Can I convince PF's resident truthers that American 77 hit the Pentagon?

Discussion in '9/11' started by cjnewson88, Jan 19, 2013.

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. Jango

    Jango New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,683
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Clarification, please.

    Yes, that was the FAA that made the declaration, but what I'm getting at is NORAD having the technology to know what the FAA knew in real time, given their responsibility to safeguard the continental United States. Redundancy exists in government, especially when it comes to defense, and in particular, when it comes to civilian responsibility in defense. You can bet that there is a military counterpart doing the same job with the same technology.
     
  2. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yes, they possibly (probably) had a big screen that could show the thousands of planes in the air over the continental US. Which of those should they be monitoring? How could they know? They relied on communication from the FAA.
    They weren't psychic ...
     
  3. cjnewson88

    cjnewson88 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,133
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Chances are NORAD have the same equipment FAA does, however as far as knowing what the FAA knew in real time, we know for a fact that was not the case on 9/11 as the FAA was not sharing any information with NEADS or NORAD. NEADS found out they had a hijack at 0937. They couldn't find the primary target, but yet both Boston and New York TMU were watching his primary target. A needle in a haystack which they were told about, and they still couldn't find it. They were so busy focusing on AA11, they didn't even get word on UA175 until after it hit the tower. All of a sudden, two hijacks, both crashed. NEADS became fixed on New York and getting fighters in. No one told them there was a lost airliner from Indianapolis center, nor were they looking for one. I've said it before, communication was the biggest error on 9/11.

    Edit: This should give you an idea of what it was like.

    [video=youtube;ttUkvGnKM2s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttUkvGnKM2s[/video]

    Estimated 4000 aircraft in the north east US at the time 9/11 was occurring.
     
  4. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,268
    Likes Received:
    845
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's a very good quality image and there's no smear.
    http://www.g7welcomingcommittee.com/blog/wp-content/images/pentagon1_plane.jpg

    Show us where the smear is.

    When this is compared to the above picture...
    http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cCKCN8TmauY/UPsE7TSmUII/AAAAAAAAARs/vgBcxcXIjr0/s1600/Pent3Full.jpg

    ...it's pretty clear that it's a doctored picture. This one flaw in your argument proves you to be totally wrong.

    Here's post #598 again which shows what probably really happened.
    http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/...erican-77-hit-pentagon-60.html#post1062385646

    I asked you in this post...
    http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/...erican-77-hit-pentagon-60.html#post1062385666

    ...what you thought of leftysergeant's stand on an issue. Are you going to answer?
     
  5. plague311

    plague311 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2012
    Messages:
    1,256
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Scott, your ignorance of evidence is mind blowing. Also, if you want to know why absolutely no one takes you seriously, it's because you link back to yourself. No one finds you to be credible when it comes to 9/11, based completely on your inability to acknowledge factual evidence. Linking back to yourself just confirms that, use real sources. A hint, spurstalk isn't a real source.
     
  6. holston

    holston Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    Messages:
    1,591
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    38
    That's right Jango.

    At any one time, they don't really know what they are looking at. All they do is look at the little dots move across the screen. A dot is just a dot to them.

    The only way they have of knowing whether a plane is off coarse is if the pilot calls in and asks for directions.

    If a pilot sees a building in the way, he is supposed to steer around it. It's not the air traffic controllers fault if the pilot can't drive.
    The only way the air traffic controllers know if a plane crashes into something is if the little dot disappears or if someone calls him on the phone and tells him that a plane crashed somewhere.

    But how can they call the air traffic controller if the line is busy?

    I bet you didn't think of that did you? Huh did you?

    Furthermore when the Air Force or Army is busy playing war games they don't have time to fool with stuff that the Air Traffic Controllers are supposed to be doing. NORAD isn't supposed to do EVERYTHING are they? Sheesh.
    I mean doesn't the FAA have any jet fighters of it's own??
     
  7. holston

    holston Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    Messages:
    1,591
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    38
    That's right too, Jango.

    With all those little dots moving around all over the screen at the same time, how are they supposed to know which one is which.

