The Pentagon on 9/11 - MODERATOR WARNING ISSUED

Discussion in '9/11' started by Bob0627, Nov 1, 2016.

You are viewing posts in the Conspiracy Theory forum. PF does not allow misinformation. However, please note that posts could occasionally contain content in violation of our policies prior to our staff intervening.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    3,473
    Likes Received:
    1,503
    Trophy Points:
    113
    you used to seem somewhat rational Bob ... wow how you have fallen into madness ... you said it all in 11 words ... I can no longer take you seriously ...
     
  2. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm so devastated Shiner. No longer? When did you ever? But seriously, I never took you seriously except maybe at the very beginning when I wasn't sure. I'm proud to be "irrational" to you.

    Mad Bob

    Edit: You're off topic as usual Shiner (so am I in response).
     
    Last edited: Apr 16, 2018
    Mr_Truth likes this.
  3. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    3,473
    Likes Received:
    1,503
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I am not at all off topic Bob ... I am just continuing the string of conversation and debate regarding the Pentagon on 9/11 ... we seem to be in disagreement on the origins of AA77 ... I am well aware of what I have been told but you seem to be confused by what YOU have been told ...

    don't play amateur psychologist with me Bob ... I will win every time ...

    you continue to embellish your psychobabble with every post ... do you honestly believe the **** you post these days or are you a fraud being paid to perpetuate this nonsense? ...

    this one is simple Bob ... AA77 ... let's start at the beginning ... I have only been fed flight records and ATR data ... what do you have to dispute that? ...
     
  4. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Off topic drivel ignored.

    Reminder: I don't debate.

    A severe lack of evidence, NO serial number match as repeatedly proven. Without that, the FDR is suspect and so are all the allegedly recovered parts. Those in conjunction with no legitimate investigation and the severe improbability/impossibility of the official claim regarding the event make EVERYTHING untrustworthy. Why would any intelligent human being fall for idiotic stories spewed by a pathological liar on faith? You want to talk about "madness", "psychobabble", "nonsense" and "(dis)honesty"? Hypocrisy much Shiner?

    Do you honestly think you can convince me of anything you have to post about 9/11? You should know better by now.
     
    Last edited: Apr 16, 2018
    Mr_Truth likes this.
  5. Charles Rice

    Charles Rice Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2018
    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    3
    ". I personally don't believe an airliner hit the Pentagon" your words. You should keep your story straight.

    Again, your stated belief does not account for the physical evidence we all saw with our own eyes--you included.

    That makes you intellectually dishonest at best.

    Have a nice day.
     
  6. Charles Rice

    Charles Rice Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2018
    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Nor are they ever on any other plane crash.

    The Pentagon is actually a building. It can tell no lies. The persons staffing the Pentagon would have no reason to spin yarns. The damage to the Pentagon is in perfect harmony with the physical evidence, the eye witnesses, and the investigation's findings.

    If by "nobody" you mean everyone; you'd be correct.

    I'm sure they are concealing some details. I would expect any investigation that involves our clandestine assets to have such with holdings from the public. The 9/11 Commission Report, however, makes perfect sense

    I'll get right on that; meanwhile, you need to come up with a competing narrative that accounts for all of the physical evidence.
     
    Shinebox likes this.
  7. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,268
    Likes Received:
    845
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You're ignoring the info on page #1 of this thread. You look really silly when you do that as the viewers have seen it.

    April Gallup - Was there a bomb in the Pentagon?

    (2:20 time mark)
     
    Bob0627 and Eleuthera like this.
  8. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    22,694
    Likes Received:
    11,760
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not true sir. Civilians, aircraft manufacturers and others, are involved in ALL civilian aircraft accidents, at the pleasure of the NTSB.

    Really, the pentagon is a building? Holy ****, one learns something every day here on the internet. You are such a source of knowledge and wisdom.

    Who was concealing details regarding the poll? It's true that any poll depends upon how exactly any question is phrased, but the point is that 85% of respondents felt that the government was hiding something. No doubt, after the Warren Commission, after Colin Powell's lies at the UN. Everybody knows the government lies, but many people prefer not to talk about it because of the implications.

