marko Posted 4 September 2011 Posted 4 September 2011 If there were bodies they wouldnt be from the 'Plane' the people on the 'plane' would have been pulverised on impact. The bodies you are talking about are most likely that of pentagon staff or visitors to the pentagon. Funny that because they found uniformed staff from the plane.
fleckneymike Posted 4 September 2011 Posted 4 September 2011 If there were bodies they wouldnt be from the 'Plane' the people on the 'plane' would have been pulverised on impact. The bodies you are talking about are most likely that of pentagon staff or visitors to the pentagon. Apart from the body fragments from the plane that is.
jonno24 Posted 4 September 2011 Posted 4 September 2011 Ah referring to the Miraculously intact Credit Cards from passengers. ID ETC Also a ATM card from a passenger that wasnt even listed on the flight that crashed into the pentagon But ofcourse i am wrong and shouldnt even be doubting the official story
fleckneymike Posted 4 September 2011 Posted 4 September 2011 Ah referring to the Miraculously intact Credit Cards from passengers. ID ETC Also a ATM card from a passenger that wasnt even listed on the flight that crashed into the pentagon But ofcourse i am wrong and shouldnt even be doubting the official story No referring to the bits of people's bodies.
marko Posted 4 September 2011 Posted 4 September 2011 Ah referring to the Miraculously intact Credit Cards from passengers. ID ETC Also a ATM card from a passenger that wasnt even listed on the flight that crashed into the pentagon But ofcourse i am wrong and shouldnt even be doubting the official story Oh no, of course you should. Just don't be drawn in by the numerous, ridiculous, conflicting conspiracy theories. Edit: I do love it how you conspiracy boys rep each other
jonno24 Posted 4 September 2011 Posted 4 September 2011 No referring to the bits of people's bodies. And by looking at bits of peoples bodies you can tell that they have been on a plane can you ?
marko Posted 4 September 2011 Posted 4 September 2011 And by looking at bits of peoples bodies you can tell that they have been on a plane can you ? No, but when you cross reference the DNA of those body bits with the passenger list and they match, it's enough to convince most people it was a plane that flew into the Pentagon.
fleckneymike Posted 4 September 2011 Posted 4 September 2011 And by looking at bits of peoples bodies you can tell that they have been on a plane can you ? I'm not even sure I understand this counter argument. As far as I am aware they weren't found with duty free on them no, but seeing as they were found at the Pentagon along with the bodies and remains of 125 other people I think its safe to assume that they were on the plane that countless people saw crash into the Pentagon. Also as the remains belonged to many who had called loved ones whilst on the plane to tell them that they had been hijacked and were going to die I think all sane people can say that they were on the plane. Unless of course the US govt did hijack flight 77, made them call their loved ones but then decided instead to unload the plane, make it take off again but this time fitted with remote control OR they landed the plane elsewhere, killed all the passengers, mutilated their bodies, snuck them into the pentagon so they could be found, whilst at the same time disguising a drone as an American Airlines plane, flying it over a crowded interstate and into the Pentagon whilst a second team went about placing large parts of a 757 around the scene in order to make it look like a plane crash. You are an idiot.
jonno24 Posted 4 September 2011 Posted 4 September 2011 I'm not even sure I understand this counter argument. As far as I am aware they weren't found with duty free on them no, but seeing as they were found at the Pentagon along with the bodies and remains of 125 other people I think its safe to assume that they were on the plane that countless people saw crash into the Pentagon. Also as the remains belonged to many who had called loved ones whilst on the plane to tell them that they had been hijacked and were going to die I think all sane people can say that they were on the plane. Unless of course the US govt did hijack flight 77, made them call their loved ones but then decided instead to unload the plane, make it take off again but this time fitted with remote control OR they landed the plane elsewhere, killed all the passengers, mutilated their bodies, snuck them into the pentagon so they could be found, whilst at the same time disguising a drone as an American Airlines plane, flying it over a crowded interstate and into the Pentagon whilst a second team went about placing large parts of a 757 around the scene in order to make it look like a plane crash. You are an idiot. What next your dad gonna beat my dad up ? Just accept that other people have a different opinion to yours and with the many inconcistencies in the official story this argument will rumble on and rumble on. I dont think you are an idiot for believing everything you are told its only human. Plus it is only human to question things that MANY other people question. I used to believe the official story of a then small terror group hijacking a plane with box cutters getting past airport security managing to fly a 757 at high - max speed very close to the ground and managing to defy the laws of physics by getting a 757 into a hole smaller than the plane itself . Lets not call each other names but debate this as anyone else would by presenting the different sides to the argument if we dont agree then hey were only human
zubi Posted 4 September 2011 Posted 4 September 2011 What next your dad gonna beat my dad up ? Just accept that other people have a different opinion to yours and with the many inconcistencies in the official story this argument will rumble on and rumble on. I dont think you are an idiot for believing everything you are told its only human. Plus it is only human to question things that MANY other people question. I used to believe the official story of a then small terror group hijacking a plane with box cutters getting past airport security managing to fly a 757 at high - max speed very close to the ground and managing to defy the laws of physics by getting a 757 into a hole smaller than the plane itself . Lets not call each other names but debate this as anyone else would by presenting the different sides to the argument if we dont agree then hey were only human Well said mate You guys are obviously debating this issue and bringing forth both sides of the story well, but no need to be rude about it... we are all city fans at the end of the day
jonno24 Posted 4 September 2011 Posted 4 September 2011 Well said mate You guys are obviously debating this issue and bringing forth both sides of the story well, but no need to be rude about it... we are all city fans at the end of the day Indeed
fleckneymike Posted 4 September 2011 Posted 4 September 2011 Well said mate You guys are obviously debating this issue and bringing forth both sides of the story well, but no need to be rude about it... we are all city fans at the end of the day We may all have opinions but some opinions are wrong. When it comes to a plane crashing into the side of a building we aren't dealing with opinions we are dealing with facts. The Moon landings were the big conspiracy not long ago, but as that got shot down bit by bit the conspiracy industry had to move on, and it's moved on to the tragic deaths of thousands of people. Every single theory put forward by 'truthers' has been rebutted yet still they come. There has not been one single piece of credible evidence to support these hair brained theories, not one. Whilst we're at it why doesn't someone start a holocaust denial thread because after all we're all City fans and its just their opinion like?
