"Although I must admit this is not very good proof of a plane
carrying a missile, it begs the question of "Where are the videos of
Flight 77 hitting the pentagon" to be answered, wouldnt you agree?"
Clearly they are being held from the public because then the conspiracy would be revealed... either that, you know, or maybe the government doesn't want to release the footage because of the mental harm it would cause family members of people who died on that flight.
0
"Although I must admit this is not very good proof of a plane
carrying a missile, it begs the question of "Where are the videos of
Flight 77 hitting the pentagon" to be answered, wouldnt you agree?"
Clearly they are being held from the public because then the conspiracy would be revealed... either that, you know, or maybe the government doesn't want to release the footage because of the mental harm it would cause family members of people who died on that flight.
And although there was free fall for a PORTION of the collapse, it's the conclusion that is the key. This can be explained in more ways then just explosives.
But I'm tired of trying to educate people who choose to believe whatever they want despite the facts. If you cared about the truth, you'd do your research and find out why. But you found your "smoking gun" or so you think. But the people interested in the truth take it a step further and look at ALL the conclusions that are possible. And knowing those and with the consistent eyewitness testimony of every official and fireman involved...I'd say it's a pretty strong case.
I watched all 3 videos, by the way.
All this subject matter we've discussed and your argument sits with 2.5 seconds of free fall on a building that a zillion firefighters said was going to collapse. I guess you win.
0
And although there was free fall for a PORTION of the collapse, it's the conclusion that is the key. This can be explained in more ways then just explosives.
But I'm tired of trying to educate people who choose to believe whatever they want despite the facts. If you cared about the truth, you'd do your research and find out why. But you found your "smoking gun" or so you think. But the people interested in the truth take it a step further and look at ALL the conclusions that are possible. And knowing those and with the consistent eyewitness testimony of every official and fireman involved...I'd say it's a pretty strong case.
I watched all 3 videos, by the way.
All this subject matter we've discussed and your argument sits with 2.5 seconds of free fall on a building that a zillion firefighters said was going to collapse. I guess you win.
If you want "eye witness testimony", Hutch, here's some from people that say a low flying plane, then an explosion, then the same plane continue to fly directly past the Pentagon.
If you want "eye witness testimony", Hutch, here's some from people that say a low flying plane, then an explosion, then the same plane continue to fly directly past the Pentagon.
And although there was free fall for a PORTION of the collapse, it's the conclusion that is the key. This can be explained in more ways then just explosives.
But I'm tired of trying to educate people who choose to believe whatever they want despite the facts. If you cared about the truth, you'd do your research and find out why. But you found your "smoking gun" or so you think. But the people interested in the truth take it a step further and look at ALL the conclusions that are possible. And knowing those and with the consistent eyewitness testimony of every official and fireman involved...I'd say it's a pretty strong case.
I watched all 3 videos, by the way.
All this subject matter we've discussed and your argument sits with 2.5 seconds of free fall on a building that a zillion firefighters said was going to collapse. I guess you win.
Awww, yes. The answer I get from just about everyone that believe the Government when they are confronted with facts that they cannot disprove. You asked for a qualified strucural engineer to admitt freefall speed? I gave you a whole report from NIST filled with them. Now you are tired of trying to convince me?
Typical.
0
Quote Originally Posted by HutchEmAll:
And although there was free fall for a PORTION of the collapse, it's the conclusion that is the key. This can be explained in more ways then just explosives.
But I'm tired of trying to educate people who choose to believe whatever they want despite the facts. If you cared about the truth, you'd do your research and find out why. But you found your "smoking gun" or so you think. But the people interested in the truth take it a step further and look at ALL the conclusions that are possible. And knowing those and with the consistent eyewitness testimony of every official and fireman involved...I'd say it's a pretty strong case.
I watched all 3 videos, by the way.
All this subject matter we've discussed and your argument sits with 2.5 seconds of free fall on a building that a zillion firefighters said was going to collapse. I guess you win.