    The Commission Report makes perfect sense for a government apologist like yourself, yes. But for independent thinkers with a working knowledge of the facts of the case, it is just another example of the psychobabble that goes along with all government reports like the Warren Commission. Its purpose was to protect the guilty parties and to satisfy those who believe only what their government and media tell them to believe.
     
    Bob0627 likes this.
  9. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    22,694
    Likes Received:
    11,760
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Thank you Scott for that excellent interview with April Gallup. She is a brave woman to speak truth to power.

    Speaking truth to power assured that her legal efforts would be rejected by the compromised US judiciary.
     
  10. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113

    It is quite straight, a belief is just that. I also said it's possible a plane may have hit the Pentagon, I just don't believe it was a commercial airliner and very unlikely it was a plane of any kind. Of course I could be wrong but the official story makes no sense and there was a coverup. So there is no conclusive evidence of any kind and certainly no legitimate investigation. So there's very little to go on other than faith that the pathological liars are telling the truth.

    The only thing that anyone saw with their own eyes is about 4 frames from a video that showed nothing. The problem is no one saw anything conclusive with their own eyes, perhaps in your imagination because you want to believe what you were told is true so you imagined what you saw in those 4 frames.

    No, it makes you dishonest even to yourself.

    Thanks but irrelevant.
     
  11. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    107,541
    Likes Received:
    34,488
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So you dismiss the witnesses outright that saw an airliner crash into the Pentagon?
     
  12. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's incorrect, I don't dismiss anyone, including eyewitnesses who believe the Pentagon was bombed and those who claim they didn't see enough evidence to convince them it was a commercial airliner or the ones who contradict the official story. I also don't dismiss the NTSB guy caught on video claiming there's a serial number on a part that will be used to identify the actual aircraft (which was never done). I don't need to dismiss anything and would hope that a legitimate investigation would have covered ALL the evidence and ALL the eyewitnesses. Sadly that never happened and IMO for good reason, they never wanted us to know what really happened and are protecting the criminals as a result. That is always the only reason for a coverup.
     
  13. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    107,541
    Likes Received:
    34,488
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So you do dismiss the witnesses that saw an airliner over others that want to believe something else.
     
  14. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What is it you didn't understand about that I don't dismiss ANYONE?
     
  15. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Let's get something straight for some of the phony posters. I started this thread because of the immense controversy surrounding the Pentagon issue on 9/11. One only has to read the very first post to get a clear understanding of my motive:

    There are compelling arguments/theories on both sides of the issue. The reason for that is that there never was any legitimate investigation into the Pentagon destruction or 9/11 in general. So all I'm looking for is an intelligent adult discussion so everyone can hopefully learn something, this is isn't about me, it's about the Pentagon on 9/11 as the title clearly indicates. That does not mean however that I will not state my opinion on the issue as I expect everyone to. But these are strictly the opinions of each individual poster, period, end of story.
     
  16. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    3,473
    Likes Received:
    1,503
    Trophy Points:
    113
    bullshit ... now you are lying to yourself and being completely contradictory ...

    please account for the obvious wing marks on the building not to mention all the other damage consistent with something the size of a 757 screaming low into the building ... do you dismiss all the photos and physical evidence associated with that ??? ...

    obviously he does ...

    so you don't have the balls to address issues but want to call others phony posters??? ... your fringe movement is dead Bob ... 2 buck lawyers can't revive this ... Better Call Saul ..
     
  17. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I am in no position nor is it my job to account for any marks on any building. That's the job of INVESTIGATORS, not me. BOP (Burden of Proof), remember? Have any official investigators (FBI, NTSB, 9/11 Commission, etc.) accounted for these marks? I don't know of any, do you? That's one major point, the other is that they are not "obvious" wing marks to me. They may be obvious wing marks to those who desperately want to believe the official narrative, but that's not me. I want to know exactly what those are via a legitimate forensic criminal investigation (BOP), that's IF there's any significance to them. Unlike you, I don't reach convenient conclusions based on what pathological liars claim.

    Same issue (BOP), you want to desperately believe what liars have fed you. The damage IMO is totally inconsistent with any commercial aircraft "screaming low into the building", never mind a specific 757. I don't dismiss ANY evidence, whether it's real or planted, you're making things up about me. If it was AA77, YOU PROVE IT, a serial number match would go a long way to proving something, especially one from the FDR, that's called HARD PHYSICAL EVIDENCE based on a forensic match, the kind that doesn't exist. I am not the one making claims, they are and you are.

