IS AE911 On The Ropes ???

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Had this discussion hundreds of times. A person is considered innocent ( telling the truth ) until proven gility or wrong.

Take the pentagon. Making it about the government is a false argument.

Over a hundred plus eyewitnesses, many civilians, attest to a large commercial jet hitting the pentagon.

Now would be the time to create a logical argument, backed by evidence, to discredit the eyewitness. Are you saying the are lying? Theyare wrong? Based on what? Then what caused the damage at the pentagon? Based on what evidence?

A jet was tracked by radar from take off until it was at the pentagon. Witnesses and contact evidence pick up where the radar data dropped off.

List of eyewitness accounts...
www.scientistsfor911truth.org...

Then you need to provide a more credible case to supersede a large jet caused the damage at the pentagon.

Cool. Release the security videos once and for all to end any other speculation.

Oh, wait...

originally posted by: Thejaybird

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Had this discussion hundreds of times. A person is considered innocent ( telling the truth ) until proven gility or wrong.

Take the pentagon. Making it about the government is a false argument.

Over a hundred plus eyewitnesses, many civilians, attest to a large commercial jet hitting the pentagon.

Now would be the time to create a logical argument, backed by evidence, to discredit the eyewitness. Are you saying the are lying? Theyare wrong? Based on what? Then what caused the damage at the pentagon? Based on what evidence?

A jet was tracked by radar from take off until it was at the pentagon. Witnesses and contact evidence pick up where the radar data dropped off.

List of eyewitness accounts...
www.scientistsfor911truth.org...

Then you need to provide a more credible case to supersede a large jet caused the damage at the pentagon.

Oh, wait...

...they already did

a reply to: Thejaybird

Can you discredit the scores of civilians that attest to a large jet hitting the pentagon? The radar data.

And as pointed out, they have released the video. I have quoted two sources in other threads that all video related to flight 77 has been released.

Thanks for a false argument.

a reply to: neutronflux


You cannot prove that scores of civilians that attest to a large jet hitting the pentagon, and we both know it.

The only people who have claimed to have seen an airliner strike the building worked there, in a society where one man lies and the other swears to it.

The only civilians on record were not in a position to see the strike that never happened. Those at the Citgo station all agreed that the only airliner they saw was on a trajectory to hit the building that contradicted where the notorious light poles lay.

It's such a myth.

a reply to: neutronflux


The evidence that the towers were brought down by CD is ample. That is why AE911 is so vilified here by you.

In order to see and understand that evidence, one must be curious with an open mind, and have a fundamental understanding of the laws of physics and building construction including fire codes.

Kevin Ryan spoke the truth early on, and was fired for it. Was he the first whistleblower regarding 911? Perhaps.

Sorry, had a moment of confusion on my part...

Word of the day; existentialism.

It is here that existentialism locates the singularity of existence and identifies what is irreducible in the first-person stance. At the same time, authenticity does not hold out some specific way of life as a norm; that is, it does not distinguish between the projects that I might choose. Instead, it governs the manner in which I am engaged in such projects—either as “my own” or as “what one does,” transparently or opaquely.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: neutronflux


The evidence that the towers were brought down by CD is ample. That is why AE911 is so vilified here by you.

In order to see and understand that evidence, one must be curious with an open mind, and have a fundamental understanding of the laws of physics and building construction including fire codes.

Kevin Ryan spoke the truth early on, and was fired for it. Was he the first whistleblower regarding 911? Perhaps.

Woukd you care to cite Ryan’s actual evidence for CD. Or is this another false argument?

a reply to: Salander

Would you like to cite the physical evidence of CD?

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: neutronflux


You cannot prove that scores of civilians that attest to a large jet hitting the pentagon, and we both know it.

The only people who have claimed to have seen an airliner strike the building worked there, in a society where one man lies and the other swears to it.

The only civilians on record were not in a position to see the strike that never happened. Those at the Citgo station all agreed that the only airliner they saw was on a trajectory to hit the building that contradicted where the notorious light poles lay.

It's such a myth.

You ignore radar data. The additional contact damage from the annex anntana, the clipped vegetation, where a jet engine hit a low concrete wall, and the items in the construction yard. You ignore the articles from Scientists for 9/11 Truth that outline the contact damage by flight 77 is constant with the flight path. Why does your narrative require hiding of facts and using evidence out of context? Do you purposely try to make conspiracists look bad?

a reply to: Salander

You cannot prove that scores of civilians that attest to a large jet hitting the pentagon, and we both know it.

The only people who have claimed to have seen an airliner strike the building worked there, in a society where one man lies and the other swears to it.

That is another ridiculous statement.
You are burying your head in the sand just to keep your conspiracy myth alive.

Please show us proof of CD.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: neutronflux


You cannot prove that scores of civilians that attest to a large jet hitting the pentagon, and we both know it.

The only people who have claimed to have seen an airliner strike the building worked there, in a society where one man lies and the other swears to it.
.

More false arguments and hiding of facts by you. The 10 or twelve witnesseses that claim a large commercial jet approached from the north, the majority agree the jet crashed into the pentagon. This is in contrast to the 100 plus witnesses that attest to a large commercial jet following the path recorded by radar hitting the pentagon.

Not all witnesses worked for the government.

Why does your narrative take hiding facts and false information.

Eyewitnesses Accounts
911research.wtc7.net...


