Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's[W:191]

[zyzygy]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

I agree. And to me, the biggest break in the "Truther" claims is simply the timeline.

If you listen to most of them, the generally accepted standard is that they were able to get a bunch of "Arabs" to come to the US, take flying lessons, and plan on a suicide mission. And at the same time they were planting explosives all through the WTC. And they did it so well that nobody ever saw anything. No workers in the buildings reported the planting of explosives. Nobody who planted the explosives has ever admitted what they did on condition of anonymity and witness protection. Not one scrap of paper, not one order for the explosives has ever come out. The absolutely perfect "Black Op".

And then the fact that they were able to do this in less then 9 months! President Bush had been in office for less then 9 months when that happened. Our government's can't decide on anything in that short of an amount of time, let alone pull off such a complex plan and have it work perfectly. Which brings us to the next logical fact, it had to have been planned by the previous administration.

Now no matter what anybody may say about President Clinton, can anybody really see him as being some evil plotter that would plan for after he left office to have thousands of his countrymen killed? No, I can't either.

Myself, I take the most credible early information from a very courageous lady, Betty Ong. She was a stewardess on American Airlines flight 11 who identified to the American Airlines call center the identities of who the hijackers were. And I have yet to hear a credible claim to impeach her final minutes.

So for me "US Government Involvement" is pretty much ruled out. This only means foreign involvement. Now for most of the other Conspiracy Theorists, this generally means Israel. Of course, if you look at the same theorists who claim that they also claim that the government is controlled by ZOG, that Jews control all elements of the press, media and government, and that The Protocols of the Elders of Zion are a real historical document. Oh, and that the Holocaust never happened.

So you can pretty obviously rule them out in an instant without even thinking about it.

So what country or organization does that leave? How many other nations or nationally backed organizations were effectively at war with the United States. And able to recruit suicide attackers to do something like this?

Well, there is really only 1. Al-Qaeda. Which was sponsored and bankrolled by the Taliban, who controlled roughly half of Afghanistan.

And finally there is the 4th airplane. If this is a government plot, why have a fourth airplane crash into a field? That really makes no sense. You would crash it into some other landmark or target, even into a city. Not into an empty field. Now what makes logical sense when comparing the two? That the Government made this plan and purposefully planned to fly one of the hijacked airliners into the ground, or that after hearing the fate of the other aircraft the passengers tried to take over as we have all heard?

This is why I tend to believe the general facts of the Government report. Because they generally match all of the information I have been able to accumulate over decades.

The government couldn't even keep the whereabouts of Clinton's willy a secret. Assuming that the far-fetched scenario you sketch could be true, they would have had no chance of keeping it secret.

 

[Fledermaus]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

Well, you're the first here to use that against me. Congratulations for making fun of a person with mental illness. :thumbs:

If the shoe fits.....

 

[BmanMcfly]

Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

I agree. And to me, the biggest break in the "Truther" claims is simply the timeline.

If you listen to most of them, the generally accepted standard is that they were able to get a bunch of "Arabs" to come to the US, take flying lessons, and plan on a suicide mission. And at the same time they were planting explosives all through the WTC. And they did it so well that nobody ever saw anything. No workers in the buildings reported the planting of explosives. Nobody who planted the explosives has ever admitted what they did on condition of anonymity and witness protection. Not one scrap of paper, not one order for the explosives has ever come out. The absolutely perfect "Black Op".

You forgot how those Arabs were living with the FBI informant.., (in case you forget the 93 bombing, where the FBI informant was the one to supply the explosives and the detonator).

As for people seeing, I'm not sure if you've ever worked in an office building, but whenever there is any construction, there is a separation made to minimize the noise and the contact between construction workers and the office work going on.

Paperwork? That could be valid... But then, most black ops are classified from start to finish, and then some. Or, as I had posited, by hiring group of mercenaries, particularly not american ones, there might not be the paperwork that you think would be generated... At least not in a place where there is potential for things like FOIA requests.

And then the fact that they were able to do this in less then 9 months! President Bush had been in office for less then 9 months when that happened. Our government's can't decide on anything in that short of an amount of time, let alone pull off such a complex plan and have it work perfectly. Which brings us to the next logical fact, it had to have been planned by the previous administration.

