It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Bodies strapped to seats on AA77, Pentagon?

page: 13
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 18 2008 @ 09:09 PM
reply to post by argentus

The OP does not have the ability to remove your posts. That was probably either me or some other moderator, and if you would like to discuss it, either send me a u2u or you can submit a complaint using complain / suggestion form to have someone look into it.

posted on Oct, 18 2008 @ 09:11 PM
reply to post by Hal9000

I will. Thank you. I sit corrected.

posted on Oct, 18 2008 @ 09:16 PM
reply to post by tezzajw

I understand, and thanks much for your taking the time to respond. I had followed some of the other threads into this one, and for what it's worth, I thought that your position was pretty well founded, I just sought to establish it more firmly as a basis for discussion. Wasn't really my business to do that, was it?

Sorry for the misunderstanding.

All best.

posted on Oct, 18 2008 @ 09:24 PM
reply to post by habu71

The detail matters because a body in a seat that can be verified by dna and the seat material positively linked to the aircraft and flight would go a long way to prove it was an aircraft.

what about the dna that was collected to identify the passengers? I thought that the dna was already positively identified as belonging to the passengers..
I don't know how you would go about identifying the seats though.. at least as far as matching them to AA77.. is that even possible?

If any "investigation" results were released that made the remotest amount of sense, they would be crucial. No evidence (meaning a collection of presentable and identifiable physical evidence) has yet been presented by any agency.

that's just it isn't it? there hasn't been anything released yet.. there may or may not be reports that are still pending further investigation.. there are no reports or testimonies, that I am aware of, from the actual clean up crews.. the ones who removed the bodies.. the ones who picked up the wreckage.. the ones who were not interviewed..

The fact that it was assumed to be a terrorist attack should have intensified the level and scope of any forensic and aircraft accident investigation ( see TWA 800).

I think I agree with you here.. but I am not surprised that they didn't.. no other day had ever been like this before.. it was a first for America..

The inertia of an aircraft (non supersonic) turning and decending might be different than one in a dive, but, as far as the Pentagon, the USG claims the aircraft had descended and was almost in level flight at impact. The inertia difference between a 300 to 400 knot impact into a reinforced concrete wall and structure would not be even remotely more gradual, it would be almost the same, therefore, catastrophic to a human body. Bodies in seats would NOT have occurred!!!!

first off flight 93 WAS in a dive.. the wall was not that thick as to be impenetrable.. the bodies towards the back would not have been effected to the same degree as the bodies in the front.. (front of mass made the hole/end of mass passed through the hole).. catastrophic? of course.. "bodies in seats would not have occurred"??? that's nothing more than an assumption..

posted on Oct, 18 2008 @ 10:46 PM
Every person in a Greyhound bus would be affected if the Greyhound bus hit a wall. Everyone either in the front of the bus or back would experience the reality of travelling at the rate of speed one instant prior to the bus hitting the wall, an instant after the bus hit the wall.

Look at a train wreck, the engine and caboose experience the same event simultaneously, at say 500 mph. The difference is the train cars at the front get to experience not only the collision of the train engine with the immovable object, they also experience the mass of the remainder of the train hitting them from the rear. So the cars in front are smashed worse than the ones in the back.

The initial impact of the plane in the pentagon would give everyone on board the exact same experience. Progressively from front to rear the passengers in the front have more mass hitting them from behind, and conversely the passengers in the rear have less mass hitting them from behind.

So the front passengers get more damage than those in the rear of the plane.

posted on Oct, 18 2008 @ 11:20 PM
reply to post by argentus

I think that the problem is that many of the same people that are asking the OP about who said it and when and why he brings it up and that is a lie, are the same people that were arguing in the thread where it was originally said, and some even posted in response to chain of responses to it. So the OP and anyone else that was reading along already knows that these people are just playing games to avoid the fact that they demanded solid proof for any claim a truther made....yet stuck up for this story based on nothing and now suddenly eyewitnesses are everything and proof is suddenly worthless? I agree it is unfair to anyone that was not already reading where this all began but Tezz did eventually offer up the who anyway so that has been settled for some time. It is hard to unbias yourself in a room full of familar faces that have been on the same path as you for a while.

posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 12:09 AM
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999

Swampfox you are right!

