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.
Tell us the vehicle, tell us the speed. But witnesses prove you wrong, and until you prove all the evidence wrong, you are stuck with a fantasy.
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
Originally posted by beachnut
Yes the 2001 interviews make your story false.
No they do not.
They NEVER contradict the north side claim in the least in fact Brooks further supports it when he claims the plane came on his "left" since we know that he would have backed into his parking space as cops always do.
Plus the FLIGHT TRACK you present is impossible to do. I told you. Everything you post the flight track it is impossible to do. Physics proves you wrong over and over again as you post a flight path impossible.
Wrong.
You have no idea of the speed OR the type of military modified plane this was.
There is nothing "impossible" about the flight path.
Now....care to comment on the new evidence?
What do you think of Steve Chaconas' testimony?
Originally posted by beachnut
Tell us the vehicle, tell us the speed.
No decoy plane! Sorry, you have no witnesses for the flyover. But Steve saw the C-130, good job.
Originally posted by beachnut
For your fantasy to work you need to prove the FDR was altered (group 4 of secret people who made up all 24 hours of FDR data that looks just like 77 for days before 9/11; all the flight are on the FDR for 24 hours! They match exactly what 77 did!)
For your fantasy to work you need to prove the FDR was planted in the Pentagon (group 5 of secret people who planted the FDR)
Originally posted by jthomas
Nothing. As we all know, one does not need any video or photos to know that AA 77 hit the Pentagon. Why you think we would is a measure of your ignorance.
Originally posted by Griff
Originally posted by jthomas
Nothing. As we all know, one does not need any video or photos to know that AA 77 hit the Pentagon. Why you think we would is a measure of your ignorance.
So much for your last 2 days worth of ranting and raving about burden of proof huh?
Oh, I get it now, it only pertains to the "truthers" and NOT the government?
Originally posted by megaman1234
reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT
Oh and Craig - does your witness know for sure it was a commercial jetliner or not? A few posts up - you make the point that we have no way of knowing what kind of modified military jet it is. But then 10 posts later you say that this guy knows "for sure" that it was a commercial airliner.
So does he or doesn't he?
If he doesn't - then that hurts not only his credibility but your as well - correct?