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.

 

Pentagon DNA Evidence....Is it Possible?

page: 19
4
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 07:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Damocles
people will say missile but miss so many obvious reasons why it almost couldnt be just because that would spoil their theories


Well if i was going to hit the Pentagon i would have used a missile first to get through the reinfored walls becasue i know an aluminum airframe is not going to casue to much penatration.

The fly the plane in after the missile to cause maximum damage.




posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 08:29 AM
link   
have you ever been asked the question "which is heavier, a ton of bricks or a ton of feathers?"

the aircraft may have been aluminum, but it was many tons of it travelling very fast. that wall had no chance (and i dont care to see the F4 video again ive seen it. it didnt weigh as much as the airliner)

but thats a point aside.

IF it had been a missile how was it able to penetrate, detonate, and NOT litter the entire lawn with building debris? typically explosions are omnidirectional. of course one could argue that it was a shaped charge in the warhead. ok, then how did it tear out the outside wall where it hit and then blow a small hole in the opposite wall? the shape charge wouldnt have done that.

IF it had been a missile, what caused the massive fireball upon impact? that was obviously a fuel explosion and not HE because we all know that the only time HE makes a fireball like that is in hollywood

IF it was a missile why was there such a large fire that took a good deal of time to put out? an HE detonation would have gone off and the overpressure and ensuing vacuum would have made such a large fire difficult even with the amount of paper present in those offices. yes, a fire could have started but not that large that fast. it would have started smaller and grown so its likely it would have never gotten as big as it was. the fire at the pentagon was obviously the result of some accellerant.

what missile in the US or any other arsenal could have penetrated the outside, reinforced wall and still gone in to detonate inside the building? they dont make "bunker buster" cruise missiles, or any other type. sure, some of the new SMAW weapons can penetrate cinderblocks but thats a max of 3" when you remove the deadspace inside the block (maybe 4" but thats being generous)

but mostly, again, why wasnt most of the outter wall and parts of the roof spread out in a circular area from the blast site? or at the very least, how did most of the outside wall at the impact site end up inside the building in such a large area (or at least very close to the wall) even if one was to say that the warhead was small enough to just damage the area where it entered so it would cause the roof etc above it to collapse and not throw debris all over, that would almost negate itself due to the size of the impact area damage. and if someone was to argue that it was a massive shaped charge that detonated before impacting the wall...that doesnt account for the massive fuel fireball.

so, for me, missile theory holds NO water



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 09:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Damocles
IF it had been a missile how was it able to penetrate, detonate, and NOT litter the entire lawn with building debris?


I did not say it was a missile. I said if i was going to hit the Pentagon i would use a missile.



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 09:11 AM
link   
WHY are there NO photographs..NONE, that show ANY bodies of passengers? WHY not ONE bit of proof outside of the controlled government nonsense? There is NO verification at all, no proof whatsoever, that DNA that was collected at the Pentagon was in fact the remains of passengers on the flight that allegedly hit the Pentagon. None.

ONE fireman says he saw one body strapped to a seat, and we are supposed to accept that as fact? Give us a break. Where is the photo? Where is ANY photo that proves their fairy tale? Not where we can see it, thats for sure. If the official story were true, the Feds would be falling all over themselves presenting hard evidence, but instead all we get are stories from non-entities who allege things that are not proven anywhere else.

If one adds up even a fraction of all the ' inexplicable anomalies' that are part and parcel of this event, one cannot come away believing any part of the official story. It is so plain and clear...why can't some people grasp the obvious? Again, either a person is in a state of deep denial, or they have some nefarious interest in supporting the Lie...no other choice.



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 09:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by Damocles
IF it had been a missile how was it able to penetrate, detonate, and NOT litter the entire lawn with building debris?


I did not say it was a missile. I said if i was going to hit the Pentagon i would use a missile.



So you are saying there was no missile involved then, correct? Just a plane? Want to make sure everyone understands what you are saying...



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 09:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Disclosed Want to make sure everyone understands what you are saying...


