| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jake
Minor Poster
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
Posts: 56
|
 Posted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 7:36 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
so I take it you have no alternative explanation of what hit the pentagon and no evidence?
thought so....
and as for your name calling and your completely baseless accusations - all I can say is that every time I think you couldn't possibly sink any lower you prove me wrong....
| Quote: | | No - they are rubbish posted by shills like yourself posing as truth seekers but really trying to discredit the 9/11 truth movement. Just like all the junk you post about a 757 "possibly" hitting the Pentagon when you show by your posts that you support the official version hook line and sinker. Presumably you have been allocated the Pentagon and your colleagues each have a different aspect of 9/11 to work on. Good luck to you - the truth is spreading faster and faster and you have no chance of stopping this bandwagon. |
first of all - no plane at the pentagon is only a small step away from no planes at the wtc. take your buddy killtown for instance - he was very vocal about no 757 hitting the pentagon for a long time and then suddenly a few months ago started promoting the no planes at the wtc theory all over the web. or hadn't you noticed that?
and based on your contributions to this thread there's not much difference between you and the no planers - you both show a complete disregard for eyewitness evidence and claim that all other evidence is junk or fake or planted (in your case without even looking at it) - and of course - you attack anyone who disagrees with you with childish insults and call them a shill.
all I can say is that you're in great company with certifiable basket cases like gerard holmgren - and I'm sure it's doing wonders for the credibility of the 9/11 truth movement....
because people are often judged by the company they keep aren't they?
like that other "pentagon expert" eric hufschmid who has devoted a great deal of time to promoting the idea that no 757 hit the pentagon and also thinks that every time a bus is 5 minutes late it's the sinister work of an international zionist consipracy who faked the moon landings and killed jfk....
is associating the search for 9/11 truth with this particular basket case good for our credibility or bad?
then there's that right wing christian fundmantalist dave vonkleist - who is also very big on the "no 757 hit the pentagon" idea - and whose sloppily researched video "in plane site" formed the basis for Popular Mechanics' hit piece against the 9/11 truth movement last year. nice one dave!
and of course there's "loose change", which relies on the American Free Press for some of it's "evidence" that no 757 hit the pentagon. In case you didn't know, the American Free Press actively promotes holocaust denial - so congratulations for associating the 9/11 truth movement with that as well....
do you know what david icke thinks about the pentagon attack? maybe you could add him to your list of allies and make us all look even more stupid....
and if you weren't so blind you'd see that by thcweaming and thcweaming about your unshakeable belief that no 757 hit the pentagon - which is based on questionable claims, many of which can easily be disproved - you are damaging the credibility of everyone arguing against the official story.
try looking through the links I posted instead of taking every word in that crappy music video "loose change" at face value - and maybe you'll start to realise that.
http://911research.wtc7.net/reviews/loose_change/pentagon.html
meanwhile - you're the one who is providing posters on this forum who do support the official story with plenty of ammunition - not me....
and it's not as if there aren't many other far more effective ways to attack the official story - like building 7 for example....
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/b7/index.html
and seriously - if you are over 10 years old, please stop calling me names and grow up....  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster
Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 8:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'd just like to say that the nose cone of a 757 is fibreglass, but do you know the reason why it is fibreglass?
It's because that's where the radar is. So it doesn't matter if the nose cone is fibreglass or not, there's still a large chunk of electronics inside it. When they say the nose broke through, they don't mean literally mean the nose cone. They mean the front of the aircraft. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TimmyG
Validated Poster
Joined: 04 Apr 2006
Posts: 489
Location: Manchester
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 9:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i have no idea what hit the pentagon.
i find it hard to believe it was a 747. just because of the hole size, and the clear punch through the wings of the pentagon. the way the lamp posts popped out of ground neatly too.
but i don't see that its definately a missle.
really we don't have enough evidence to draw any kind of conclusion i think.
certainly something very fishy went on at the pentagon around the time of the attack though
_________________
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blackcat
Validated Poster
Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 9:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | so I take it you have no alternative explanation of what hit the pentagon and no evidence?
