Bodies strapped to seats on AA77, Pentagon?

reply to post by ThroatYogurt


One would expect to find at the very lease an “accordianed” or crumpled portion of the body of the airliner. It would make sense if the wings, engines attached, had crashed through the outer wall because of their mass. But not the body.

reply to post by tezzajw


Oh, well I have to add a little more. Seems I was mistaken. There were two witnesses of bodies (or body) in seats:

"When Williams discovered the scorched bodies of several airline passengers, they were still strapped into their seats. The stench of charred flesh overwhelmed him.

'It was the worst thing you can imagine,' said Williams, whose squad from Fort Belvoir, Va., entered the building, less than four hours after the terrorist attack. 'I wanted to cry from the minute I walked in. But I have soldiers under me and I had to put my feelings aside.' "

And:

"I did see airplane seats and a corpse still strapped to one of the seats."
–Capt. Jim Ingledue, Virginia Beach Fire Dept

reply to post by ThroatYogurt


Could there have been a body found strapped in a seat? - possibly

Could the first responder have been mistaken? - possibly

What we do not have is photographic evidence of this persons claim.

What we do not have is a corroborated statement from another source.


So... bottom line: The man may or may have not seen a person strapped in an airplane seat.





For a min I thought you were a truther I was almost fooled.

reply to post by cashlink


I deal with facts my friend. There were two witnesses to bodies found in airplane seats. I don't take it as 100% gospel, but it sure is a possibility.

reply to post by ThroatYogurt


Someone else has already quoted this already, this is not anything, but hear say.
Besides Dora know very well what happened she was there taking a pee on the front lawn.

reply to post by ThroatYogurt


(but it sure is a possibility.)
I am glade to see you are at lease thinking in the grey.

Originally posted by cashlink
reply to post by ThroatYogurt

 

One would expect to find at the very lease an “accordianed” or crumpled portion of the body of the airliner. It would make sense if the wings, engines attached, had crashed through the outer wall because of their mass. But not the body.

There were several pieces of "crumpled" sections of the airplane found outside the Pentagon.

Dora was peeing on the front lawn??

DOUBLE POST SORRY

[edit on 10/17/0808 by ThroatYogurt]

'All you are doing is quoteing the liberal media and a bunch of witnesses who aren't qualified

(Great! Perhaps now we can have a rational discussion on why the physical evidence at the Pentagon is overwhelmingly convincing beyond any reasonable doubt that a 757 impacted the building and bodies, still strapped in their seats, were discovered/seen by rescue/recovery personnel.)

Unqualified by whose standards? The people who witnessed the bodies
were from FEMA USAR rescue teams called in to perform search and rescue. USAR teams are highly skilled teams made up of Firefighters,
police, structural engineers, medical personnel and dog handlers.
They are highly skilled personnel and called into major diasters and
incidents.

www.fema.gov...

Report on USAR operations at Pentagon

74.125.45.104...:YkNs9yEIXpEJ:www.ukfssart.org.uk/files/pentagon%2520report.PDF+usar+teams+fairfax+pentagon&hl=en&ct=c lnk&cd=8&gl=us&ie=UTF-8

There is a USAR team in a neighboring city - the battalion chief in charge
and his team members are willing to give up their time to train our
men.

So who are you calling unqualified? Ever been to a aircraft crash, building
collapse or major fire scene? No? For someone in mommy's basement
your comments are laughable

I will be back in a little while I have to cook dinner for Dora and me.
Yes a can of Alpo for me, and a juicy stake for Dora.
When I get back, I will dictate what Dora told me, what really happened at the Pentagon on the morning of 911.

reply to post by thedman


Yes you are so right about all the witness, but one thing you do not know, and nether do I or anyone else in this matter, is this, They all could have been paid very well to misinform, to lie, and it is a known fact a lot of these witness were given high promotions in their jobs. So you are only parroting the lying media.

Originally posted by tezzajw

we've finally got you admitting that you won't prove anything, Seymour.

Wrong again, Holmes...

You haven't convinced me yet that I should even try, since your questions come from pure ignorance and incredulity.

So now what? I refuse to play, and you still haven't managed to put together anything that would suggest that the differing conditions of the bodies at the 2 crash sites is in any way suspicious.

So..... troofers would like another investigation, right?

So in order to construct reason to doubt that there was something suspicious about the differing states of the victims at the 2 crash sites, SOMEONE will have to do an analysis pointing out why it is wrong.

It looks like you will fail in helping them out with this.

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
reply to post by Griff

 

Griff,

He said they were bodies at the Pentagon. From what I see there is only one person in a jumpsuit. (if indeed it is a jumpsuit.)

Well, according to swampfox, they are pentagon employees. So, what again would that have to do with this thread about flight passengers?

No offense, but either way, the photos were off topic IMO.

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
So... bottom line: The man may or may have not seen a person strapped in an airplane seat.

I knew you were a man of reason.