I want to make sure everyone understands that you do not have any report, photo or video of Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon.

So how can you believe the official story ?



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 09:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

I want to make sure everyone understands that you do not have any report, photo or video of Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon.

So how can you believe the official story ?



But you don't believe it was a missile, correct? That is what I was asking...based on your statement a couple of posts ago.



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 09:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Disclosed
But you don't believe it was a missile, correct? .


But you have no evidence that it was Flight 77, Correct?



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 09:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

I want to make sure everyone understands that you do not have any report, photo or video of Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon.

So how can you believe the official story ?



But you don't believe it was a missile, correct? That is what I was asking...based on your statement a couple of posts ago.


Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by Damocles
IF it had been a missile how was it able to penetrate, detonate, and NOT litter the entire lawn with building debris?


I did not say it was a missile. I said if i was going to hit the Pentagon i would use a missile.



[edit on 9-4-2008 by Disclosed]



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 09:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Disclosed
But you don't believe it was a missile, correct? .


Do you believe it was flight 77?



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 09:46 AM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


Wow, I didn't realize the question I asked you was so hard for you to answer.


It's ok though. the evidence speaks for itself.



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 09:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Disclosed
Wow, I didn't realize the question I asked you was so hard for you to answer.

It's ok though. the evidence speaks for itself.


I answered that question a hundred times.

What evidence ?



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
I answered that question a hundred times.


You did?


Care to point out in this thread where you stated that you didnt believe it was a missile? Or did believe?

If it was a hundred times, it should be easy to find where you stated that fact. I can't seem to find that though. Hmmm...



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 10:09 AM
link   
well i wont speak for anyone but me, but i think i was clear that I dont think it was a missile.

and i think my reasons that i listed are pretty valid though should someone have some strong counterpoints id be happy to discuss them.



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 10:12 AM
link   
reply to post by eyewitness86
 


why in gods name would they release those photos? had our mom dad brother sister son daughter been one of the victims would you want their dead body all over the net?

i mean jesus if you want to see stuff like that go rent "faces of death"

now, having said all of that...there is no reason not to release photos of everything else that one would have expected to find in that scene. but i for one see no reason on earth to release photos of the bodies.



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 01:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Disclosed
You did?


Yes i did answer this question many times to you and others, now move on.

So what evidence do you have, i am still waiting for it.



[edit on 9-4-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Yes i did answer this question many times to you and others, now move on.


Thats funny. Your answer isnt anywhere on this thread at all. Please link the post where you stated that. I'm just asking you to back your statement with the post. Otherwise you are lying....and there is absolutely no reason to debate the issue if you cannot tell the truth on such a simple matter.



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 07:23 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


Ultima... How many times does it have to be said?

What evidence is there that flight 77 hit the Pentagon?

-Many many many eyewitnesses.

- Thousands of eyewitnesses to destruction, remains of humans

- DNA evidence of those on flight 77

- FDR shows flight path consistent with damage done to pentagon.

- Personal belongings of those on flight 77.


Now that is a small list ....

YOUR TURN!!!!

What evidence do you have showing something else hit the pentagon

What evidence do you have that shows plane parts were planted, DNA evidence was planted.

Please provide SOME evidence that something other than flight 77 hit the Pentagon.

Please keep in mind Ultima, lack of evidence is not evidence of a conspiracy.

Step up and show us what you got.



posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 01:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Disclosed
Thats funny. Your answer isnt anywhere on this thread at all.


I have answered your question on many other threads, so move on.


Still waiting on proof that flight 77 hit the Pentagon.



posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 01:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
-Many many many eyewitnesses.

- Thousands of eyewitnesses to destruction, remains of humans

- DNA evidence of those on flight 77

- FDR shows flight path consistent with damage done to pentagon.


1. Eyewitness that could not agree what hit the Pentagon and where, and whose testimony would not hold up in court.

2. Show me evidence that remains where passengers of flight 77.

3. See 2.

4. No, FDR shows different flight path then official story and being to high to hit the building. I suggest you file a FOIA request with the NISB to get the FDR data.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join