fleckneymike Posted 4 September 2011 Posted 4 September 2011 Plus it is only human to question things that MANY other people question. I used to believe the official story of a then small terror group hijacking a plane with box cutters getting past airport security managing to fly a 757 at high - max speed very close to the ground and managing to defy the laws of physics by getting a 757 into a hole smaller than the plane itself . Lets not call each other names but debate this as anyone else would by presenting the different sides to the argument if we dont agree then hey were only human Many people question evolution, but those people are wrong. When you debate it is generally helpful if the person you're debating with understands the things they are saying. I'm not sure if you'd had the pleasure of taking an internal US flight pre 9/11 but if you had you'd know beating security is not difficult, it was more akin to catching a bus than a plane. So bad was security that their own checks of the system enabled them to sneak bombs and guns on board well before 2001. Shocked by these findings they leapt into action and did......nothing. That's the crime, not your bullshit drone, explosives, aliens theory.
Rincewind Posted 4 September 2011 Posted 4 September 2011 I heard someone say in a pub once the Moon landings were fake because there was a shadowb in one of the pictures and the flag moved a little. Also asked 'Who was taking the picture?' And this bloke was sober and serious. He probably saw something about it in the Daily Star. Same sort of person that would believe all immigrants are living in free houses with 10 people in each and living on £5000 per week social security cuz they know someone that has a cousin that went in a pub and heard it off a bloke who lives next door to one so it must be true. Not so sure about the sober bit.
zubi Posted 4 September 2011 Posted 4 September 2011 We may all have opinions but some opinions are wrong. When it comes to a plane crashing into the side of a building we aren't dealing with opinions we are dealing with facts. The Moon landings were the big conspiracy not long ago, but as that got shot down bit by bit the conspiracy industry had to move on, and it's moved on to the tragic deaths of thousands of people. Every single theory put forward by 'truthers' has been rebutted yet still they come. There has not been one single piece of credible evidence to support these hair brained theories, not one. Whilst we're at it why doesn't someone start a holocaust denial thread because after all we're all City fans and its just their opinion like? Well ok, if you can give me facts and change my opinion that's no problem, i'm open to that. One thing which bugs the hell out of me and I mentioned in a previous post is that the Americans have technology to monitor the planes and their flightpaths, they also have the technology to intercept with fighter jets... Surely they woud have seen this one coming. So any reason why they failed to pick up on it?
Rincewind Posted 4 September 2011 Posted 4 September 2011 I thought fighter jets forced one plane down?
BoneDog Posted 5 September 2011 Posted 5 September 2011 Many people question evolution. Well, they are bound to question it. The fossil record speaks for itself.
