The strangest Coincidence regarding the Pentagon attack on 9/11

a reply to: AnkhMorpork

Not exactly pristine condition, but they were identifiable. But what difference does that make.... I remember the first item from the crash that killed JFK Jr. and the Bassett sisters was a luggage tag from Lauren Bassett's garment bag.... does that mean her luggage tag was planted too? Cause it's in pretty damn good condition too....

When something like an aircraft crashes, it's kinda silly what will and what won't survive....

A2D

deleted double post

a reply to: facedye

I did not say that there is a good chance the 9/11 evidence was planted. If you could quote me saying that, it would sure surprise the hell out of me.

What I did say was that if you INSIST that the landing gear found wedged between two buildings was planted, then I ask you WHO planted it and WHY. There would be two schools of thought to that answer.... A) The people who want you to think it was an airplane/terrorists...and B) The people who want you to think it wasn't an airplane/terrorists... they both have a motive.

But, the most logical conclusion when you see something like an airplane landing gear wedged between two buildings with a rope around it, found mere blocks from where an iconic incident involving AIRPLANES happened...you'd assume that the landing gear is a relic of debris from that incident and perhaps someone at sometime was trying to pull it free using a rope.... (you do realize how much debris from the 9/11 incident can sell for, right?)

But nope, you come to the conclusion that it was planted there by some group of elite individuals with some sort of malevolent motives which have yet to be determined...

Right.....

A2D

originally posted by: AnAbsoluteCreation
a reply to: 5StarOracle

It is my personal assessment the world is at war. The war is between the Nationalists and Globalist.

So 9/11 was a Globalist event. Which means that Globalists leaders knew in advance which would explain a lot.

I am happy to think that the collective of humanity is waking up to this dastardly plot. I think Globalist overplayed their hand with multiculturalism and immigration. This refugee hope will be the nail in Globalism's coffin. If not, we will experience another global war.

Trump and Putin are Nationalists. They are fighting Globalism. This is why Putin Annexed Crimea. This is why BREXIT happened. This is why Trump was elected. This is why the French elections will see a female Trump. This is why more countries will bow out of the EU.

This is a great time for Nationalist.

AAV

Excellent post. I believe you to be 100% correct in this assessment. Great thread, too. Too many questions about 911 do NOT add up, more questions than answers actually exist about that day. The 911 commission report was a joke along with NIST. Building 7, the key to the WHOLE thing, is widely swept under the rug by the MSM.

The end game really is about globalism, IMO. The Soros funded riots, all the brainwashing by the media, pointless wars and violence, ALL of it, is the establishment globalist agenda. The RINO's on the right are involved too. We may THINK us free-thinking people are winning under Trump, and I love the thought of it, but he is being thrown around and beaten by the media, he's becoming a rag-doll. They (the drones on the left) think HE is the next Hitler, they don't feel it's OK to insult the media. They are wrong. They are pawns.

I HOPE this all gets exposed, but I have doubts, serious doubts. It's trendy to be a socialist these days, and soon it will be trendy to be a communist. "Nationalism" is being painted as fascist and even being sold to millions as Nazi white supremacy.

It's a sick world we live in right now.

originally posted by: Agree2Disagree
a reply to: AnkhMorpork

Not exactly pristine condition, but they were identifiable. But what difference does that make.... I remember the first item from the crash that killed JFK Jr. and the Bassett sisters was a luggage tag from Lauren Bassett's garment bag.... does that mean her luggage tag was planted too? When something like an aircraft crashes, it's kinda silly what will and what won't survive....

so now you're drawing a comparison between JFK jr.'s plane crash into the water to a plane ramming into the twin towers at upwards of 500 mph?

what do you suppose happened to keep the passport in such amazing condition, being potentially found prior to impact? maybe he threw it overboard preemptively just to giggle about discussions like this with his 72 virgins in the afterlife?

no, seriously, how are you going to sit there and call other people's postulations "ridiculous" while you make such an unacceptable comparison to support your position that "silly things happen during plane crashes"?

how convenient it must be to have confidence in your own position, supported by thin air, while scoffing at people who really try to work through the details in a logically concise manner.

a reply to: facedye

High impact does a lot of funny things..... you can't exactly predict what will and what won't happen... it's different every time. A passport surviving isn't unthinkable...

