9/11: A Boeing 757 Struck the Pentagon

Originally posted by CatHerder

Originally posted by Shroomery Fact is they DID tape the moonlanding in a studio, IN CASE something went wrong, directed by Lynch or Kubrik I can't remember. There's a great docu about this with ALL the "big guys" talking about it. Henry Kissinger being one of them.

Prove it: Provide links, names of videos, ISBN numbers, anything to prove this. Hurry up, the bullshit you've splashed here is already drying up! But I already know which "documentary" you're talking about: it's called DARK SIDE OF THE MOON (documentary says moon photos were faked, 'but we DID go to the moon' say Kissinger-Rumsfield-Haig-Helms). CBC Passionate Eye, Nov 17, 2003 -- funny how you're totally wrong about Kissinger etc in your post. Why do inept fools like you always make crap up when you have nothing valid or true to post?

Or perhaps you've confused a fiction movie made in the late 70's for reality? It's ok, we understand.

First you don't know what docu I'm talking about because you want proof. Then you say you already know that it's a docu with Kissinger. Then you tell me I'm wrong about Kissinger being in it. And then you state, just like me, that the docu said they did go to the moon. Are you trying to go somewhere with this? Looks like you're agreeing with me to be honest.

Originally posted by Shroomery Are you trying to go somewhere with this? Looks like you're agreeing with me to be honest.

Dude, you still haven't shown anything to support the notion that Kubrick or Lynch were part of a NASA-concocted "fake" moon-landing (other than one mentioned in several posts, which is a mockumentary - even though it was shown on national TV). The documentary you mention has yet to be sourced, noted or otherwise referenced; the only one we do know in existance is an admitted hoax. Until you can come up with something - anything - to even support your allegation that such a thing exists, you're hardly in a position to complain about someone else's rebuttal. Let's play fair

Originally posted by CatHerder If you have a large attack in a city the size of New York, there is no way on earth you could stop it from getting on TV and in the media unless you lined up 10,000+ media personalities and shot them all in the head. Is that clearer for you?

Well your numbers are going up very quickly again, first you mention a bunch of news-stations, now all of a sudden it's 10.000 people? Next thing you know they need to kill everyone in New York.. someone might actually SEE what happend. Anyhow, I'll take your answer as a "yes I think they're still free" And thanks again for resorting to name calling! Keep em coming I love it.

Originally posted by Shroomery Well your numbers are going up very quickly again, first you mention a bunch of news-stations, now all of a sudden it's 10.000 people? Next thing you know they need to kill everyone in New York.. someone might actually SEE what happend. Anyhow, I'll take your answer as a "yes I think they're still free" And thanks again for resorting to name calling! Keep em coming I love it.

Can you please reword this into something coherant? My response, as it was in the first place, is YES the FBI could confiscate video tapes from 3 static locations. And NO the FBI couldn't possibly block the events at the WTC from getting on television. How hard is that for you to comprehend?

Originally posted by CatHerder photos.airliners.net... photos.airliners.net... photos.airliners.net... photos.airliners.net... photos.airliners.net...

Rats, airliners.net no longer lets you link directly to images (so I quoted this and provided the above links to the photos I'd listed as an example). Here are two of the above images I relocated to display within the post.

Originally posted by Shroomery First you don't know what docu I'm talking about because you want proof. Then you say you already know that it's a docu with Kissinger. Then you tell me I'm wrong about Kissinger being in it. And then you state, just like me, that the docu said they did go to the moon. Are you trying to go somewhere with this? Looks like you're agreeing with me to be honest.

Going somewhere? Yes. Here I go, hang on tight. You NEVER have anything of value or substance to post in ANY of your posts ANYWHERE on ATS/PST/BTS. You, can't prove the moon landing was a hoax BECAUSE IT WAS NOT A HOAX. You post on this forum only to hear your empty head prattle on about subjects you know NOTHING about. You are full of shit. That is where I was going. Any questions? The "documentary" did NOT have kissenger saying we faked the moon landing. The "documentary" was an entertainment piece or a "mockumentary" (they were mocking people like you who are foolish to believe the moon hoax story). Why people wish to drag the rediculousness of the moon hoax into a thread about a 757 hitting the Pentagon (which it did) does nothing to help the conspiracy idea. All it does is makes people laugh at the messenger, and reduces your credability factor exponentially. Mind you, you have no credability on this forum already shroomery so no loss there.

Originally posted by Light Being Why did you ignore the forensically collected radiation evidence? The link again is right here: rense.com...

From that article:

Two high profile radiation experts concur Pentagon strike involved use of a missile. Also Geiger counter readings right after the attack shows high levels of radiation 12 miles away from Pentagon crash site.

Please, let's see some hard data. What kind of radiation, was it alpha, beta or gama? What were the levels, 12 miles, then it must be much higher closer to the building, right? Surely it is possible to get closer than 12 miles to the building. why aren't those reading repoerted? What a load of Korean Ferilizer.

