Pentagon crash during 9/11

[jjones]

Will the stupidity never end?

 

[BrokenVisage]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: gigapet


im not making up anything. i see there was clearly an explosion of some sort at the pentagon. I am not cinvinced either way on what caused it.

That right there tells me that you lack discernment ability. Any normal person would look at the facts and see the obvious. But some people can't see it. Their mind lacks resolution and problem-solving ability. It's what many people call "common sense". Some people don't have common sense.

So tell me 91TTZ, do you believe Lee Oswalt killed Kennedy and acted alone in the assult too? Just curious.

 

[MikeyIs4Dcats]

you've got to be fvcking kidding me.

and why does every one of these posts almost read verbatim!

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: BrokenVisage


So tell me 91TTZ, do you believe Lee Oswalt killed Kennedy and acted alone in the assult too? Just curious.

No, I don't believe that someone named "Lee Oswalt" killed Kennedy.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: gigapet


hmmm thats funny. Since my job revolves around assembling facts and problem solving.

The facts in this case are flimsy. Plane wrecks usually leave more mess so the obvious conclusion would be it wasnt a plane. Common sense also tells me that decisive videos of the plane as it approached would have been released at the very least to provide a stronger case for the airplane theory. These videos never surfaced. Common sense tells me there are more questions than answers which is why common sense tells me not to believe one side or the other until im presented with something irrefutable.

Of course you were going to say that. That's a pretty typical reply from someone of your caliber.

You might say that your job is to troubleshoot, but let's not forget that the captain of the Exxon Valdez had a job driving oil tankers, too.

Your argument and tactics speak volumes about you. If you had an ounce of common sense you wouldn't even have considered the argument that you gave.

 

[EyeMWing]

As I've said in every other thread: Lets throw YOU at the wall of the Pentagon at 500mph and see how much of you survives.

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: gigapet


hmmm thats funny. Since my job revolves around assembling facts and problem solving.

The facts in this case are flimsy. Plane wrecks usually leave more mess so the obvious conclusion would be it wasnt a plane. Common sense also tells me that decisive videos of the plane as it approached would have been released at the very least to provide a stronger case for the airplane theory. These videos never surfaced. Common sense tells me there are more questions than answers which is why common sense tells me not to believe one side or the other until im presented with something irrefutable.

Of course you were going to say that. That's a pretty typical reply from someone of your caliber.

You might say that your job is to troubleshoot, but let's not forget that the captain of the Exxon Valdez had a job driving oil tankers, too.

Your argument and tactics speak volumes about you. If you had an ounce of common sense you wouldn't even have considered the argument that you gave.

my caliber :roll:

instead of convincing me you've just attacked my common sense. I am not arguing anything. I said from the beginning i am un convinced. still am. Probably will be until something more conclusive is released.

Thank god science is not based on common sense lord only knows what world we'd live in.

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: EyeMWing
As I've said in every other thread: Lets throw YOU at the wall of the Pentagon at 500mph and see how much of you survives.

why did the expert Kilheimer claim he held body parts from the wreck as well as the blackbox.

If body parts survived and arent made of steel and metal like the aircraft where is the debris! That does'nt make sense to me.

 

[EyeMWing]

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: gigapet


hmmm thats funny. Since my job revolves around assembling facts and problem solving.

The facts in this case are flimsy. Plane wrecks usually leave more mess so the obvious conclusion would be it wasnt a plane. Common sense also tells me that decisive videos of the plane as it approached would have been released at the very least to provide a stronger case for the airplane theory. These videos never surfaced. Common sense tells me there are more questions than answers which is why common sense tells me not to believe one side or the other until im presented with something irrefutable.

Of course you were going to say that. That's a pretty typical reply from someone of your caliber.

You might say that your job is to troubleshoot, but let's not forget that the captain of the Exxon Valdez had a job driving oil tankers, too.

Your argument and tactics speak volumes about you. If you had an ounce of common sense you wouldn't even have considered the argument that you gave.

my caliber :roll:

instead of convincing me you've just attacked my common sense. I am not arguing anything. I said from the beginning i am un convinced. still am. Probably will be until something more conclusive is released.

Thank god science is not based on common sense lord only knows what world we'd live in.

Read it.

Furthermore, I still invite you to fling yourself at the pentagon at 500mph. By your logic, you should survive in big enough pieces to be surgically reassembled.

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: EyeMWing

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: gigapet


hmmm thats funny. Since my job revolves around assembling facts and problem solving.