PNAC was written about a year before bush even got elected. Not every position gets changed over just because a new president comes into office. Just to say, 9 months is actually something of an arbitrary number...

Now no matter what anybody may say about President Clinton, can anybody really see him as being some evil plotter that would plan for after he left office to have thousands of his countrymen killed? No, I can't either.

Same as last point, plus, I don't even think bush himself had much of any foreknowledge, Cheney on the other hand...

So what country or organization does that leave? How many other nations or nationally backed organizations were effectively at war with the United States. And able to recruit suicide attackers to do something like this?

Well, there is really only 1. Al-Qaeda. Which was sponsored and bankrolled by the Taliban, who controlled roughly half of Afghanistan.

How many of the hijackers were afghans again?

And finally there is the 4th airplane. If this is a government plot, why have a fourth airplane crash into a field? That really makes no sense. You would crash it into some other landmark or target, even into a city. Not into an empty field. Now what makes logical sense when comparing the two? That the Government made this plan and purposefully planned to fly one of the hijacked airliners into the ground, or that after hearing the fate of the other aircraft the passengers tried to take over as we have all heard?

This is why I tend to believe the general facts of the Government report. Because they generally match all of the information I have been able to accumulate over decades.

three possibilities here :

- there was an actual target, the passengers sacrificing themselves to ensure that the target was never reached. Or,
- it was taking too long, and a lack of response over that time would raise too many questions. (Though it's tough to speculate on the actual thought process at play)
- the plane was shot down, and the narrative created of people fighting back to sacrifice themselves rather than be a bomb on another target, to show the fighting spirit of America in the face of such extreme adversity... Or something like that.

 

[Fledermaus]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

You forgot how those Arabs were living with the FBI informant..,

An informant that did not inform the FBI.

You keep ignoring that.

(in case you forget the 93 bombing, where the FBI informant was the one to supply the explosives and the detonator). .

So, are you abandoning the claim the FBI supplied the explosives?

As for people seeing, I'm not sure if you've ever worked in an office building, but whenever there is any construction, there is a separation made to minimize the noise and the contact between construction workers and the office work going on.

And ignorance about the type of maintenance that goes on in large office buildings... HVAC, electrical, lighting, etc. So, NO ONE saw the explosives planted... Even people who see the inner workings of the building... Right.....................

Paperwork? That could be valid... But then, most black ops are classified from start to finish, and then some. Or, as I had posited, by hiring group of mercenaries, particularly not american ones, there might not be the paperwork that you think would be generated... At least not in a place where there is potential for things like FOIA requests.

Modified appeal to magic.

BTW - WHO hired this "group of mercenaries"?

How many of the hijackers were afghans again?

None. That is where some trained and where OBL retreated to. They were the ones hosting him post 9/11.

three possibilities here :

- there was an actual target, the passengers sacrificing themselves to ensure that the target was never reached. Or,
- it was taking too long, and a lack of response over that time would raise too many questions. (Though it's tough to speculate on the actual thought process at play)
- the plane was shot down, and the narrative created of people fighting back to sacrifice themselves rather than be a bomb on another target, to show the fighting spirit of America in the face of such extreme adversity... Or something like that.

The FIRST answer is the one supported by FACTS.

The other two are claims based on ignorance.

 

[BmanMcfly]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

An informant that did not inform the FBI.

You keep ignoring that.



So, are you abandoning the claim the FBI supplied the explosives?

The FBI officially denies involvement in the 93 attacks... The agent working the case with the informant told a very different story on the phone when he didn't know he was being recorded...

And what claim are you talking about?

Doesn't matter... I would swear that you are not even a human typing at a computer, but more like some bot with programmed responses to keywords... Except that if someone were to make such a piece of software, you would expect that they would try to make it at least appear intelligent.

 

[Fledermaus]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

The FBI officially denies involvement in the 93 attacks... The agent working the case with the informant told a very different story on the phone when he didn't know he was being recorded...

And what claim are you talking about?

