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.

 

For the undying 9/11 MORONIC JET FUEL ARGUMENT

page: 27
24
<< 24  25  26    28 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 04:10 PM
link   
a reply to: firerescue


You do realize don't you, that the relevance and point of NORTHWOODS is that the government spooks would seriously plan such an operation in such detail, NOT that they carried it out.

Everybody knows they did not carry out the plan, but we all know they PLANNED to do it, just as some other spooks PLANNED the events of 11 September.

Hopefully that is not too nuanced for you to grasp.




posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 04:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander




just as some other spooks PLANNED the events of 11 September.

Prove it.

Others have had 16 years to prove it and failed.
Give it your best shot.



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 05:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: firerescue


You do realize don't you, that the relevance and point of NORTHWOODS is that the government spooks would seriously plan such an operation in such detail, NOT that they carried it out.

Everybody knows they did not carry out the plan, but we all know they PLANNED to do it, just as some other spooks PLANNED the events of 11 September.

Hopefully that is not too nuanced for you to grasp.


What does this have to do with there is no evidence of CD at the WTC?



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 05:54 PM
link   
a reply to: madenusa

You did not answer the question?

Imagine what?

There is a reason millions are spent on the research, development, and care of structural steel fire proofing? Fire proofing knocked off by the jet impacts?

That Silverstein actually lost money from 9/11, and that he did not make money?

ThAt hours before the collapse of WTC7, its documented that WTC 7 was showing signs it would fail?

Can you actually refute and rebuttal this piece that explains “looks like CD” is a false narrative?
www.implosionworld.com...

If it was not impact damage and fires leading to mechanical failure, what theory should supersede?

Nukes?
Mythical fizzle no flash explosives?
Fraudulent thermite?
Dustification?

Don’t get mad at me because the truth movement only offers out of context arguments, hiding of facts, lies, and pseudoscience.
edit on 17-12-2017 by neutronflux because: Fixed more



posted on Dec, 19 2017 @ 04:12 AM
link   
a reply to: madenusa

Here are some statements from people inside the Pentagon.


"Most of the wreckage was in very small pieces and most was carried out in drywall buckets. Some was large enough to identify -- including the tail number on the aircraft. I don't think there's any doubt about what it was and who owned it." (From a letter by an employee of the Pentagon)



"DC Matthew" wrote about his work inside the Pentagon: "After about 15 minutes shoveling up chunks of carpet and brick, I found a piece of circuit board, and a chunk of the plane. When I say a chunk of it, I mean a piece that was about 3 oz of twisted aluminum. The biggest piece I've seen so far is about the size of a refrigerator."



While searching through wreckage inside the building, firefighters Carlton Burkhammer and Brian Moravitz "spotted an intact seat from the plane's cockpit with a chunk of the floor still attached." Burkhammer also "spotted lime-green pieces from the interior of the plane" within the building.



ARFF Captain Michael Defina said: "The only way you could tell that an aircraft was inside was that we saw pieces of the nose gear."



Navy Lt. Commander David Tarantino described the A-E Drive punchout hole: "They found an area where fire surrounded a hole in a wall that was blown out. They heard cries from people who were trapped and saw a plane tire."



"The nose of the plane just barely jutted out into A/E Drive (the street that runs around the inside of the building). It made a perfectly round, 5-foot hole in the wall. There was one set of landing gear (presumably from the nose) out in A/E Drive. But most of the plane's skin was in pieces not much bigger than a piece of notebook paper." (From a letter by an employee of the Pentagon)


All of those and many more from Here



posted on Dec, 19 2017 @ 06:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: firerescue
a reply to: madenusa



Operation Northwoods operatives to commit acts of terrorism against American civilians and military targets, blaming it on the Cuban government, and using it to justify a war against Cuba.


NORTHWOODS - Ah Yes, the favorite meme of the conspiracy loon ....

