real first and last name as well as the city I work in and live via PM tells me that you are lying or merely guessing. Otherwise, if you were certain, there'd by no harm in telling me.
0
Quote Originally Posted by smdio:
If you're an actual attorney, which I'm told that you are, you would understand the ramifications that providing that document to a gambling forum could possibly have on a Federal case, especially with the charges being brought. On top of that, I'm told that this document should not and cannot be seen by absolutely anyone outside of the people who have already seen it.
You have no idea what we went through and how long it took to obtain this 12 page document, Kap.
And I not only know your name, I know the city you work in and also live in. Don't think that I have any intention on doing jack shit with that information, I'm not a stalker or psycho path. It just came up in a dinner conversation and snow balled from there.
I have no intentions on proving to you that I know your name. That's not the intended directly of this thread. No one cares if I know your name or don't, or if you admit that "I'm right and will never step foot in this thread again". I actually kinda like you here, except for the fact that you are siding with a known and obviously scared-to-death HutchEmAll.
OK smdio -- again, you are not bringing CHARGES against anyone. This is lawyering 101. Charges are criminal, causes of action are civil. Charges can only be brought by US Attorneys, Attorneys General, and/or District Attorneys, who do not take private clients. They represent the federal (US Attorneys), state (Attorneys General), or county (District Attorney) government entities. Also, if you are bringing a case against people, the documents will likely be public record, so there is no harm in releasing them. Hell, you can even redact some of the information if it would make you feel better or protect a source. But I must say smdio, failing to produce such a document -- one that would CLEARLY give credence to your point of view that we aren't being told the whole story -- really hurts your credibility.
The fact that you will not confirm my real first and last name as well as the city I work in and live via PM tells me that you are lying or merely guessing. Otherwise, if you were certain, there'd by no harm in telling me.
OK smdio -- again, you are not bringing CHARGES against anyone. This is lawyering 101. Charges are criminal, causes of action are civil. Charges can only be brought by US Attorneys, Attorneys General, and/or District Attorneys, who do not take private clients. They represent the federal (US Attorneys), state (Attorneys General), or county (District Attorney) government entities. Also, if you are bringing a case against people, the documents will likely be public record, so there is no harm in releasing them. Hell, you can even redact some of the information if it would make you feel better or protect a source. But I must say smdio, failing to produce such a document -- one that would CLEARLY give credence to your point of view that we aren't being told the whole story -- really hurts your credibility.
The fact that you will not confirm my real first and last name as well as the city I work in and live via PM tells me that you are lying or merely guessing. Otherwise, if you were certain, there'd by no harm in telling me.
To address your points
1.) Pardon me if I am not getting the terminology correct. Charges, civil action, etc. I have no idea what the difference between any of them are. My role in this entire process was research and fact finding, as well as paper trails. I do not handle the legal aspect of our case, as there are other litigants that take on those responsibilities. I am not claiming to be an attorney and do not know law or law terminology. By trying to disprove my statements using the argument of semantics makes you look weak, Kap. Please knock it off
2.) The document will indeed become public knowledge, so I understand, once the case reaches that level. Until that time, I am under strict orders to keep it's secrecy in tact. Revealing the document to an internet gambling forum is idiotic, as you must know, being an attorney. I don't care about my credibility on a gambling forum, I care about the truth and certain individuals being held responsible for what happened that day. If you think by repeating 10x that "my credibility is hurt" that it will make me do something to hurt our case, you really must think I'm a fool.
3.) Ask yourself this: Why on earth would I mention such a thing if it were not true? Telling you that this thread came up at a get together recently, and some how or another, your name was linked to your forum account, had absolutely nothing to do with what we were talking about at the time. I have no reason to lie about this information and didn't think it was as big of a deal as you're making it seem. I'm going to ignore future "WHATS MY REAL NAME THEN HUH?!" requests because it's going to take this thread into a direction which is more like a kindergarten atmosphere, and that's not where I want it going.