Awww, yes. The answer I get from just about everyone that believe the Government when they are confronted with facts that they cannot disprove. You asked for a qualified strucural engineer to admitt freefall speed? I gave you a whole report from NIST filled with them. Now you are tired of trying to convince me?
before i a was a fire fighter i looked into allot of the theorys, once in the Academy we used 9/11 so often as a tool on how to fight fires, we talked about the building collapse just again and again, everything that happens in a fire is predictable it's a science, i look at the Kid videos onYoutube and i laugh now
0
before i a was a fire fighter i looked into allot of the theorys, once in the Academy we used 9/11 so often as a tool on how to fight fires, we talked about the building collapse just again and again, everything that happens in a fire is predictable it's a science, i look at the Kid videos onYoutube and i laugh now
the debunk 9/11 site has some answers, i honestly feel you would have more professionals of various fields coming out and saying 9/11 didn't add up, construction builders, chemists, fire fighters, physics people ect.
0
the debunk 9/11 site has some answers, i honestly feel you would have more professionals of various fields coming out and saying 9/11 didn't add up, construction builders, chemists, fire fighters, physics people ect.
The plane that supposedly hit the Pentagon, United Flight 77, was piloted by a man named Charles Burlingame. About 10 years prior to 9/11, the pentagon did experiments to simulate a commercial jet-liner crashing into the pentagon, as a precaution to future terrorist attacks. The experiments led to certain areas of the pentagon being "full proofed", which basically means they used several layers of steel-reinforced concrete so that whatever were to hit the pentagon never got further than the second or third layer, which kept most damage at a minimum to the actually operating structure of the building.
There are a few things that never made sense to me here.
First, there was only 1 area of the Pentagon that was 100% completed in terms of the "full proofing". Other areas were in the process of being "full proofed", but were not complete. The same exact area of the Pentagon that was completed to help prevent terrorist attacks via missle or jet-airliner? It was the same exact area that Flight 77 supposedly crashed into. That is far too much of a coincidence for me. But it gets worse.
The group that first decided to improve the Pentagon's stability in terms of preventative terrorist measures was lead by a team of architects and scientists. Guess who was the "CEO" of that team? Charles Burlingame.
Although I've yet to draw a "connection" between these coincidences, I'm sure something is there. 9/11 is far too much of a conspiracy for something like this to go unnoticed, and I'm sure it's somehow connected to the rest of the events. I just can't prove it yet
hey bobert smdio posted some kind of answer to the pentagon crash
I think what he said was the pilot Charles Burlingame has signed the same papers that every one else in his vivid imaginary scenario has signed - has never been seen again and is doing this to keep the U.S. government from being found responsible - very patriotic of him and all of the others, since according to smdio they all know the truth.
kind of ironic that smdio gets so upset when someone questions the validity of his fathers death, when he so freely smears the names of others lost that day.
0
Quote Originally Posted by smdio:
What do I know?
The plane that supposedly hit the Pentagon, United Flight 77, was piloted by a man named Charles Burlingame. About 10 years prior to 9/11, the pentagon did experiments to simulate a commercial jet-liner crashing into the pentagon, as a precaution to future terrorist attacks. The experiments led to certain areas of the pentagon being "full proofed", which basically means they used several layers of steel-reinforced concrete so that whatever were to hit the pentagon never got further than the second or third layer, which kept most damage at a minimum to the actually operating structure of the building.
There are a few things that never made sense to me here.
First, there was only 1 area of the Pentagon that was 100% completed in terms of the "full proofing". Other areas were in the process of being "full proofed", but were not complete. The same exact area of the Pentagon that was completed to help prevent terrorist attacks via missle or jet-airliner? It was the same exact area that Flight 77 supposedly crashed into. That is far too much of a coincidence for me. But it gets worse.
The group that first decided to improve the Pentagon's stability in terms of preventative terrorist measures was lead by a team of architects and scientists. Guess who was the "CEO" of that team? Charles Burlingame.