Doesn't matter... I would swear that you are not even a human typing at a computer, but more like some bot with programmed responses to keywords... Except that if someone were to make such a piece of software, you would expect that they would try to make it at least appear intelligent.

The garbage claim YOU made time and again, over and over, that the FBI SUPPLIED THE EXPLOSIVES....

The claim YOU could not back up, even though you were asked time and again.

And, you can swear whatever you want. Tis but your delusion talking.

 

[BmanMcfly]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

The garbage claim YOU made time and again, over and over, that the FBI SUPPLIED THE EXPLOSIVES....

The claim YOU could not back up, even though you were asked time and again.

And, you can swear whatever you want. Tis but your delusion talking.

Lmao... I put the tapes up, and you were the one who could not understand the plain English.

Have a good one... *shakes head* (some peoples children)

 

[Oozlefinch]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

You forgot how those Arabs were living with the FBI informant.., (in case you forget the 93 bombing, where the FBI informant was the one to supply the explosives and the detonator).

Hold on one second. We already went over this before.

The "explosive" was home made ANFO. Basically cow poop and diesel oil. The same thing Timothy McVeigh would use to bomb Oklahoma City. So are you really trying to claim that they were unable to buy these 2 items without help from the FBI?

And he had started making bombs even before he came to the US. And he continued after the WTC bombing, including a 1994 bomb that he himself built and placed in a Philippine Airlines 747 which killed 1 passenger and injured 10 others.

At the time of his arrest, he had 2 bombs that he was trying to place on flights bound for the US.

Does this really sound like a guy who required the FBI to acquire for him the materials he needed?

 

[Jango]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

If the shoe fits.....

Except that it doesn't.

 

[Fledermaus]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

Lmao... I put the tapes up, and you were the one who could not understand the plain English.

Have a good one... *shakes head* (some peoples children)

You put tapes that DO NOT show the FBI GIVING explosives to anyone.

 

[Jango]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

But the problem with most CTs is that they rely upon omission of information as their proof. Yet they call themselves "skeptics" because they doubt the "official line".

Some may solely rest their case on the fact of life that the government willingly withholds information from being publicly released while telling us that we've gotten the whole story, but that fact is hardly ever the sole one used by everyone, as there are more bread crumbs along the trail than just the lack of transparency. We should doubt the official line when 1) we know that we're not getting the whole picture presented to us and 2) we're just getting the picture the head-of-state's administration wants us to be aware of.

That however is not what a real skeptic is. A real skeptic keeps an open mind until they can gather as many facts as possible. And having no facts is not in itself a fact, however many would have you believe that way.

Skepticism -- a skeptical attitude; doubt as to the truth of something.

Why accept a version of a story (whatever a person can scrounge together and remember) when we know without a doubt that so much of that story remains hidden from our very eyes? That's not skepticism. Skepticism is not believing something unless proof is shown. If the government retains the position of, "Yes...we're withholding information, but that doesn't mean you should not trust us, it means that you should trust us," the skeptic will be like :alert :naughty If any government wants their people to believe what they have to say, then they need to prove to us that we can.

This is the logical failure of the "double negative", and many have tried to debate me in that way. "I say President Reagan entered into a secret agreement with England to crash the economy of Myopia. Prove me wrong!"

Well, if it did not happen, it is impossible to be proven wrong. This is the fallacy of the double negative. Yet they will crow that since they can not be proven wrong, they must be right.

One glove does not fit all though. Some may rely on that argumentation style, but it is not universally distributed.

Now you and I have agreed sometimes, and disagreed on others. But if you notice one thing I consistently challenge people is to validate their own sources. If you say something is true, well it is not up to me to prove you to be false, it is up to you to prove yourself to be correct.

Which I have done in several different ways -- essays, link dumps, essays about what is found within the links I previously posted...it's that horse & water thing. You feel that way towards conspiracy theorists, but I feel that way equally with the two main camps of posters that routinely frequent this forum.

This is diametrically opposed to the majority of Conspiracy Theorists. They see any questioning of their beliefs as an attack. Believe anything you want to believe, it is your mind and your life.

