|
Do you believe there is a U.S. government cover-up surrounding 9/11? (pg. 213)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| XaNaX |
| quote: | Originally posted by colonelcrisp
A rational and logical person would conclude that the thing that hit the pentagon was flight 77.
|
That is the problem here, this thread is chock full of jackasses who have absolutely no common sense. Not only that, but they don't have one shred of evidence to back up any alternate theory of something besides Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon, but at the same time want us to provide like engine part serial numbers.
tards |
|
|
| Lebezniatnikov |
| quote: | Originally posted by culorut
Not at all, if someone saw a plane in the sky how is it that they can prove it was Flight 77? Do these eyewitness have super powers which enable them to read the markings on the airliner to identify it? |
I don't think anybody ever said it was visually identified as AA Flight 77. I think they said it was visually identified as an AA flight. I'm just curious as to where you're going with this. For the sake of your argument, let's pretend it was just some random American Airlines plane that hit the Pentagon, and not Flight 77... my question to you is... what in the world does that prove?
| quote: | | Really? So pieces of an airliner pierced a hole in the Pentagon (rein enforced concrete, thick metal) and also remained on the lawn??? Sounds a little suspicious to me, you cannot have it both ways. |
Have you ever seen a plane crash dude? You do realize that the plane doesn't stay intact and disperse in a nice neat pattern, right? The fuselage penetrated the reinforced concrete, but the wings, landing gear, etc. got shaved off and remained on the lawn. Not too hard to imagine mate, I'm not sure if you're just joking around with these questions or not.
| quote: | | Besides none of "parts" recovered where ever directly matched to Flight 77 serial numbers. |
Again, is your argument that another plane hit the Pentagon, that a missile hit the Pentagon, or that the whole thing is a fabrication? It's kind of hard to refute your argument when nobody even knows what it is. |
|
|
| culorut |
1- They have pieces of a airplane all over the scene
Which airplane are these parts from is what is being asked. Not one of the airplanes from 9/11 have ever been traced to the said flights.
2- They find bodies of passengers in the building.
Does not prove what hit the Pentagon.
3- AA flight 77 is missing and no one has found it
I really do not care at this point. The official fairy tale says that Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. The government is telling everyone this so where exactly is the 100% concrete evidence that it actually happened? |
|
|
| culorut |
| quote: | | Again, is your argument that another plane hit the Pentagon, that a missile hit the Pentagon, or that the whole thing is a fabrication? It's kind of hard to refute your argument when nobody even knows what it is. |
My argument is that if the official story says that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon then where the hell is it?
It is definitely not in the bull video released for sure and nothing has ever been matched to the serial numbers of the said flight.
It has only been 7 years but no one can back up the claims? What exactly is there to hide if this is supposed to be the one of the truth's of 9/11.
:rolleyes: |
|
|
| XaNaX |
| quote: | Originally posted by culorut
My argument is that if the official story says that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon then where the hell is it?
It is definitely not in the bull video released for sure and nothing has ever been matched to the serial numbers of the said flight.
|
god damn it are you really that ing retarted? Where is it? The ing plane crashed into the ground/a building at several hundred miles per hour and burst into flames. There are tiny little pieces of it all over the lawn and inside the Pentagon. The dead bodies of its passengers were found in the Pentagon. There is no reason to match serial numbers, the only people who don't think Flight 77 crashed at the Pentagon are halfwit tard no-planer truther sticks and even if they showed you the serial numbers and they matched you stupid ing douchebags would just say that was another conspiracy and they faked the serial numbers or something.
The bottom line is you dumbs:
1. Cannot offer any evidence of one single alternate account of what happened at the Pentagon
2. Can't explain what airplane parts and dead bodies of Flight 77 passengers are doing there if the flight didn't crash there
3. Have never posted on shred of evidence to back up any of the claims you have made that hasn't been quickly and easily debunked
Go eat a dick and stop posting until you have some evidence that proves something besides Flight 77 hit the Pentagon |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
rightyo.
so what we have is
-eye witness testimony that an american airlines jet crashed into the pentagon; hundreds of witnesses that saw a plane crash into the pentagon
-bodies from those that were known to have flown on flight 77 matched via DNA
-flight 77 nor its passengers have turned up elsewhere
-american airlines never reported any other of its passenger jets missing
-multiple pieces of wreakage consistent with a 757 found on site
-relatives of those who died on flight 77 saying their loved ones had called them and said their plane had been hijacked by terrorists with knives and box cutters.
i'd really like to hear from cretinrot how he thinks hte bodies from flight 77 really appeared in the pentagon. that must be worth a grin or two from us!!!