Although I've yet to draw a "connection" between these coincidences, I'm sure something is there. 9/11 is far too much of a conspiracy for something like this to go unnoticed, and I'm sure it's somehow connected to the rest of the events. I just can't prove it yet
hey bobert smdio posted some kind of answer to the pentagon crash
I think what he said was the pilot Charles Burlingame has signed the same papers that every one else in his vivid imaginary scenario has signed - has never been seen again and is doing this to keep the U.S. government from being found responsible - very patriotic of him and all of the others, since according to smdio they all know the truth.
kind of ironic that smdio gets so upset when someone questions the validity of his fathers death, when he so freely smears the names of others lost that day.
hey bobert smdio posted some kind of answer to the pentagon crash
I think what he said was the pilot Charles Burlingame has signed the same papers that every one else in his vivid imaginary scenario has signed - has never been seen again and is doing this to keep the U.S. government from being found responsible - very patriotic of him and all of the others, since according to smdio they all know the truth.
kind of ironic that smdio gets so upset when someone questions the validity of his fathers death, when he so freely smears the names of others lost that day.
Can you point to a line or sentence in which you claim I have "smeared" the names of ANY victim of the 9/11 tragedy? Or is that just some made up thought in your head that makes you feel better about the cover up which you are having trouble refuting?
0
Quote Originally Posted by swahili:
hey bobert smdio posted some kind of answer to the pentagon crash
I think what he said was the pilot Charles Burlingame has signed the same papers that every one else in his vivid imaginary scenario has signed - has never been seen again and is doing this to keep the U.S. government from being found responsible - very patriotic of him and all of the others, since according to smdio they all know the truth.
kind of ironic that smdio gets so upset when someone questions the validity of his fathers death, when he so freely smears the names of others lost that day.
Can you point to a line or sentence in which you claim I have "smeared" the names of ANY victim of the 9/11 tragedy? Or is that just some made up thought in your head that makes you feel better about the cover up which you are having trouble refuting?
If you read anything on this subject, read this and you tell me who has more credibility. If it wasn't such a serious subject as Roberts said, this would be a clown show from top to bottom.
You can read all of it if you want, but I urge you to click on the link re. flight 77 and the pentagon and scroll down until you get to the part about the plane engines and how these nutjobs try to show how the plane parts weren't from a boeing 757. It's beyond comical.
Read the whole thing and just see how many times they omit important information, flat out lie, and frequently mislead.
They even went out of their way to say the light poles weren't damaged and there was no debris from a plane.
You guys should be proud to have hitched your wagon to these lying,
I can show you lies, omissions, misleading statements.....100's of them.
If you read anything on this subject, read this and you tell me who has more credibility. If it wasn't such a serious subject as Roberts said, this would be a clown show from top to bottom.
You can read all of it if you want, but I urge you to click on the link re. flight 77 and the pentagon and scroll down until you get to the part about the plane engines and how these nutjobs try to show how the plane parts weren't from a boeing 757. It's beyond comical.
Read the whole thing and just see how many times they omit important information, flat out lie, and frequently mislead.
They even went out of their way to say the light poles weren't damaged and there was no debris from a plane.
You guys should be proud to have hitched your wagon to these lying,
I can show you lies, omissions, misleading statements.....100's of them.
Awww, yes. The answer I get from just about everyone that believe the Government when they are confronted with facts that they cannot disprove. You asked for a qualified strucural engineer to admitt freefall speed? I gave you a whole report from NIST filled with them. Now you are tired of trying to convince me?
Typical.
2.5 seconds of free fall explainable by factors other then explosive charges.
0
Quote Originally Posted by smdio:
Awww, yes. The answer I get from just about everyone that believe the Government when they are confronted with facts that they cannot disprove. You asked for a qualified strucural engineer to admitt freefall speed? I gave you a whole report from NIST filled with them. Now you are tired of trying to convince me?
Typical.
2.5 seconds of free fall explainable by factors other then explosive charges.
sure the pilot of the plane that crashed at the pentagon died that day however you insinuate he was involved in staging the crash
Actually, all I said was that he led a group that performed experiments simulating a commercial jet airliner crashing into the exact position of the Pentagon that was hit on 9/11
If that's insulting him in anyway, then I apologize perfusely.