If don't have anything else, just go to Northwoods

You do realize when the plan was presented to JFK, his response was "This is F*ck*ng nuts!" and rejected it

The author of the plan, Joints Chief General Lyman Lemnitzer , was denied another term on Joints Chiefs and
sent to Europe as Nato commander

Kennedy wanted him out of Washington .......
that was JFK what about Bush?
we will never know...



posted on Dec, 19 2017 @ 06:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: firerescue


You do realize don't you, that the relevance and point of NORTHWOODS is that the government spooks would seriously plan such an operation in such detail, NOT that they carried it out.

Everybody knows they did not carry out the plan, but we all know they PLANNED to do it, just as some other spooks PLANNED the events of 11 September.

Hopefully that is not too nuanced for you to grasp.
you realize that was with a different president ,im just
outside looking in .
What if it would have been Bush instead of JFK it all fell right into place like they planned it over 50 years ago.
edit on 19-12-2017 by madenusa because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 20 2017 @ 03:35 AM
link   
a reply to: madenusa

Woukd you like to actually discuss physical evidence, or civilian accounts at the pentagon by the scores attesting to a large commercial jet.

Again, you only have innuendo and false arguments.
The Pentagon Attack: Problems with Theories Alternative to Large Plane Impact
First Published January, 2011. Version 3, April 2016.
By John D. Wyndham (PhD, Physics)
www.scientistsfor911truth.org...



posted on Dec, 20 2017 @ 06:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: madenusa

Woukd you like to actually discuss physical evidence, or civilian accounts at the pentagon by the scores attesting to a large commercial jet.

Again, you only have innuendo and false arguments.
The Pentagon Attack: Problems with Theories Alternative to Large Plane Impact
First Published January, 2011. Version 3, April 2016.
By John D. Wyndham (PhD, Physics)
www.scientistsfor911truth.org...


The only people reporting they saw an airliner strike the pentagon were employees of that organization, and they say what they are told to say.

All the civilians in the area who were on record reported the low flying aircraft, in the wrong location and on the wrong track to hit where the explosions took place.

Your propaganda efforts are superb.



posted on Dec, 20 2017 @ 06:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander


Omar Campo, a Salvadorean, was cutting the grass on the other side of the road when the plane flew over his head.

"It was a passenger plane. I think an American Airways plane," Mr Campo said. "I was cutting the grass and it came in screaming over my head. I felt the impact. The whole ground shook and the whole area was full of fire. I could never imagine I would see anything like that here."

Afework Hagos, a computer programmer, was on his way to work but stuck in a traffic jam near the Pentagon when the plane flew over. "There was a huge screaming noise and I got out of the car as the plane came over. Everybody was running away in different directions. It was tilting its wings up and down like it was trying to balance. It hit some lampposts on the way in."

A pilot who saw the impact, Tim Timmerman, said it had been an American Airways 757. "It added power on its way in," he said. "The nose hit, and the wings came forward and it went up in a fireball."


The Guardian



posted on Dec, 20 2017 @ 11:31 AM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy


"Tim Timmerman" sounds like a fake made-up name if I ever heard one.

(just kidding/stirring the pot).



posted on Dec, 20 2017 @ 11:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Salander

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: madenusa

Woukd you like to actually discuss physical evidence, or civilian accounts at the pentagon by the scores attesting to a large commercial jet.

Again, you only have innuendo and false arguments.
The Pentagon Attack: Problems with Theories Alternative to Large Plane Impact
First Published January, 2011. Version 3, April 2016.
By John D. Wyndham (PhD, Physics)
www.scientistsfor911truth.org...


The only people reporting they saw an airliner strike the pentagon were employees of that organization, and they say what they are told to say.

All the civilians in the area who were on record reported the low flying aircraft, in the wrong location and on the wrong track to hit where the explosions took place.

Your propaganda efforts are superb.


Thanks to butcherguy!

Do you think or research before you post?

And.....