thought so.... |
I could speculate but why? The evidence that it was obviously not a 757 is one reason for a PROPER enquiry. I do not need to know what happened to know what did not. The idea that I must have an explanation because I question the tommy rot I am told by the government is the sort of line of questioning that is either indicative of a low intellect or the manner of a shill.
| Quote: | | and as for your name calling and your completely baseless accusations - all I can say is that every time I think you couldn't possibly sink any lower you prove me wrong.... |
ffs stop whinging about name-calling - you are doing it as much as anyone. Go look through your last post.
| Quote: | | first of all - no plane at the pentagon is only a small step away from no planes at the wtc. |
bs! There is stacks of evidence that planes struck the wtc. There is ZERO evidence that a plane hit the Pentagon.
| Quote: | | take your buddy killtown for instance - he was very vocal about no 757 hitting the pentagon for a long time and then suddenly a few months ago started promoting the no planes at the wtc theory all over the web. or hadn't you noticed that? |
He is not my buddy (are you name-calling here?) and I quoted him to counter the reams of nonsense you posted. Tit for tat. Lots of tat.
| Quote: | | and based on your contributions to this thread there's not much difference between you and the no planers - you both show a complete disregard for eyewitness evidence and claim that all other evidence is junk or fake or planted (in your case without even looking at it) - and of course - you attack anyone who disagrees with you with childish insults and call them a shill. |
Not worth a response.
| Quote: | | all I can say is that you're in great company with certifiable basket cases like gerard holmgren - and I'm sure it's doing wonders for the credibility of the 9/11 truth movement.... |
Name calling again!!!
| Quote: | | because people are often judged by the company they keep aren't they? |
They certainly are and the company you are with, believing as you clearly do that a 757 hit the pentagon, is pretty evil.
| Quote: | | like that other "pentagon expert" eric hufschmid who has devoted a great deal of time to promoting the idea that no 757 hit the pentagon and also thinks that every time a bus is 5 minutes late it's the sinister work of an international zionist consipracy who faked the moon landings and killed jfk.... |
I do not care if you say the devil himself says that a 757 did not hit the pentagon. I do not believe it because anyone else believes it. I believe it because I have a BRAIN!!!!
| Quote: | | is associating the search for 9/11 truth with this particular basket case good for our credibility or bad? |
There will always be devious people trying to undermine the truth movement and associating views with nuts is a particularly common one. Another is getting people like yourself to pretend they are on-side when your agenda is obvious.
| Quote: | then there's that right wing christian fundmantalist dave vonkleist - who is also very big on the "no 757 hit the pentagon" idea - and whose sloppily researched video "in plane site" formed the basis for Popular Mechanics' hit piece against the 9/11 truth movement last year. nice one dave!
and of course there's "loose change", which relies on the American Free Press for some of it's "evidence" that no 757 hit the pentagon. In case you didn't know, the American Free Press actively promotes holocaust denial - so congratulations for associating the 9/11 truth movement with that as well.... |
well that really puts you in the open. Is there ANYTHING in the 9/11 truth movement you agree with???
| Quote: | | do you know what david icke thinks about the pentagon attack? maybe you could add him to your list of allies and make us all look even more stupid.... |
He sounds like the thickest man I have ever heard. Why I wonder does he get so much publicity?????
| Quote: | | and if you weren't so blind you'd see that by thcweaming and thcweaming about your unshakeable belief that no 757 hit the pentagon - |
name calling again....
| Quote: | | which is based on questionable claims, many of which can easily be disproved |
Yeah yeah yeah yawn.... you have disproved them because you said so...
| Quote: | | you are damaging the credibility of everyone arguing against the official story. |
I am offering to anyone visiting this site the opportunity not to be misled by the bs you are posting you * shill.
| Quote: | | try looking through the links I posted instead of taking every word in that crappy music video "loose change" at face value - and maybe you'll start to realise that. |
I have not seen loose change. I most certainly will not trawl through the garbage you have posted. I know what you are. Why don't you recommend people go see screwloosechange while you are at it. I won't be going there either. Like I said I have a brain - save your * for the idiots.
