It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A B757 hit the Pentagon, reported by GOFER06

page: 10
64
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 12:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Realtruth
Yea if the MSM said it was an airplane and you saw the debris yourself, then it must be true. The MSM and the government never lie, so that's it case closed, everyone move on.

/sarcasm


Oh, you got me again!!! I was suckered in by all the fake aircraft parts in those photos.

How did they get there if not from an aircraft? Please, inquiring minds need to know.




posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 12:08 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

you're approaching this entire discussion with the subtlety of a baboon.

in b4 "well you're approaching this with some Derp level logic about Derp missiles into Derp buildings during Derp/11"



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 12:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: facedye
you're approaching this entire discussion with the subtlety of a baboon.


Thank you for the compliment, that was my intention. Like I said earlier, this is like religion for some people, they go absolutely ape s*** (that's my simian reference in reply to yours) over this stuff and believe every myth and fantasy there is to justify their stance.


in b4 "well you're approaching this with some Derp level logic about Derp missiles into Derp buildings during Derp/11"


Still haven't said who launched it and where it came from. Or how it got all those aircraft parts in it. Or what happened to all the dead people. Or how they kept it so quiet that only the 'awakened' peeps figured it out.

This stuff almost makes has me making wee in my big boy pants from laughing. Can I speak to you about Jez-us? Maybe a new religion could be helpful.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 12:24 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

now you're making the implication that I hold my points of view on this specifically on faith?

that's pretty funny because i don't believe anything i can't cite and source. care to go through all of the points the OS wants you to take on faith? something tells me you already have a religion in this regard.



"Still haven't said who launched it and where it came from. Or how it got all those aircraft parts in it. Or what happened to all the dead people. Or how they kept it so quiet that only the 'awakened' peeps figured it out. "


my reply to you on the above is that it's not evident beyond a shadow of a doubt that a 757 hit the pentagon. before you go into a laughing fit over the question of whether or not it was a missile, please think deeply about this fact.

otherwise, if you don't think that this is a fact, can you show me anything that proves a 757 undoubtedly hit this building? with all this laughing you're doing, surely you must be able to provide something that can clear this up for everyone aside from half-hearted conjecture. please do.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 12:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: facedye
my reply to you on the above is that it's not evident beyond a shadow of a doubt that a 757 hit the pentagon. before you go into a laughing fit over the question of whether or not it was a missile, please think deeply about this fact.


The how did all the American Airlines aircraft parts get there? They use the magic Pentagon teleporter to strew them all over the scene?



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 12:40 PM
link   
Quick question to anyone who can answer it..

I remember in Loose Change they showed the engine found in the Pentagon debris and it wasn't the proper engine for the plane they said hit the building



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 12:49 PM
link   
Sorry,,, skullduggery is evil minds doing their nasty ideas....

757s have the most power to go straight up.....of all widebody airliners because of their ROLLSROYCE RB 211 series turbines....I mumble , huh! Ya outta catch me on a Friday after the sun is down below the yardarm mates

on 12-3-2017 by GBP/JPY because: (no reason given)

edit on 12-3-2017 by GBP/JPY because: (no reason given)

edit on 12-3-2017 by GBP/JPY because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 12:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: GBP/JPY
757s have the most power to go straight up.....of all widebody airliners...


Er, what?


The Boeing 757 is a mid-size, narrow-body twin-engine jet airliner that was designed and built by Boeing Commercial Airplanes.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 12:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: facedye
my reply to you on the above is that it's not evident beyond a shadow of a doubt that a 757 hit the pentagon. before you go into a laughing fit over the question of whether or not it was a missile, please think deeply about this fact.


The how did all the American Airlines aircraft parts get there? They use the magic Pentagon teleporter to strew them all over the scene?


"all" the American airlines parts? there were next to none when compared to basically any other air crash with similar crash mechanics.

either way, you raise a good question. I don't know how they got there. the 8+ CCTV cameras that hold the answers to your question are being withheld by the same organizations you seem to be confiding in.

maybe you should go and ask them, see if you have any luck and report back
pretty sure people have tried that before though. no such luck. womp womp.

..so I'm assuming your avoidance of my request to show me anything that proves a 757 hit the pentagon means that you can't show me anything that proves that?

..which means your only rebuttal is "but there were AA plane pieces found. if there are pieces from the crash on the ground, why should I assume that a 757 plane didn't hit the pentagon?"

to which of course I would respond with: the evidence at hand.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 12:54 PM
link   
Hey, yes but when ya compare to a 737.......

Im real picky on an airliner, if it's not Boeing, im not going....i swear an Airbus has more adverse yaw.....and is that caused by a vertical stabilizer being too small?a reply to: AugustusMasonicus



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 12:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: facedye
"all" the American airlines parts? there were next to none when compared to basically any other air crash with similar crash mechanics.

either way, you raise a good question. I don't know how they got there. the 8+ CCTV cameras that hold the answers to your question are being withheld by the same organizations you seem to be confiding in.