0
Quote Originally Posted by swahili:
sure the pilot of the plane that crashed at the pentagon died that day however you insinuate he was involved in staging the crash
Actually, all I said was that he led a group that performed experiments simulating a commercial jet airliner crashing into the exact position of the Pentagon that was hit on 9/11
If that's insulting him in anyway, then I apologize perfusely.
2.5 seconds of free fall explainable by factors other then explosive charges.
Are you forgetting that it only took WTC7 5 seconds to fall? So more than half of the collapse was in freefall speed.
And the other half? It stopped freefalling because the debris started falling on top of each other and formed a pile of rubble.
I gave you the engineers that you asked for. So please start addressing the other things I've recently posted, and explain to me why Don Rumsfeld mentioned that Flight 93 was shot down in Pennsylvania.
Little Lie = Big Lie, Hutch ""
0
Quote Originally Posted by HutchEmAll:
2.5 seconds of free fall explainable by factors other then explosive charges.
Are you forgetting that it only took WTC7 5 seconds to fall? So more than half of the collapse was in freefall speed.
And the other half? It stopped freefalling because the debris started falling on top of each other and formed a pile of rubble.
I gave you the engineers that you asked for. So please start addressing the other things I've recently posted, and explain to me why Don Rumsfeld mentioned that Flight 93 was shot down in Pennsylvania.
so is that what you meant when you pointed out that he led a group involved in these experiments -- that he's not really dead that the plane did not crash -- then where the hell has he been for the last 9 years? and where are the rest of the people that were onboard?
0
so is that what you meant when you pointed out that he led a group involved in these experiments -- that he's not really dead that the plane did not crash -- then where the hell has he been for the last 9 years? and where are the rest of the people that were onboard?
"The official explanation is that the intense heat from the jet fuel vaporized the entire plane. From these pictures, it seems that there is absolutely no trace of a Boeing 757."
This is actually a statement that was made by Loose Change.
Apparently they are now using airplane parts in the contruction buildings.
Notice how he uses the term, "from these pictures" so he can be technically correct and misleading. But he's too chickenshit to say, "but no plane wreckage was found" because there is picture upon picture of the plane wreckage.
And you CT's eat it up like a bunch of hungry dogs. LMAO
You guys should be proud of your leader. All the CT's talk about how the government has us brainwashed. Sorry folks, you are the lemmings here.
0
"The official explanation is that the intense heat from the jet fuel vaporized the entire plane. From these pictures, it seems that there is absolutely no trace of a Boeing 757."
This is actually a statement that was made by Loose Change.
Apparently they are now using airplane parts in the contruction buildings.
Notice how he uses the term, "from these pictures" so he can be technically correct and misleading. But he's too chickenshit to say, "but no plane wreckage was found" because there is picture upon picture of the plane wreckage.
And you CT's eat it up like a bunch of hungry dogs. LMAO
You guys should be proud of your leader. All the CT's talk about how the government has us brainwashed. Sorry folks, you are the lemmings here.
Moreover, according to police, the youth confirmed having made the September 6 statement about the towers. At the moment he did so, his older brother elbowed him, said he had been “kidding,” and the youth in question agreed.
I do not know of any Law enforcement agency policies that use "group" interrogations. The idea that both brothers were questioned simultaneously, in the same room, makes me question the veracity of the whole report. Policy dictates that the brothers be seperated, and questioned seperately. Discrepancies would be noted between the two brothers' answers, as well as "too similar" statements. ( those that are identical word for word, for example.)
Additional questioning would then be performed, placing doubt in the minds of each of the brothers as to what the other had said, in order to detect even more discrepancies, such as changes in their stories, explanations for same that create even more questions or raise additional doubts.
Likewise, the fathers' returning from Pakistan and complaining about civil rights violations sounds fake as well. Said father would not have had time to complain about his sons' civil rights, as he would be howling about his own. He would be in custody and going through a major grilling, non-stop, for at least a week, maybe a month. He would be held incommunicado, woken and questioned at odd and random hours, and not allowed a good night's rest.
