Military planes in 911

Yeah ok ultima. Its me that is being stupid. It is me that is beyond your help. Never mind the evidence throughout the last few pages.

Good night, god bless.

Ok, then IF there is a conspiracy about it, why pretend that it was a 757 when there are so many cameras around? Like he said, one person in the wrong place, taking a picture, and the whole thing is blown wide open.

Originally posted by waynos

Yeah ok ultima. Its me that is being stupid. It is me that is beyond your help. Never mind the evidence throughout the last few pages.

Good night, god bless.

What evidence, you have proven nothing. You do not have any evidence to back up your theory of the parts being from a 757.

I was talking of the evidence of your own stupidity which is there for all to see. No parts numbers needed for that old fruit.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Ok, then IF there is a conspiracy about it, why pretend that it was a 757 when there are so many cameras around? Like he said, one person in the wrong place, taking a picture, and the whole thing is blown wide open.

What conspiracy, since when is finding the truth a conspiracy ?

We have seen no pics even when the FBI confiscated all photos and equipment from the military people who were first on the scene and the FBI stated they took thousands of crime scene photos.

www.fbi.gov...

Working in conjunction with New York City agencies and authorities, we helped process over 1.8 million tons of debris for investigative leads and victim identification and took more than 45,000 crime scene photographs.

[edit on 30-3-2007 by ULTIMA1]

So if you have complete faith in the FBI, and are so sure it was not a conspiracy, why the hell do you doubt that it was a 757 that really crashed?

Yet again, what would be the point of lieing about the model of aeroplane involved?

Well if they say it was a 757, and it WASN'T then isn't that a conspiracy? And if it WASN'T a 757, and not a conspiracy then you're saying the FBI is so incompetent that they can't even figure that out with all the wreckage that they found on the scene.

Originally posted by waynos
So if you have complete faith in the FBI, and are so sure it was not a conspiracy, why the hell do you doubt that it was a 757 that really crashed?

Yet again, what would be the point of lieing about the model of aeroplane involved?

I only doubt that its was a 757 because we do not have all the evidence and reports. From my education and background i see some things wrong with the scene and the official story and so i am doing research to try to find out what really happened.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Well if they say it was a 757, and it WASN'T then isn't that a conspiracy? And if it WASN'T a 757, and not a conspiracy then you're saying the FBI is so incompetent that they can't even figure that out with all the wreckage that they found on the scene.

Well the fact is we do not know 100% what hit the pentagon because we do not have all the information. From my education and background i see some things wrong with the scene.

The FBI did not take over the crash site at the Pentagon and make it a crime scene for 10 days, then after stating it would take 30 days to work the crime scene they handed it back to the military in 5 days.

Do you also doubt that a 747 crashed on Lockerbie or that a VC-10 was bombed by terroroists in the Lebanon? Or have you examined every last iota of evidence in other cases?

You must have a reason to doubt it was 757, otherwise why would you? Thats silly. I don't agree with the people who are sure it wasn't a 757, but I recognize that they believe in reasons for their doubt. You appear to doubt this one just because you have chosen to. Thats a bit random isn't it?

'something wrong with the crash site (which is extremely vague) leads you to suspect it might not have been A 757? OK, if thats what you want.

Originally posted by waynos
Do you also doubt that a 747 crashed on Lockerbie or that a VC-10 was bombed by terroroists in the Lebanon? Or have you examined every last iota of evidence in other cases?

'something wrong with the crash site (which is extremely vague) leads you to suspect it might not have been A 757? OK, if thats what you want.

Well for 1 we have the reports from PAM AM 103, Flight 800 and even KAL flight 007 and most other aircraft crime scenes. But we do not have the reports on any of the crime scenes on 911.

I did not say it was not a 757, i stated that the scene did not look right. Missing debris field and no correct crime scene set up.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Ok, then IF there is a conspiracy about it, why pretend that it was a 757 when there are so many cameras around? Like he said, one person in the wrong place, taking a picture, and the whole thing is blown wide open.

What would happen? Well, since we have been trained from childhood to believe our authorities (kind of like the people that swallow the official story completely) and we would be told that the videos and pictures are fake in order to try and, well, create a conspiracy.

Like our great leader said, "Let us not believe in any crazy conspiracy theories" because that would question them and that is not allowed now either because he also said this "if you are not with us, then you are with the terrorists".
That's why we haven't seen anything and never will until we hold them liable for what they did via the court systems. WE are the government not them. The people made this country and it will be the people that save it.

Why are thier no reports on any of the aircraft crime scenes on 911 ?

I can not find any FBI or NTSB reports for crime scenes on 911.

[edit on 31-3-2007 by ULTIMA1]

You say there are no reports, a quick googling reveals web pages that say the same as you and others that say the reports don't go deep enough and others that the reports are inadequate - All on conspiracy sites. So which is it? No reports, or inadequate reports? Who is lying?

Originally posted by waynos
You say there are no reports, a quick googling reveals web pages that say the same as you and others that say the reports don't go deep enough and others that the reports are inadequate - All on conspiracy sites. So which is it? No reports, or inadequate reports? Who is lying?

I can access government sites, i can not find any official FBI and NTSB crime scene reports.

Thier are sites that have information but they do not show the actual reports, please learn what the actual reports are.

[edit on 31-3-2007 by ULTIMA1]

Ok here is some proof that the Vulcan tankers were used in the falklands.

Some Vulcan bombers were also pressed into service as tankers to give additional temporary tanker capacity and the RAF’s Nimrod MR 2 maritime patrol aircraft had to be given refuelling probes to perform their tasks in the South Atlantic.

Here is the document that the quote is from.
i114.photobucket.com...

Here is the page the quote is on.
i114.photobucket.com...

replied on the other thread as to why it is no such thing.

Originally posted by waynos
replied on the other thread as to why it is no such thing.

You might want to check again, i have proved it.

Vulcan B.2(K), first flight - Woodford, Manchester 18 June 1982 (XH561)


So, no. You have not.



[edit on 2-4-2007 by waynos]

Originally posted by waynos

Vulcan B.2(K), first flight - Woodford, Manchester 18 June 1982 (XH561)
So, no. You have not.
[edit on 2-4-2007 by waynos]

So what government documents will you believe?