To say that there is no way possible a passport could survive a plane crash is just being naive. People, and objects, have survived much, much worse.
A2D

a reply to: Agree2Disagree

you said:

Yes, the NYPD suspected it could have been planted, but they don't state by who. I'm saying, if you want to assume it was planted, then you have to assume that it could have been planted by ANYONE.

i responded with:

at this point it's neither here nor there if they don't state "by who." the fact of the matter is that there's a very good chance some of the 9/11 "evidence" we're seeing is in fact planted. you yourself just said so. how about we digest that for a moment and consider what kind of plausible deniability that creates?

so now, when you come back with:

I did not say that there is a good chance the 9/11 evidence was planted. If you could quote me saying that, it would sure surprise the hell out of me.

now you're disagreeing with the NYPD? on what basis? the "simplest explanation"?

simple like your comparison to jfk jr.'s crash to 2 planes ramming into the twin towers?

originally posted by: Agree2Disagree
a reply to: facedye

High impact does a lot of funny things..... you can't exactly predict what will and what won't happen... it's different every time. A passport surviving isn't unthinkable...

To say that there is no way possible a passport could survive a plane crash is just being naive. People, and objects, have survived much, much worse.
A2D

so by your line of reasoning, if it's "not unthinkable" then that must be what happened?

a reply to: facedye

If you find blood, someone probably bled there... (it most likely wasn't planted)

If you find bread crumbs, someone was probably eating bread....(it most likely wasn't planted)

If you find aircraft landing gears, there was probably an accident involving aircraft nearby...(it most likely wasn't planted)

If you find a passport, someone probably lost it....(it most likely wasn't planted)

All logical conclusions friend.

A2D

originally posted by: Agree2Disagree
a reply to: facedye

If you find blood, someone probably bled there... (it most likely wasn't planted)

If you find bread crumbs, someone was probably eating bread....(it most likely wasn't planted)

If you find aircraft landing gears, there was probably an accident involving aircraft nearby...(it most likely wasn't planted)

If you find a passport, someone probably lost it....(it most likely wasn't planted)

All logical conclusions friend.

A2D

if you find blood where there shouldn't be any, it may have been planted.

if you find bread crumbs where there was never any bread, it may have been planted.

if you find air craft landing gears where they shouldn't be, they may have been put there.

if you find a passport in amazing condition from a terrorist who just turned a boeing airplane into a massive fireball, it probably didn't fall out of the window on impact.

all logical conclusions, friend.

a reply to: facedye

So you're saying that two airplanes crashing into a building...shouldn't leave landing gears somewhere? That's crazy... What are airplanes landing on these days if they don't use landing gears anymore? The Hudson? I thought that was a fiasco....

The passport surviving is just an act of nature.... Kind of like a man, Amasifuen Gamarra, who survived a 5,000 ft fall from an airplane when his parachute didn't open and he didn't even break a bone... no internal bleeding, nothing... Strange things just happen sometimes and there's really no explaining it....

A2D

originally posted by: Agree2Disagree
a reply to: facedye

So you're saying that two airplanes crashing into a building...shouldn't leave landing gears somewhere? That's crazy... What are airplanes landing on these days? The Hudson? I thought that was a fiasco....

The passport surviving is just an act of nature.... Kind of like a man who survives a 5,000 ft fall from an airplane when his parachute doesn't open and doesn't even break a bone... no internal bleeding, nothing...

A2D

you have absolutely *no supporting information* to claim that it was an act of nature. just because you say something, and deeply want it to be true, that doesn't quite make it so.

the landing gears should land "somewhere," yes. this one should have never landed where it was found. do you really think the NYPD would deem this to be a crime scene and publicly suspect foul play if they had ample evidence to assert that it literally just landed in between two buildings? consider that there's no notable damage to any part of the buildings from the supposed impact you suggest is the most likely scenario.

for someone who seems to be big on logic, you're exceedingly short on reason.