    No one really knew what was going on that day.

    We all have days like that. You've got to give the FAA and NORAD credit. After all they're only human. Things like that happen to the best of us>>>flame bait removed.

    Remember. In addition to the voluminous knowledge on high rise construction, nano thermite technology, and the physics of falling buildings, they also know a lot about military protocol and air traffic control procedure.
    If either of them had been on the job that day, none of this might ever have happened.

    It's a good thing that NORAD and the FAA kept such meticulous records. Otherwise the debunkers wouldn't be able to tell us in retrospect precisely what happened.
     
  8. plague311

    plague311 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2012
    Messages:
    1,256
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Your hilarious attempt at sarcasm aside, the people here aren't necessarily experts in any field. Some of the people that post here are experts in their given field. However, what I have learned to do is take the information given to me on this board, and research the life out of it. I research until I know for sure that experts with knowledge in an applicable field that I am researching, confirms or denies the theory I am researching. This is beginner type stuff. I know that Holston would prefer to make everything seem shadowy, and he's doing a good job using the truther handbook so far, but it's just not factual.

    Why lie, Holston?
     
  9. holston

    holston Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    Messages:
    1,591
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    38
    You wouldn't lie to us would you? Maybe exaggerate a little no and then?

    Thanks for your commendation but there is no "Truther Handbook". It's sort of like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and the Illuminati, and Nazis hiding under every bush, a product of someone's wild imagination.

    A riddle for you:

    A says B is lying and B says A is lying. How do you know who's telling the truth?

    You answered the question already. You have to research. This is what investigations and the search for 9/11 Truth is all about. Debunkers are all about shutting it down.
     
  10. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Nope, not about shutting it down. Research all you'd like. Knock yourself out, launch your own independent investigations. Just be honest with your findings.
     
  11. holston

    holston Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    Messages:
    1,591
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    38
    We really need someone with subpoena power who isn't a Zionist, a duel Israeli citizen, working for the Mossad, getting bribes from AIPAC, or receiving threats from the press or the "Russian" mob.

    That pretty much rules out everyone in Washington D.C.
     
  12. cooky

    cooky New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2011
    Messages:
    439
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Scott, a mqm-107 drone has a maximum takeoff weight of <1500 pounds. As such the drone does not have the mass or payload capabilities to inflict the kind of damage to the pentagon that occurred. The mqm-107 can not carry enough fuel to produce a massive deflagration like the on observed at the pentagon on 9/11. Whats more, the image that you are basing your whole hypothesis on is quite poor and shows almost nothing. Im really not sure how you can arrive at such zany conclusions from that pic alone.
     
  13. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So whatever will you do? Is the task just too hard?
     
  14. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,268
    Likes Received:
    845
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This is a classic example of "HandWaving".
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handwaving
    (excerpts)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------
    Handwaving is a pejorative label applied to the action of displaying the appearance of doing something, when actually doing little, or nothing. For example, it is applied to debate techniques that involve fallacies.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------
    Handwaving is also occasionally used in informal debate or discussion. If the opponent in a debate uses the term, it is meant as a shorthand way to accuse the proponent in the debate of having committed an informal fallacy. In this sense, it is also as if a participant is waving their hands as to discourage an insect that is flying around their head, so are they waving away questions.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------

    Please address the actual issues that I raised.
    I also asked cjnewson88 to address this issue.
    http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/...erican-77-hit-pentagon-60.html#post1062385666

    I say that leftysergeant destroyed his crediblity by saying something lame. I want his and your opinions.

    It's plausible that there were pre-planted explosives in that section of the Pentagon.

    I discussed all of these issues on pages one and two of this thread.
    http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/275987-few-debunking-links.html#post1061950663
     
  15. holston

    holston Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    Messages:
    1,591
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I'll just keep informing as many people as possible.

    What they do with the knowledge is up to them.

    This is not all that hard. There are only a couple of obstacles. One is indifference and complacency. The other is the work of the Hasbarats on the net and in the media.

    Corruption and evil has been in the world since Adam's fall. There is nothing new about this. The duty of each man is to fear God and keep His commandments, NOT fear the Jews and keep their commandments. We are instructed to overcome evil with good.

