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.

 

Iranian Daily: Former US Air force Pilots Behind WTC, Pentagon Attacks

page: 2
2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 11:45 AM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.



but in your first post you give "evidence" of american military flying a plane into the pentagon.

later you ask for evidence that a plane hit the pentagon.

so, first you say it happened, then you ask for proof that it happened.

while I understand you were merely stating that there isn't explanations to all the questions, why would you bring up this question in a thread where you are giving examples of it happening?

negates your own arguement.

either the article is, therefore bunk (I think it is - the shot down pilot comment I made would be my reason for that) or the no plane in the pentagon theory is bunk.

can't be both in this thread that you started and have now raised conflicting results.



As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.




posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by exponent
There are two videos released of AA77 impacting the Pentagon. These are the only videos which exist showing this.


Too bad none of them actaully show the 757 of AA77.


With regards to a report matching parts, I don't think there is any official report as the plane's identity was never in doubt except within the conspiracy theorist community.


So you don't think the planes identy should be verified by a proper crime scene investigation?



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 11:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Crakeur
can't be both in this thread that you started and have now raised conflicting results.


Sorry but i am just asking for evidence that was stated in his post.



[edit on 21-9-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 11:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Too bad none of them actaully show the 757 of AA77.

They both do actually, unfortunately they are low resolution so it is difficult to distinguish. Integrated Consultants produced an analysis of this video which might help shed light on the scale issues: www.youtube.com...


So you don't think the planes identy should be verified by a proper crime scene investigation?

Of course not, AA77 was tracked on radar to the Pentagon, its FDR was recovered along with DNA from everyone onboard including some personal effects. There is no question as to the identity of the plane.



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 11:56 AM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


the evidence is in your first post where you show an article stating that a air force pilot plowed into the pentagon.

you can't say it happened this way and then say it didn't.

what you're doing is chasing your own tail at this point.



As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by exponent
Of course not, AA77 was tracked on radar to the Pentagon, its FDR was recovered along with DNA from everyone onboard including some personal effects.


But wasn't AA77 off radar for at least 18 minutes?

Do you mean the FDR that contridicts the official story?

Oh and no reports to confirm that the bodies from AA77 were in the Pentagon.

[edit on 21-9-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 12:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Crakeur
what you're doing is chasing your own tail at this point.



All i am doing is asking for the evidnece that was stated in a post.



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
But wasn't AA77 off radar for at least 18 minutes?

I fail to see how this is relevant, unless you have any positive evidence the plane was interfered with, you are simply trying to cast doubt.


Do you mean the FDR that contridicts the official story?

If you believe some people, everything contradicts the official story. Detailed analyses have been undertaken which show the FDR is consistent with the impact. It was after all, found in the pentagon.


Oh and no reports to confirm that the bodies from AA77 were in the Pentagon.

Actually there are, you've forgotten to include your weasel word (note to mods: this is not incivility, it is a recognised term
) "official". I have presented you several different accounts of bodies and DNA evidence being recovered and matched, you denied they were relevant if you remember correctly.



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 12:22 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.




round and round we go where it stops, nobody knows.

and the 9/11 debate becomes less important.

best of luck.



As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 12:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by exponent
I fail to see how this is relevant, unless you have any positive evidence the plane was interfered with, you are simply trying to cast doubt.


Doubt on your post when you stated it was tracked to the Pentagon.


Detailed analyses have been undertaken which show the FDR is consistent with the impact. It was after all, found in the pentagon.


I happen to have the AA77 FDR datsa and the flight path is different than the officaal story. Ther are also questions about the altimeter.


I have presented you several different accounts of bodies and DNA evidence being recovered and matched, you denied they were relevant if you remember correctly.


Was their reports that stated the bodies from AA77 wer ein the Pentagon or was the DNA evidence for the people inside the Pentagopn?


[edit on 21-9-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 12:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Doubt on your post when you stated it was tracked to the Pentagon.

Casting doubt is irrelevant, unless you have evidence that another plane was substituted for AA77 this doubt can easily be overcome by the mountain of evidence suggesting it was in fact AA77 which impacted.


Originally posted by Crakeur
round and round we go where it stops, nobody knows.

and the 9/11 debate becomes less important.

Unfortunately this is often the case. It truly is a shame because I hate to see people so radically misinformed, especially when some (no names mentioned) can be hugely arrogant in their beliefs



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Crakeur
round and round we go where it stops, nobody knows.



Why are you having a hard time with me asking someone to post evindece that they state they have?



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by exponent
Casting doubt is irrelevant,


Well it proves the plane WAS NOT tracked all the way to the Pentagon as your post states.


It truly is a shame because I hate to see people so radically misinformed,


I hate to say it but the only people misinformed are the people that only believe what they are told to believe do not think for themselves and do thier own research.



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Well it proves the plane WAS NOT tracked all the way to the Pentagon as your post states.

I apologise, I was simply trying to point out that the FDR data from the plane matches the radar tracking data.


I hate to say it but the only people misinformed are the people that only believe what they are told to believe do not think for themselves and do thier own research.

Not at all. The speed of Gravity is c. Do you believe this, or do you need to do your own research into it?



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by exponent
Not at all. The speed of Gravity is c. Do you believe this, or do you need to do your own research into it?


But we are not talking about Gravity are we?

Did you know what the types of planes were when you were watching them hit the towers on TV or did you need someone to tell you, or do research?

The planes crashes are crims scenes so we need proper investigations.



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
But we are not talking about Gravity are we?

It was an example, there are things which you are unable to verify personally and must rely on authorities for. I believe the speed of Gravity is c despite the fact I have not conducted any independent testing.


Did you know what the types of planes were when you were watching them hit the towers on TV or did you need someone to tell you, or do research?

I didn't know they were 767-200s, but I certainly would believe someone who told me. I don't see what your point is here, yes people should try and do their own research in situations where there is serious contention over factual data, but this is not always possible. For example I don't expect you to run your own LS-DYNA simulation of WTC7. This is most likely not within your means, but it cannot hurt to do so.



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by exponent
I didn't know they were 767-200s, but I certainly would believe someone who told me.


So you just believe anything that someone tells you, like the media?



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 01:00 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


You make it sound like everyone who witnessed the airliners hit must instantly know what type/model/flightnumber that plane was, or their information is invalid. Regardless of the fact they saw them and knew they were airliners.

That would be like a crowd of people witnessing a man shoot someone, but not knowing what model of gun was used, and what type of bullet it fired.

So silly...

[edit on 21-9-2008 by gavron]



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
So you just believe anything that someone tells you, like the media?


Like I have just illustrated, it depends on the fact. I am happy to believe things I am told as long as
  • They make sense within the context
  • I have no evidence to suggest otherwise
  • The source can be trusted


I exercise appropriate scepticism wherever possible, but in cases this is simply not applicable. Like I say, you can't prove to yourself that the speed of Gravity is c, you must accept it from people who are qualified and experienced.



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by gavron
You make it sound like everyone who witnessed the airliners hit must instantly know what type/model/flightnumber that plane was,


I do expect the government and military poeple at the Pentagon to know the difference between a commercial jet and a business jet, or how many engines it had and where.




top topics



 
2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join