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. FivepointFive

    FivepointFive Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2017
    Messages:
    2,754
    Likes Received:
    684
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Did all the aluminum vaporize?? wouldn't aluminum residue be everywhere?? I am not a forensic scientist (they sucked in 1963 too) but it just smells

     
    Last edited: Dec 26, 2018
  2. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,268
    Likes Received:
    845
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Here's your answer.
    (post #1807)
    http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/the-pentagon-on-9-11.482175/page-91#post-1070011927

    All you did was show scorn for my answer. Simply showing scorn instead of giving a logical rebuttal would get you laughed out of the debating hall. If all you can do is show scorn for something, it means you're checkmated and won't admit it.
     
  3. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Responding to your post is against my better judgment but this one is almost civil (except for the last sentence that shows the usual lack of maturity). BTW, yet another reported post of yours was deleted because you don't know how to be civil.

    Not at all. From your posts it looks like you're afraid of evidence because you're trying really hard to substitute apples for oranges.

    And it's good enough for you but what we don't have is any legitimate investigation of any kind and what we also don't have is transparency. We do have coverups and reams of extreme over-classification of documents and evidence under pretext of national security. And what is glaringly missing is the authentic documentation for the physical airplane parts identification that was claimed to have been done by the NTSB director and denied under 2 FOIA requests for the usual phony (or non-existent) reasons. And that is the potential REQUIRED evidence you're afraid of.
     
    Last edited: Dec 26, 2018
  4. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,102
    Likes Received:
    779
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You suggested something so moronic, so ludicrously impracticable, so convoluted and insanely implausible. You offered no evidence at all and offered nothing but your uninformed opinion.

    You're damn right I showed scorn for it! There's nothing to respond to.
     
  5. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,102
    Likes Received:
    779
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You don't have any better judgement. You have fixation and evasion.

    What a dumb response. One of us is providing evidence and it isn't you.

    Pathetic. Every item ignored yet again by the afraid person who doesn't appear to have any insides.

    You are waving away all the evidence which comes from entirely legitimate onsite investigation.
     
  6. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,268
    Likes Received:
    845
    Trophy Points:
    113

    (from post #1900)
    So, you're saying that it was impossible to plant those plane parts and the plane parts are proof that a 757 hit the Pentagon. Is that right?
     
  7. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,102
    Likes Received:
    779
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No. Metal doesn't vaporize at such low temeratures. Did you mean melt!?

    What is aluminum residue? Do you mean fragmented? dustification? melted?

    The plane was obliterated on impact. The blaze would significantly melt smaller parts and edges. It would deform everything on the plane.

    No you aren't. Yet you suggest that your opinion on something so rare and indeterminable should be taken seriously!
     
  8. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,102
    Likes Received:
    779
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, you are saying that. I choose to view the evidence as valid unless something exists to call it into question. Such as zero counter evidence and a scenario that is so stupid it beggars belief.

    I made my position quite clear. You chose to ignore it!

    You have untold personnel manufacturing plane evidence and planting it. You have a team killing the entire passenger list and crew, burning them cutting them up and delivering their body parts. You have a team disposing of the actual plane. You have a team planting charges to blow poles and out buildings. You have a whole barrage of fake witnesses including on site experts. You have somehow to scorch either side of the impact hole to make it look like wings. You have something to actually hit the building and make sure nobody sees it. The least this would require is a facility or ship capable of launching such an object and the team who do this.

    You are an object of sane people's derision if you think that batshit crazy list is plausible!
     
  9. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,268
    Likes Received:
    845
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You're being deliberately obtuse. He's sarcastically saying that aluminum wouldn't just disappear. He's saying that there should be some sign of the aluminum from both wings and the tail.

    http://physics911.net/images/pentagon_hole.jpg


    You know what he meant. Maybe there is an explanation but you just look silly when you play this game instead of addressing his argument.
     
  10. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,102
    Likes Received:
    779
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm highlighting his ignorance of basic terminology. Aluminum didn't just disappear. It fragmented, melted and was mainly obliterated by extremely fast velocity impact. I don't care what he's saying, I require him to show significant technical knowledge to explain why!

    He didn't make an argument. He made an ignorant claim. I addressed it. I suppose I should not be surprised that you don't understand the difference between bare assertion and actual argument.

    Did you not notice that he quoted a very large post and basically ignored the whole thing!?
     
