It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
You do realize the plan struck the Pentagon on the side facing one of the busiest highways in the nation during morning rush-hour and there are dozens of eye-witnesses (if not hundreds) who saw the plane (including my brother). The plane flew low-and-fast over the highway before hitting the Pentagon.
Originally posted by deltaboy
depends on how fast it was goin bsbray. not to mention the type of material the craft is crashing into. wen u look at the video large debris are comin out. compare to that craft in yer pic that was goin like really realy fast.
Originally posted by HowardRoark
So now, instead of “where are the wings?” we get “where did this piece come from?”
Originally posted by billybob
look into my eyes. you are getting sleepy, ...very ssllllleeeeeeeepy.
you will not connect the dots.
you will not notice that there is suspicious, strange, contradictory data concerning 911. you will not notice that the only story that really makes any sense is not the official lie.
you will isolate every 911 factoid in your mind, and not cross correlate or look for inconsistencies. any inconsistencies will be explained as alternatively 'incompetence', or 'systemic error'. only establishment established facts shall be considered to be facts by you. even if they are erroneous. if the different branches of establishment facts do not mesh, it is to be explained as 'incompetence' or 'systemic error'. if one branch is found to be hiding or fabricating data, it is to be explained as 'incompetence' or 'systemic error'.
you know nothing. you are not qualified to know anything. your thinking is flawed.
oh yeah, and from now on, whenever i say 'terror', you will give me all your money, and all your familiy's money for the next five generations, and yours and their freedom.
you are awake.
bring it on.
Originally posted by bsbray11
I'll have no trouble admitting there is no equivalent of the angular momentum problem for the events that unfolded at the Pentagon (ie, nothing conclusive either way, but simply circumstantial, and thus my lack of any definite position on the issue, even though I suppose I should take this as another opportunity to state that I am inclined to believe a large aircraft struck the Pentagon), but unless there has been some conclusive evidence of a 757 released, your sarcasm can be used on either side.
I suppose I should take this as another opportunity to state that I am inclined to believe a large aircraft struck the Pentagon
Originally posted by bsbray11
And I would appreciate it especially if you didn't try to play with emotions (ie, family references). Emotions don't need to be dragged up. We all know that people died, too, btw. Just thought I'd like to mention that before your next post.
[edit on 10-10-2005 by bsbray11]
What I do doubt is how positive of an identification they could make of a plane going about 500 miles per hour across their field of vision for only a few seconds, and just preceding a very traumatic event, especially with so much explicit talk afterwards of a 757.
Have you seen the studies showing how horribly off witnesses can be, even when being very open and sincere? Maybe you can prove eyewitness accounts to be far more accurate than currently held? Or maybe that people you know somehow are more qualified as witnesses, simply because you know them?