Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* - - - - 2 votes

Connection Between 911 and 2012

911 et technology

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
294 replies to this topic

#61    AN.UNNA.KI

AN.UNNA.KI

    Alien Embryo

  • Banned
  • Pip
  • 112 posts
  • Joined:23 Sep 2012
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 23 September 2012 - 06:18 PM

View PostThe New Richard Nixon, on 23 September 2012 - 05:44 PM, said:

We have....how old are really? 15-25?

What? You have what? What does "how old are really" mean? Are you asking me my age? That's none of your business.


#62    AN.UNNA.KI

AN.UNNA.KI

    Alien Embryo

  • Banned
  • Pip
  • 112 posts
  • Joined:23 Sep 2012
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 23 September 2012 - 06:21 PM

View Postlightly, on 23 September 2012 - 12:40 PM, said:

:)  Welcome aboard  AN.UNNA.KI

Thank you.


#63    AN.UNNA.KI

AN.UNNA.KI

    Alien Embryo

  • Banned
  • Pip
  • 112 posts
  • Joined:23 Sep 2012
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 23 September 2012 - 06:32 PM

View PostbooNyzarC, on 23 September 2012 - 04:33 PM, said:

Oh gosh... another one...  :rolleyes:

Yes sorry if that disturbs you. hate to bust your bubble. hate to have to make you go through your same old rhetoric. Put me out of my misery.
Just show me any large or significant part of that 757 please.  How about showing me a picture of a suitcase, one of the seats, part of the fuselage, or a wing tip.


#64    RaptorBites

RaptorBites

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,208 posts
  • Joined:12 Jan 2012

Posted 23 September 2012 - 06:40 PM

View PostAN.UNNA.KI, on 23 September 2012 - 06:32 PM, said:

Yes sorry if that disturbs you. hate to bust your bubble. hate to have to make you go through your same old rhetoric. Put me out of my misery.
Just show me any large or significant part of that 757 please.  How about showing me a picture of a suitcase, one of the seats, part of the fuselage, or a wing tip.

Maybe you missed it.

So I will put it plainly into a format you are able to read so you don't miss it a 2nd time.

It is your burden of proof to provide evidence to the contrary and the accepted fact that a BOEING 757 specifically AAL77 flew into the Pentagon.

Iron Lotus was kind enough to provide you evidence of 757 parts strewn across the lawn of the Pentagon, and you disregard those and start asking about suitcases, seats, and the like?  Is this a joke to you?

Iron Lotus has met your demand for providing pictures of 757 parts and you go and change your request to something else?

It is very sad that you are now changing the conditions to suit your theory.  

You are not here for an honest debate, nor are you here with a need to learn the truth.  You have it in YOUR mind that 9/11 was an inside job orchestrated by the US military, so are not going to be swayed from your beliefs

If you want to learn something, then stick around, if all you want to do is spout off theories without basing anything on hard-nosed evidence.  Then this place is not for you.

Edited by RaptorBites, 23 September 2012 - 06:43 PM.

No, you surround yourself with a whole different kettle of crazy. - Sir Wearer of Hats

#65    frenat

frenat

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 3,090 posts
  • Joined:22 Jun 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Wayne, IN

Posted 23 September 2012 - 06:43 PM

View PostAN.UNNA.KI, on 23 September 2012 - 04:10 PM, said:

What the hell does having a knowlede of physics have to do with it. All I needed was a set of eyes and half a brain to figure this one out. Well wait I do know a little about physics? Would'nt physics say that if you crashed a 757 aircraft into a building that you should find large parts of that aircraft laying around? So you show me these large parts of that 757 and I will eat all my words and denounce my theory!!!!!!!!!! Come on man, that should be simple enough! Show me a part of the wing,landing gear, tail section anything. Take off those government issued rose colored glasses and open your eyes to the truth. Do you want more physics how about this. How does this alleged terrorist who's flying this 757 aircraft who had maybe 10 hours of flight training manage to fly this plane inches above the ground to slam into the ground floor of the Pentagon and not even leave a divot in the grass. A 757 aircraft is carrying thousands of pounds of jet fuel. It slams into the ground floor of the Pentagon. You would think it would incinerate everything inside this building. Yet when you look at the pictures you can still see office furniture and computers just sitting there not even shinged. There were more firefighting vehicles at a backyard barbecue fire than at the Pentagon.