Until you, or anyone else, can tell me how the 'next to none' aircraft parts got there you will never indoctrinate me into the religion that is 9/11 conspiracy.


..so I'm assuming your avoidance of my request to show me anything that proves a 757 hit the pentagon means that you can't show me anything that proves that?


Yeah, I cite the 'next to none' aircraft parts that were identifiable as being from the American Airlines flight. You know, the one with the people on it that would have to be disappeared if it didn't actually hit the Pentagon.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 12:59 PM
link   
Oh, the post above me...

I saw a brand new Jet Ranger with the three color paint job......

With a video crew reporting the news.......they said not enough debris to fill a suitcase

They were early in the event, and the video was clear and plain...

So, I have the image in my volumes of memories, oh and they match Shanksville, another Jet Ranger with a new three color paint job....how they come from the factory

For a little detail, I have all of it....the trees at Shanksville had no debris on that video.....
edit on 12-3-2017 by GBP/JPY because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 01:02 PM
link   
a reply to: GBP/JPY

Cool story, bro. I saw a video about a guy who knew a guy that said the other guy in that video was wrong. This is the truth because I said it on the internet.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 01:05 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I'm not trying to indoctrinate you. never was, never will.

it's just that I'm liable to place more importance on the word of pilots, aviation experts and experienced professionals in the field over your suppositions.

thanks for admitting you can't prove it.

Pilots For 9/11 Truth Flight 77 Press Release

and.. if I may - it looks like the concept of planting evidence is beyond the realm of possibilities for you.

funny, how you're so confident that the United States government would never plant evidence at a crime scene.

your point of conviction on this is moot and unfortunately insignificant.

dare I say, it doesn't deny ignorance.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 01:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: facedye
thanks for admitting you can't prove it.


I don't have to prove anything, I am not the one saying things didn't happen. That's over on your side.


funny, how you're so confident that the United States government would never plant evidence at a crime scene.


Funny how you think they could plant a commercial airliner's parts all over the lawn and make it's crew and passengers disappear and no one, even 15 years later, has come forth with any evidence. This is the same government that cannot deliver the mail, botches basically everything it does and has more leaks than a sub with a screen door. Yeah, so believable.

Have you met my Lord and Savior Cthulhu? His religion is open to all.




edit on 12-3-2017 by AugustusMasonicus because: Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 01:19 PM
link   
Yes

But on that note...witnesses from five miles around and beyond should have seen the antics of a 757 coming little low making adjustments and this


Get ready

The airspeed, can I tell ya ....

The speed limit is 175 indicated.........no one sees an airliner doin more around town....I fudge it to 185. But get advised to maintain separation...that one came in fast, huh!
edit on 12-3-2017 by GBP/JPY because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 01:20 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

looks like you just want to pile on the conjecture when you have nothing to substantiate other than doubling down on your own questionable position.

and no, you don't *have* to prove a thing. sure would help you not look a little silly though
on that note, "the burden of proof is on you" is already a tired and old copypasta. it's a non-argument.

I don't think they definitely planted any evidence. I'm telling you I don't know how that happened. the reason I don't know how that happened is partly because of all the pilots and professionals who time and time again have stated that the maneuvers performed are either impossible or close to impossible. I'm also partly stating that because all of the official story reports clearly contradict one another, and leave out key points of the event that are crucial to understanding what happened.

but what do they know, right? their 10,000+ hours of flight time and experience must be useless and can be easily dismissed because there were small pieces of what looked like AA77 on the lawn.

give me a break lol.


edit on 12-3-2017 by facedye because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 01:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: facedye
I don't think they definitely planted any evidence.


Then why bring it up? Seems kinda pointless if you ask me.


...and can be easily dismissed because there were small pieces of what looked like AA77 on the lawn.


If those were not aircraft parts and only 'what looked like AA77 ' what were they and how did they get there? And 'I don't know' is a cop out answer.


give me a break lol.


No. Breaks are for closers.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 01:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: scubagravy

So if you drive a car into two different types of solid objects it's going to leave identical damage? The Pentagon was made out of reinforced concrete, while the WTC towers were hollow steel shells. The impact of the planes broke the joins on the steel plates of the Towers.

That hole wasn't the impact hole, it was the exit hole.



What poor terminology..something ENTERING a building is NOT EXITING



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 01:32 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

if that's your point of view, then "the burden of proof is on you" is a cop out answer as well. one of the worst ones, actually.

I have a few suppositions as to how they got there, but that's all they are. suppositions. I don't base my beliefs on suppositions. I can't say the same for you.



Then why bring it up? Seems kinda pointless if you ask me.


because it's more plausible than believing flight 77 actually crashed into the pentagon, based on all of the evidence available.



new topics

top topics


active topics

 
64
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join