Newly Released FBI Docs Shed Light on Apparent Mossad Foreknowledge of 9/11 Attacks

originally posted by: openedeyesandears
a reply to: neutronflux

I pulled the old neutronflux's trick.

you never answered mine (quite a few) and always go on with misleading quotes/statements and NEVER commented on any video supported to you by me or others.

How does it feel?

Your question has no based in the reality of the situation. So, how can it be answered?

Again. Do you have any evidence the remains handed over to surviving family members of flight 77 as attested to by those family members are not authentic?

Do you have any evidence the death certificates issued were fraudulent.

Do you have any evidence of the remains pulled from the flight 77 crash site are fraudulent.

You passed the realm of innuendo and entering the realm of slander unless you have actual proof the surviving family members, the issues death certificates, the documented remains recovery, and the DNA testing was fraudulent.

If your making allegations of people lying, the burden of proof is on you.

a reply to: openedeyesandears

How about instead of you “asking questions”, you state a clear theory. And then provide proof of fraudulent DNA testings, death certificates, and accounts that has nothing to do with video of body bags if you think there were no flight 77 victims.

a reply to: neutronflux

here is a clear theory...

The young man: " Does the order still stand? "
Cheney: " Of course it does, have you heard anything to the contrary? "



Is that clear enough?

originally posted by: openedeyesandears
a reply to: neutronflux

here is a clear theory...

The young man: " Does the order still stand? "
Cheney: " Of course it does, have you heard anything to the contrary? "

Is that clear enough?

In the context of flight 77 victims.
No it’s not. Because you cannot form an actual argument, and post actual facts.

Now.
Your question has no based in the reality of the situation. So, how can it be answered?

Again. Do you have any evidence the remains handed over to surviving family members of flight 77 as attested to by those family members are not authentic?

Do you have any evidence the death certificates issued were fraudulent.

Do you have any evidence of the remains pulled from the flight 77 crash site are fraudulent.

You passed the realm of innuendo and entering the realm of slander unless you have actual proof the surviving family members, the issues death certificates, the documented remains recovery, and the DNA testing was fraudulent.

If your making allegations of people lying, the burden of proof is on you.

a reply to: openedeyesandears

The young man: " Does the order still stand? "
Cheney: " Of course it does, have you heard anything to the contrary? "

You have a clue what is being talked about ??

We were discussing your ghoulish infatuation with the dead bodies

What Cheney is talking about is what to do if plane ignores orders to land or fail to make contact with ATC

In that case assume plane is under control of terrorist and hostile

At this point Air Force will shoot it down

Stop trying to derail thread and stay on topic ………..

a reply to: firerescue

And they shot it down before it hit the Pentagon?
I get it... They missed. ok

Fools

originally posted by: openedeyesandears
a reply to: firerescue

And they shot it down before it hit the Pentagon?
I get it... They missed. ok

Fools

Then what damaged the pentagon, and how did the flight crew and passengers of flight 77 end up dead at the pentagon?

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: openedeyesandears
a reply to: firerescue

And they shot it down before it hit the Pentagon?
I get it... They missed. ok

Fools

Then what damaged the pentagon, and how did the flight crew and passengers of flight 77 end up dead at the pentagon?

A drone or a possible missile? Just like the towers. I wasn't there to see it with my own eyes like you did.
How do you view that statement from Mineta about Cheney? Of course you will ignore it, just like why the USA didn't invade Saudi Arabia instead, why was 9/11 called " The New Pear Harbour" by the scumbags, suspicious transactions prior to that day, "terrorists" supposedly being monitored by FBI months before and still manage to destroy the buildings, "terrorists" couldn't fly a kite yet outperformed the best pilots out there, phone calls that didn't exist ( story changed so many times), Israelis (Mossad) again just monitored by FBI, PNAC Document that you still don't know about ( read ignore), etc, etc.

Look at the bigger picture not just that darn beam that you found on the ground twisted from " the pancake effect". lol

It's obvious you are pushing your idea on here for some reason because you never want to discuss any of what many have posted on here. Just the old parrot of the same pictures and same old nasty comments to whoever don't agree with you.

a reply to: openedeyesandears

You

A drone or a possible missile

Nope on the missile.

Well. Look at that. This has been posed for you before.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: openedeyesandears

Based on the entrance hole into the pentagon and the actual damage to the pentagon, why would anyone with credibility believe it was a missile?