(And knowing tezzie and cashie as I do, it wont matter if I post that document here, because they will say two things. 1. It is redacted so how can I prove its Sgt Williams and 2. He works for the government therefore cannot be believed.)

There has been too much evidence pointing toward the Bush Administration they are involved; furthermore, they will use whatever mouthpiece, to tell their lie including our own military. To think that our Government is not capable of pulling 911 off is ignorant. However you are entitle to your own opinion, and I am entitle to mine.

I do not really think there is anything more to discuss on this matter until we have some real evidence to support this rumor.

[edit on 10/19/2008 by cashlink]

posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 08:34 AM

Originally posted by cashlink
I do not really think there is anything more to discuss on this matter until we have some real evidence to support this rumor.

Well, talk to the CEO's of ATS then. Shut down the 911 forum. Because that is what this entire forums is about. Rumors and speculation. God knows there isn't any real evidence to support the TM.

posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 01:55 PM
reply to post by ThroatYogurt

(Well, talk to the CEO's of ATS then. Shut down the 911 forum. Because that is what this entire forums is about. Rumors and speculation. God knows there isn't any real evidence to support the TM.)

I see you are taken info like mine and you are spinning it differently. That is not what I said or meant! I made the statement there is not any more to talk about on “this” information. It is time to move on until “new” evidence with real proof is found. However I don’t see that happening since the Bush administration has block any real investigations.

posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 02:40 PM
I believe that both scenarios are false. I do not believe for one minute that there was a airliner that hit the Pentagon.

I believe it was a missle aimed at making us believe that a plane hit the Pentagon. I have seen too many photos of the Pentagon with windows open to the outside, computer on desk etc and then see the after math of the crash with the same windows and computer still on the desk and nothing seemingly out of place. If a plane the size of the supposed AA77 hit the Pentagon, no matter what the material and or the effects to the plane, there would be parts found. A wheel, a engine peice, a part of the seat, a wing or tail tip. Something, but nothing was found. Also the size of the wing span would have made a much larger opening in the building than the official pictures show us.

They confiscated all the video surveillance cameras from almost a mile around the Pentagon. What did they think or what were they afraid they would show or what we would see? The Missle coming in to hit the Pentagon?

I do not believe that terrorist hit the Twin Towers, I believe it was much closer to home. I saw pictures of the planes hitting the towers, I watched it real as it was happening on TV, that fateful Sept 11th morning as I was getting ready to go to wor, there were explosions just before the plane hit the tower. There were explosions as the towers fell, each floor showing a massive explosion,then the next and the next, out of the windows as the tower came down. I do not believe that anyone would have been able to call their families from cell phones going at that speed, and altitude the towers would not have picked them up. I do believe that people heard from their loved ones but not in the planes that hit the towers.
Why did the AF have a stand down order on that morning? After the first jet hit the tower, why didn't they scramble the jets and stop the 2nd plane?
Because it was not part of the plan. The plan was to insite the American people thorough the horrors of what they were watching, to invade IRAQ, that was the only way that Bush could get the oil.

Check out Loose Change. com and they have all the videos and official reports made by those who witnessed and or lived through the largest attack and hoax ever perpetrated aganist the people of the United States. What was the reason you ask? OIL and GREED. Bush had planned on invading Iraq long before he became President. Just as he has planned on invading IRAN, but hopefully this one will not come to pass. Saddam was hired by our government and then we execut him as a traitor and for war crimes. What leader, or dictitator would not respond in this way, I am not saying Saddam was not a evil person and committed crimes aganist humanity. But the senseless, loss of our children, husbands, fathers and for what a lie based on greed and OIL. We invaded " His " country. Taken from Regime change How the CIA put Saddam's party in power "