| Quote: | | meanwhile - you're the one who is providing posters on this forum who do support the official story with plenty of ammunition - not me.... |
No - you are just supporting the official version.
| Quote: | | and it's not as if there aren't many other far more effective ways to attack the official story - like building 7 for example.... |
Oh come come - I am sure you have a perfectly reasonable "official" explanation for that. Just get the Pentagon fairy tale over with then you can get to work on that one.
| Quote: | | and seriously - if you are over 10 years old, |
name calling agin!!
| Quote: | | please stop calling me names and grow up. |
more name calling. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
paul wright
Moderator
Joined: 26 Sep 2005
Posts: 2650
Location: Sunny Bradford, Northern Lights
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jake
Minor Poster
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
Posts: 56
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 10:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | I could speculate but why? The evidence that it was obviously not a 757 is one reason for a PROPER enquiry. I do not need to know what happened to know what did not. The idea that I must have an explanation because I question the tommy rot I am told by the government is the sort of line of questioning that is either indicative of a low intellect or the manner of a shill. |
yeah right - what's the point in having any evidence to back up your claims? lol....
| Quote: | | ffs stop whinging about name-calling |
if you didn't spend so much time calling everybody who disagrees with you "gullible", "crackpots", "shills" etc there would be no need to respond to your name-calling. try behaving like an adult in the first place....
| Quote: | | bs! There is stacks of evidence that planes struck the wtc. There is ZERO evidence that a plane hit the Pentagon. |
refusing to look at the evidence - as you have persistently done - doesn't mean there isn't any, it just ruins your credibility.
and why would the perpetrators use planes at the wtc but not at the pentagon?
and you didn't answer the following question:
take your buddy killtown for instance - he was very vocal about no 757 hitting the pentagon for a long time and then suddenly a few months ago started promoting the no planes at the wtc theory all over the web. or hadn't you noticed that?
are you a hardcore noplaner (no planes used on 9/11) or just a wannabe noplaner (no plane at the pentagon)?
| Quote: | and based on your contributions to this thread there's not much difference between you and the no planers - you both show a complete disregard for eyewitness evidence and claim that all other evidence is junk or fake or planted (in your case without even looking at it) - and of course - you attack anyone who disagrees with you with childish insults and call them a shill.
Not worth a response. |
you have no response because it's true....
| Quote: | | They certainly are and the company you are with, believing as you clearly do that a 757 hit the pentagon, is pretty evil. |
what - you mean like nearly everybody in the world who's heard of the pentagon attack? nice....
| Quote: | | There will always be devious people trying to undermine the truth movement and associating views with nuts is a particularly common one. Another is getting people like yourself to pretend they are on-side when your agenda is obvious. |
there you go again - you think because I don't completely rule out the possibility that a 757 hit the pentagon I must be a shill? and you claim to have a brain?
| Quote: | | well that really puts you in the open. Is there ANYTHING in the 9/11 truth movement you agree with??? |
yup - how about....
past examples of the US government lying to justify war (vietnam/kuwait)
operation northwoods
the lengths the neocons went to to steal the election of 2000
links between the us government/intelligence agencies and the alleged terrorists
cia funds the pakistani isa - pakistani isa funds al qaeda
osama bin laden's history of being a cia asset
links between the bush and bin laden families
links between the bush familiy and the saudis (most of the alleged hijackers were saudis)
evidence of prior knowledge
evidence that investigations into al qaeda were blocked at the highest level
evidence that drills of the scenarios that happened on 9/11 were practiced before 9/11
control over norad taken away from the military and given to dick cheney in june 2001
security at the wtc up to 9/11
marvin bush/john o'neill
trading on aa/ua/boeing stock prior to 9/11
suspicions about the hijackers/cia links etc
why were the first 3 planes allowed to reach their targets?