shen Posted 5 September 2011 Posted 5 September 2011 We may all have opinions but some opinions are wrong. When it comes to a plane crashing into the side of a building we aren't dealing with opinions we are dealing with facts. The Moon landings were the big conspiracy not long ago, but as that got shot down bit by bit the conspiracy industry had to move on, and it's moved on to the tragic deaths of thousands of people. Every single theory put forward by 'truthers' has been rebutted yet still they come. There has not been one single piece of credible evidence to support these hair brained theories, not one. Whilst we're at it why doesn't someone start a holocaust denial thread because after all we're all City fans and its just their opinion like? I can't comment on there not being a 'single piece of credible evidence' that supports any of the given conspiracy theories, but I agree that there definitely aren't enough pieces. Frankly, I don't believe it was an inside job. What I do believe is that government and other authorities have been deliberately withholding incriminating information and evidence that would hold them responsible for at least some of the lives lost that day. Fact is, the Twin Towers and WTC 7 shouldn't have collapsed because of fire. They shouldn't have collapsed from a plane crash. Everyone agrees on that. It is quite extraordinary how WTC 7 could collapse the way it did for the reasons in the report. But even accepting that, it would never have happened if the fire proofing was adequate. The same goes for the Towers. A whole host are responsible for this, not least the Port Authorities. The blowup of flight 93. The crash into the supposedly most secure civil building in the world. By not telling the truth, they authorities are in fact just covering up their own incompetences and inadequacies. When a supposedly small pocket of terrorists were able to expose such major flaws and succeed with such an extraordinary attack, it begs the question what the USSS, CIA etc are there for. And the consequence is that people should and do doubt the credibility of their own government and their ability to safeguard their country. The 'truthers' (boy have they had many names in this thread alone already) might be completely wrong with their theories, but where there's smoke, there's fire. I think the people that were partly responsible for nearly 3.000 lives lost during the attack should be identified and punished. And as long as someone questions their part in the event, no matter how wrong they may be, it means there is still hope that these people will be exposed.
BoneDog Posted 5 September 2011 Posted 5 September 2011 Ok braniac, if these criminal super minds were planning an attack on themselves but wanted to make it look like terrorists using a 757 why would they build into their fiendishly clever plan a manoeuvre that allegedly the plane which hit the Pentagon couldn't do? Also it would be nice if you used the complete quotation which ends "You don't fly a 757 in that manner. It's unsafe" I don't know why the incoming object took the route it did. There could be many possibilities for that. I also haven't a clue who these criminal super minds could be. I'm sure of one thing though, that the military men and women who were in the part of The Pentagon that was hit sure weren't in on any plans. Their job that day was to oversee the war games that I think made sure that most of the US air force still based at home were flying over Northern Canada at the time of the WTC attacks. As for the "You don't fly a 757 in that manner. It's unsafe" quote, it's a pity they didn't expand on that and say why it's unsafe.
shen Posted 5 September 2011 Posted 5 September 2011 I also haven't a clue who these criminal super minds could be. I'm sure of one thing though, that the military men and women who were in the part of The Pentagon that was hit sure weren't in on any plans. Their job that day was to oversee the war games that I think made sure that most of the US air force still based at home were flying over Northern Canada at the time of the WTC attacks. Could you expand a bit on those war games you're on about? I have genuinely no idea what it's about nor exactly which role you suggest it plays in the 9/11 attacks. And if you could add some sources it'd be great too.
BoneDog Posted 5 September 2011 Posted 5 September 2011 Unless of course the US govt did hijack flight 77, etc.... I'd say that flight 77 ended up somewhere else. I've heard many folk who are ex USAF talk about the different possibilities and they are definitely not whackos who hate their country. In fact they most likely love their country more than most do. What they do hate is what happened that day and they are not at all convinced by what their government tells them happened. Also, one of the flights went missing totally off radar for 45 minutes and then reappeared. I'd say that was a different plane.
BoneDog Posted 5 September 2011 Posted 5 September 2011 Could you expand a bit on those war games you're on about? I have genuinely no idea what it's about nor exactly which role you suggest it plays in the 9/11 attacks. And if you could add some sources it'd be great too. I thought the war games that morning were common knowledge? There were war games/drills involving Navy and Air Force of Canada and the US. I think that these drills made sure that most of the US air defence was flying over Alaska and north Canada at the time of the first attacks. I can't remember the correct name but I think it is called The Office of Naval Intelligence or The US Naval Command Centre at The Pentagon. This was the place where the US side of the drills were being conducted from, but they had spy planes and ships out there and also one or more of these planes were command planes (I'm not sure of the technicalities until I go back and re-read ). The people I listened to on this subject (including some ex air force) seemed to think that the perpertrators of 911 were in one of these command planes and/or ships and not in the Naval Offices at The Pentagon. I think they also said that whoever was in charge of the 'Common Operational Picture' in these drills had a hand in the planning and carrying out of the atrocities of Sept 11th. When I've found the best sources for this I'll post them.
OzFox Posted 5 September 2011 Posted 5 September 2011 Oh shit. Zingari's called in the big guns. We're doomed. Doomed to a never ending list of factoids that is
Rincewind Posted 5 September 2011 Posted 5 September 2011 I think Shen makes some good points. I can quite believe the US govt. are concealing evidence of their own incompentance not evidence that it was an inside job. They know the therorists will never be able to prove their ideas so see no reason to release certain evidence that will show them in bd light. Those at the top value their jobs.
Zingari Posted 5 September 2011 Author Posted 5 September 2011 I’ve watched footage of the WTC7 collapse a few more times since this thread started and it still looks like it was a controlled demolition to me. I suggest everyone does this and with the sound off if necessary to make your own judgement of what you are actually witnessing. And no amount of, “Why would they do it?” or “How could they do it?” or petty insults has changed my opinion of what I am witnessing . It walks like a duck and it quacks like one. Steel buildings do not collapse into themselves. They never have before or since, because they can’t .
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.