Exactly, but I'd add this caveat on top: it is every bit as true for the other main segment of posters in this forum.

Believe anything you want to believe, it is your mind and your life.

Perhaps that is true for yourself, but many here are of different mentalities -- they certainly care what people think in this forum which is exactly why anytime a post is made that does not agree with their sensibilities, they viciously attack it.

But if I am involved and somebody spews incorrect information, even if it is something I agree with, I will call them on it.

:thinking

 

[KokomoJojo]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

Some may solely rest their case on the fact of life that the government willingly withholds information from being publicly released while telling us that we've gotten the whole story, but that fact is hardly ever the sole one used by everyone, as there are more bread crumbs along the trail than just the lack of transparency. We should doubt the official line when 1) we know that we're not getting the whole picture presented to us and 2) we're just getting the picture the head-of-state's administration wants us to be aware of.

Skepticism -- a skeptical attitude; doubt as to the truth of something.

Why accept a version of a story (whatever a person can scrounge together and remember) when we know without a doubt that so much of that story remains hidden from our very eyes? That's not skepticism. Skepticism is not believing something unless proof is shown. If the government retains the position of, "Yes...we're withholding information, but that doesn't mean you should not trust us, it means that you should trust us," the skeptic will be like :alert :naughty If any government wants their people to believe what they have to say, then they need to prove to us that we can.

One glove does not fit all though. Some may rely on that argumentation style, but it is not universally distributed.

Which I have done in several different ways -- essays, link dumps, essays about what is found within the links I previously posted...it's that horse & water thing. You feel that way towards conspiracy theorists, but I feel that way equally with the two main camps of posters that routinely frequent this forum.

Exactly, but I'd add this caveat on top: it is every bit as true for the other main segment of posters in this forum.

Perhaps that is true for yourself, but many here are of different mentalities -- they certainly care what people think in this forum which is exactly why anytime a post is made that does not agree with their sensibilities, they viciously attack it.

:thinking

thats a good post. unfortunately the people who are on the hugger team follow more along the lines of shills and disinformationalists. As an example, Oz claimed what was clearly and easily heard as a high explosive, was not a HE, and when asked could not or would not continue with how that conclusion was made. Always backwards or meaningless asssertions to throw people off the trail, and that goes for most of the hugger posts.

 

[Jango]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

thats a good post. unfortunately the people who are on the hugger team follow more along the lines of shills and disinformationalists. As an example, Oz claimed what was clearly and easily heard as a high explosive, was not a HE, and when asked could not or would not continue with how that conclusion was made. Always backwards or meaningless asssertions to throw people off the trail, and that goes for most of the hugger posts.

Which is why a proposed official debate in the True Debate forum has been denied on three occasions now.

 

[BmanMcfly]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

Hold on one second. We already went over this before.

The "explosive" was home made ANFO. Basically cow poop and diesel oil. The same thing Timothy McVeigh would use to bomb Oklahoma City. So are you really trying to claim that they were unable to buy these 2 items without help from the FBI?

And he had started making bombs even before he came to the US. And he continued after the WTC bombing, including a 1994 bomb that he himself built and placed in a Philippine Airlines 747 which killed 1 passenger and injured 10 others.

At the time of his arrest, he had 2 bombs that he was trying to place on flights bound for the US.

Does this really sound like a guy who required the FBI to acquire for him the materials he needed?

Whether they were capable or not is irrelevant. The FBI guy is admitting to supplying the actual explosive, rather than a simulant of the explosive saying that it might have been detected.

The detonator had been supplied so that there would be a secure conviction.

As far as the other bombings, I suppose I should listen to the tapes again to refresh the memory, but I seem to remember him referring to other bombs he had built.

Bottom line, you are negating the FBI on a phone call with the informant admitting to the involvement in the 93 bombing with "could have" speculation.

Now, back to Oklahoma City Bombing and mcveigh. How many bombs were used that day? If you said a number less than 4, you are wrong. There was the big one that blew up, and 3 others that were defused after. So, right there, you should admit that the story you had been told was a lie...