"coincidence" of the wargames/hijacking simulations taking place on 9/11
"coincidence" of the fema exercise taking place at the wtc on 9/11
evidence for controlled demolition of wtc 1&2
evidence for controlled demolition of wtc7
larry silverstein's involvement
evidence that flight 93 was shot down
dubya's behaviour on 9/11 and his subsequent accounts of it
changes to the andrews airforce base website on 12/9/2001 (removal of any references to the 2 squadrons of fighter jets that were stationed there)
flying out the bin ladens
restriction of access to the crimescenes and rapid removal of evidence
2 public denials by osama bin laden were not shown on US tv
the dubious nature of the bin laden "confession tape"
environmental cover up/effects on the health on new yorkers and ground zero workers
resistance to/delay in creating a commission to investigate 9/11
the make up and very limited remit of the 9/11 commission
omissions and distortions in the commission's report
nobody called to account for the failure to prevent the attacks
changes to the official story re: timelines/foreknowledge etc
use of 9/11 to justify war against afghanistan
failure to capture osama bin laden
use of 9/11 to justify occupation of iraq
use of 9/11 to erode civil liberties
and other stuff like that....
you see - it's not necessary to believe that a 757 couldn't have hit the pentagon to attack the official story. and nailing your colours to the mast about something you can't prove and using easily disprovable claims to advance your case is still rather silly even if you can't seem to understand that....
| Quote: | | I am offering to anyone visiting this site the opportunity not to be misled by the bs you are posting you * shill. |
yet again....
| Quote: | | I most certainly will not trawl through the garbage you have posted. I know what you are. |
you haven't got a * clue....
I repeat - please stop calling me names and grow up.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jake
Minor Poster
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
Posts: 56
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 10:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hey blackcat!
| Quote: | and while we're at it why don't YOU explain to us how the pentagon attack happened and show how YOUR theory is supported by:
- the eyewitness evidence
- the alleged aircraft's manouevres prior to hitting the pentagon
- the damage/displacement to the lamp posts, cable spools and generator before whatever it was slammed into the wall
- the damage to the pentagon itself
- the recovered debris
so we can really see if your unshakeable beliefs stand up to scrutiny..... |
how about it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jake
Minor Poster
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
Posts: 56
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 10:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dh wrote: | This cartoon age
These are all cartoons writ large
Whats your problem? |
no planes?
at the pentagon or no planes at all? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
paul wright
Moderator
Joined: 26 Sep 2005
Posts: 2650
Location: Sunny Bradford, Northern Lights
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 10:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Best guess- no planes at all The evidence of anything is tawdry to say the least
The most frequented footage of the wtc2 hit is very suspect
I revisit this many times and from many angles and there is nothing real about it
It is purely a hyped image
_________________
http://www.exopolitics-leeds.co.uk/introduction |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jake
Minor Poster
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
Posts: 56
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 10:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| don't believe in it myself based on what I've read - and it's hardly likely to convince many people is it? and there's plenty of other things to concentrate on.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
IronSnot
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 07 Jul 2006
Posts: 595
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 1:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have to agree with you Jake. So this DH character thinks there were holograms and posts up nonsense about illuminati on Indymedia when Chris of Indymedia starts making sense.
Probably not a shill but jesus do they have to do it for free? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blackcat
Validated Poster
Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 8:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| jake wrote: | hey blackcat!
| Quote: | and while we're at it why don't YOU explain to us how the pentagon attack happened and show how YOUR theory is supported by:
- the eyewitness evidence
- the alleged aircraft's manouevres prior to hitting the pentagon
- the damage/displacement to the lamp posts, cable spools and generator before whatever it was slammed into the wall
- the damage to the pentagon itself
- the recovered debris
so we can really see if your unshakeable beliefs stand up to scrutiny..... |
how about it? |
Now why would I have to do anything of the sort. You yourself believe that it just "might" have been a 757 not that it actually was! So if you do not believe it definitely WAS a 757 then you also have to explain all those things. Well how about it? Are you going to admit for once that you think it WAS a 757 instead of lying about being open-minded on this issue? Are you going to admit that you believe the government line and stop lying? How do you explain all those things if you treally think it might not have been a 757? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ally
Moderate Poster
Joined: 04 Aug 2005
Posts: 909
Location: banned
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 2:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm happy to post anyone footage from sept 12 2001 that proves the media showed us fake planes and CGI footage, the south tower is clearly hit by something that travels in on different plight paths, looks different in each capture and even the audio was manipulated and replicated on different hits thus undermining further the veracity of any film which appears to show the south tower being hit by a commercial airplane.