The facts in this case are flimsy. Plane wrecks usually leave more mess so the obvious conclusion would be it wasnt a plane. Common sense also tells me that decisive videos of the plane as it approached would have been released at the very least to provide a stronger case for the airplane theory. These videos never surfaced. Common sense tells me there are more questions than answers which is why common sense tells me not to believe one side or the other until im presented with something irrefutable.

Of course you were going to say that. That's a pretty typical reply from someone of your caliber.

You might say that your job is to troubleshoot, but let's not forget that the captain of the Exxon Valdez had a job driving oil tankers, too.

Your argument and tactics speak volumes about you. If you had an ounce of common sense you wouldn't even have considered the argument that you gave.

my caliber :roll:

instead of convincing me you've just attacked my common sense. I am not arguing anything. I said from the beginning i am un convinced. still am. Probably will be until something more conclusive is released.

Thank god science is not based on common sense lord only knows what world we'd live in.

Read it.

Furthermore, I still invite you to fling yourself at the pentagon at 500mph. By your logic, you should survive in big enough pieces to be surgically reassembled.

Forgot Snopes is the dispenser of all irrefutable facts on the planet.

 

[EyeMWing]

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: EyeMWing

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: gigapet


hmmm thats funny. Since my job revolves around assembling facts and problem solving.

The facts in this case are flimsy. Plane wrecks usually leave more mess so the obvious conclusion would be it wasnt a plane. Common sense also tells me that decisive videos of the plane as it approached would have been released at the very least to provide a stronger case for the airplane theory. These videos never surfaced. Common sense tells me there are more questions than answers which is why common sense tells me not to believe one side or the other until im presented with something irrefutable.

Of course you were going to say that. That's a pretty typical reply from someone of your caliber.

You might say that your job is to troubleshoot, but let's not forget that the captain of the Exxon Valdez had a job driving oil tankers, too.

Your argument and tactics speak volumes about you. If you had an ounce of common sense you wouldn't even have considered the argument that you gave.

my caliber :roll:

instead of convincing me you've just attacked my common sense. I am not arguing anything. I said from the beginning i am un convinced. still am. Probably will be until something more conclusive is released.

Thank god science is not based on common sense lord only knows what world we'd live in.

Read it.

Furthermore, I still invite you to fling yourself at the pentagon at 500mph. By your logic, you should survive in big enough pieces to be surgically reassembled.

Forgot Snopes is the dispenser of all irrefutable facts on the planet.

Okay then, don't read Snopes and instead look at these pictures:
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/analysis/conclusions/docs/hullpiece_c.jpg
Fuselage, CLEARLY American Airlines.

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: EyeMWing

Read it.

Furthermore, I still invite you to fling yourself at the pentagon at 500mph. By your logic, you should survive in big enough pieces to be surgically reassembled.

Forgot Snopes is the dispenser of all irrefutable facts on the planet.

Moreso than a random flash-montage you find on some conspiracy site. Did you read the Purdue links I provided? I think they explain the "missing debris" mystery quite well.

 

[clarkey01]

Pentagon has ground to air misses doesnt it and a radar system ?

The gas station or was it the hotel had thier security video taken right after the "Plane" hit. Why

What was that hole all about ?

It just happen to be the side that was being worked on.

Im not saying it wasnt a plane but the lack of parts and some of stuff I read make for a strong case.

What happend to the ppl on that flight ? It'ds been said they were taken to an army base and blown up in a room. Doesnt matter if I believe it or not.

The first plane that hit the WTC was said to have had no windows (see 911 In plane sight) on the second there was a black box on the underside of the plane, what was that ?.

 

[Al Neri]

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: EyeMWing

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: gigapet


hmmm thats funny. Since my job revolves around assembling facts and problem solving.

The facts in this case are flimsy. Plane wrecks usually leave more mess so the obvious conclusion would be it wasnt a plane. Common sense also tells me that decisive videos of the plane as it approached would have been released at the very least to provide a stronger case for the airplane theory. These videos never surfaced. Common sense tells me there are more questions than answers which is why common sense tells me not to believe one side or the other until im presented with something irrefutable.

Of course you were going to say that. That's a pretty typical reply from someone of your caliber.

You might say that your job is to troubleshoot, but let's not forget that the captain of the Exxon Valdez had a job driving oil tankers, too.

Your argument and tactics speak volumes about you. If you had an ounce of common sense you wouldn't even have considered the argument that you gave.

my caliber :roll:

instead of convincing me you've just attacked my common sense. I am not arguing anything. I said from the beginning i am un convinced. still am. Probably will be until something more conclusive is released.

Thank god science is not based on common sense lord only knows what world we'd live in.

