Secret Note Discovered in Stomach of "AA77" Passenger

Discussion in '9/11' started by Bob0627, Aug 1, 2018.

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.

  1. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    So the debris came from a plane striking the Pentagon, just not the one that was claimed. Is that what you're getting at?
     
  2. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Whether elements within the US government planned 9/11 or not there is no rationale in destroying evidence, stalling an investigation, failing to legitimately investigate it (by failing to physically identify the debris in this case) and over-classifying it beyond reason, among many other egregious and well documented actions other than to coverup the crime. Whether it was strictly CYA or for more sinister reasons, these actions are serious crimes that amount to treason. Defending and/or marginalizing such actions is reprehensible and complicity.
     
  3. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    And what does your whining above have to do with the physical attacks/events that are said to have taken place that day? You know, the planes being flown into the twin towers, the collapse of the twin towers, the collapse of WTC7, the plane impacting the Pentagon, and the plane at Shanksville? None of the above is proof that the government planned and/or carried out the attacks of that day. None of the above is proof that what is said to have happened at each location is in fact a lie. They are two separate issues. The way the attacks were dealt with leading up to and including that day was pathetic and those involved scrambled to cover their butts in the aftermath. That I DO have an issue with.

    What you have provided is evidence that people may have been trying to cover their own butts. That's it, nothing more.
     
    Last edited: Aug 14, 2018
  4. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There's no proof of anything official so why would you be asking ME for proof? Is there anything in any official investigation that itemizes and attempts to forensically identify each and every part from each the 4 claimed airliners? Do you have proof that the totality of the alleged debris adds up to 4 large commercial airliners (for the most part)? The question is rhetorical because I know you have zero proof of anything since you never took part in any 9/11 investigation nor would I seriously be asking any anonymous poster for any 9/11 proof (unlike you).

    I'm not "getting at" anything other than what I posted. I haven't made any such claim. Whether a large commercial airliner designated as AA77 crashed into the Pentagon or not has not been proven via any legitimate investigation. A legitimate investigation is what should be of primary concern to anyone serious and of reasonable intelligence who really cares about 9/11.

    For me every official action and non-action, every convenient coincidence and every anomaly adds up to a massive coverup and raises many, many questions about the OCT. As such it also causes the OCT to lose all credibility.

    Yes the OCT could very well be mostly true but all the indicators show otherwise and the missing pieces (huge holes) indicate there is much, much more to it that is being covered up.

     
  5. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't whine, I post same as you. Are you whining when you post? This is a DISCUSSION forum, why do I need to remind you?

    No I don't know. You believe you know because that's what you were fed. I want to know every single detail because for me EVERYTHING about the OCT is suspect.

    None of it is proof that Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy are not real either. Apples and oranges. What it all amounts to is proof that there was no legitimate investigation and by extension that the official story is a fraud and a coverup.

    At least that. So there is a tiny morsel of humanity somewhere within your mentality.

    So then you believe 9/11 was never legitimately investigated but it seems you want to put a screeching halt on anything beyond that. And if you believe it was never legitimately investigated, why would you believe anything that came out of those pathological liars who just wanted to "try to cover their own butts"? Why do you spend nearly 24/7 defending them and a story you believe did not come from a legitimate investigation? If one lie was told, how do you know there weren't thousands of other lies? I don't expect you to answer any of these questions honestly because you've never shown any such thing in the past.
     
  6. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Per your quote below, "all indicators" show that AA77 DIDN'T crash into the Pentagon. Is that correct? I mean the Pentagon IS part of the "OCT" right"
     
  7. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No it isn't correct. The Pentagon issue is PART of the OCT by your own words and you're obviously attempting to invent what I post even though you're quoting me. That's pretty lame. Re-read my post for comprehension, do you need a dictionary?

    https://www.dictionary.com/
     
  8. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Do you believe entire explanation of flight 77 impacting the Pentagon to be true? If not, which parts have "indicators" that show it to be NOT true?
     
  9. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No I don't, there is no physical proof matching the debris to AA77. Something as simple as a parts match, which is REQUIRED especially for an event such as 9/11 would go a long way to help substantiate that AA77 impacted the Pentagon. The same is true for the other 3 claimed airliners. The fact that it was never done or perhaps was done but refused to be released even under 2 FOIA requests smells of coverup, especially given everything else that stinks about the official 9/11 story. If you can't see the forest for the trees you are truly lost.

    Far too many parts of the OCT are questionable, the above for starters. If only a couple of minor details are in question that's one thing but when there is so much in question there's virtually no doubt there's a lot wrong with this picture that doesn't add up. I don't really know what's not true for the same reason I don't know what is true.

    So my position by default is that none of it is true unless and until PROVEN otherwise beyond any reasonable doubt. I take that position ALWAYS when it comes from the US government because of its long history of lies with just about everything that has any significance. I'm not sure why anyone with any reasonable amount of intelligence would do otherwise except for the cognitive dissonant and those with an agenda. Why do you if you claim you believe the investigations were strictly CYA?
     