No Planes all begins and ends with the lightpoles.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: AnAbsoluteCreation

Interesting observations.

There's still the problem of the what hit the lightpoles? I can tell you first hand, that subject was beaten to death back in the day. I'm no "Skeptic", and for the longest time remained on the fence, but eventually (when CIT was stomping around) helped lead the charge in bringing Pentagon No Planer noise to a collective close.

My old thread:
First things first: What Hit the Lightpoles?!

I doubt many of the images from that era still work, but the arguments should hold true.

We had many other threads in those days that went on for eternity. I got a pretty good taste for much of them.

Maybe there could have been a missile too, but something hit those lightpoles and I've never seen anyone properly sort that out.

a reply to: facedye

Supporting information for saying something is an act of nature? What? you want mother nature to testify? Dear Lord save me now....

The NYPD said they "suspected" it could have been foul play(The NYPD suspects lots of things, doesn't make them true)...what ever came of that anyways? Did they come to a conclusion? Well, actually they did....

Cops believe the newly discovered piece of WTC plane wreckage found near the Ground Zero mosque wasn’t intentionally placed there — but instead blasted into the tiny alley on 9/11.

“There’s no evidence to suggest that it’s part of a hoax,” NYPD spokesman Paul Browne said yesterday of the discovery of the rusty, 5-foot-long chunk of metal next to 51 Park Place.

A law-enforcement source said, “Right now, the feeling is it fell from the plane after it hit the building.’’ Photos of the piece of wreckage released by cops right after it was found showed a rope oddly looped around one end of it. This prompted speculation that the part may have been lowered from the building’s roof by clueless construction workers at some point to clear debris.

But yesterday, Browne said one of the cops who first responded to the report of the wreckage had “used rope he found on the ground nearby to wrap around the aircraft part in order to move it” to look for serial numbers or other identifying marks.

source

A2D

a reply to: Agree2Disagree

i'm saying you're placing all of your confidence in what you personally feel "most likely happened."

protip: don't become an investigator.

what a peculiar and interesting source you just posted too. let me ask you a pretty funny question:

if the cops and investigators associated with Browne "haven't reached any definitive conclusions," why exactly did you post this link?

what are you trying to say? that because Browne stated one of his cops used the rope in question (even though that wasn't widely reported and was adding to the NYPD's suspicion), it probably just landed there?

if so, why do you think that if they haven't reached any definitive conclusions?

a reply to: facedye

Reading Comprehension Tip: The NYPD came to the conclusion that the wing flap support(it wasn't a landing gear) landed there from one of the airplanes hijacked on 9/11..it wasn't planted.

A2D

originally posted by: Agree2Disagree
a reply to: facedye

PROTIP: The NYPD came to the conclusion that the wing flap support(it wasn't a landing gear) landed there from one of the airplanes hijacked on 9/11..it wasn't planted.

A2D

PROTIP:

“It had just enough clearance to fall in, but we haven’t reached any definitive conclusions,” Browne said of the piece of wing-flap support, which was discovered at the site last Wednesday.

are you being serious? LOL

I couldn't resist. My old war was really with the WTC No Planers, where that was my ongoing joke with all that as the plane engines on the ground on video yeah everything to do with WTC No Planes was beyond absurd (and ultimately it was an extension of Pentagon No Planes).

No Planers almost single handedly destroyed the 9/11 Truth Movement (which was destroyed).

edit on 20-2-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)

a reply to: facedye

"no definitive conclusions" means the case was still open at the time...

please find me a source that says they came to a conclusion that it was staged...oh wait... THERE AREN'T ANY...BECAUSE THEY CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT IT LANDED THERE... Try harder.

A2D

originally posted by: Agree2Disagree
a reply to: facedye

"no definitive conclusions" means the case was still open at the time...

please find me a source that says they came to a conclusion that it was staged...oh wait... THERE AREN'T ANY...BECAUSE THEY CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT IT LANDED THERE... Try harder.

A2D

please quote exactly where they "came to that conclusion."

i'm literally not trying at all.