I cannot doubt what witnesses in NY saw but what we all saw on television was faked. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
paul wright
Moderator
Joined: 26 Sep 2005
Posts: 2650
Location: Sunny Bradford, Northern Lights
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 3:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| IronSnot wrote: | I have to agree with you Jake. So this DH character thinks there were holograms and posts up nonsense about illuminati on Indymedia when Chris of Indymedia starts making sense.
Probably not a shill but jesus do they have to do it for free? |
Get stuffed,Iron Snot. I didn't mention the illuminati on there and it was a justified response to someone aggressively responding about hijacking demos and 'conspiracy b*****ks' . I've met with Chris a couple of times and been in communication with him a lot more. I've said he's a good guy in here and note that he even made the effort to respond to my BG comments on im
I've said what I think is a maybe on 9/11 and declined to follow that up here
How many times have you been out on the streets recently giving 911-related stuff away and talking to people?
_________________
http://www.exopolitics-leeds.co.uk/introduction |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ally
Moderate Poster
Joined: 04 Aug 2005
Posts: 909
Location: banned
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster
Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 04, 2006 9:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
Curses, the government brought down by someone doing some eyeball analysis with Flight Simulator.
I like the way the government gets credited with dreaming up and planning the perfect attack on its own country, and keeping everyone quiet that was in on it, but a couple of kids with computers seem to be able to blow the whole thing out of the water.
Don't you ever wonder why its people with no experience in the image analysis field that are making all the claims about the footage being CGI, but all the experts in the field have nothing to say about it, because there is nothing faked or CGI about the footage perhaps?
The same goes for all the "smoking guns". They've all been pointed out by people that don't understand them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ally
Moderate Poster
Joined: 04 Aug 2005
Posts: 909
Location: banned
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 04, 2006 10:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| PM me ur details and I'll post you dvd, you can see for yourself the fakes screened by British news programs, these are not digital manipulations five years after the fact but hard evidence of bogus planes melting into buildings AND reappearing out the otherside. No hijacked jets hit any of their alleged targets on 911. It is only you who has nothing to say about it and likes to waste time with depthless posts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jake
Minor Poster
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
Posts: 56
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 04, 2006 12:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| blackcat wrote: | | Now why would I have to do anything of the sort. You yourself believe that it just "might" have been a 757 not that it actually was! So if you do not believe it definitely WAS a 757 then you also have to explain all those things. Well how about it? Are you going to admit for once that you think it WAS a 757 instead of lying about being open-minded on this issue? Are you going to admit that you believe the government line and stop lying? How do you explain all those things if you treally think it might not have been a 757? |
hmmmm....
it's clear that you can't understand plain English. it's clear that you have nothing to say that's of any substance. it's clear that you have no reply to the many points that I have brought up. it's clear that no matter how much evidence is posted to completely undermine your case, you will refuse to even look at it and prefer instead to cling like a paranoid limpet to your silly misconceptions. this forum is apparently all about truth - but when confronted with obvious truths that challenge those misconceptions your only response is to call me childish names and accuse me of being a shill. I've tried to reason with you but you seem to be completely impervious to reason - so I guess I'm just the latest person who has reached the conclusion that you're a waste of space and a waste of time.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jake
Minor Poster
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
Posts: 56
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 04, 2006 12:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ally wrote: | | PM me ur details and I'll post you dvd, you can see for yourself the fakes screened by British news programs, these are not digital manipulations five years after the fact but hard evidence of bogus planes melting into buildings AND reappearing out the otherside. |
is that a genuine offer? I don't believe the no-planes stuff even though many here do, but I wouldn't mind having a look at what you've got.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eckyboy
Validated Poster
Joined: 03 May 2006
Posts: 162
Location: Edinburgh
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 04, 2006 2:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I might have got you wrong Jake. Showing a willingness to look at evidence you do not necessarily believe in shows you have an open mind and do not jump to conclusions. I would like to look at that footage as well so I can see it for myself even if at the moment I do not believe the no planes theory either. Only by looking at all angles and exhausting every avenue can we ever hope to try and piece together what really happened. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blackcat
Validated Poster
Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 04, 2006 4:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | hmmmm....
