the hole in the pentagon..is the big hole in the 911 story

reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever


I thought it wasnt conclusive the engine matched a plane, but that it possibly matched a Global Hawk. Big difference..

What are you trying to do here? and if your a believer, what are you skeptic about?

Originally posted by Myendica
reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever

 

I thought it wasnt conclusive the engine matched a plane, but that it possibly matched a Global Hawk. Big difference..

What are you trying to do here? and if your a believer, what are you skeptic about?

I just put "believer" in my name in case I visit any other sections of this site that have nothing to with 911 that I may agree with.

And the engine found at the Pentagon matched up with Flight 77 not a Global Hawk, that's another lie lol

This thread explains in great detail how that silly Hawk theory got debunked.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever


so straight up.. you hate people who question 9/11? that seems to be what you are implying with that statement. If it bothers you that much, write your representatives, and ask for a new investigation, so they can release all information proving it was terrorists.. and i'll applaud you and thank you. I dont disbelieve 9/11 story because it was terrorists, I disbelieve it because the evidence suggests other factors, factors that you seem to be fine with ignoring.

I aprreciate you being a believer in the OS, but you shoulda been a skeptic here..

have fun hating everyone once the informations points to other factors..

factors = rich wealthy, possibly government officials..

Originally posted by SkepticAndBeliever
Cased closed.

Originally posted by SkepticAndBeliever
A few months ago me and my friend got in trouble with the cops, It was a surprise because the cop couldn't have known my name and my friend got let go RIGHT AWAY but I was the one who got in trouble. Now, a conspiracy theorist would assume my buddy snitched on me, a person who looks at evidence would know that the cop knew my name because of my licence plate number and my buddy got let out because he had a clean record and I had a prior. Basically I'm trying to break people from the "common sense" thinking , because it's only common sense to assume I got snitched on but it was not true. People need to look at hard facts not flimsy A to B connections.

Since a guy that's so articulate with tremendous credentials says case closed I mean "cased closed" it's final folks.

Originally posted by Myendica
reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever

 

so straight up.. you hate people who question 9/11?

Wow more assumptions not based by facts (no surprise). It's cool to ask questions, but don't ask questions that have been answered and debunked 3483948 years go, and don't latch on to bunk scientists to make you feel better about believing in a false conspiracy theory. Asking questions is fine, I did too, but when smart people get the answers, they move on and quit looking for deceptions that don't exist.

Steven Jones, all the "experts" from A&E Truth have been embarrassed by there miscalculations (tons of real experts poking the holes in their logic). Yet they have the nerve to claim the NIST report falsified facts? The creators of Loose Change even said that their movie is filled with false claims and to check out some other truther BS. It's all old debunked theories, all I'm doing here is studying why people still believe them...It's interesting.

Originally posted by SkepticAndBeliever


Wow more assumptions not based by facts (no surprise). It's cool to ask questions, but don't ask questions that have been answered and debunked 3483948 years go, and don't latch on to bunk scientists to make you feel better about believing in a false conspiracy theory. Asking questions is fine, I did too, but when smart people get the answers, they move on and quit looking for deceptions that don't exist.

oh.. really? 3483948 years ago.. so we should take your word for everything?

you are an insult to a lot of things.. I would hope a true OSer wouldn't be as immature as you are.

You just make all OSers look so crazy and lunatic

Originally posted by Myendica

Originally posted by SkepticAndBeliever


Wow more assumptions not based by facts (no surprise). It's cool to ask questions, but don't ask questions that have been answered and debunked 3483948 years go, and don't latch on to bunk scientists to make you feel better about believing in a false conspiracy theory. Asking questions is fine, I did too, but when smart people get the answers, they move on and quit looking for deceptions that don't exist.

oh.. really? 3483948 years ago.. so we should take your word for everything?

you are an insult to a lot of things.. I would hope a true OSer wouldn't be as immature as you are.