Originally posted by CatHerder Here are two of the above images I relocated to display within the post.

Excellent photos CatHerder. I'm hard pressed to believe that anyone could mistake a 757 flying 15-20 feet or so above his/her head/car with a missile or smaller aircraft! Still that's just heresay anyway so doesn't lead to facts anyway and there's people saying things that support both sides of the issue. Still I can't get over the conglomeration of evidence that points to something deceptive going on with this adminstration and the events of 9/11. Something stinks in Washington and it's not the trash. Peace, ~Jammer

Originally posted by CatHerder You NEVER have anything of value or substance to post in ANY of your posts ANYWHERE on ATS/PST/BTS. You, can't prove the moon landing was a hoax BECAUSE IT WAS NOT A HOAX. You post on this forum only to hear your empty head prattle on about subjects you know NOTHING about. You are full of shit.

Whenever I read your replies I get images of donkey kong throwing barrels around. You're too busy throwing to read any posts correct. You simply misread statements and with it a totally false conclusion follows. It's quite funny how your "victory posts" where you try to mock people are totally based on false information. Honestly I think people are just too lazy to try and correct all of your obvious mistakes. Just like I am.

Does anyone have a good/convincing theory on why the government won't release the video cameras from all of the local businesses that were immediately confiscated after the event and clear up this question for good? Does anyone know what right the government has to confiscate evidence such as this indefinitely from the owners and under what laws this is made legal? The government won't release key pieces of documentation (black boxes) and video cameras making this whole deal suspicious. (Note- this happened in the Oklahoma City bombing case and in the same manner which also had a great deal of evidence to show involvement of more than Tim McVeigh) Peace, ~Jammer+

The tapes are allegedly being held so that they won't interfere with a court case. I have no idea how this is a legitimate excuse, as it seems to corrupt the legal system as it withholds evidence that may hinder the state's prosecution of someone, but even afterwards I doubt the tapes will be released. The blackboxes.. I have heard no such excuses. They just flat-out weren't released. I think it's been alleged that some of them weren't even found.

What would be the point of releasing the black boxes. The recordings themselves are never released, just the transcripts. It is against the law for them to release the CVR tapes, and the FDR wouldn't show anything but flight parameters like altitude, airspeed and the like, and wouldn't do anything to prove or disprove the case. Not to mention the CVR only records 30 minutes. "The CVR recordings are treated differently than the other factual information obtained in an accident investigation. Due to the highly sensitive nature of the verbal communications inside the cockpit, Congress has required that the Safety Board not release any part of a CVR audio recording. Because of this sensitivity, a high degree of security is provided for the CVR audio and its transcript. The content and timing of release of the written transcript are strictly regulated: under federal law, transcripts of pertinent portions of cockpit voice recordings are released at a Safety Board public hearing on the accident or, if no hearing is held, when a majority of the factual reports are made public." www.ntsb.gov... [edit on 10-9-2005 by Zaphod58]

Originally posted by Shroomery Honestly I think people are just too lazy to try and correct all of your obvious mistakes. Just like I am.

Put your money where your mouth is, Shroomery. Show us the video evidence you've kept claiming exists. (You can start a different thread if you feel it's derailing this one; it would probably be more appropriate now I think about it)

Originally posted by Zaphod58 What would be the point of releasing the black boxes. The recordings themselves are never released, just the transcripts. It is against the law for them to release the CVR tapes, and the FDR wouldn't show anything but flight parameters like altitude, airspeed and the like, and wouldn't do anything to prove or disprove the case. Not to mention the CVR only records 30 minutes.

Against the law? How about terrorizing your own people? Is that against the law?

Read the source I quoted from shroomery. It has ALWAYS been illegal for them to release the CVR, partly to be sensetive to the families. They didn't want to force the families to have to listen to the last minutes of their loved ones lives, and hear them die.

That's exactly what those relatives want in the first place. Second, nobody is forced to listen to them, people who DO want to hear it can't for some reason.

Originally posted by Zaphod58 It is against the law for them to release the CVR tapes, and the FDR wouldn't show anything but flight parameters like altitude, airspeed and the like, and wouldn't do anything to prove or disprove the case.

Just out of curiosity, would the FDR also show lattitude/longitude figures?

It is wrong to focus on the Pentacon conspiracy, as it takes away and makes the real coverups all seem like some fanciful tinfoil hat job. People should be focusing on WTC 7, NORAD standing down, Bush and the bin Ladens, Pakistani's ISI General, advanced warnings, explosives...not these unmanned fake planes and other crap.

Very true 8bit, it's all so obvious that it's pointless to go into details. Sadly enough, you can't connect the dots for other people.

The FDR only shows the aircraft configuration. IE: power settings, altitude, airspeed, etc. It doesn't show anything about the position, or anything else. It's just to record the flight perameters of the aircraft. The first FDRs recorded 5 parameters. Altitude, airspeed, roll, pitch, and power settings. The current generation records something like 32.