it's clear that you can't understand plain English. it's clear that you have nothing to say that's of any substance. it's clear that you have no reply to the many points that I have brought up. it's clear that no matter how much evidence is posted to completely undermine your case, you will refuse to even look at it and prefer instead to cling like a paranoid limpet to your silly misconceptions. this forum is apparently all about truth - but when confronted with obvious truths that challenge those misconceptions your only response is to call me childish names and accuse me of being a shill. I've tried to reason with you but you seem to be completely impervious to reason - so I guess I'm just the latest person who has reached the conclusion that you're a waste of space and a waste of time.... |
I will take that as a no. You have no explanations to offer therefore you believe without question it WAS a 757 that hit the Pentagon. So you are lying when you say you have an open mind. Thought so.
On the other hand I believe
1 The eyewitness evidence is unreliable and contradictory
2 The alleged aircraft's manouevres prior to hitting the pentagon were ridiculous to attribute to the "hijacker".
3 The damage/displacement to the lamp posts, cable spools and generator before whatever it was slammed into the wall do not prove it was a 757
4 The damage to the pentagon itself does NOT correlate with being hit with a 757
5 The recovered debris is utterly inconsistent with a 757 and is far too small.
You have "proven" nothing - least of all that you have an open mind about this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster
Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 4:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| blackcat wrote: |
1 The eyewitness evidence is unreliable and contradictory |
Eyewitness evidence often is, but the general direction of the statements point towards an airliner.
| Quote: |
2 The alleged aircraft's manouevres prior to hitting the pentagon were ridiculous to attribute to the "hijacker". |
The hijacker had a pilots licence, but even I could have carried out manouevers he carried out. They really are not difficult at all.
| Quote: | | 3 The damage/displacement to the lamp posts, cable spools and generator before whatever it was slammed into the wall do not prove it was a 757 |
Not conclusively, but they do indicate an aircraft of the same approximate size.
| Quote: | | 4 The damage to the pentagon itself does NOT correlate with being hit with a 757 |
Actually it does. Before the section collapsed there was a 757 sized hole in it. That's why the section collapsed.
| Quote: | | 5 The recovered debris is utterly inconsistent with a 757 and is far too small. |
The debris recovered was consistent with a 757, because it was a 757
Look, http://www.911myths.com/html/757_wreckage.html wreckage.
What size should the debris be? Honestly, how do you know that the debris is too small?
http://www.911review.com/errors/pentagon/crashdebris.html
The photos about halfway down are of an F-4 hitting a concrete wall at 480 mph, about the same as the 757 that hit the pentagon. Where's the large debris? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TimmyG
Validated Poster
Joined: 04 Apr 2006
Posts: 489
Location: Manchester
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 8:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
the no planes theory is bs!! please let it go!
think about it.. think about how many videos would have had to be faked.
people saw it happen! were all the observers of the planes in new york under cia mind control?!
its more likely that the planes were real
_________________
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster
Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 9:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TimmyG wrote: | the no planes theory is bs!! please let it go!
think about it.. think about how many videos would have had to be faked.
people saw it happen! were all the observers of the planes in new york under cia mind control?!
its more likely that the planes were real |
How many people were in New York with video cameras? Wouldn't somone have noticed if they watched the video again and saw there were no planes? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blackcat
Validated Poster
Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 9:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| There were planes that hit wtc1 and 2. It was NOT a 757 that hit the Pentagon. Blatant. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TimmyG
Validated Poster
Joined: 04 Apr 2006
Posts: 489
Location: Manchester
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 9:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | TimmyG wrote:
the no planes theory is bs!! please let it go!