    THAT is the hardest part ie "returning good for evil". This kind of action requires a conscious and deliberate effort because it runs contrary to human nature. THAT is perhaps one reason why "without faith it is impossible to please God", because acting in such a manner requires "faith" ie "evidence of things unseen" and the substance of things hoped for.
     
  16. cjnewson88

    cjnewson88 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,133
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    48
    If you honestly think those two pictures are of the same quality then your rational thinking is severely compromised.

    Proves me wrong? Where is the proof? You claim its doctored therefore it must be so? Is that sufficient 'proof' to you? I've told you before, this is sourced from the 2009 release of the original re-recordings. Where is yours sourced from?

    Do try and speak plainly. What are you asking here?

    Oh, and why are you ignoring my post scott? I ask you to show where to shadow for your 'drone/missile' is. Without a shadow for your missile or drone in the video, I'm afraid your argument is destroyed. Nothing else you say matters.
     
  17. NAB

    NAB Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    Messages:
    1,821
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    38
    What about those that believe there is no God, and, therefore, aren't particularly concerned about pleasing the non-existent?
     
  18. cooky

    cooky New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2011
    Messages:
    439
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Scott, it is 'plausible' that there were preplanted explosives in the pentagon but THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT THERE WERE PRE-PLANTED EXPLOSIVES IN THE PENTAGON. Nothing about the damage at the pentagon- the impact or the deflagration- are consistent with your hypothesis that a MQM-170 hit the building. The only 'evidence' that you have provided to support your hypothesis is that picture. I can't make out anything in that picture. The quality is horrible. The image is so poor that I don't think its possible to draw any reasonable conclusions from it.

    Essentially, your whole hypothesis rests on your opinion of what you think you see in that picture. You don't have any evidence that explosives were planted at the pentagon and you do not have any evidence that an MQM-170 hit the pentagon. An mqm-170 would not have the payload or kinetic energy to damage the pentagon in a manner consistent with what occurred on 9/11. Its probably time to revize your hypothesis dude.
     
  19. holston

    holston Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    Messages:
    1,591
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    38
    What about those who are believers that do not appreciate the atheists Marxist agenda rammed down their throat?

    - - - Updated - - -

    What difference does it make what hit the Pentagon? We already know that the entire chain of events was set up by the dancing Mossadis and their gangster handlers.
     
  20. NAB

    NAB Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    Messages:
    1,821
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I asked first.

    Protip: I'm not a Marxist nor was I raised as one, but your strawman is cute.
     
  21. plague311

    plague311 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2012
    Messages:
    1,256
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Keeping up with the lies about the dancing Israelis? Wow, that's commitment to something that is such a blatant lie. How many times does that need to be debunked before you'll just admit it's false? These are the types of things that really show people that you're an anti-semite. Hanging on to a discarded myth with ferocity to try and turn those people into a scape goat. Sad.
     
  22. holston

    holston Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    Messages:
    1,591
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    38
    OK. So there were no dancing Mossad agents. They were all just innocent moving van workers from Israel.

    Am I allowed to say they were from Israel?

    http://www.takeourworldback.com/dancingisraelisfbireport.htm



     
  23. holston

    holston Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    Messages:
    1,591
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    38
    [​IMG]
     
  24. RtWngaFraud

    RtWngaFraud Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    20,420
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well, those folks are already condemned in all likelihood so, they have to get their yayas out before they go I suppose. Evils rules on earth for sure these days.
     
  25. Jango

    Jango New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,683
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    1. There was an eyewitness to them doing what they did.

    2. By whom and by what evidence?

    3. Why would I, or likely holston, admit that it is false when I, and likely he have/has seen contradictory information to the affirmative stating that they did indeed do what they were claimed to have done. I will need to see what you are claiming has debunked these allegations.

    4. Again, how can it be a 'discarded myth' when it was witnessed by an American women on the day of 9/11? Are we now not accepting testimony from 9/11 witnesses because their message is perceived to be derogatory to all Jews?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page