10 characteristics of conspiracy theorists
A useful guide by Donna Ferentes
5. Inability to employ or understand Occam's Razor. Aided by the principle in 4. above, conspiracy theorists never notice that the small inconsistencies in the accounts which they reject are dwarfed by the enormous, gaping holes in logic, likelihood and evidence in any alternative account.
| quote: | Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov
Again, is your argument that another plane hit the Pentagon, that a missile hit the Pentagon, or that the whole thing is a fabrication? It's kind of hard to refute your argument when nobody even knows what it is. |
| quote: | Originally posted by culorut
My argument is that if the official story says that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon then where the hell is it? |
3. Inability to answer questions. For people who loudly advertise their determination to the principle of questioning everything, they're pretty poor at answering direct questions from sceptics about the claims that they make. |
|
|
| {b.s.e.} |
| quote: | Originally posted by XaNaX
STFU truther jackass I have discredited every claim you have made recently in this thread and exposed every post you have made as being full of lies, half-truths, and false "evidence". Stop trolling this thread until you can answer the following (I'm now asking for the 6th or 7th time):
1. If Flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon what did? Please back your claim up with actual real evidence not more questions.
2. If Flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon where is the plane, its crew, and all its passengers? Please back your claim up with real hard evidence.
|
Heh, 'simpleton'. You aren't very smart yourself, are you?
I'm entirely open to being wrong, you head; if you actually feel able to judge someone based on their opinion and interpretations of proof on one subject, then you have a lot to learn about being a normal ing human. The term is ignorant, and you fit it to a 'T'. I don't need a list to tell me that.
You might try calming down a shade too. :cool: This is the internet.
___________
Eyewitness testimony, gleaned from official Pentagon eyewitness accounts.
Scott P. Cook, fifth floor of the Portals building, at 1280 Maryland Avenue SW, Washington DC, the southernmost building at the end of 14th Street, right at the Tidal Basin and Maine Avenue
"We didn’t know what kind of plane had hit the Pentagon, or where it had hit. Later, we were told that it was a 757 out of Dulles, which had come up the river in back of our building, turned sharply over the Capitol, ran past the White House and the Washington Monument, up the river to Rosslyn, then dropped to treetop level and ran down Washington Boulevard to the Pentagon. I cannot fathom why neither myself nor Ray, a former Air Force officer, missed a big 757, going 400 miles an hour, as it crossed in front of our window in its last 10 seconds of flight. ... As we watched the black plume gather strength, less than a minute after the explosion, we saw an odd sight that no one else has yet commented on. Directly in back of the plume, which would place it almost due west from our office, a four-engine propeller plane, which Ray later said resembled a C-130, started a steep decent towards the Pentagon. It was coming from an odd direction (planes don’t go east-west in the area), and it was descending at a much steeper angle than most aircraft. Trailing a thin, diffuse black trail from its engines, the plane reached the Pentagon at a low altitude and made a sharp left turn, passing just north of the plume, and headed straight for the White House. All the while, I was sort of talking at it: "Who the hell are you? Where are you going? You’re not headed for downtown!" Ray and Verle watched it with me, and I was convinced it was another attack. But right over the tidal basin, at an altitude of less than 1000 feet, it made another sharp left turn to the north and climbed rapidly. Soon it was gone, leaving only the thin black trail
Michael DiPaula, walking outside to a construction trailer
"It sounded like a missile," DiPaula recalls. "There were three loud thump, thump, thumps. You could hear the metal cracking and crinkling, and the explosion."
Allen Cleveland --
"Soon after the crash (Within 30 seconds of the crash) I witnessed a military cargo plane (Possibly a C130) fly over the crash site and circle the mushroom cloud. My brother inlaw also witnessed the same plane following the jet while he was on the HOV lanes in Springfield. He said that he saw a jetliner flying low over the tree tops near Seminary RD in Springfield, VA. and soon afterwards a military plane was seen flying right behind it."
Kenneth McClellan --
"A C-130 cargo plane had departed Andrews Air Force Base en route to Minnesota that morning and reported seeing an airliner heading into Washington 'at an unusual angle,' said Lt. Col. Kenneth McClellan, a Pentagon spokesman. Air-traffic control officials instructed the propeller-powered cargo plane 'to let us know where it's going,' McClellan said. The C-130 pilot 'followed the aircraft and reported it was heading into the Pentagon,' he said.:
John O'Keefe --
"Then the plane -- it looked like a C-130 cargo plane -- started turning away from the Pentagon, it did a complete turnaround."
Phillip Thompson -- observed from 1-395 HOV lanes, directly across from the Navy Annex
"Then a gray C-130 flew overhead, setting off a new round of panic. I tried to reassure people that the plane was not a threat. All around me people began to panic, fleeing for their lives."
Keith Wheelhouse --
"The second plane looked similar to a C- 130 transport plane, he said. He believes it flew directly above the American Airlines jet, as if to prevent two planes from appearing on radar while at the same time guiding the jet toward the Pentagon."