think about it.. think about how many videos would have had to be faked.
people saw it happen! were all the observers of the planes in new york under cia mind control?!
its more likely that the planes were real
How many people were in New York with video cameras? Wouldn't somone have noticed if they watched the video again and saw there were no planes? |
i don't understand. are you arguing with me?
i am in agreement with you on this
_________________
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster
Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 10:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TimmyG wrote: | | Quote: | TimmyG wrote:
the no planes theory is bs!! please let it go!
think about it.. think about how many videos would have had to be faked.
people saw it happen! were all the observers of the planes in new york under cia mind control?!
its more likely that the planes were real
How many people were in New York with video cameras? Wouldn't somone have noticed if they watched the video again and saw there were no planes? |
i don't understand. are you arguing with me?
i am in agreement with you on this |
Oh sorry, yes, I agree. No planes theory = no good. I was just in a bit of a hurry.
I meant to say that the idea that all the home video footage of the attacks were faked is quite simply ridiculous, because there is so much of it, and it is all independent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster
Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 10:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| blackcat wrote: | | There were planes that hit wtc1 and 2. It was NOT a 757 that hit the Pentagon. Blatant. |
No, not blatant. Unless you explain how there came to be a 757 embedded in the pentagon and strewn across the lawn. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blackcat
Validated Poster
Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 6:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | No, not blatant. Unless you explain how there came to be a 757 embedded in the pentagon and strewn across the lawn. |
Why are you here? What do you gain from coming to a 9/11 truth site and peddling the horseshit that the government offers to cover up its crime? That a 757 did not hit the Pentagon is glaringly obvious. Something did - but it was clearly not a 757 and I will not "debate" the point with a shill any more than I will argue with you if you insist that 2 + 2 = 5. Present as much "evidence" as you like but keep it for those who are still, as yet, uninformed about the monstrous crime the US government cabal has perpetrated on its own people. I have already had one shill advise me he won't be wasting his time on me. Success!! Now if I can just * you off as well... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andrew Johnson
Mighty Poster
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 1919
Location: Derbyshire
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 7:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Dear
All,
Following
some thought and reflection I have now unlocked the locked threads. I have the
following ideas for all posters to consider:
1)
If people want to waste their time posting pointless replies to someone
who isn’t interested in the truth – merely in stating that “he/she/it is
the only person who knows what it is” and that we are the opposite of what
we know we are – they are free to do just that.
2)
Johnny Pixels is either a software entity or person who is paid to do
what he does.
3)
His strategy of wasting our time has been quite successful.
4)
It is possible the JP is working in tandem with someone else who is
apparently “on our side”. This is simple technique will fuel the time
wasting process and be much more effective at sucking genuine people into the
fake debate.
So,
can we learn any lessons from this? Yes! As one of my good friends put it
“DON’T FEED THE TROLLS!”
I
will try to keep moving posts of people of Johnny’s ilk to the critics
corner, but this could take time as whomever is doing it may intensify their
efforts to derail our campaign, so I’m not going to attempt to fight it that
much – there is too much else to be done.
To
JP, and their type, what you have done has certainly not been a complete waste
of my own time. In my effort to determine whether you are a machine or not, I
decided to contact someone I haven’t spoken to for over 14 years and I used
the e-mail below to advise him of the current “state of play” with our
campaign. He is a professor now. So hopefully he will learn the truth too.
Whoever
or whatever you are, it is your efforts that will ultimately fail – because
of those genuine people who post against you – collectively we stand against
you and your agenda.
I
will do my best not to be drawn in to any debates on “critics corner” for
all the reasons outlined above. I will post this message to threads where JP
has posted.
Thank
you.
Dear Dave,
I wonder if you
remember me. The last time I spoke to you was probably over 14 years ago when
we both worked above the Canteen at Technology Drive, Beeston, for the (now
dismembered) GPT. I used to work with Nick Thompson and Dave Mason for Dave
Wright's (redundant) squad - at the same time you worked for Douggie Laws.