In 1963, Saddam Hussein worked with the CIA to carry out the coup by the Baath party, which eventually brought him to power in Iraq. /i]

So that is all I am going to say. I know many will label me crazy and even a traitor to my country. But I assure you, I can direct you to this information that I have read and I am proud to be an American but equally I do not support the President Bush or his administration. I hope that one day we will be told the truth about the Kennedy Assignation, our Space program and what they really know about contact, and the truth about 911. I also hope those responsible will be made to admit their part in this the worst act of treason against the American people.

posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 06:59 PM
reply to post by cashlink

Cashlink..your sooo right! I started investigating 911 4-5 months after it happened because to many things weren't adding up. Bush and Cheney need to be charged with...(and not limited to)

War Crimes
Voter Fraud 2000-2004
Corporate Fraud
Black Water
US Constitution

I didn't think this admin. Could blow my mind anymore. 3x's get use to it..right? Well, my MIND was blown again watching a NEWS show that has suggested they are seening Language out there...(somewhere OUT that leads them to believe that another 911 incident right after 11-08. Now...this isn't coming from some Lunatic chicken little shawn hannity watching idiot....this is coming from CNN. I believe it was CNN...could have been FOX. Yes.. I watch FOX so most of you don't have to listen to all the lies all the time. Case in Point: Since Powell came out for Obama...Fox Morning News anchor suggested that it was because McCain didn't ask Powell to be VP....AND this guy was dead serious! Just like the reporter asking Powell after his coming out speech...."Are you still a Republican?" omg...can the right get anymore ridiculous? I ASK YEA!!!?? lol

posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 03:00 AM
It's probably disinformation.

posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 04:26 AM
reply to post by tezzajw

There were NO bodies at either Shansville or the pentagon because both accidents were staged.

posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 04:06 PM
So let me guess. These bodies were planted at the pentagon by our government and are not actual vicims that day. I am sure their families would love to hear that from all of you.Victim Remains Pentagon

posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 04:23 PM

Originally posted by tide88
These bodies were planted at the pentagon by our government and are not actual vicims that day.

Here are two reasons that prove you did not either read the thread, or understand it.

Firstly, those pictures have already been posted within the thread.

Secondly, those pictures do not show any bodies strapped to airline seats.

Thanks for your well thought and researched contribution.

posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 05:19 PM
reply to post by cashlink

Exactly, were told that the 6000 lb titanium engines burned up and yet some one expects us to believe bodies surrvived. BS It was a cruse missle or I'm not an As* H&^e. Any way, enjoyed.

posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 05:44 PM

Exactly, were told that the 6000 lb titanium engines burned up and yet some one expects us to believe bodies surrvived. BS It was a cruse missle or I'm not an As* H&^e. Any way, enjoyed

So why did they find the jet engines in the wreckage?

posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 06:10 PM
a plane didn't hit the pentagon.

case closed

posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 06:27 PM
reply to post by thedman

Thedman, it is obvious that you support the Government conspiracies theories. What I just can’t understand, is as long as you been on ATS, You should have already found out that we all have been lied to by the Bush administration concerning 911. So you think that photo solves your conspiracies theories. I “don’t” think so. As far as I am concern it was planted there or that photo wasn’t taken at the crash site it could have came from anywhere who’s to say, the photo could have been taken from an airplane salvage yard.

posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 07:16 PM
As said, there is nothing indicating bodies in airline seats at the pentagon......Also, why no investigation results of dna, release of documented aircraft accident investigation data (not theories)........

And by the way, if you are traveling inside an aircraft at 300 knots, when it impacts a solid wall (or ground), the aircraft stops, you continue at 300 knots until you impact something....the aircraft (if it is an aircraft) expends energy by wings shearing and structure crumpling.....the humans, unfortunately, do not crumple well......whether in the forward section or aft, seated and belted or standing, all sustain the same g force.

top topics

<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in