Joel Sucherman --
"Within a minute another plane started veering up and to the side. At that point it wasn't clear if that plane was trying to manouver out of the air space or if that plane was coming round for another hit."
__________
Who actually uses 'STFU' in an argument? That's hilarious....ly lame. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
so, instead of posting ambiguous bollocks (i especially like your inclusion of the missile quote (as if Michael DiPaula is an expert on US missile systems :rolleyes:) but i want a thesis.
what exactly do you believe the C-130 was in the area doing? what was its role in 9/11? |
|
|
| {b.s.e.} |
http://911research.wtc7.net/
this a great page.
___________
Honestly, Xanax, you're a pretty annoying person. I'd hate to be trapped in a seat beside you in the 757 to Hell. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by {b.s.e.}
Heh, 'simpleton'. You aren't very smart yourself, are you?
I'm entirely open to being wrong, you head; if you actually feel able to judge someone based on their opinion and interpretations of proof on one subject, then you have a lot to learn about being a normal ing human. The term is ignorant, and you fit it to a 'T'. I don't need a list to tell me that.
You might try calming down a shade too. :cool: This is the internet.
___________ |
3. Inability to answer questions. For people who loudly advertise their determination to the principle of questioning everything, they're pretty poor at answering direct questions from sceptics about the claims that they make. |
|
|
| {b.s.e.} |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
so, instead of posting ambiguous bollocks (i especially like your inclusion of the missile quote (as if Michael DiPaula is an expert on US missile systems :rolleyes:) but i want a thesis.
what exactly do you believe the C-130 was in the area doing? what was its role in 9/11? |
Yeah, I had to. I suppose I could have suggested a grain of salt alongside. :wtf:
Evem if I'm wrong it doesn't matter, that's what you guys don't understand. Just because I don't have the air-tight case against the government doesn't mean they aren't guilty s.
I really don't know what happened on 9-11. None of us do. What I can't believe is that some people can't at least acknowledge that something quite shady transpired on that day. When you investigate a murder, motive is a primary issue. Who would have benefited from such an act? A pissed off, and piss poor region in the Middle East? Or the oil hungry war machine that's walking around in their back yard with a permanent military operation. Obviously Al Qaeda took credit for the bombings, though initially bin Laden denied the allegations*. It was quite politically advantageous for them, no? I'm pretty sick of going in circles in this thread.
There is sufficient evidence and enough lies to fool most people, and the idea that they would perpetrate against their own people so horrendous that it's near impossible for everyone to take anything but the official story. The official story of the WTC collapse is absurd.
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but not questioning important events that will shape our of future [such as this] is much, much worse.
*edit
______
Source: Khilafah.com, 10 Oct 2001
The Al-Qaidah group had nothing to do with the 11 September attacks on the USA, according to Usama bin Ladin in an interview with the Pakistani newspaper Ummat. Usama bin Ladin went on to suggest that Jews or US secret services were behind the attacks, and to express gratitude and support for Pakistan, urging Pakistan’s people to jihad against the West. The following is the text of an interview conducted by a "special correspondent", published in the Pakistani newspaper Ummat on 28 September, place and date of interview not given.
UMMAT: You have been accused of involvement in the attacks in New York and Washington. What do you want to say about this? If you are not involved, who might be?
USAMA BIN LADEN: In the name of Allah (God), the most beneficent, the most merciful. Praise be to Allah, Who is the creator of the whole universe and Who made the Earth as an abode for peace, for the whole humankind. Allah is the Sustainer, who sent Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) for our guidance. I am thankful to the Ummat Group of Publications, which gave me the opportunity to convey my viewpoint to the people, particularly the valiant and momin (true Muslim) people of Pakistan who refused to believe the lies of the demon (Pakistani military dictator General Pervez Musharraf).
I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people. Such a practice is forbidden even in the course of a battle. It is the United States, which is perpetrating every maltreatment on women, children and common people of other faiths, particularly the followers of Islam. All that is going on in Palestine for the last 11 months is sufficient to call the wrath of God upon the United States and Israel. There is also a warning for those Muslim countries, which witnessed all these as a silent spectator. What had earlier been done to the innocent people of Iraq, Chechnya and Bosnia? Only one conclusion could be derived from the indifference of the United States and the West to these acts of terror and the patronage of the tyrants by these powers that America is an anti-Islamic power and it is patronizing the anti-Islamic forces. Its friendship with the Muslim countries is just a show, rather deceit. By enticing or intimidating these countries, the United States is forcing them to play a role of its choice. Put a glance all around and you will see that the slaves of the United States are either ruler[s or enemies of Muslims. |
|
|
| {b.s.e.} |
| Like, holy , I have better things to do in my life than research the government's role in 9-11. I've got a job and a girlfriend, and last I checked I'm Canadian. Good luck with your shiny new Patriot Act and NSA wiretaps. The Government's your friend, hey Xanax? :gsmile: |
|
|
|
|