The Missile Hypothesis

www.foreignpolicyjournal.com...

The missile hypothesis cannot explain the spatial characteristics of the physical damage. The light poles were effectively 100 feet apart, and the generator-trailer and low concrete wall were effectively 43 feet apart. These objects could not all have been impacted by a missile. The shape and size of the impact hole precludes a missile, the damaged internal columns were spaced apart over a wide area, and the bowed and abraded columns could not have been rendered in such a condition by a missile. A missile could possibly have created the C ring hole, but only plane parts were found in the debris in the AE Drive.

Donald Rumsfeld alluded to a missile, and eyewitness Mike Walter spoke of a missile, but in the metaphorical sense of a plane acting as a missile. These comments fueled the missile hypothesis. But no witnesses claimed to have seen a missile. Witnesses overwhelmingly described a large plane. The missile hypothesis fails the test of the scientific method and the analysis shows the hypothesis is false.

As far as a drone?

Doesn’t explain the people that boarded flight 77 at gate D26 from Dulles, the flight tracked to the pentagon by radar, the bulk of witnesses that attest to a large jet hitting the pentagon, the flight path and pentagon damage, and then the remains of flight 77’s passengers and crew ending up at the pentagon.

You

Look at the bigger picture not just that darn beam that you found on the ground twisted from " the pancake effect". lol

From the person that gets the littlest details wrong? Really?

Your wrong about so many things concerning 9/11, why would I find you credible. Especially when you just ignore facts? Like there is no evidence a drone or missile caused the damage at the pentagon.

a reply to: neutronflux

hmm, that's weird. Looks like you skipped a whole paragraph you omitted to answer... because you know what it's all about. And, why would Cheney make that comment? I can't wait to see what kind of an argument an idiot would come up with..

originally posted by: openedeyesandears
a reply to: neutronflux

hmm, that's weird. Looks like you skipped a whole paragraph you omitted to answer... because you know what it's all about. And, why would Cheney make that comment? I can't wait to see what kind of an argument an idiot would come up with..

Because your statements are based on false narratives, and have not conveyed yourself as credible. You cannot evan make the case something other than flight 77 hit the pentagon. Flight 77 hit the pentagon, and your narrative crumbles.

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: openedeyesandears
a reply to: neutronflux

hmm, that's weird. Looks like you skipped a whole paragraph you omitted to answer... because you know what it's all about. And, why would Cheney make that comment? I can't wait to see what kind of an argument an idiot would come up with..

Because your statements are based on false narratives, and have not conveyed yourself as credible. You cannot evan make the case something other than flight 77 hit the pentagon. Flight 77 hit the pentagon, and your narrative crumbles.

This here is better than watching cartoons.
False narrative about,

* Cheney's comments?
* PNAC Document?
* War in Afghanistan and Iraq instead of Saudi Arabia?
* " Terrorists " that couldn't fly a kite, outperformed the best pilots out there?

Which one?

a reply to: openedeyesandears

NO WRONG AGAIN

Orders to land all aircraft and by implication shoot down those who refused CAME AFTER PENTAGON WAS HIT

Do you any research or simply parrot stupid memes created by conspiracy fantasists ??

What I mean by research is using actual provable facts not lies or made up BS by the Conspiracy loons

a reply to: firerescue

Well, listen to what Mineta is saying in the video and tell me if it was BEFORE or AFTER... D_ _MY

originally posted by: openedeyesandears

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: openedeyesandears
a reply to: neutronflux

hmm, that's weird. Looks like you skipped a whole paragraph you omitted to answer... because you know what it's all about. And, why would Cheney make that comment? I can't wait to see what kind of an argument an idiot would come up with..

Because your statements are based on false narratives, and have not conveyed yourself as credible. You cannot evan make the case something other than flight 77 hit the pentagon. Flight 77 hit the pentagon, and your narrative crumbles.

This here is better than watching cartoons.
False narrative about,

* Cheney's comments?
* PNAC Document?
* War in Afghanistan and Iraq instead of Saudi Arabia?
* " Terrorists " that couldn't fly a kite, outperformed the best pilots out there?

Which one?

Your your list hasn’t with the fantasy a drone or missile hit the pentagon. And flight 77 is what crashed into the pentagon.

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: openedeyesandears

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: openedeyesandears
a reply to: neutronflux

hmm, that's weird. Looks like you skipped a whole paragraph you omitted to answer... because you know what it's all about. And, why would Cheney make that comment? I can't wait to see what kind of an argument an idiot would come up with..

