Connection Between 911 and 2012

[Iron_Lotus]

That's the problem. You can't face the truth. So you run and hide. What is it that you are afraid of? You should not hide from your fears you should face them and conquer them. I don't know how many of you I am answering today but you are all in denial. Just as I was. So you go right ahead and stay inside your little bubble where it's nice and safe.

no evidence again, suprise suprise, just as i thought well im off to eat i shall return later to laugh at you and your ridiculous thread.

[synchronomy]

I too am patriotic but I do not believe everything I am told. I love my country I love my government but that does not mean that they are 100% honest.

Did you read that before you posted it?...and you are implying we're "out to lunch"?

The only reason you posted this rubbish here is probably because the other forums you posted in gave you the same reaction.

...I'm going to go make a sandwich...there's far more "substance" in it than I'm getting from you.

[AN.UNNA.KI]

no patriotism here and my views on the united states are my own and since i dont even live there and have no wish too i have no reason to stand by their government, the only one running here is you, evidence has been presented from us but nothing from you of course, the burden of proof is yours and yours alone, now were all waiting for evidence from you, we all know you cant provide it so the best thing you can do is just say you dont have any. it would be the only truthful statement to come out of you in your short time here.

What does my time here have to do with anything. Okay so your Canadian. So what. Still you live in that little bubble. You refuse to have an open mind. You just are told something and you are fine with it. You want me to show you evidence that the plane did not hit the Pentagon, while the evidence again is that there is no parts of this 757 anywhere to be found. Why can't you see that. The answer is because you don't want to.http://freedomfiles.org/war/pentagon.htm this is where you go if you want to see the truth. But of course you will going to say that this was all made up by some radicals who want to discredit the United States government. It all depends on how you look at it. And it seems like you guys cannot see out of one eye and are blind in the other. So if you would genuinely want to know the truth take off those glasses and watch this video. Think about what is presented to you with an open mind. Don't don't look at this video through those same rose-colored glasses. Take them off and you will see that what I've been saying is the truth, no matter how much it hurts, it is the truth.

[Mr.United_Nations]

Blah blah.. show us of a c130 firing missiles

[AN.UNNA.KI]

Blah blah.. show us of a c130 firing missiles

Blah blah.. show us of a c130 firing missiles

Once again this is nothing but a copout on your part. The CIA couldn't even show you a picture of that C-130 firing a missile. Again show me any significant part of that 757. What is so hard about that!

[Mr.United_Nations]

Once again this is nothing but a copout on your part. The CIA couldn't even show you a picture of that C-130 firing a missile. Again show me any significant part of that 757. What is so hard about that!

No I dont want the CIA, I want you to show us.

Are you blind as a bat?

[AN.UNNA.KI]

No I dont want the CIA, I want you to show us.

Are you blind as a bat?

Well maybe you could help me out. I can't seem to find any pictures showing any significant part of that 757 that crashed into the Pentagon. This is getting to be a little redundant. What is so hard about showing me that picture? I may be blind as a bat but I can see when something wrong. Things just don't add up. 200,000 pound aircraft hits the Pentagon and you can't show me any significant part of that 757.

[Mr.United_Nations]

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

[RaptorBites]

Well maybe you could help me out. I can't seem to find any pictures showing any significant part of that 757 that crashed into the Pentagon. This is getting to be a little redundant. What is so hard about showing me that picture? I may be blind as a bat but I can see when something wrong. Things just don't add up. 200,000 pound aircraft hits the Pentagon and you can't show me any significant part of that 757.

Your constant disregard and hand waving of any pictures Iron has posted that you requested shows a high level of ignorance. You disregard them as proof of a plane hitting the pentagon, yet they are accepted pictures of the after math of the event.

Then you go around asking for evidence without providing any of your own.

Classic case of a CT trolling to pass the time.

The burden of proof is on your side to provide the evidence to the contrary that a plane did indeed hit the pentagon.

Boony pointed you to a thread that will provide you with all the evidence you can ever want, and you ignored it.

Bravo.

This thread needs to die quick, as it is pointless running in circles with you.

Edited September 23, 2012 by RaptorBites

[synchronomy]

What does my time here have to do with anything. Okay so your Canadian. So what. Still you live in that little bubble. You refuse to have an open mind. You just are told something and you are fine with it. You want me to show you evidence that the plane did not hit the Pentagon, while the evidence again is that there is no parts of this 757 anywhere to be found. Why can't you see that. The answer is because you don't want to.http://freedomfiles....ar/pentagon.htm this is where you go if you want to see the truth. But of course you will going to say that this was all made up by some radicals who want to discredit the United States government. It all depends on how you look at it. And it seems like you guys cannot see out of one eye and are blind in the other. So if you would genuinely want to know the truth take off those glasses and watch this video. Think about what is presented to you with an open mind. Don't don't look at this video through those same rose-colored glasses. Take them off and you will see that what I've been saying is the truth, no matter how much it hurts, it is the truth.

IF some domestic group faked an attack on the Pentagon using a missile, they would have made it appear that terrorists shot the missile. They wouldn't fire a missile, then try to make up a story that it was a 757. Give your head a shake.

It was a 757 that hit the building.

Again IF the attack was faked, they would not have targetted a very important asset such as the Pentagon.

Think about it...if you wanted to fake a suicide attempt and survive, would you shoot yourself in the heart or in the foot?

Edited September 23, 2012 by synchronomy

[AN.UNNA.KI]

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.

[AN.UNNA.KI]

Welcome aboard AN.UNNA.KI

Thank you.

[AN.UNNA.KI]

Oh gosh... another one...

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.

[RaptorBites]

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 September 23, 2012 by RaptorBites

[frenat]

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 September 23, 2012 by frenat

[booNyzarC]

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.

1. It doesn't disturb me.
   
2. You haven't burst anyone's bubble.
   
3. You aren't making me do anything.
   
4. 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.
   
5. 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 September 23, 2012 by booNyzarC

[RaptorBites]

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:

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

[Iron_Lotus]

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.

[AN.UNNA.KI]

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.

[Babe Ruth]

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.

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.

[Iron_Lotus]

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

cute.

[skyeagle409]

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.

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:

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 September 23, 2012 by skyeagle409

[frenat]

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.

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.

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.

[skyeagle409]

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

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

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.

[skyeagle409]

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!!

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