What hit the Pentagon was a cruise missile fired by a black ops C-130. The 757 was piloted by an experienced American pilot. He was able to fly this aircraft just above the rooftops. As he approached the Pentagon he was able to bring this aircraft down to just feet above ground level and just before hitting the Pentagon building he was able to pull-up and way without hitting the Pentagon. Now the timing between this maneuver in the firing of the cruise missile by the C-130 had to be perfect and it was. Just behind the 757 was the C-130. He was coming in at a different approach. His approach was the approach that official government papers say that the 757 took. They even showed where this low-flying 757 knocked down light poles in its approach to hit the Pentagon. But what really happened was that just as that 757 banked up and away from the Pentagon the C-130 fired the cruise missile that hit the Pentagon. The official government reports say that the 757 was traveling at speeds over 500 mph. Now a 757 hitting a light post at over 500 mph should have demolished those post .but when you look at the pictures the post are only feet away from their base, and still intact. Now do you need to be a physicist to figure that one out? I can go on and on and on here but I now turn to you and say show me a large part of this 757 that allegedly slammed in to the ground floor of the Pentagon. The parts that they show as so called evidence when put together would not make a small pickup truck.

funniest thing I've read this year!

Show us ANY C-130 that can fire a cruise missile.
Then tell us who in their right mind would concoct a plane that requires a 757 to go missing, 757 parts to be found at the site (which is a tourist location by the way), witnesses that will see a 757, but then crash something COMPLETELY DIFFERENT?

Edited by frenat, 23 September 2012 - 06:46 PM.

-Reality is not determined by your lack of comprehension.
-Never let facts stand in the way of a good conspiracy theory.
-If I wanted to pay for commercials I couldn't skip I'd sign up for Hulu Plus.
-There are no bad ideas, just great ideas that go horribly wrong.
If you have to insist that you've won an Internet argument, you've probably lost badly. - Danth's Law

#66    booNyzarC

booNyzarC

    Forum Divinity

  • Closed
  • 13,536 posts
  • Joined:18 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 23 September 2012 - 06:50 PM

View PostAN.UNNA.KI, on 23 September 2012 - 06:32 PM, said:

1. Yes sorry if that disturbs you. 2. hate to bust your bubble. 3. hate to have to make you go through your same old rhetoric. 4. Put me out of my misery.
5. Just show me any large or significant part of that 757 please.  How about showing me a picture of a suitcase, one of the seats, part of the fuselage, or a wing tip.
  • It doesn't disturb me.
  • You haven't burst anyone's bubble.
  • You aren't making me do anything.
  • Why would I want to put you out of your misery?  Nonsensical threads like this can be a fun diversion from serious discussions with people who actually have some idea of what they are talking about.
  • You've already been shown pictures of aircraft debris and I'm sure others will provide more.  You could, of course, choose to go read that thread I pointed you to previously to save everyone some trouble.


Edited by booNyzarC, 23 September 2012 - 06:52 PM.


#67    RaptorBites

RaptorBites

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,208 posts
  • Joined:12 Jan 2012

Posted 23 September 2012 - 07:03 PM

View Postfrenat, on 23 September 2012 - 06:43 PM, said:

funniest thing I've read this year!

Show us ANY C-130 that can fire a cruise missile.
Then tell us who in their right mind would concoct a plane that requires a 757 to go missing, 757 parts to be found at the site (which is a tourist location by the way), witnesses that will see a 757, but then crash something COMPLETELY DIFFERENT?

It's pointless Frenat.

That one singlaur post of his has so many mis-informed statements that made my head hurt.

See below:

Quote

How does this alleged terrorist who's flying this 757 aircraft who had maybe 10 hours of flight training manage to fly this plane inches above the ground to slam into the ground floor of the Pentagon and not even leave a divot in the grass.

Hani Hanjour had over 500 hours of flight training.  This statement already shows that you have no research time involved in your theory.

