The Pentagon on 9/11 - MODERATOR WARNING ISSUED

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

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

    Mandelus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2015
    Messages:
    10,882
    Likes Received:
    2,030
    Trophy Points:
    113
    WRONG!!!

    Those who offend the "official story" as fake and so on are the prosecutors and every sort of law and relationship has in content rule #1: Proof your accusing!

    So where is the proof that it was no Airliner? What was it then?
    To say only "it was no airliner" but not being able to tell what it was then is only ridiculous BS of claiming nonsense - point!

    I know ... you will come with that and this other "detail" about ... but ALL OF THEM were and are still refuted!
    Anyone who claims that the impact area is too small is telling BS, because it is fitting like a finger print for the Airliner in dimension! Alone at this point was so much total BS delivered from Truthers to declare that it does not fit ... a fairy tale is telling more truth!
    And this is going on point for point a tissue of Pentagon!

    And finally again: Who declares and tells "it was no plane!" must be able to give a serious, working alternative or his / her declaring is only BS blabbering!
     
  2. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,186
    Likes Received:
    1,122
    Trophy Points:
    113
    For you, that's your problem. I don't care.

    Offend the official story? That's a joke right? This isn't a court of law, you're in the wrong place, it's a discussion forum. The BOP lies with the US government whether you like it or not or whether you agree or not. As posted repeatedly, I'm not here to convince you of anything and you're in the wrong thread as well, I'm not interested in your attempt to convince me of anything, it's not the purpose of this discussion.
     
  3. Mandelus

    Mandelus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2015
    Messages:
    10,882
    Likes Received:
    2,030
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The question is at least, if you are joking, no I!
    Of course this is no court in reality, but even in life it is usual behavior to back his claims with facts ... otherwise it is only BS blabbering! So what hit the Pentagon if not the named Airliner, eh?

    You must not convince me, will be a "mission impossible" in matter of 9/11 for you ... as I'm not here to convince anyone of these Truthers who want to make people believe that it was a fake. BUT ... I fight this BS blabbering of these Truthers, because it is only ridiculous which nonsense they tell! OK now?
     
  4. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,186
    Likes Received:
    1,122
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sure, enjoy. But your post has nothing to do with this discussion as already explained.
     
  5. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1,145
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
    i'm a realist Bob ... I don't live out in Cloud Cuckoo Land ...
     
  6. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,186
    Likes Received:
    1,122
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sorry, neither you, your personal issues or where you live or don't live have anything to do with this discussion. Re-read the post you quoted for comprehension. I suggest you use a dictionary if it's too complicated for you. Oh wait, you hate those, never mind.
     
  7. l4zarus

    l4zarus Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2012
    Messages:
    886
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    18

    You still don't understand the concept of a pubic forum with public posts that can be replied to publicly, do you?

    As for the rest, I'm sure it has been very helpful to having people point out flaws in truther theories and logic. What it really sounds like is you're upset, because as a result the 9/11 Twoof movement is deader than a doornail and there is nothing you can do about it.
     
  8. l4zarus

    l4zarus Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2012
    Messages:
    886
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Well, YOU'RE an anonymous poster and YOU expect to prove things here. So why shouldn't someone else?

    You sound upset. Why is that, Bob?
     
  9. l4zarus

    l4zarus Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2012
    Messages:
    886
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Hey, Bob, you forgot to reply to these points in my post:

    "Great. You're entitled to your feelings.

    Now about the marketing clowns from SoCal. I can't find the thread right now, it was either at Intl Sceptics or the SLC forums, but I definitely remember one of them shrieking about how their lives were at risk or in danger. What are they up to now? Their forum looks dead except for one guy who isn't even part of CIT:

    z3.invisionfree.com/CIT/index.php?showtopic=1892




    Because, to state the obvious, he's been conned by a couple of frauds who long since bailed.

    [last activity of Aldo was late Oct 2016. Last activity of Ranke Mar 2015]

    Other exciting topics endorse by these clowns:

    Pinned: The Franklin Scandal
    Pinned: Obama
    Pinned: Inspirational Words from the Bible


    You consider these people credible why again, Bob? Why are you pushing their theories? Why don't they come here themselves?"

     
  10. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,186
    Likes Received:
    1,122
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sorry, see above, as usual. Try again, if you must, it's your prerogative.
     