Because your statements are based on false narratives, and have not conveyed yourself as credible. You cannot evan make the case something other than flight 77 hit the pentagon. Flight 77 hit the pentagon, and your narrative crumbles.

This here is better than watching cartoons.
False narrative about,

* Cheney's comments?
* PNAC Document?
* War in Afghanistan and Iraq instead of Saudi Arabia?
* " Terrorists " that couldn't fly a kite, outperformed the best pilots out there?

Which one?

Your your list hasn’t with the fantasy a drone or missile hit the pentagon. And flight 77 is what crashed into the pentagon.

Again as usual, the old Neutronflux bs when you see the obvious but yet, you don't want to answer because it would show you the bigger picture thus, the OS is BS.

Show me proof flight 77 crashed in the Pentagon

originally posted by: openedeyesandears

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: openedeyesandears

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: openedeyesandears
a reply to: neutronflux

hmm, that's weird. Looks like you skipped a whole paragraph you omitted to answer... because you know what it's all about. And, why would Cheney make that comment? I can't wait to see what kind of an argument an idiot would come up with..

Because your statements are based on false narratives, and have not conveyed yourself as credible. You cannot evan make the case something other than flight 77 hit the pentagon. Flight 77 hit the pentagon, and your narrative crumbles.

This here is better than watching cartoons.
False narrative about,

* Cheney's comments?
* PNAC Document?
* War in Afghanistan and Iraq instead of Saudi Arabia?
* " Terrorists " that couldn't fly a kite, outperformed the best pilots out there?

Which one?

Your your list hasn’t with the fantasy a drone or missile hit the pentagon. And flight 77 is what crashed into the pentagon.

Again as usual, the old Neutronflux bs when you see the obvious but yet, you don't want to answer because it would show you the bigger picture thus, the OS is BS.

Show me proof flight 77 crashed in the Pentagon

When you push falsehoods like a missile hit the pentagon? Why should I find you arguments credible again? Because you say so? Again. Why ask questions and rant if you could create a credible argument with evidence? Use your time wisely?

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: openedeyesandears

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: openedeyesandears

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: openedeyesandears
a reply to: neutronflux

hmm, that's weird. Looks like you skipped a whole paragraph you omitted to answer... because you know what it's all about. And, why would Cheney make that comment? I can't wait to see what kind of an argument an idiot would come up with..

Because your statements are based on false narratives, and have not conveyed yourself as credible. You cannot evan make the case something other than flight 77 hit the pentagon. Flight 77 hit the pentagon, and your narrative crumbles.

This here is better than watching cartoons.
False narrative about,

* Cheney's comments?
* PNAC Document?
* War in Afghanistan and Iraq instead of Saudi Arabia?
* " Terrorists " that couldn't fly a kite, outperformed the best pilots out there?

Which one?

Your your list hasn’t with the fantasy a drone or missile hit the pentagon. And flight 77 is what crashed into the pentagon.

Again as usual, the old Neutronflux bs when you see the obvious but yet, you don't want to answer because it would show you the bigger picture thus, the OS is BS.

Show me proof flight 77 crashed in the Pentagon

When you push falsehoods like a missile hit the pentagon? Why should I find you arguments credible again? Because you say so? Again. Why ask questions and rant if you could create a credible argument with evidence? Use your time wisely?

What a goof,
so you can't show proof of flight 77 hitting the Pentagon?
It could have been anything.
Like Neutronflux would say... If Flight 77 hit the Pentagon, the burden of proof is on you to show the plane actually hitting the Pentagon.

( He's going to post a picture with something on the ground with 77 on it ) lol

a reply to: neutronflux

Of course you won't. I already know it

a reply to: neutronflux

Based on the entrance hole into the pentagon and the actual damage to the pentagon, why would anyone with credibility believe it was a missile?

boy it's good to see you again, still towing the line. you must have some persistent handlers.

to answer your question, maybe it's because nobody with common sense would look at the entrance/exit holes and assume a plane hit it - they'd be right, too:







witnesses saw a plane you say, eh? alright, well witnesses heard successive explosions within the twin towers too. you never mention this with the same kind of conviction and confidence. you can't pick and choose facts, but you can pick and choose a narrative.

you know what we all see? fully operational security cameras. you know what we all don't see? the footage. which, by the way, is technically the property of the American people.