Nevermind that a witness came out and said how she saw multiple people dressed as phone repair people carrying grey sticks of butter. Or the other supplemental facts that show any reasonable person that mcveigh was a lone patsy, not a lone wolf terrorist.

 

[BmanMcfly]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

Which is why a proposed official debate in the True Debate forum has been denied on three occasions now.

That's the last thing the primary debunkers would want... They know that the evidence does not support the official story, beyond on a surface (re: propaganda) level.

 

[Gina]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

Which is why a proposed official debate in the True Debate forum has been denied on three occasions now.

That's the last thing the primary debunkers would want... They know that the evidence does not support the official story, beyond on a surface (re: propaganda) level.

Moderator's Warning:

Do not discuss moderation in public. If you have questions or concerns, PM a moderator or use the Contact Us button. To all of you, the personal comments and baiting need to stop. There is already a forum-wide warning in place. Please stick to the topic.

 

[BmanMcfly]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

Moderator's Warning:

Do not discuss moderation in public. If you have questions or concerns, PM a moderator or use the Contact Us button. To all of you, the personal comments and baiting need to stop. There is already a forum-wide warning in place. Please stick to the topic.

Neither of use was discussing moderation...

Some had been challenged to more formal debate of the topic, which has been refused... I was pointing out the last thing those people want is an honest and structured debate, as the why the other parties to the debate would refuse.

This wasn't about whether the mod team would allow such a debate to take place.

(At least not from my end)

 

[Gina]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

Neither of use was discussing moderation...

Some had been challenged to more formal debate of the topic, which has been refused... I was pointing out the last thing those people want is an honest and structured debate, as the why the other parties to the debate would refuse.

This wasn't about whether the mod team would allow such a debate to take place.

(At least not from my end)

Moderator's Warning:

While I thank you for the clarification, which was necessary so it was understood the context of those comments, please do not quote mod-boxes.

 

[KokomoJojo]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

That's the last thing the primary debunkers would want... They know that the evidence does not support the official story, beyond on a surface (re: propaganda) level.

the following is not in reference to anything 'mod'.

BM, what we have going down here are the same tactics used in the 70's to take down the peace movement.

Infiltrators into both debunkers and truther camps which is why you see them classifying me as a troll when their backs are against the wall and the only answer that can be given is to agree with a truther. Not in minutia, which they have no problem doing but in the fundamental premises.

These people are 'posers' and their objective is 'political' designed to bog down and distract threads to insure no substantial discussion can occur about hot political or potentially hot political topics.

I am sure you recall them handwaving away the core as insignificant, and they run from posting any real physics or math, or looking at it in a 3d perspective and everything they put up now days is merely soapbox rants of unsupported assertion followed by more unsupported assertions claiming their superior correctness. (cough!) lol

That is why you see these guys constantly dodge when anything goes against the generally held government position. For instance notice how they 'always' (in the end) agree with the government premise even if they have to say the government is wrong but they are right.

Look at the mountains of denial of material evidence. and on and on and on ///

 

[BmanMcfly]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

the following is not in reference to anything 'mod'.

BM, what we have going down here are the same tactics used in the 70's to take down the peace movement.

Infiltrators into both debunkers and truther camps which is why you see them classifying me as a troll when their backs are against the wall and the only answer that can be given is to agree with a truther. Not in minutia, which they have no problem doing but in the fundamental premises.

These people are 'posers' and their objective is 'political' designed to bog down and distract threads to insure no substantial discussion can occur about hot political or potentially hot political topics.

I am sure you recall them handwaving away the core as insignificant, and they run from posting any real physics or math, or looking at it in a 3d perspective and everything they put up now days is merely soapbox rants of unsupported assertion followed by more unsupported assertions claiming their superior correctness. (cough!) lol

That is why you see these guys constantly dodge when anything goes against the generally held government position. For instance notice how they 'always' (in the end) agree with the government premise even if they have to say the government is wrong but they are right.

Look at the mountains of denial of material evidence. and on and on and on ///

Ya, with friends like these who needs COINTELPRO.