Read it.

Furthermore, I still invite you to fling yourself at the pentagon at 500mph. By your logic, you should survive in big enough pieces to be surgically reassembled.

Forgot Snopes is the dispenser of all irrefutable facts on the planet.

its ok, just don't do it again.

 

[Al Neri]

Originally posted by: EyeMWing

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: EyeMWing

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: gigapet


hmmm thats funny. Since my job revolves around assembling facts and problem solving.

The facts in this case are flimsy. Plane wrecks usually leave more mess so the obvious conclusion would be it wasnt a plane. Common sense also tells me that decisive videos of the plane as it approached would have been released at the very least to provide a stronger case for the airplane theory. These videos never surfaced. Common sense tells me there are more questions than answers which is why common sense tells me not to believe one side or the other until im presented with something irrefutable.

Of course you were going to say that. That's a pretty typical reply from someone of your caliber.

You might say that your job is to troubleshoot, but let's not forget that the captain of the Exxon Valdez had a job driving oil tankers, too.

Your argument and tactics speak volumes about you. If you had an ounce of common sense you wouldn't even have considered the argument that you gave.

my caliber :roll:

instead of convincing me you've just attacked my common sense. I am not arguing anything. I said from the beginning i am un convinced. still am. Probably will be until something more conclusive is released.

Thank god science is not based on common sense lord only knows what world we'd live in.

Read it.

Furthermore, I still invite you to fling yourself at the pentagon at 500mph. By your logic, you should survive in big enough pieces to be surgically reassembled.

Forgot Snopes is the dispenser of all irrefutable facts on the planet.

Okay then, don't read Snopes and instead look at these pictures:
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/analysis/conclusions/docs/hullpiece_c.jpg
Fuselage, CLEARLY American Airlines.

( that picture was ) implanted by the agency!

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: EyeMWing

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: EyeMWing

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: gigapet


hmmm thats funny. Since my job revolves around assembling facts and problem solving.

The facts in this case are flimsy. Plane wrecks usually leave more mess so the obvious conclusion would be it wasnt a plane. Common sense also tells me that decisive videos of the plane as it approached would have been released at the very least to provide a stronger case for the airplane theory. These videos never surfaced. Common sense tells me there are more questions than answers which is why common sense tells me not to believe one side or the other until im presented with something irrefutable.

Of course you were going to say that. That's a pretty typical reply from someone of your caliber.

You might say that your job is to troubleshoot, but let's not forget that the captain of the Exxon Valdez had a job driving oil tankers, too.

Your argument and tactics speak volumes about you. If you had an ounce of common sense you wouldn't even have considered the argument that you gave.

my caliber :roll:

instead of convincing me you've just attacked my common sense. I am not arguing anything. I said from the beginning i am un convinced. still am. Probably will be until something more conclusive is released.

Thank god science is not based on common sense lord only knows what world we'd live in.

Read it.

Furthermore, I still invite you to fling yourself at the pentagon at 500mph. By your logic, you should survive in big enough pieces to be surgically reassembled.

Forgot Snopes is the dispenser of all irrefutable facts on the planet.

Okay then, don't read Snopes and instead look at these pictures:
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/analysis/conclusions/docs/hullpiece_c.jpg
Fuselage, CLEARLY American Airlines.

wow look at that. The same ONE piece of debris that they show in EVERY picture when you ask where the debri is. ONE PIECE!!!! amazing!!!!!

 

[gigapet]

this one video from a pentagon camera was ok to release but the rest are not??? That is the most shady friggin operation I have ever heard of.

RELEASE THESE 5 pitures and this video ONLY!@!!!

WTF????? why?

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: clarkey01
Pentagon has ground to air misses doesnt it and a radar system ?

The gas station or was it the hotel had thier security video taken right after the "Plane" hit. Why

What was that hole all about ?

It just happen to be the side that was being worked on.

Im not saying it wasnt a plane but the lack of parts and some of stuff I read make for a strong case.

What happend to the ppl on that flight ? It'ds been said they were taken to an army base and blown up in a room. Doesnt matter if I believe it or not.

The first plane that hit the WTC was said to have had no windows (see 911 In plane sight) on the second there was a black box on the underside of the plane, what was that ?.

wow.. please tell me this is an attempt at a humorous post.

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: gigapet

wow look at that. The same ONE piece of debris that they show in EVERY picture when you ask where the debri is. ONE PIECE!!!! amazing!!!!!

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Simulation of Pentagon Plane Crash

Produced by structural engineers and CS majors. Forgive me if I take their word and expertise over an ATOT poster.