    Last edited: Dec 26, 2018
  11. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,102
    Likes Received:
    779
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Regarding the crash impact area:

    I can't post the full link as the forum software keeps interpreting aHYPHENhole as you know what!

    https://www.quora.com/How-does-a-Boeing-757-crash-into-the-Pentagon-and-only-leave-******-that-size

    "I try to avoid these questions because its inevitable that the conspiracy theorists will drop in to argue. However, if you were a pilot and had ever been in the Pentagon, you'd understand that the walls of that building were mostly over two feet thick in order to resist all but direct ordnance hits. It was a military building, after all. Aircraft are mostly made of aircraft-grade aluminum. After all, if they weren't light, they would never be able to get off the ground. That plane was traveling at high speed, so even though it was a light grade of aluminum, the kenetic energy it would carry at those speeds would be significant, but much more so at the fuselage point of impact vice the wings. The fuselage is going to contain the lions share of the weight. However, the wings are going to be significantly lighter, and would tend to fold and break off. As a result, a crash into a dense building like the Pentagon is not going to leave a ‘cartoon hole’, as we see while watching the World Trade Center videos in slow motion. Consequently, you're not going to see a perfect plane-shaped silhouette of damage in the Pentagon. BTW: look at pictures of planes that have crashed into dense soil at a high angle of attack (‘head-on’ angle) at high speed and you do not see perfect plane-shaped holes there either.

    But you can't win with conspiracy theorists. They pick one or two things that seem to correlate with their desired outcomes and ignore anything you say to counter their ideas. They call you ‘sheeple' who don't understand that the shadow government, illuminati or whomever planted this and that, and may even call you a co-conspiritor or a planted, paid witness. And that's why I never really indulge, except here, I guess."
     
    Last edited: Dec 26, 2018
  12. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,268
    Likes Received:
    845
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No. I'm saying it was possible to plant those plane parts and they are therefore not proof that a 757 hit the Pentagon.

    This is a very plausible scenario. Please explain why it would be impossible for some of the parts to be pre-planted and some planted immediately after the explosion before the smoke cleared.

    The US government is capable of doing some pretty sleazy things. Go back and look at this info again.
    http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/the-pentagon-on-9-11.482175/page-78#post-1069894912
    http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Torture/Torture_page.html

    Do you mean to set up poles to make it look like a plane had knocked them over? That's a strange way to word it. That's very plausible
    http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=9632&st=0&start=0

    That's all very plausible. In a conspiracy of this size, they would plant some bogus witnesses. Anyway, facts trump testimony and the facts point to a 757's not having hit the Pentagon.

    That's the trouble. It doesn't look like wings hit the Pentagon and there doesn't seem to be any sign of melted aluminum where they would have hit. There seem to be people with experience saying this.

    "No Plane hit the Pentagon" - Gen. Albert Stubblebine



    It would just require a bomb.


    I know you'll never admit anything. The only thing I expect to do is post the clearest proof so that you have to say something lame to maintain your position. That way the viewers can see things clearly and not be swayed by empty rhetoric. These debates are all about what the viewers end up thinking.

    There's nothing ignorant about wondering why there's no visible sign of where the wings and tail would be expected to be. You didn't address the issue he raised. You tap danced around it. The info in post #1911 doesn't address the issue of where the aluminum went. It just talks about the strength of the Pentagon walls.

    Here's some info on conspiracy theorists.
    https://www.globalresearch.ca/weapo...ory-disinformation-agents-and-the-cia/5524552
    http://northerntruthseeker.blogspot.com/2012/03/radical-rethinking-of-conspiracy.html
    https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2016/08/31/are-you-a-mind-controlled-cia-stooge-paul-craig-roberts/
    http://www.tomatobubble.com/id196.html
    http://www1.ae911truth.org/faqs/821-why-do-good-people-become-silentor-worseabout-911-.html

    Scientific View - Why you can't believe the truth about 9/11 - Because you're scared of the Truth

     
    Last edited: Dec 26, 2018
  13. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,268
    Likes Received:
    845
    Trophy Points:
    113
    When that happens to me, I copy and paste it and put spaces between the letters where the stars are. Replace the dots with the word "Dot". Eliminate this part - https://www.

    Try that.
     
    Last edited: Dec 26, 2018
  14. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    3,473
    Likes Received:
    1,503
    Trophy Points:
    113
    troofers still afraid of troofer videos...



    confounding how the basement dwellers can't even watch one chapter never mind the 16 others ... ( I will give Bob some credit for watching the preface that informed his confirmation bias) ...

    what about you and the "viewers" Scott? ... quit being a spineless troll ... and Merry Christmas ...
     