Quote

A 757 aircraft is carrying thousands of pounds of jet fuel. It slams into the ground floor of the Pentagon. You would think it would incinerate everything inside this building. Yet when you look at the pictures you can still see office furniture and computers just sitting there not even shinged. There were more firefighting vehicles at a backyard barbecue fire than at the Pentagon.

What do you expect from a solid reinforced concrete wall several feet thick?  The pentagon was made to withstand that force, even the windows on the exterior were blast proof.

Quote

What hit the Pentagon was a cruise missile fired by a black ops C-130. The 757 was piloted by an experienced American pilot.

Goes to show you know nothing about military aircraft, and also know nothing about missile launch dynamics.  Maybe do some research before comming up with such ridiculous ideas.

Quote

As he approached the Pentagon he was able to bring this aircraft down to just feet above ground level and just before hitting the Pentagon building he was able to pull-up and way without hitting the Pentagon.

So tell me genuis, how come the DoubleTree video not show a C-130 on a fly over above the Pentagon before your supposed missle hit?

How come no eye witness in the area described a military C-130 in the area other than the one on a fly over pattern in an attempt to locate the missing Boeing 757?

Quote

Now a 757 hitting a light post at over 500 mph should have demolished those post .but when you look at the pictures the post are only feet away from their base, and still intact. Now do you need to be a physicist to figure that one out?

The lamp posts where attached to the groud using bolts, not some sort of nuclear alien created super glue.

The level of flight the 757 was flying on its way to the Pentagon would place the wings closer to the top of the pole.  As physics will show you, leverage is much higher the farther away you are from the fulcrum, AKA the point where the lamp post attached to the ground.  Hence why the posts fell over and did not desintegrate,

Let's face it.  You are making things up as you go along.

No, you surround yourself with a whole different kettle of crazy. - Sir Wearer of Hats

#68    Iron_Lotus

Iron_Lotus

    Happy

  • Member
  • 3,001 posts
  • Joined:02 Jul 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada

  • I'll scream for you in whispers, because I always hated being too loud.

Posted 23 September 2012 - 07:16 PM

yeah i figured the OP wouldn't have anything to present by the time i got back. im glad i dont expect as much from these people anymore.

"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."

#69    AN.UNNA.KI

AN.UNNA.KI

    Alien Embryo

  • Banned
  • Pip
  • 112 posts
  • Joined:23 Sep 2012
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 23 September 2012 - 07:24 PM

View PostIron_Lotus, on 23 September 2012 - 04:26 PM, said:

hmmm i don't believe i was responding to you.. *looks at post* hmmm nope i believe i was responding to another local bs'er who said "the official story cannot be proved without the presence of some sort of Magic Wand that can suspend the rules of physics." in previous threads which im sure you have not gotten around to yet he has been shown to know next to nothing about what he speaks on.



yeah.... shame you havn't figured out anything at all though.

I have figured it out. You just don't want to see it. You still in the denial stage.


#70    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,714 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 23 September 2012 - 07:26 PM

AN.UNNA

The trouble with the photos of "official debris", both at the Pentagon and regarding Shanksville, is that the photos are out of context.  They are represented as photos from inside the Pentagon, but it is well known that the Pentagon stages events and evidence in a little exercise they call False Flag Operation.  Super secret, as you already know.

And these guys cannot explain, and would rather not discuss, how an airplane that supposedly bores through several of the Pentagon rings, can at the same time shed a part of its fuselage, paint and all, shed it backwards while traveling 400 knots.  Terrific photo op, I say, regarding the nice painted piece of fuselage conveniently placed in front of the cameras. :yes:

Some folks like to support the least likely hypothesis on any given manner, especially the collapse initiation point.  That is evidenced on several threads here.  Not most likely hypothesis, but least likely.  Most improbable events are held up as being absolutely certain, because the government said so.

While the role of a C-130 that you mention cannot be proved, neither can the Official Conspiracy Theory.