Anlauf, Deb & Jeff
Mrs. Deb Anlauf, resident of Colfax, Wisconsin, was in her 14th floor of the Sheraton Hotel [located 1.6 mile from the explosion], (immediately west of the Navy Annex) when she heard a "loud roar": Suddenly I saw this plane right outside my window. You felt like you could touch it; it was that close. It was just incredible. "Then it shot straight across from where we are and flew right into the Pentagon. It was just this huge fireball that crashed into the wall (of the Pentagon). When it hit, the whole hotel shook. (...) Jeff didn't feel the impact of the plane crash as directly as his wife. He was attending an environmental meeting on the second floor of the hotel when the plane struck the Pentagon. About five seconds before the crash, Jeff said he heard the sound of "tin being dropped," likely as construction workers building an addition to the hotel saw the plane and dropped their building materials. "Then, about 5 seconds later, the whole hotel shook," Jeff recalled. "I could feel it moving. We said 'Oh, my gosh, what's going on?' "
www.leadertelegram.com...

Campo
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."
www.guardian.co.uk...

a reply to: Salander

More documented witnesses accounts...

www.scientistsfor911truth.org...

a reply to: Salander

So it was impossible for the light poles to be sent tumbling when struck, and roll and bounce about when hitting the ground? Why does your narrative require ignoring reality?

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: Salander

You cannot prove that scores of civilians that attest to a large jet hitting the pentagon, and we both know it.

The only people who have claimed to have seen an airliner strike the building worked there, in a society where one man lies and the other swears to it.

That is another ridiculous statement.
You are burying your head in the sand just to keep your conspiracy myth alive.

Please show us proof of CD.

Show me how ridiculous my statement is. Prove the official claims are true. You will not because you cannot.

a reply to: Salander

Do yo have a credible theory to what caused the damage at the pentagon to supersede the fact a large commercial jet hit the pentagon?

What remains were released to the surviving family members of flight 77’s passengers and crew.

Can you explain the contact damage from flight 77 you ignore.

Radar data tracked flight 77 from take off to the point of no return in its flight into the pentagon.

Going to answer why you have to hide evidence to create your false narrative?

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: neutronflux

The only people who have claimed to have seen an airliner strike the building worked there, in a society where one man lies and the other swears to it.
.

Another statement by you totally void of fact, and proven wrong by documented statements you cannot discredit. Statements made by civilians that were independent of the pentagon, outlining your false arguments. A quoted example that you are willing to promote intellectual dishonest arguments, while avoiding questions leveled at you, and all your questions/concerns are answered with credible facts.

a reply to: Salander

Prove the official claims are true. You will not because you cannot.

That's what I mean by your head in the sand.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Salander

Do yo have a credible theory to what caused the damage at the pentagon to supersede the fact a large commercial jet hit the pentagon?

What remains were released to the surviving family members of flight 77’s passengers and crew.

Can you explain the contact damage from flight 77 you ignore.

Radar data tracked flight 77 from take off to the point of no return in its flight into the pentagon.

Going to answer why you have to hide evidence to create your false narrative?

My bet is that if the truth could be known, I have been involved in post crash analysis in more cases than you have.

What the public was shown at the pentagon was not consistent in any way with the crash of an airliner, same as the Pennsylvania site. Nothing there was consistent with a crashed airliner, yet all these years later you are so very concerned that I believe there was. I can only laugh at you NF. Your insistence that AA77 crashed there shows some measure of desperation, and it's easy to understand why.

The government provided Flight Data Recorder was not even assigned to an airframe. You people are hilarious.

originally posted by: Salander

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Salander

Do yo have a credible theory to what caused the damage at the pentagon to supersede the fact a large commercial jet hit the pentagon?

What remains were released to the surviving family members of flight 77’s passengers and crew.

Can you explain the contact damage from flight 77 you ignore.

Radar data tracked flight 77 from take off to the point of no return in its flight into the pentagon.

Going to answer why you have to hide evidence to create your false narrative?

My bet is that if the truth could be known, I have been involved in post crash analysis in more cases than you have.

What the public was shown at the pentagon was not consistent in any way with the crash of an airliner, same as the Pennsylvania site. Nothing there was consistent with a crashed airliner, yet all these years later you are so very concerned that I believe there was. I can only laugh at you NF. Your insistence that AA77 crashed there shows some measure of desperation, and it's easy to understand why.

The government provided Flight Data Recorder was not even assigned to an airframe. You people are hilarious.

Baby steps. What does a number have to do with the only credible explanation of the damage at the pentagon is a large commercial jet. What does a number have to do with actual radar tracking the jet from take off to the pentagon. The airframe thing that is debunked? What happen to you ranting about the contact damage caused by flight 77.

Here is you list.....

Why does your narrative need to be based on hiding of facts and false arguments?

The false argument that only people that worked at the pentagon attest to a large commercial jet impact.


More false arguments and hiding of facts by you. The 10 or twelve witnesseses that claim a large commercial jet approached from the north, the majority agree the jet crashed into the pentagon. This is in contrast to the 100 plus witnesses that attest to a large commercial jet following the path recorded by radar hitting the pentagon.

Do yo have a credible theory to what caused the damage at the pentagon to supersede the fact a large commercial jet hit the pentagon?

What remains were released to the surviving family members of flight 77’s passengers and crew.

Can you explain the contact damage from flight 77 you ignore.

Radar data tracked flight 77 from take off to the point of no return in its flight into the pentagon.

Going to answer why you have to hide evidence to create your false narrative?

a reply to: Salander

Another false argument “What the public was shown at the pentagon was not consistent in any way with the crash of an airliner, “.

This has been repeatedly posted for you. With no rebuttal....

The Pentagon Attack: Problems with Theories Alternative to Large Plane Impact
First Published January, 2011. Version 3, April 2016.

www.scientistsfor911truth.org...



Conclusion
Clearly, the main theory, that a large plane such as a Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon, is by far the most plausible theory compared with the alternative theories. The main theory still has some unanswered questions, but it is much stronger than any of the alternative theories.
At present (November 2011) the available evidence points strongly to the main theory, and away from all the alternative theories which would require difficult explanations for staged events.