  15. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,102
    Likes Received:
    779
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The noise coming off the truthers is deafening. Here is the post you ignored. Explain which parts are inaccurate.

    We have witnesses saying they saw the plane. We have poles knocked over, buildings damaged and a plane sized entry hole with scorching and damage highlighting it was winged. We have plane debris on the lawn showing it was a UA flight. We have images of 757 landing gear and tires. We have 757 engine parts. We have numerous items that are also recognizable as coming from a 757 plane. We have a missing 757 with its crew and passengers. We have DNA analysis showing the same passengers as the Flight 77 list.

    Just fyi, your inept bare assertion doesn't count.
     
  16. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Conducted by who or what? How was it "legitimately conducted"? Where is the official report? Is this the "legitimate onsite investigation" where there are photographs of men in suits compromising the crime scene by removing evidence? Where is the authentic documentation for the result of the airplane parts identification?

    Sorry I'm not a 24/7 apologist bending over for the US government, that's YOUR job that YOU decided to take on. Criminal investigations have very specific universally accepted protocols that must be followed meticulously before they can be labeled legitimate. You show you obviously know nothing about that and that the extent of your knowledge is incessant insults aimed at all posters who disagree with you.
     
  17. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,102
    Likes Received:
    779
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You have no concept at all of how ludicrous your claim is. This means all attendees are in on the hoax. Or do you make the totally brainless suggestion that people wandered in carrying plane parts and dumped them without anyone noticing!? Parts on the front lawn! Hoping also that nobody anywhere near can see this going on either.

    And yet again you use the word plausible as though your woeful opinion means something. Everything about what you claim is absurd.

    Crash the plane. Or all the things in the above post. If there were anything odd about the events of 911, the actions of "no planers" are the surety that nothing will get taken seriously. THE dumbest of all claims.

    There's no trouble. It's a 757 shaped hole and the wings have been forced back into the fuselage on entry.

    Unbelievable that you think aluminum would be visible when the whole area is scorched and blackened from fire!



    Why wasn't his family threatened? Why didn't the evil government bump him off? What are his qualifications on high velocity airplane impacts on heavily fortified buildings?

    Brainless again. It was observed by numerous witnesses and why didn't the evil government set the impossible bomb to make wing holes!?

    You ignore evidence and present nothing but ignorant conjecture. The viewers who NEVER arrive are well aware of your forum spamming and evasion.

    There's nothing ignorant about wondering why there's no visible sign of where the wings and tail would be expected to be. [/quote]

    Just as a small child understands very little.

    ALL addressed. Your blatant inability to see it is not my problem. The tail was obliterated.
     
    Last edited: Dec 26, 2018
  18. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,102
    Likes Received:
    779
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Spam blah, spam blah. Ignore evidence at all costs. This is first and foremost a crash scene. Parts were photographed and removed. In Bobworld obviously that is not allowed. That pesky evidence that you blatantly ignore. Your behaviour is most nauseating.
     
  19. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,102
    Likes Received:
    779
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Your use of that word is a thinly veiled insult. Weasel words.

    The nausea continues. On the one hand in Bobworld he wants all the reports from the same source and dismisses existing evidence because it IS from that source!

    And you know that's what happened because you were there? How do you know there were no NTSB there? Did another troofah tell you?

    I have lived in various parts of Europe for over 20 years. My company computer has an English non US auto spellchecker. Sometimes I correct it sometimes I can't be bothered.

    Flame baiting reported.

    And even if I were not an American the rest of the world does to have to put up with internet troofahs talking crap.
     
    Last edited: Dec 26, 2018
  20. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes I know I keep reading your posts. I don't even know why, they are repetitively boring and mostly insulting drivel.

    I know that's what happened from the photos and the eyewitness reports. I also know there was no legitimate investigation because there's no record of any. Destruction of evidence was a good part of the US government agenda following 9/11, that's a historical fact in case you missed it.

    Good luck, that terrifies me.

    There's no such thing but feel free to ignore what you don't like to read. So that's your agenda, posting apologist drivel and insults to help the world? Methinks you have a pretty ****ed up hobby but who am I to say what turns some posters on.
     
  21. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,673
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Personally I am laughing my ass off with the fact he refuses to respond to how a 757 can mow down 7 light poles and remain intact then impact glass windows without leaving so much as a scratch, and that he cant find the main aircraft parts, like the other 7 wheels, or main landing gear.