Is it a true statement that I have posted civilian accounts of a commercial jet hitting the pentagon in the past for your benefit.

And is it a true statement I have linked to spreadsheets containing large amounts of accounts of a large commercial jet hitting the pentagon.


Why do you bring false arguments to the table?

What is it like being suckered by the truth movement?



edit on 20-12-2017 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Dec, 20 2017 @ 02:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Know of a guy first name "Goof" - a Dutch name

Also know of someone named George George ........



posted on Dec, 20 2017 @ 03:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: firerescue
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People


Also know of someone named George George ........


Actually so do I. A Greek guy from Pittsburgh.



posted on Dec, 20 2017 @ 04:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander




The only people reporting they saw an airliner strike the pentagon were employees of that organization, and they say what they are told to say.

Proof please.
Or should we just put this straight into the innuendo can now?



posted on Dec, 22 2017 @ 07:33 AM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy


Thanks, I read that testimony many years ago. Close examination revealed that from the location in traffic, and from where Campos was mowing, the actual point of supposed impact could not be seen.

There is no question that an airliner flew over the area. The question is whether or not it actually struck the building.

This testimony is misleading, as they could not see the point where it supposedly struck. Further, from the work done by Citizen Investigative Team, those people who happened to be at the CITGO station and were willing to go on record, all saw an airliner fly by, but neither could they see the supposed point of impact. The airplane they saw fly by was on the wrong trajectory to have struck that point, and the wrong trajectory to have hit the famous light poles.

The Devil is in the details, as is so often the case.



posted on Dec, 22 2017 @ 07:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: Salander




The only people reporting they saw an airliner strike the pentagon were employees of that organization, and they say what they are told to say.

Proof please.
Or should we just put this straight into the innuendo can now?


Because POTUS Bush refused to conduct a proper investigation into the events of the day (it took almost 2 years before the commission was seated), many private citizens began their own investigations, on their own nickel. That is the case of the Citizen Investigative Team, and many others.

If you want to learn about what they discovered, you should visit Pilots For 911 Truth. That is all documented and explained there. If you are truly curious, please visit that site. It contains a wealth of information.



posted on Dec, 22 2017 @ 08:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: butcherguy


Thanks, I read that testimony many years ago. Close examination revealed that from the location in traffic, and from where Campos was mowing, the actual point of supposed impact could not be seen.

There is no question that an airliner flew over the area. The question is whether or not it actually struck the building.

This testimony is misleading, as they could not see the point where it supposedly struck. Further, from the work done by Citizen Investigative Team, those people who happened to be at the CITGO station and were willing to go on record, all saw an airliner fly by, but neither could they see the supposed point of impact. The airplane they saw fly by was on the wrong trajectory to have struck that point, and the wrong trajectory to have hit the famous light poles.

The Devil is in the details, as is so often the case.

They saw the plane coming in low, so low that people were abandoning their vehicles to seek safety. The plane flew towards the Pentagon and an explosion was heard immediately afterward, then fire and smoke.
The passengers of the plane are all still missing.

It all seems to draw a pretty clear picture, and it isn't that the plane went somewhere else where the people were taken to some undisclosed location and either murdered or put in some underground prison, while a missile was launched at the Pentagon.

The plane hit the Pentagon and all of the passengers on board died in the crash.



posted on Dec, 22 2017 @ 08:23 AM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy


Tell that fairy tale to your children and grandchildren. I'm too old and too well informed for such fantasy.



posted on Dec, 22 2017 @ 11:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: butcherguy


Tell that fairy tale to your children and grandchildren. I'm too old and too well informed for such fantasy.


You have been present with numerous lists of individuals that detail their given accounts. It’s up to you to provide evidence that discredits their accounts. Might start with a credible explanation of what caused the damage at the pentagon if it was not a large commercial jet.

Just facts, no rants. No innuendo.




top topics



 
24
<< 24  25  26    28 >>

log in

join