    Where have you been Shiner? You want to claim I don't have the balls to address issues when I've started several threads addressing major issues about 9/11? The kind YOU ignore or readily dismiss because it doesn't fit your world view? You are a phony, you made the claim yourself that you're only here as a "hobby". How much phonier can you get than that? You don't care squat about 9/11, all your posts show that quite clearly. You're only here to ridicule those who don't buy the snake oil you bought. The rest of your drivel exposes you so perfectly:

    1. I don't have any "fringe movement", bowel movements, yes, I can admit to that just for you.

    2. Lawyers are working on it, so sorry about that. I'm guessing they will be relentless just like that scary "fringe movement" called AE911Truth that has prompted real investigations by real experts. Are you terrified?

    3. No, it's not a TV series, it's reality Sherlock. Is that going to cause you to soil your pants?

    Can I expect a subsequent tantrum from you?
     
  18. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    22,694
    Likes Received:
    11,760
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Nobody saw an airliner crash into the pentagon. Nobody.

    Yes, of course, a few pentagon military types have made such statements, but would not make those statements at the 911 Commission proceedings. The sordid fraternity in the military is rather like fraternities--you lie, and I"ll swear to it.

    No airliner crashed at the pentagon, but some Boeing did make a low pass.
     
  19. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    107,541
    Likes Received:
    34,488
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Thanks for proving my point.
     
  20. Charles Rice

    Charles Rice Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2018
    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    3
    If you had a bomb, why would you need a plane? It makes no sense. But such is the life of truthers...the crazier the theory, the more stock they put into it.
     
  21. Charles Rice

    Charles Rice Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2018
    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    3
    And they were involved in this operation as well.

    Compared to the rabble here, I'm a Rhodes Scholar.

    I was speaking of the entire story. When clandestine assets are involved, I would expect the government to with hold those details.

    I make no apologies for the government. The 9/11 Commission report does make perfect sense though. How'd the light poles get downed? The wings of the plane. Where did the plane parts come from? The plane it self. Why did forward ATCs see a plane enter the airspace but not leave? Because of the crash. It dovetails perfectly with all of they physical evidence. NOTHING you've said so far makes any sense whatsoever.

    You have no facts on your side of the argument. Otherwise, you could account for the physical evidence.

    it's easy to believe because it makes sense.

    You're welcome to tell us your all inclusive version of events but you won't do it for some reason. Why? Nobody knows. I suspect because the moment you start writing it, you will quickly ascertain how ridiculous it sounds.
     
  22. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The 9/11 Commission Report does NOT address any details about the Pentagon other than claiming AA77 crashed into it without any supporting evidence and the emergency response. The entirety of the Pentagon issue begins at Page 311 and ends at Page 315 with photos taking up Pages 312 and 313. That makes zero sense for an investigation. The resulting report from a legitimate investigation into the Pentagon should result in a report taking up hundreds of pages.

    The physical evidence at the Pentagon has never been forensically matched to AA77, a required NTSB procedure for all airplane crash investigations where parts are available. It is unprecedented that this protocol was never followed in the case of the Pentagon crash.

    https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/process/Pages/default.aspx

    Please review: https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/process/Documents/MajorInvestigationsManualApp.pdf

    There were at least 2 FOIA requests for the parts identification match, both were denied.

    It's quite apparent you've never done the research and are clueless.
     
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2018
  23. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    22,694
    Likes Received:
    11,760
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Kristofferson and Clinton are Rhodes Scholars, but you are not.

    You are one of those people who believe outlandish stories told by notorious liars, and there is nothing I can do about that except be aware that you post fallacies.
     
  24. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    3,473
    Likes Received:
    1,503
    Trophy Points:
    113
    flat out lie ... many did ...

    wrong, many civilians made statements ... another flat out lie to add to your record ...

    an airliner clearly crashed at the Pentagon ... supported by physical, circumstantial and witness evidence ...
     
  25. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,268
    Likes Received:
    845
    Trophy Points:
    113
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page