You just make all OSers look so crazy and lunatic

You take my 38493849 years thing literally and think I'm crazy? If I said I could eat a horse would you think that's what I would actually eat for dinner? And I'm the lunatic lol And why do people assume I want them to take my word for it, I didn't know truthers were so lazy that they couldn't look up claims themselves (nah actually I did, that's why believe false things lol).

reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever

Quit denying the facts. And there are no such things as disinformation agents, this isn't the matrix, this isn't a movie, it's real life.

Well, lookie here folks........there's no such thing as a disinfo agent! We believe you, Skeptic!

Here is a list of what the witnesses saw that day regarding The Pentagon:


136 saw a plane approach The Pentagon
103 saw a plane hit The Pentagon
26 said it was an American Airlines Jet
7 said it was a Boeing 757
39 mentioned a large commercial jet, some say it was a corporate jet (these are obviously the minority, and where conspiracy theorists get most of their false ammo from)
8 witnesses were pilots
1 was an Air Traffic Controller and the Heliport
41 saw air craft debris
2 saw bodies still strapped into their seats
0 saw a missile hit the pentagon
0 saw a Global Hawk or a military aircraft hit The Pentagon
0 saw a helicopter hit The Pentagon

reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever


pfffft. debunkers pretending as if flight 77 dived into the (upper) side of the pentagon,
rather than slamming directly and horizontally into the wall, in a straight line justa
few ft off the ground.

Originally posted by SkepticAndBeliever[/url]

 

Quit denying the facts. And there are no such things as disinformation agents, this isn't the matrix, this isn't a movie, it's real life.

Some examples of paid shills...

The Foreign Ministry unveiled a new plan this week: Paying talkbackers to post pro-Israel responses on websites worldwide. A total of NIS 600,000 (roughly $150,000) will be earmarked to the establishment of an “Internet warfare” squad.

www.eutimes.net...

These Chinese netizens get their name from the reported 50 Chinese cents that they are paid for each post supporting state policy that they make in popular forums and online portals.

www.techdirt.com...

Under the pilot program the Harper government paid a media company $75,000 to monitor and respond to online postings about the east coast seal hunt.

www.news1130.com...



Paid shills are well known, you really think they are none here?

It's all old debunked theories, all I'm doing here is studying why people still believe them...It's interesting.

Hopefully, you'll do a better job studying this topic than you did studying and not learning something as simple as the English language.

I didn't know truthers were so lazy and couldn't look up my claims themselves.

What's that...waste my time looking up your claims? I wouldn't waste my time pissing on your claims.

Well, lookie here folks........there's no such thing as a disinfo agent! We believe you, Skeptic!

Unless the IQ requirements and language skills for disinfo agents have been drastically lowered to record levels, I doubt it. But then again, this character is catering to the lowest of the low, so it is not out of the question.

Originally posted by blackrain17

Originally posted by SkepticAndBeliever
Cased closed.

Originally posted by SkepticAndBeliever
A few months ago me and my friend got in trouble with the cops, It was a surprise because the cop couldn't have known my name and my friend got let go RIGHT AWAY but I was the one who got in trouble. Now, a conspiracy theorist would assume my buddy snitched on me, a person who looks at evidence would know that the cop knew my name because of my licence plate number and my buddy got let out because he had a clean record and I had a prior. Basically I'm trying to break people from the "common sense" thinking , because it's only common sense to assume I got snitched on but it was not true. People need to look at hard facts not flimsy A to B connections.

Since a guy that's so articulate with tremendous credentials says case closed I mean "cased closed" it's final folks.

Read the part about flimsy A to B connections, and where did I say I had credentials? Quit looking for stuff that isn't there, the world isn't out to get you lol

reply to post by impressme


He hasnt falsified anything. Relax, and stop resorting to "Liar Liar Pants on Fire". You sound like a freaking 4 year old.

reply to post by NightGypsy


Curiously, I've never met a "disinfo" agent. I've never spoken to one either that I know of. What should I be looking for to determine who is one or who is not? Is there a list or something? Lapel pin? Ear piece with cord running down the shirt back? How about a "Disinfo for Dummys" book? Would that be available at Borders - or just places like Info Wars and Loose Change?