  11. l4zarus

    l4zarus Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2012
    Messages:
    886
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Let me get this straight, Bob:

    It doesn't bother you at all that you're pushing bankrupt theories of two Californian marketing conmen who have long since bailed from the conspiracy scene(not enough $$$$?) and who cynically pandered to Alt-right religious woo to push their theories.

    In addition, after looking through old Int'l Sceptics threads, they went out of their way to target an elderly black man as an agent for attacks from an internet mob who, just to be clear, is heavily composed of Alt right loons, many of whom are racist.

    At the very least Aldo and Ranke were delusional, reckless and irresponsible in their "research". Given it was all debunked years ago, one if forced to come to the conclusion they acted with malice in their reckless disregard for Mr. England's safety all to make a small pile of cash.


    In any case, in no way can these clowns be considered credible.
     
  12. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1,145
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I know Bob ... you just want to be stroked by other twoofers ...
     
  13. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    6,775
    Likes Received:
    2,382
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I agree with you, those pictures prove that whatever flying object they show, it is far too small to be an airliner.

    Sorry I don't have it right at my fingertips, but others "on the internet" have employed orthographic projection to show what a 757 would actually look like on those video frames.

    Because we know the dimensions of such an airplane, and we know the dimensions from the parking lot camera to the point of impact, it is easy to superimpose a diagram of what a 757 would have looked like had one been present. It towers over the small object shown.

    And while those who support the official story are quick to give super pilot status to Hanjour, that shows how desperate their story is. A number of pilots who actually fly the airplane for a living are on record (Pilots For Truth) as saying they could not perform the maneuver required by the official story.

    It is a ludicrous story. IF it were a true story, it is a safe bet that the boys at the pentagon would have included actual footage of the airliner flying low level across their front lawn. They have not. It was not an airliner, but something much smaller.
     
  14. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    6,775
    Likes Received:
    2,382
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Does it bother you that you are defending as gospel truth the statements of the pathological liars at the pentagon?

    Are you old enough to remember the lessons of Daniel Ellsberg and the "Pentagon Papers?" Do you not understand that almost to a man the 911 Commission wanted to charge the pentagon guys with perjury? That Senator Dayton called out NORAD for its wildly inaccurate statements?
     
  15. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1,145
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Bob's always upset ... his posts scream rage ... I can just see him throwing all his toys out of the playpen ...
     
  16. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,186
    Likes Received:
    1,122
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I doubt you ever will, you haven't so far. But like I said, keep trying ... if you must. You never know.
     
  17. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,186
    Likes Received:
    1,122
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yeah that must be it, an impressive observation, especially coming from an "engineer". Sorry, bro, this thread is still not about me or your personal demons as already explained ad nauseum. I know it's a difficult concept for you, especially without the use of a dictionary.
     
  18. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1,145
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
    bring the evidence Bob ...
     
  19. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1,145
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
  20. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,186
    Likes Received:
    1,122
    Trophy Points:
    113
  21. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1,145
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
    well ... yeah Bob ... I didn't fall off the turnip truck yesterday ...
     
  22. cjnewson88

    cjnewson88 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,110
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    38
    What nonsense have you linked? It contains nothing about serial numbers

    Also nonsense. It says the aircraft serial number and registration must be logged. Which it would have been. You can even find each aircrafts serial number online.

    If engine destruction was the cause of the crash it says to log serial numbers from the engine components.

    There is nothing in either of those documents which states aircraft component serial numbers need to be matched for the purposes of identifying the aircraft. Absolutely none.
     
  23. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,186
    Likes Received:
    1,122
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm sorry to hear that. But you're reverting to posts that have nothing to do with this discussion. Remember what I posted about this discussion having nothing to do with you or me? Oh wait, that was long ago, like almost 1 hour 15 minutes ago. Short term memory problems?
     
  24. cjnewson88

    cjnewson88 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,110
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    38
    All the evidence on my blog point to American Airlines 77 being the aircraft which crashed into the Pentagon.

    There is precisely zero evidence that any aircraft other than AAL77 hit the Pentagon. None.
     
  25. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,186
    Likes Received:
    1,122
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Thanks for your input coming from someone who hasn't a clue but unlike you I read the NTSB crash investigation manuals and the Appendices. They are very informative, you are not. Perhaps you should read them before you post silly statements. I also saw the video of the NTSB guy at the Pentagon explaining to some person who showed him a part with a serial number on it that it will be used to identify the aircraft. Sorry I don't have the link to the video but like I said, it's not my job to convince you of anything. You are obviously already convinced and this thread is not about those who are convinced the OCT is true. I posted that in the first post.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page