Phase I
Phase II

Now watch that video and see if you can understand why there isn't much giant plane wreckage to be found.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: gigapet

Thank god science is not based on common sense lord only knows what world we'd live in.

They'd probably call it "Earth". You're welcome to join us if you want....

 

[EyeMWing]

Originally posted by: clarkey01
Pentagon has ground to air misses doesnt it and a radar system ?

The gas station or was it the hotel had thier security video taken right after the "Plane" hit. Why

What was that hole all about ?

It just happen to be the side that was being worked on.

Im not saying it wasnt a plane but the lack of parts and some of stuff I read make for a strong case.

What happend to the ppl on that flight ? It'ds been said they were taken to an army base and blown up in a room. Doesnt matter if I believe it or not.

The first plane that hit the WTC was said to have had no windows (see 911 In plane sight) on the second there was a black box on the underside of the plane, what was that ?.

Not at that time, no it didn't. The White House and it's adjoining buildings are the sole AAA site in DC. The White House's missile system sits on the roof of the WH itself, which makes it impossible for it to have targetted that aircraft due to the massive office buildings on either side (which now house permanent SAM installations as well)

If YOU were attacked, you'd want to know right away, for certain, what just hit you. Jacking someone else's security video is perfectly legitimate for that.

A plane hit the f'ing building. It made a hole.

1/5 probability.

Again, lets throw YOU at a wall and see what survives. Witnesses say that debris rained down "like confetti". That's more than there was at the WTC.

Again with the throwing you at the wall. They were killed in the impact and cremated. Notice how we don't have any survivors from the other two planes, either.

You clearly missed the video of the first plane that hit. And the phone calls with the stewardesses. And 11ty billion other things. And a black box on the bottom of the second plane? I demand a screencap, because I sure as hell didn't see it. That, and even the USAF's 757/767 fleet doesn't incorporate black boxes on the bottom of their planes.

You have less evidence than the accepted story does. Prove your points. NOW. Also, while you're at it, assuming all 3 planes were fake, WHERE IN THE HELL DO YOU MAKE 3 FULLY LOADED AIRLINERS DISSAPEAR TO?

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Originally posted by: gigapet

wow look at that. The same ONE piece of debris that they show in EVERY picture when you ask where the debri is. ONE PIECE!!!! amazing!!!!!

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Simulation of Pentagon Plane Crash

Produced by structural engineers and CS majors. Forgive me if I take their word and expertise over an ATOT poster.

Phase I
Phase II

Now watch that video and see if you can understand why there isn't much giant plane wreckage to be found.

simulations are not very convincing.

 

[EyeMWing]

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Originally posted by: gigapet

wow look at that. The same ONE piece of debris that they show in EVERY picture when you ask where the debri is. ONE PIECE!!!! amazing!!!!!

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Simulation of Pentagon Plane Crash

Produced by structural engineers and CS majors. Forgive me if I take their word and expertise over an ATOT poster.

Phase I
Phase II

Now watch that video and see if you can understand why there isn't much giant plane wreckage to be found.

simulations are not very convincing.

Okay, simulations aren't convincing. Lets try an experiment then. Now you go buy a 757 and a gigantic Pentagon mockup... Alternatively, we could just fling you at the wall and see what happens, since the human body is much more impact resistant than an airplane.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: gigapet
this one video from a pentagon camera was ok to release but the rest are not??? That is the most shady friggin operation I have ever heard of.

RELEASE THESE 5 pitures and this video ONLY!@!!!

WTF????? why?

Honesly, do you really lack the intelligence to figure this out? (personally, I think you probably aren't stupid, but instead border on being schizophrenic)

 

[gigapet]

You have less evidence than the accepted story does. Prove your points. NOW. Also, while you're at it, assuming all 3 planes were fake, WHERE IN THE HELL DO YOU MAKE 3 FULLY LOADED AIRLINERS DISSAPEAR TO?

come on now it would not take an act of god to fly some planes to an undisclosed military hangar or into the ocean or......use yoru imagination.


but on another note...

give me a 5 second low quality video from any other angle and I would be convinced.

This one video they released has an obstructed view and it is crappier quality than my webcam.

too many things dont add up....

they have many videos of the event but apparently its only ok to release one 5 second clip with an obstructed view and very low quality that is very ambiguous in what it is depicting.

THen release about 5-10 fotos of the after math and make sure to only feature the same one piece of debris in each picture.

It just does not make sense that they will not release more compelling evidence. Granted the pentagon is a safe building but if they are going to release one video clip why not a second? what difference would it make?