This is not directed towards you TY, but, I'd like to know why people are so adamant about this one article being true just because one or two firefighters said so, but ignore 13 independant policeman, citgo workers etc., when they state unequivocally that the plane flew on the north side of the citgo?

[edit on 10/17/2008 by Griff]

[edit on 10/17/2008 by Griff]

reply to post by Griff

This is not directed towards you TY, but, I'd like to know why people are so adamant about this one artical being true just because one or two firefighters said so, but ignore 13 independant policeman, citgo workers etc., when they state unequivocally that the plane flew on the north side of the citgo?

because there are many testimonies contrary to the 13 witnesses..
in this case there are no conflicting stories to deal with..

[edit on 17-10-2008 by pccat]

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt

I got cornered???

Hey hero, go count how many times I posted a response to the OP in here.... answer.. ONCE.

Oh, and I am not wrong.

By the way, did you find that witness to the missile?

I do not care how many times you responded to the OP. You have posted many many times. You got cornered plain and simple. You have not admitted being wrong, just alluded to the idea that you understand that on some level, being wrong is in the area of where you are but actually saying it would be antithetical to your hubris and therefore are pretending that you somehow were right all while admitting that in fact, you have none of the requirements of being right. Nice.

What the heck does one response to the OP have to do with anything? You argued with the OP that there were indeed bodies strapped into seats. You argued that there was truth to this statement. Where is the evidence?

As for the missile? You really do need everything spoon fed to you don't you? I never claimed there was a missile. I am just pointing out that if I had, you would ask for proof. When I failed to produce proof of the missile, what would you say...that means NO MISSILE. How do I know? I have watched you have this empty argument over and over again.

Try to keep up this time. I am not saying there was a missile. Why? I have no proof of it. It is not necessarily the theory I would go with anyway. The point is, if my lack of evidence or proof means my story is false...then you have to apply those same standards to yourself.

You have no evidence of any kind that any bodies were found strapped into seats. We both know this would be in a number of "official" reports. It would be more than well documented. So... where are the documents. Either no proof means it never happend or you have to consider alternative theories that also have no proof. You do not get to have it both ways just because it is a new page or a new thread. I know you think people cannot just go back and read what you wrote before but they actually can. You were wrong to argue, you cannot back it up, you got cornered and as a result said that you are better than a truther because you can admit you were wrong, without actually doing so.

You talk in circles, you are a proven liar, and so far all you are doing is trolling this thread looking for a fight because you have added all you have to add and it has worked out to a sum of nothing so far.

Originally posted by Seymour Butz

Wrong again, Holmes...

You haven't convinced me yet that I should even try, since your questions come from pure ignorance and incredulity.

So now what? I refuse to play, and you still haven't managed to put together anything that would suggest that the differing conditions of the bodies at the 2 crash sites is in any way suspicious.

So..... troofers would like another investigation, right?

So in order to construct reason to doubt that there was something suspicious about the differing states of the victims at the 2 crash sites, SOMEONE will have to do an analysis pointing out why it is wrong.

It looks like you will fail in helping them out with this.

Speaking of trolling and adding nothing. I am calling you out on your BS because so far all you have added to this thread is personal insults. Is that really how you want to win this argument? "Hey guys, I never made sense or stated any facts but I insulted them alot. I am such a good American!" Try making some sense, being on topic, and posting just one thing that is not just an empty personal dig at someone.

Well, here is Dora “story” of what she saw and hear the night before 911 at the Pentagon.
She told me, that she had a date with this body sniffing German Shepard She said he works for FEMA. She said he had been station at the Pentagon all week, anyway when Dora arrived at the Pentagon that evening, she was shown her room that she would be staying in with her date Brutus. Dora said Brutus had a master his name was Bob he also works for FEMA . I ask Dora why was FEMA at the Pentagon she said she had ask the same question her self and was told it was of some National security. Anyhow, Dora told me she was aloud a tour through the Pentagon. She said she saw trucks coming and going all night, she told me she couldn’t get any sleep because she kept hearing drilling noises and heavy equipment all night she said she saw all kinds of work crews in different uniform she said she could hear men yelling orders like no no! Move it here, or move it there, or be careful with that and hurry up and so on. I ask Dora where all of this commotion going at was. She said at the new section of the Pentagon, of course I had no idear there was a new section being built at the Pentagon. She said yes it looks like the work crew where in a hurry to finish up what ever they were doing.