0
Quote Originally Posted by kaponofor3:
OK smdio -- again, you are not bringing CHARGES against anyone. This is lawyering 101. Charges are criminal, causes of action are civil. Charges can only be brought by US Attorneys, Attorneys General, and/or District Attorneys, who do not take private clients. They represent the federal (US Attorneys), state (Attorneys General), or county (District Attorney) government entities. Also, if you are bringing a case against people, the documents will likely be public record, so there is no harm in releasing them. Hell, you can even redact some of the information if it would make you feel better or protect a source. But I must say smdio, failing to produce such a document -- one that would CLEARLY give credence to your point of view that we aren't being told the whole story -- really hurts your credibility.
The fact that you will not confirm my real first and last name as well as the city I work in and live via PM tells me that you are lying or merely guessing. Otherwise, if you were certain, there'd by no harm in telling me.
To address your points
1.) Pardon me if I am not getting the terminology correct. Charges, civil action, etc. I have no idea what the difference between any of them are. My role in this entire process was research and fact finding, as well as paper trails. I do not handle the legal aspect of our case, as there are other litigants that take on those responsibilities. I am not claiming to be an attorney and do not know law or law terminology. By trying to disprove my statements using the argument of semantics makes you look weak, Kap. Please knock it off
2.) The document will indeed become public knowledge, so I understand, once the case reaches that level. Until that time, I am under strict orders to keep it's secrecy in tact. Revealing the document to an internet gambling forum is idiotic, as you must know, being an attorney. I don't care about my credibility on a gambling forum, I care about the truth and certain individuals being held responsible for what happened that day. If you think by repeating 10x that "my credibility is hurt" that it will make me do something to hurt our case, you really must think I'm a fool.
3.) Ask yourself this: Why on earth would I mention such a thing if it were not true? Telling you that this thread came up at a get together recently, and some how or another, your name was linked to your forum account, had absolutely nothing to do with what we were talking about at the time. I have no reason to lie about this information and didn't think it was as big of a deal as you're making it seem. I'm going to ignore future "WHATS MY REAL NAME THEN HUH?!" requests because it's going to take this thread into a direction which is more like a kindergarten atmosphere, and that's not where I want it going.
1.) Pardon me if I am not getting the terminology correct.
_______________
You rarely ever get your terminology correct. One of the guys who believes in your fairy tail to the tee said he won't talk about flight 93 and flight 77.
.) Ask yourself this: Why on earth would I mention such a thing if it were not true?
Because you don't have a clue.
I'll be on Covers for the next 5 years....I look forward to this "document" coming to fruition.
0
1.) Pardon me if I am not getting the terminology correct.
_______________
You rarely ever get your terminology correct. One of the guys who believes in your fairy tail to the tee said he won't talk about flight 93 and flight 77.
.) Ask yourself this: Why on earth would I mention such a thing if it were not true?
Because you don't have a clue.
I'll be on Covers for the next 5 years....I look forward to this "document" coming to fruition.
1.) Pardon me if I am not getting the terminology correct.
_______________
You rarely ever get your terminology correct. One of the guys who believes in your fairy tail to the tee said he won't talk about flight 93 and flight 77.
I have never spoke to the person you are referring to and have never aligned myself with Loose Change. Attempting to draw a line between myself and them is 100% inaccurate.
I stand by everything on our forums and website. If you have the balls (which I know you don't) to watch this video and respond, I will then continue to debate with you.
Until then, you are nothing but a coward to me. And I've proved that fact to everyone in this thread.
0
Quote Originally Posted by HutchEmAll:
1.) Pardon me if I am not getting the terminology correct.
_______________
You rarely ever get your terminology correct. One of the guys who believes in your fairy tail to the tee said he won't talk about flight 93 and flight 77.
I have never spoke to the person you are referring to and have never aligned myself with Loose Change. Attempting to draw a line between myself and them is 100% inaccurate.
I stand by everything on our forums and website. If you have the balls (which I know you don't) to watch this video and respond, I will then continue to debate with you.
Until then, you are nothing but a coward to me. And I've proved that fact to everyone in this thread.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Hot Forum Topics