Conversely, dismissing anyone out of hand that who screws up a good conspiracy by citing facts by labeling them a "disinfo" agent is pretty convenient isn't it?

reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever


i dont take much of what you say seriously. honestly.. I think you aren't presenting your true thoughts and opinions on the matter.

though my "believing" in your 373456876 years mention, is sort of like how YOU, and others treat "truthers" because someone had some radical claim. You lump it all together.. so if you are an OSer, all OSers must be like you.

Here is a list of what the witnesses saw that day regarding The Pentagon: 136 saw a plane approach The Pentagon 103 saw a plane hit The Pentagon 26 said it was an American Airlines Jet 7 said it was a Boeing 757 39 mentioned a large commercial jet, some say it was a corporate jet (these are obviously the minority, and where conspiracy theorists get most of their false ammo from) 8 witnesses were pilots 1 was an Air Traffic Controller and the Heliport 41 saw air craft debris 2 saw bodies still strapped into their seats 0 saw a missile hit the pentagon 0 saw a Global Hawk or a military aircraft hit The Pentagon 0 saw a helicopter hit The Pentagon

Here is a list of witnesses who saw me jump off of a 50 story building, land on my feet and walk away without injury.

14 people saw me jump
25 people saw me gliding through the air
17 people saw me land on my feet

What's that? You want photographic or video evidence to verify my claims. Sorry, it doesn't exist, but it did happen because you have to take the witnesses' and my word that it happened.

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
14 people saw me jump
25 people saw me gliding through the air
17 people saw me land on my feet

What's that? You want photographic or video evidence to verify my claims. Sorry, it doesn't exist, but it did happen because you have to take the witnesses' and my word that it happened.

I'll believe it. I believe everything I'm told. Though I did hear it was 49 floors.. the whole 13th missing floor thing.. ya know

reply to post by GrinchNoMore


Have a problem with READING COMPREHENSION?????

I said the INTERIOR PARTITIONS between the exterior E Ring and the exit hole at C Ring allwy were sheet rock
there was no brick dividing wall

By the way the walls of the Pentagon were made of brick to save on steel for the war

Exterior E ring had a facade of gray limestone

Can clearly see the brick at the C ring

Originally posted by dilapidated
most focus about 911 is put on the towers, but the big proof of an inside job comes from the pentagon

911review.org...

the US refused to release anything about the pentagon and it was very hidden from the media
but any picture of the actual hole in the pentagon proves that it was not hit by a plane
its simply not big enough, and does not resemble a collision at all but actually resembles explosive damage!

what more evidence do you need?

it would be impossible to fly a huge Boeing in at the angle it hit, especially with limited flight training

www.youtube.com...

I will tell you what more evidence is required. Please explain to me why the government would devise a plan so complex as 9/11 where 1000 different things have to work perfectly for this not to blow up in their face when a simple lone arab man getting caught setting off a dirty bomb would have accomplished the same thing? Why risk exposure with something that has an extreme likelyhood of failure and the amount of people who know about it is so high.

Look at previous government secret things that were epic failures. They couldn't pull off the Bay of Pigs without getting found out or look at the controversy around the JFK assassination. A couple shooters was all they had to cover up and they couldn't even get that right without it leaking out. Look at Nixon who couldn't even pull off 2 guys stealing some files without getting caught. Look at the Gulf of Tonkin incident that Johnson and the Pentagon couldn't keep secret.

And you really expect the government to pull off something as insanely complex as 9/11? First ask yourself if the government came to you and asked you to create a staged event to justify the war in Iraq is this what you would have came up with? Doubtful as it's way to complicated and the chance of failure way to high.

It is overkill.

This is why 9/11 wasn't an inside job. Sure you can't explain everything about it but alot of things went on that day and i'm afraid your not seeing the forest through the trees. Don't overlook the big picture to focus on a few details.