That's why my default position is that I don't really know what happened EXCEPT THAT I was fooled, and I was lied to. :whistle:


#71    Iron_Lotus

Iron_Lotus

    Happy

  • Member
  • 3,001 posts
  • Joined:02 Jul 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada

  • I'll scream for you in whispers, because I always hated being too loud.

Posted 23 September 2012 - 07:27 PM

View PostAN.UNNA.KI, on 23 September 2012 - 07:24 PM, said:

I have figured it out. You just don't want to see it. You still in the denial stage.

cute.

"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."

#72    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,693 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 23 September 2012 - 07:40 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 23 September 2012 - 07:26 PM, said:

AN.UNNA

The trouble with the photos of "official debris", both at the Pentagon and regarding Shanksville, is that the photos are out of context.

That is just another misleading statement of yours considering that  I have identified the parts at the Pentagon and at Shanksville, right down to the hi-shear hilock fasteners.

Quote

They are represented as photos from inside the Pentagon, but it is well known that the Pentagon stages events and evidence in a little exercise they call False Flag Operation.

How amusing that you would  suggest the Pentagon was a staged event during the time that  hundreds of workers were recovering and cleaning up the area. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Quote

While the role of a C-130 that you mention cannot be proved,...

Why of course if can be proven that the C-130 did not fire a cruise missile. Do you remember the controller who described the maneuver of American 77 as he watched with his own eyes? He didn't say anything about a cruise missile and look what you posted.

Edited by skyeagle409, 23 September 2012 - 07:58 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#73    frenat

frenat

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 3,090 posts
  • Joined:22 Jun 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Wayne, IN

Posted 23 September 2012 - 07:50 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 23 September 2012 - 07:26 PM, said:

AN.UNNA

The trouble with the photos of "official debris", both at the Pentagon and regarding Shanksville, is that the photos are out of context.  They are represented as photos from inside the Pentagon, but it is well known that the Pentagon stages events and evidence in a little exercise they call False Flag Operation.  Super secret, as you already know.

And these guys cannot explain, and would rather not discuss, how an airplane that supposedly bores through several of the Pentagon rings, can at the same time shed a part of its fuselage, paint and all, shed it backwards while traveling 400 knots.  Terrific photo op, I say, regarding the nice painted piece of fuselage conveniently placed in front of the cameras. :yes:

Some folks like to support the least likely hypothesis on any given manner, especially the collapse initiation point.  That is evidenced on several threads here.  Not most likely hypothesis, but least likely.  Most improbable events are held up as being absolutely certain, because the government said so.

While the role of a C-130 that you mention cannot be proved, neither can the Official Conspiracy Theory.

That's why my default position is that I don't really know what happened EXCEPT THAT I was fooled, and I was lied to. :whistle:

You're still on that several rings nonsense?  You like to prove you're incapable of learning don't you?  The outer three rings are CONNECTED on the lower floors.  They are essentially ONE RING.  You also prove you don't understand explosions.  Sad really.

-Reality is not determined by your lack of comprehension.
-Never let facts stand in the way of a good conspiracy theory.
-If I wanted to pay for commercials I couldn't skip I'd sign up for Hulu Plus.
-There are no bad ideas, just great ideas that go horribly wrong.
If you have to insist that you've won an Internet argument, you've probably lost badly. - Danth's Law

#74    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,693 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 23 September 2012 - 07:52 PM

View PostAN.UNNA.KI, on 23 September 2012 - 04:37 PM, said:

That's a big copout. What is so hard about showing me any significant part of that 757.

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

And, a cruise missile could not have caused the kind of damage depicted here:

Posted Image



And, a cruise missile could not have been responsible for knocking down all of those light poles for obvious reasons the wingspan of a cruise missile is not wide enough to knock down those light poles.

Posted Image

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#75    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,693 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 23 September 2012 - 07:54 PM

View Postfrenat, on 23 September 2012 - 07:50 PM, said:


You're still on that several rings nonsense?  You like to prove you're incapable of learning don't you?  The outer three rings are CONNECTED on the lower floors.  They are essentially ONE RING.  You also prove you don't understand explosions.  Sad really.

Ditto!! :tu:

And, he has proven that he has no knowledge of anything related to aviation.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users