Evidence STILL severely lacking for Flight 93 mostly buried claim

So you are calling pretty much everyone but you a dishonest skeptic in blatant defiance of the ToS? Hmmmm.

 

suede still avoiding providing any sources. Ozzy Bin Oswald must be disappointed in this impotence.

 

Pretty funny someone who posts like you brings up "blatant defiance of the ToS".

Oh by the way,

Care to ever prove your claim?

 

Your meaning seemed pretty clear to me.

Seems pretty straight forward.

Now it's your turn to post your evidence.

But I am getting tired of waiting. I'm kind of impatient that way.

 

Well you got the meaning of the 2nd option wrong.

Well it does to most people, but what did you think the 2nd option meant?

Soon as you fulfill the correct deal.

Btw, you were well on your way to fulfilling option one, then totally abandoned it after I asked you the following simple question:

Clarification: Are you saying that the debris in the trash container is what was excavated from the ground? yes or no

Why was that?

 

Perhaps it's the word 'or' that he's having a problem with.

suede's statement was "do this OR do that and I'll post my evidence" (paraphrasing)
Those were the only conditions.
DDave did "that", suede still hasn't posted his evidence.

Seems pretty straightforward. Wonder why suede won't keep his word?

 

I wonder why Hannibal, the person who claims to have unique Shanksville footage that proves the plane buried but refuses to show any, continues to try to slander me?

 

No slander at all, just pointing out that you still haven't kept your word.

By the way, trying to refocus on me won't help you keep your word. Just post your evidence like you promised you would.

 

I'm just showing people who are the kinds of people who are making slanderous claims about me after I explain to them why the deal has not been met.

But I'll make you a deal, you post any of the photographs or video of the Shanksville scene you claimed to have received, and I'll post my evidence even if Dave hasn't honestly fulfilled his part of the deal. Deal?

 

There has not been one slanderous word said against you.

You haven't kept your end of the deal you made with Ddave. Ddave fulfilled his end and you have been trying to change the subject ever since. Your credibility is lacking. Why would anyone make a 'deal' with you?

As for my sources, you have had them for months now.

 

Did I? But it said . . .

Pretty straight forward.

Well, silly me, I thought "concede that claim is a lie" meant "concede that claim is a lie". Which I did.

Does "concede that claim is a lie" mean something other than "concede that claim is a lie" to you?

Now we're just stuck here waiting for you to fulfill your part of the deal.

 

Your continued game playing is only delaying what you are seeking.

 

Twoofers lacking credibility? Nah...really?

 

And your continued avoidance of upholding your end of the deal should come as a surprise to no one.

 

Nope. Honestly fulfill the deal, or keep waiting.

If you didn't fully understand what the meanings of the options where, first, sorry for overestimating your intelligence, second, I'll gladly explain so we can move forward.

 

Oh, please do.

Given the following quote . . .

can you please explain to me what the meaning of "or concede that claim is a lie" is?

 

You got what the claim is wrong, so you were conceding to the wrong claim. I already told you this, but don't mind telling you again.

Do you need to know what the correct claim is?

 

I took the wording right out of your quote. How could that be wrong?

But I tire of this fruitless exercise.

Clearly you have no evidence for your claim. If you DID, it would be monumental and would rock the journalism world. You would be proclaiming it from the rooftops and you would be interviewed on one news show after another instead of skulking around anonymously on Internet forums.

 

Let's look what you originally had conceded to:

Then your craftily amended it:

Are you done with your game playing? Wanna go back and fulfill option one that you were well on your way to fulfilling until I stopped you dead in your tracks by asking your a simple clarification question?

 

Well, good Heavens, if it's the amendment that bothers you then this should suffice.

Oh no. You stopped me in my tracks all right. I suppose my evidence was not as convincing as I thought.

I have no alternative but to concede that the claim that most of Flight 93 buried is a lie. There, Option #2 fulfilled -- yet again.

Now please post your evidence supporting the following quote.

Still waiting . . .

 

Dave has certainly fulfilled the letter and intention of the deal.

When will the other party ever post his evidence?

 

I never said it wasn't convincing. I just wanted one clarification so I fully understood it, but you seemed to bolt from it when I asked for a simple clarification. Why was that?

Since everyone here knows how you like to try to be crafty with skirting the intended meaning of things, I need clarification on one small thing before I present my evidence (something Hannibal is afraid to do, present evidence):

The claim you are conceding to, who is making this claim?

 

It's been four days. You would think he would JUMP at the chance to prove everyone wrong.

And I should trust you this time because . . . . . . .

You've been dancing for four days. Either you have evidence or you don't. Stop playing games and post it already or we'll assume you have none.

 

It's been four months. You would think the skeptics would JUMP at the chance to prove the no-plane-buried conspiracy theory wrong.

If you hadn't continued to dance around my clarification questions to your answers, we'd be done on the first day of the deal.

 

One cannot convince a person who does not wish to look at the evidence and believes everyone else is lying no matter how much evidence you present or who says what. Trying to pretend it is possible to convince you of anything is just retarded.