    Last edited: Aug 14, 2018
  10. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Can you explain what "physical proof" you would need convince you that the plane debris from the Pentagon was from AA77? I can't see how that's even possible with you and your major mistrust of the government. I mean, how easy would it be to make up a database that matched the plane parts? Or rip apart a plane and use it's parts and match to a database? The government lies about everything of significance right?

    When does going down the rabbit hole cease? At what point?
     
    Last edited: Aug 14, 2018
  11. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Is it required Bob? Can you point me to all the criminal/terrorist acts using planes to crash into US targets where the NTSB was required to match parts to the flights? That's just stupid. You mean to tell me they didn't know which flights hit where or what happened?
     
    Margot2 likes this.
  12. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    73,644
    Likes Received:
    13,766
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The tail number is all they needed, genius.
     
  13. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    No, no it's NOT required. Especially when the FBI took over and all the NTSB did was do as requested. Did the FBI request them to match parts to the actual planes?

    https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/R...=20020123X00105&AKey=1&RType=Summary&IType=MA
     
  14. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Can you link me to Hulsey's preliminary report you read and convinced you that NIST's theory was impossible?

    Thanks.
     
  15. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    73,644
    Likes Received:
    13,766
    Trophy Points:
    113

    They weren't looking for mechanical failure of some airplane part. They know the tail number on the aircraft. Bob just doesn't know any better.
     
  16. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Already explained ad nauseum, why are you pretending to be dense?

    Yep.

    There is no "rabbit hole", the facts speak for themselves. When does your senseless devotion and groveling to the OCT cease despite your baffling contradictory claim that you believe the investigations were strictly CYA?

    Yep, not for you of course, any 9/11 investigation is satisfactory despite that it was strictly CYA.

    Nope. I posted an alleged list of crashes where FDR serial numbers were published, and a statement from a seasoned pilot, that's the best I can do for you. Do the research yourself if you're truly interested in holding the US government's feet to the fire.

    What's really stupid in your incessant OCT defense, no matter what, not even your own contradictions.

    Coming from you it means zero to me. I can read a manual that lists a specific detailed protocol.

    Did the FBI scratch his/her nose? Was I there? What kind of an idiot question is that? What is there you don't understand about 2 FOIA requests denied?
     
  17. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Really? It says that where in the NTSB manual?

    So if the tail isn't available but other parts with serial numbers on them are, what then? Never mind, they're unnecessary?

    Or if the tail number matches but other parts don't what then? Forget about it, no need to investigate further?

    That's like a coroner examining a body for a gun shot to the head but he doesn't find one so the guy wasn't shot (even though he has 3 bullet holes in his heart). You make no sense.

    Eh "genius"?

    How do you know? Did you do the investigation? Were you there?

    Really, so where is the document that matches the tail number for all 4 airplanes to the actual claimed airliners?

    It sounds more like you're absolutely clueless and just throwing **** against the wall and hoping it sticks.
     
  18. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Already done, go back through the posts. You're welcome.

    Hulsey didn't convince me NIST's theory is impossible. I was convinced long before I ever heard of Hulsey.
     
  19. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    There were three questions in my post or didn't you understand that?

    Sure there is. The one you continue done into.

    No it's not Bob. It's in the manual you keep referring to. They answer to the FBI once the scene is determined to be a crime scene. They do what the FBI requests. They don't follow their procedure anymore.

    I have and you're wrong.

    Obviously you DIDN'T read the manual. Again, once the scene is determined to be a crime scene, the FBI takes over and they cease to do THEIR investigation and only do as requested by the FBI. But you can keep playing your games.

    https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/process/Pages/default.aspx
     
    Last edited: Aug 15, 2018
  20. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    You mean his slideshow presentation?! You saw that and consider what he shows as legitimate?

    :roflol:

    I hope you're kidding!!
     
  21. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    So you watched his slideshow and everything looks good to you right? You found no mistakes? Or are you taking his word for it? You research EVERYTHING remember Bob?
     
  22. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    So you'd except the NTSB supplying a list of plane parts and saying they matched it to their respective planes? You'd take their word for it?
     
  23. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    3,473
    Likes Received:
    1,503
    Trophy Points:
    113
    there's the rub of the conspiracy theorist mindset ... if the truthers had the serials numbers of every part, including the no longer used armrest ashtrays, they would just spin that as another cover up using faked serial numbers ... they dismiss every bit of evidence that doesn't fit their paranoid worldview ...

    I'll be quite old, but I hope I'm still kickin for another 17 years to watch the twitching machinations of the delusional ...
     
    Margot2 likes this.
  24. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    That's exactly what I meant about the endless rabbit hole that Bob pretended he didn't understand. What would convince him? You can see he beat around the bush when answering saying that he already did.
     
    Margot2 likes this.
  25. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    You mean like where the manual states that if it's a crime scene the NTSB ceases to investigate and the FBI takes over and the NTSB does what it is asked to do by the FBI? And you keep spreading the lie that the NTSB was supposed to collect plane parts according to their manual?
     
    Margot2 likes this.

Share This Page