There Was No Missile At the Pentagon - But the Plane Did Not Hit

reply to post by tezzajw


Trolling Tezza,
The physical evidence of an aircraft strike is there. The light posts are knocked over in a trail leading to the impact point. The large hole in the Pentagon wall and fuel deflagration and fires could not have been caused by a missile or explosive charges. Witnesses saw the plane flying low and heading toward the Pentagon. Only one says it flew away; the rest say the plane hit. Personal effects of the passengers were recovered as were bodies of passengers. People disappeared and funerals occurred. The fact that you don't believe any of it doesn't mean that it didn't happen. You say you are waiting for more evidence to be posted on the web. Then you may inspect it and determine if it somehow meets your standards. Until then, you say the plane did not hit.
I may have been wrong about your actual chronological age and student status but I think I understand your behavior. You don't like people to say that they understand your motivations because you consider yourself to be a man of mystery, incomprehensibly complex and unable to be assessed by the common man. You try to remain above the fray and play other posters off against one another using a few basic troll techniques. You also like to denigrate other posters by insinuating that their arguments are so faulty as to be beneath your consideration, implying vast mental abilities. You are exceptionally thin skinned when on the receiving end but merciless when on the giving. You claim to be emotionless but anger and outrage can often be seen in your words.

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by SPreston

 

Good luck with the "planes never took off because someone didn't fill out paperwork" argument.

Hahaha, That's exactly what BTS did, in black and white.

Flight AA11 and AA77 never existed on 9/11-2001.

So please try to find another AA flight that matches the planted debris, I keep track on all of them. Good luck with that.

D.Duck



[edit on 14-3-2009 by D.Duck]

reply to post by D.Duck

I contend that the flights did exist, that passengers and crew died, that passengers and crew communicated with their families before impact, and that forms that were not completed are proof only that no entries were made.

Originally posted by pteridine
Trolling Tezza,

Personal insult noted.

The physical evidence of an aircraft strike is there. The light posts are knocked over in a trail leading to the impact point.

The light posts being found on the ground indicates that light posts were found on the ground. Craig has found many eyewitnesses who place the alleged plane NOC and/or ONA, far away from the light posts.

I may have been wrong about your actual chronological age and student status but I think I understand your behavior. You don't like people to say that they understand your motivations because you consider yourself to be a man of mystery, incomprehensibly complex and unable to be assessed by the common man. You try to remain above the fray and play other posters off against one another using a few basic troll techniques. You also like to denigrate other posters by insinuating that their arguments are so faulty as to be beneath your consideration, implying vast mental abilities. You are exceptionally thin skinned when on the receiving end but merciless when on the giving. You claim to be emotionless but anger and outrage can often be seen in your words.

Moderators, it is clear that pteridine's innacurate psychological assessments about me are cluttering this thread with his off-topic rants.

reply to post by tezzajw


Witnesses can be mistaken and when it comes to the flight path of a large, low-flying, high-speed aircraft, shock and surprise may make memory less than accurate. Some of those same witnesses also say the plane struck the Pentagon. CIT chooses to accept the NoC testimony and reject the impact testimony. If you are supporting CIT's position, you must reconcile their selective acceptance of witness testimony.
The physical evidence points toward the aircraft impact. The lack of evidence and contortions required for planting materials, demolitions placed and detonated, and thousands of gallons of fuel ignited, coupled with the sacrifice of military and civilain personnel for no reason makes the probability of any "no-plane" conspiracy vanishingly small; essentially zero.

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by D.Duck

 

I contend that the flights did exist, that passengers and crew died, that passengers and crew communicated with their families before impact, and that forms that were not completed are proof only that no entries were made.

That mindset is usually called denial.

D.Duck

reply to post by D.Duck


Is it your contention that because data was not entered for two flights that the flights did not take off? Do you claim that there were no passengers and no aircraft on the flights with no data and only the two flights that had entries were legitimate? Do you claim that all passengers' remains, phone calls from the planes to family and emergency switchboards, and personal effects found in the wreckages were faked or planted?
You think you have inside knowledge based on incomplete records published on the web. You believe that the conspirators who arranged the most complex plot in history forgot to fake a form so that you alone could discover their dark secret while wandering on the web in your spare time.
With such solid evidence, you should mobilize all the "something for truth" groups and call in the reporters, expose the truth, bring the lawsuit, and force the conspirators to confess. That would be just ducky.
Until then, I will remain in Denial.