I have asked them numerous times to express what it is that they use as a basis for calling you a troll, not because I believe them, I've seen nothing to suggest that you are different from me... Trying to get to the bottom of it all. Then, the best response I get is "it should be obvious", while the only thing obvious is that it's an attempted distraction.

My favorite is how often a debunker will come out claiming I'm wrong, and then detail the proof that I am right, and they won't even realize it.

 

[KokomoJojo]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

Ya, with friends like these who needs COINTELPRO.

I have asked them numerous times to express what it is that they use as a basis for calling you a troll, not because I believe them, I've seen nothing to suggest that you are different from me... Trying to get to the bottom of it all. Then, the best response I get is "it should be obvious", while the only thing obvious is that it's an attempted distraction.

My favorite is how often a debunker will come out claiming I'm wrong, and then detail the proof that I am right, and they won't even realize it.

Yep its like when I corner them on the construction being a lattice. What did I hear? go over to the amateur hour thread to see their jeers and summary dismissals. Now we hear the same thing coming from european engineers. it goes on and on the countless dodges and they come up with ANY and I do mean ANY reason NOT to respond see http://www.debatepolitics.com/consp...y-demolitions-w-1022-a-55.html#post1064071973

Now they are distancing themselves from the ROOSD theory too! Not them, major tom! Despite they have been pushing it as express fact LOL

As we can see they cannot rationally respond in support of their bogus claims so they do the next best thing, claim and try to paint a picture of superiority, as they are being flushed down the tubes.

Yep I think we have a new name for these political groups infiltrating posers. That said, dont get me wrong, its not like they get everything wrong, they dont, just details that change the nature of the premise from natural collapse to CD, those are krytonite.

 

[Mark F]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

Ya, with friends like these who needs COINTELPRO.

I have asked them numerous times to express what it is that they use as a basis for calling you a troll, not because I believe them, I've seen nothing to suggest that you are different from me... Trying to get to the bottom of it all. Then, the best response I get is "it should be obvious", while the only thing obvious is that it's an attempted distraction.

My favorite is how often a debunker will come out claiming I'm wrong, and then detail the proof that I am right, and they won't even realize it.

About what, how people use the word "explode" even when it doesn't involve explosives? That was the actual lesson of the conversation you refer to, not a detail about how big a transformer has to be to make a spectacular explosion. THAT misses the point entirely, as you did - claiming victory over a detail while completely missing the big picture conclusion.

 

[KokomoJojo]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

About what, how people use the word "explode" even when it doesn't involve explosives? That was the actual lesson of the conversation you refer to, not a detail about how big a transformer has to be to make a spectacular explosion. THAT misses the point entirely, as you did - claiming victory over a detail while completely missing the big picture conclusion.

so what conclusion was missed mark? That posers want the world to believe that hundreds of reported explosions including those that ripped skin off of peoples faces broke their legs and threw them across the room and shook the ground outside the building was all transformers.

that point?

 

[BmanMcfly]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

so what conclusion was missed mark? That posers want the world to believe that hundreds of reported explosions including those that ripped skin off of peoples faces broke their legs and threw them across the room and shook the ground outside the building was all transformers.

that point?

Right, but they barely even took the time to address the actual witness statements and just used hand waving opinions to dispute it, while not even checking to see if the explanation worked for what was described.

 

[Mark F]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

Right, but they barely even took the time to address the actual witness statements and just used hand waving opinions to dispute it, while not even checking to see if the explanation worked for what was described.

Bman, you were asked directly and repeatedly specifically which of the 2 hours of witness accounts dealt with explosive devices and which ones did not. Your hand-waved answer after months of avoiding the question was effectively they all heard explosives.

Dude, your not even trying.

I already knew this was complete nonsense. Right off the bat there were several accounts on that video that I could demonstrate were not describing explosives because I know the specific backstory in those cases. So what exactly is there to address? You refused to do the bare minimum of work required to make a case to answer, so why should anyone take the time to give a meaningful response? I presume it is because you either lack the courage or ability to back up your own claim by doing even so little as to pick out a single star witness who you think best supports your case and even just presenting that. Or perhaps you were hoping to win by attrition - making the rest of us rebut each and every witness individually even though you yourself refused to present them individually.