The next morning Dora said she got up early she took a stroll out front of the Pentagon and noticed all that equipment that was there last night was gone! And so was all those workers. Dora said, she had to go to the bathroom, she said the lawn was gorgeous and freshly cut. Dora said, she was so excited the lush green lawn had so many new odors she said, that she could just sniff for weeks and never get bored. Dora said it took her a while to locate a spot to pee she couldn’t wait another minute, just as she was about squat to do her tinkle, she said, she heard a loud Wwwwoooooosssssshhhhhh ahead of her way above her. I ask her did you see what it was. Dora said yes it was small, it look like some kind of cylinder it had a trail of white smoke behind it she said it was moving very fast. I ask Dora did you see anything else unusual about this object she said yes it came out of another plane a very fast plane, I ask her was it a military jet she said yes! Dora said, the jet flew near the pentagon and fired that object then swoop up and over the Pentagon, and was out of site in no time. but it didn’t matter about the jet, because people were not seeing it. What everyone saw was the huge explosion. poor Dora, she was so devastated, she said she peed all over her self and lost all leave of her self, she said she had never ran so fast in her life. she said you would have thought I was a run away slave! Dora said her eyes were about to pop right out of her head. Poor girl she said she heard more than one explosion she heard several all around the same time.
Anyway, Dora said she found a hiding place under a broken office desk that had blasted out of the building on the lawn. She said she was frighten to death she told me she hid under that desk for a while trembling. Dora said, she peek under the broken desk and saw Brutus and Bob Dora yelp help me, please help me! My beautiful coat had been scorch from the flying debris and the huge fireball. Poor Dora, said she, had a piece of glass stuck in her leg she tried to pull it out but to her luck, it broke off in her leg. she said, she was in a lot of pain, she kept yelping help me, Brutus please help me finally Brutus saw Dora he broke lose from his handler he let out a loud yelp I am coming baby I am going to get you out of here my precious girl. Of course Bob had no idea why Brutus took off he was screaming Brutus get over here now! However, when he saw Brutus drag poor Dora out from under the broken desk he knew Brutus was doing what he was trained to do, he was saving Dora life. This is the first part of Dora “story”, when Dora related this story to me I was in tears, I am still in disbelief !

Originally posted by MorningStar8741

Try making some sense, being on topic, and posting just one thing that is not just an empty personal dig at someone.

The topic is why there were bodies in seats at the Pentagon, and why the crash in Shanksville doesn't have the same.

No one has proven yet why they should be the same.

Tezza has tried to steer his own thread OT by asking for proof from a coroner...... etc.

But this is just a red herring that he has introduced into his own thread to avoid explaining WHY the 2 crash scenes would have produced the same results. This is because the whole thread is based on his personal ignorance/incredulity, and he knows this. This passes for a logical question in the troofer community. However, this doesn't work in the real world. I hope you realize this.

So, let's move past the id'ing of the bodies in the seats for now and move on to the meat of the personal incredulity.

Can anyone present evidence that the 2 scenes should be the same?

Originally posted by Seymour Butz
The topic is why there were bodies in seats at the Pentagon, and why the crash in Shanksville doesn't have the same.

Take a read of the initial post, Seymour. That was one of the questions that I was asking. Sure. Given that there may have been bodies at the Pentagon.

Also, take a look at the title of the thread, Seymour. What does a question mark usually signify? In this case, as per the thread title, it would suggest that I'm asking a question about bodies at the Pentagon. I never put the word Shanksville in the title, as that was merely an afterthought while I was typing the OP. Did you read this part of the initial post where I state that so far I have not seen proof of any bodies at the Pentagon?

tezzajw
I've not yet seen a single coroners report that verifies this. If there were bodies strapped to seats, then those bodies have names - they were people. Therefore, a coroners report should include the name of the body, how it was found, cause of death, photographs of the bodies as crime-scene evidence, etc, all signed by a coroner.

Notice how that quote is high up in the initial post and comes before I even mention Shanksville?

Speculating about what might happen at the Pentagon and Shanksville is fine, given that we can firstly establish that there were bodies found strapped to their seats at the Pentagon - which was the intention of the original post.

I was hoping that someone could actually prove that there were bodies found strapped to airline seats, before we could then discuss the case of why it was not so at Shanksville.

It must be a real sticking point for you, huh? You admitted that you have not offered proof for any bodies that were strapped to airline seats, existing at the Pentagon. YET, you want to then discuss why these so-far-non-existent bodies should have been at the Pentagon and not at Shanksville!

Here, Seymour. I'll dumb it down for you again, as you obviously aren't used to following logical implications: You provide the PROOF that there were bodies found at the Pentagon, strapped to airline seats, belonging to the alleged Flight AA77 and then we can discuss the differences between the Pentagon and Shanksville.

You type about arguing from incredulity, yet you're the only one who is doing exactly that! You want to discuss body dynamics at the Pentagon and Shanksville WITHOUT EVEN PROVING that there were bodies found at the Pentagon strapped to airline seats.

Nice try. It's too bad that your counterlogic is really really obvious to spot and nip in the bud.

Originally posted by Seymour Butz
So, let's move past the id'ing of the bodies in the seats for now and move on to the meat of the personal incredulity.

Let's move past the IDing of the bodies, once we have established that they were there. Until then, you've got nowhere to go. Your own incredulity wants to assume that those bodies existed.

At least you've admitted in this thread that you've offered no proof and don't intend doing so. Thanks for that!

[edit on 18-10-2008 by tezzajw]