    I hope Gamolon will jump in with his advanced physics to help him!

    [​IMG]

    Wait! Eureka! I solved it, scotty beamed the rest of the plane parts up, thats it captain kirk went rogue!

    I'm sure beta will agree thats why he is incapable of showing us the plane parts!
     
    Last edited: Dec 27, 2018
    Eleuthera likes this.
  22. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,102
    Likes Received:
    779
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The only part of your post that isn't noise. So let me get this straight, you KNOW from the eyewitness reports and photos something, yet you deny the evidence from the eyewitnesses and photos and the DNA? How messed up in the head are you!

    You "know" there was no legitimate investigation because you've never seen one. As for the destruction of evidence, you dismiss incompetence and we are not discussing the collapse of the towers or the subsequent disposal of all the debris. Do you have any historical facts about Pentagon evidence being destroyed?
     
  23. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,102
    Likes Received:
    779
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't believe you for one minute. I think you sit behind your screen thinking of ways to avoid owning up to the evidence.

    I don't believe anybody has asked me that. It's down to kinetic energy. The wing with fuel travelling at full speed would cut through a hollow pole like butter.

    After you've stopped laughing your sad ass off, show why the poles would make the plane NOT intact.

    The plane didn't do that at all. It impacted some windows it broke, the ones it didn't break are blast resistant and didn't receive a sufficient amount of energy to break them.

    Now once again, after you've picked your inept carcass off the floor post laughter, explain why the same criteria isn't imposed on a bomb or missile!

    Most of it was mangled and destroyed. Explain why you think the only bits recovered were the photographed pieces.
     
  24. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,673
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Consider getting a better tuner, do you have any historical facts of the evidence ever existing in the first place?

    Got a video to prove that?
    Because thats all they could fit in the back of their toyota pickup truck, stop trying to dodge my questions.

    How you doing on explaining the window that the alleged tail of the alleged 757 hit that was scratch free? Main landing gear? 2 Engines? 8 wheels?

    Nothing? Still Nothing at all?


    Oh, it did? Since when? Show us the pics where you think the 44ft tall tail hit and 'broke' windows!


    I know the invincible plane was going so fast it mowed down 7 poles without a scratch then disintegrated itself when it hit the window! Brilliant!

    Show us 7 wheels.

    Show us the 2 main landing gear.

    Show us both engines.

    Show us those broken windows from the tail.


    Ante up! Show em if you got em! LMAO
     
    Last edited: Dec 27, 2018
  25. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,102
    Likes Received:
    779
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So your method for supplied evidence is to dismiss it and say it's fake. How can anyone take anything you say seriously?

    I don't need a video to prove it, I just need to understand physics. What is this you claim about a Toyota truck?

    Prove this happened and I will explain it.


    Your reading and comprehension is inversely on a par with your appeal to incredulity or ignorant bare assertion.

    The plane disintegrated. That's what happens when a chunk of mass with huge kinetic energy hits a heavily fortified structure. I suspect you aren't intelligent enough to understand this.

    The leading edge of the tail went through the impact hole, the upper part is almost certainly sheared off as it strikes the upper edge of the impact hole. Once again you prove yourself an expert in noise generation and not much else.

    Bullshit statement. Nobody said it didn't cause damage. I asked you to show why the pole would leave the plane NOT intact.

    How come you avoided that? Are you afraid?


    https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a5659/debunking-911-myths-pentagon/
    "Why wasn't the hole as wide as a 757's 124-ft.-10-in. wingspan? A crashing jet doesn't punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building, says ASCE team member Mete Sozen, a professor of structural engineering at Purdue University. In this case, one wing hit the ground; the other was sheared off by the force of the impact with the Pentagon's load-bearing columns, explains Sozen, who specializes in the behavior of concrete buildings. What was left of the plane flowed into the structure in a state closer to a liquid than a solid mass. "If you expected the entire wing to cut into the building," Sozen tells PM, "it didn't happen.""

    More bullshit. No impact on any window disintegrated the plane.



    Explain why you think the debris collected is all that you know about!

    Just this video alone shows more debris than could possibly fit on a pickup:





    Explain why you should know about every piece recovered. Even if every single piece was given to you and photographed, you would dismiss it as fake.


    Explain with diagrams and physics why the plane tail would hit a window.


    Back at you. You are making lots of noise but you're just repeating other ignorant claims without understanding a damn thing.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page