Hilarious flash -you attach a link to a story that could have come from the national enquirer --with all kinds of people tearing the report to shreads ---
not even close to as real as the towers coming down.
I'm sure you're mom humored you when you sent her this but like I said before --friends and co-workers probably not wise.
Wow, you must not be that bright. The article was originally from MSNBC, and picked up by this site (posted link) and many others. Also, the ORIGINAL article I read was on ABC NEWS. That is a FACT whether you want to believe it or not. Keep your head in the sand...
0
Quote Originally Posted by swahili:
someones response from your link
Moreover, according to police, the youth confirmed having made the September 6 statement about the towers. At the moment he did so, his older brother elbowed him, said he had been “kidding,” and the youth in question agreed.
I do not know of any Law enforcement agency policies that use "group" interrogations. The idea that both brothers were questioned simultaneously, in the same room, makes me question the veracity of the whole report. Policy dictates that the brothers be seperated, and questioned seperately. Discrepancies would be noted between the two brothers' answers, as well as "too similar" statements. ( those that are identical word for word, for example.)
Additional questioning would then be performed, placing doubt in the minds of each of the brothers as to what the other had said, in order to detect even more discrepancies, such as changes in their stories, explanations for same that create even more questions or raise additional doubts.
Likewise, the fathers' returning from Pakistan and complaining about civil rights violations sounds fake as well. Said father would not have had time to complain about his sons' civil rights, as he would be howling about his own. He would be in custody and going through a major grilling, non-stop, for at least a week, maybe a month. He would be held incommunicado, woken and questioned at odd and random hours, and not allowed a good night's rest.
Hilarious flash -you attach a link to a story that could have come from the national enquirer --with all kinds of people tearing the report to shreads ---
not even close to as real as the towers coming down.
I'm sure you're mom humored you when you sent her this but like I said before --friends and co-workers probably not wise.
Wow, you must not be that bright. The article was originally from MSNBC, and picked up by this site (posted link) and many others. Also, the ORIGINAL article I read was on ABC NEWS. That is a FACT whether you want to believe it or not. Keep your head in the sand...
This is exactly how the conspiracy kooks work. When the evidence doesn't back them up, they turn to the supernatural....or even the made up.
The biggest conspiracy in history....so big in fact....and so secure....that NYC kids even knew about it.
I'm surprised you weren't in on it, flash.
Everyone knows about it, but no one has been able to come up with the detailed plans as to how the government pulled it off.
Comical.
What is comical is your intelligence.
I posted many other FACTS that you have yet to acknowledge. It is clear there are people who had foreknowledge of the attacks, otherwise you wouldn't see the insider trading leading up to the event. You have yet to address the 9-11 Commission members stating their report does not tell the whole truth. No word from you on Dick and Bush, doing everything they could to impede the investigation. No word on the Commission NOT covering the actual crime scene or evidence. Your verocity and selective arguments, make you sound guilty, Hutch. Were you in on it too?
This story was first reported on ABC NEWS and the link I posted was to an article from MSNBC NEWS. Yes, groups of kids knew about the attacks ahead of time, Yes, there are multiple intelligence reports saying they knew of attacks ahead of time. Hell, Osama even said they were coming. Also, check out Sibel Edmonds, translator for the FBI. She recently testified under oath on her experiences. A testimony the US Gov't tried to prohibit her from telling.
Either, the greatest millitary on earth is the most incompetent on the planet, or they let it happen. Hutch has yet to show any evidence to prove otherwise.
.
0
Quote Originally Posted by HutchEmAll:
This is exactly how the conspiracy kooks work. When the evidence doesn't back them up, they turn to the supernatural....or even the made up.
The biggest conspiracy in history....so big in fact....and so secure....that NYC kids even knew about it.
I'm surprised you weren't in on it, flash.
Everyone knows about it, but no one has been able to come up with the detailed plans as to how the government pulled it off.
Comical.
What is comical is your intelligence.