Sorry to
"interrupt" your busy schedule. Don't feel the need to reply to this
message. I will get to why I thought of you later on. I would warn you that,
if you want to try and answer this question honestly, it may turn your world
upside down (no, it's not religious - it is, essentially, a technical
question).
I was just
browsing your cv - man, what a cv! I'm a bit flummoxed by it actually, and
rather ambivalent about asking you what I wanted to ask you, because it's kind
of trivial, but behind the question is an issue of global importance.
Like many people,
I experienced "The Broadband Revolution" - in about May 2003 (when
it became available in our area on NTL). Since then, well, let's say I have
had "a 30+ hours per week unpaid research job". To cut a long
story short, this has lead me to join, following invitation, a loose
association of Scholars called "Scholar's
for 9/11 Truth". This group formed in about December last year and
it's most prominent member is probably Professor (Emeritus) Morgan Reynolds,
who served in George
W Bush's 1st Administration for 16 months in the Department of Labour .
You can find out about other members of the group on the web link, and also
here are audios (done by other people) of several of them being interviewed
etc (stored on my own website).
I have also
become involved in The British 9/11
Truth Campaign, with "these hats on", I have corresponded with
people like Michael Meacher and BBC News Director Helen Boaden. Some of this
correspondence (and other stuff) can be found on the Campaign Forum Website (link).
This brings me to
my question, which, from your considerable knowledge and experience, you
may be able to give me some thoughts on - or ask someone you might know for
theirs, as it may be a little outside your field. I have no idea why your name
suddenly came into my mind, except that I remember you as a jolly, affable and
extremely intelligent person (honest!)
QUESTION:
In the past couple of months, we have experienced increasing
"attacks" on our forum, and I wondered if you thought it would be
feasible that a "forum posting Bot" exists somewhere in the world.
My reason for
asking has been brought on by a sequence of posts I have made on this thread.
Scan through my
posts which respond to "Johnny Pixels". Is Johnny Pixels a real
person, or is he, perhaps what I suggest (jokingly) he might be (on the
thread)? I wonder if something could pass the Turing test. Looking at the
latest competition, http://loebner.net/Prizef/2005_Contest/Transcripts.html it
would seem not. However, on our forum, the topics are fairly narrow and you
don't post questions in a random or "gobbledegook" fashion. Also,
the communication is not real time. Added to that, the "black
technology" is at least 30 to 40 years in advance of anything publicly
disclosed, so my current guess would be around 80% probability that
"Johnny Pixels" and his ilk are software entities. Do you know any
AI experts, or linguists or psychologists who would profile the thread?
In reality, the
answer to this particular question is perhaps not that important, if you care
to consider the information posted on the forum and, why the forum even exists
in the 1st place. (My answers below).
For myself, I can
say for sure that the scenario portrayed in Orwell's 1984 (Orwell's real
name was Eric Blair, don't you know) is pretty much what we are very near to
now - and I am now personally engaged in a vigorous information war, and a
battle for our freedom.The US and UK are either supporting Israel or being
lead by them in planned genocide in the Middle East. I wish I could convince
myself otherwise. BBC News has now become a propaganda organisation where, for
regular news bulletins, no one is willing to do real investigative
journalism and ask any hard questions of those that should be questioned. This
is proved by the BBC's point blank refusal to cover the formation of our
highly-credentialed Scholars Group (see
our forum for
proof). They fake impartiality. The ignore or distort important stories,
but are happy to report inconsequential trivialities as part of
"editorial policy" - and we pay for it. The proof of this is in the
fact that you know nothing about the Worldwide 9/11 Truth campaign (if it is
true that you currently know nothing about it).
I am sorry if
this has spoiled your day. Take a look at the Scholars group and see what you
make of it. More info and free
DVDs available on request. Other comments and feedback greatly welcomed. I
hope you'll come and join the party. We need all the "rockers" we
can get.
Cheers for
reading this, dude - from way back, to right now....
Andrew (Johnson)
Still the same
really, if you remember me....
P.S. This
is about as far as I've pushed out my boat on this issue so far.
[/html]
_________________
Andrew
Ask the Tough Questions, Folks! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