I posted many other FACTS that you have yet to acknowledge. It is clear there are people who had foreknowledge of the attacks, otherwise you wouldn't see the insider trading leading up to the event. You have yet to address the 9-11 Commission members stating their report does not tell the whole truth. No word from you on Dick and Bush, doing everything they could to impede the investigation. No word on the Commission NOT covering the actual crime scene or evidence. Your verocity and selective arguments, make you sound guilty, Hutch. Were you in on it too?
This story was first reported on ABC NEWS and the link I posted was to an article from MSNBC NEWS. Yes, groups of kids knew about the attacks ahead of time, Yes, there are multiple intelligence reports saying they knew of attacks ahead of time. Hell, Osama even said they were coming. Also, check out Sibel Edmonds, translator for the FBI. She recently testified under oath on her experiences. A testimony the US Gov't tried to prohibit her from telling.
Either, the greatest millitary on earth is the most incompetent on the planet, or they let it happen. Hutch has yet to show any evidence to prove otherwise.
And check it out. "Loose Change I" has flight 93 crashing in PA...in fact, Dylan ends the "film" with "let's roll." Then in the 2nd one, he says:
"At 11:43 on September 11th, WCPO, a local TV station in Cincinatti, Ohio, reported that two planes landed at Cleveland Hopkins Airport due to a bomb threat. United Airlines identified one of the planes as Flight 93."
He can't even keep his misinformation straight.
My hero.
0
And check it out. "Loose Change I" has flight 93 crashing in PA...in fact, Dylan ends the "film" with "let's roll." Then in the 2nd one, he says:
"At 11:43 on September 11th, WCPO, a local TV station in Cincinatti, Ohio, reported that two planes landed at Cleveland Hopkins Airport due to a bomb threat. United Airlines identified one of the planes as Flight 93."
If you want "eye witness testimony", Hutch, here's some from people that say a low flying plane, then an explosion, then the same plane continue to fly directly past the Pentagon.
This guy says a missile hit the pentagon. OK, you can believe him. Why did they recover almost all of the bodies from flight 77....IN the pentagon along with tons of debris...including engines, landing gear, and wheels.
I just post quotes? It's evidence. You can believe some jackass similar to yourself calling in some radio show. I'll believe the forensic evidence. Whatever works for you, though.
0
Quote Originally Posted by smdio:
If you want "eye witness testimony", Hutch, here's some from people that say a low flying plane, then an explosion, then the same plane continue to fly directly past the Pentagon.
This guy says a missile hit the pentagon. OK, you can believe him. Why did they recover almost all of the bodies from flight 77....IN the pentagon along with tons of debris...including engines, landing gear, and wheels.
I just post quotes? It's evidence. You can believe some jackass similar to yourself calling in some radio show. I'll believe the forensic evidence. Whatever works for you, though.
Although I must admit this is not very good proof of a plane carrying a missile, it begs the question of "Where are the videos of Flight 77 hitting the pentagon" to be answered, wouldnt you agree?
__________
Then why did they identify almost all the bodies of the people on that flight as well as tons of debris FROM A 757????
Directly answer that question or I'm done here.
If I found wreckage from a Cessna 172 in my house when I got home from vacation, I WOULDN'T NEED A FUCKING VIDEO TO KNOW THAT ONE HIT IT.
You honestly are this stupid, aren't you?
0
Although I must admit this is not very good proof of a plane carrying a missile, it begs the question of "Where are the videos of Flight 77 hitting the pentagon" to be answered, wouldnt you agree?
__________
Then why did they identify almost all the bodies of the people on that flight as well as tons of debris FROM A 757????
Directly answer that question or I'm done here.
If I found wreckage from a Cessna 172 in my house when I got home from vacation, I WOULDN'T NEED A FUCKING VIDEO TO KNOW THAT ONE HIT IT.
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.
there are multiple intelligence reports saying they knew of attacks ahead of time. Hell, Osama even said they were coming. Also, check out Sibel Edmonds, translator for the FBI. She recently testified under oath on her experiences. A testimony the US Gov't tried to prohibit her from telling.
My hero.
Hot Forum Topics
