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.

 

Independent Investigation Into Pentagon Attack Yields Alarming Information

page: 21
215
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by jprophet420
reply to post by jthomas
 



img132.imageshack.us...


The federally registered aircraft reportedly used during the 9/11 attacks:

- American Airlines flight 11 (N334AA), United Airlines flight 175 (N612UA), American Airlines flight 77 (N644AA) and United Airlines flight 93 (N591UA).


That debris is not from flight 77, how did it get on the pentagon lawn?


Demonstrate your claim. Thanks in advance.




posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 07:40 PM
link   
reply to post by jthomas
 


I directly demonstrated it. Either accept it or dont, refute it or don't. I dont really care. There are hundreds of extra people lurking here this week and every single one of them that see's youre lack of basic reading comprehension and ability to effectively debate is a "win".



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 07:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by jthomas
AA77, a Boeing 757.


and how do you know it was flight 77?


That was easy.


Good, then it should be just as easy to explain how you know it was AA77 a B757.


Now admit you don't know that my answer is correct.


You are right, no one knows that your answer is correct. In fact some of us very much doubt that it is. Have you not been paying attention?

You are someone to talk about just hearing what people tell you. Explain how you know it was AA77 then. You can't and you will not.



[edit on 10-9-2009 by Lillydale]



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 07:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by Lillydale
 


Lilly,
You missed the point when I asked you to complete the survey. I thought that you might have trouble because it does require a little original thought and knowledge of the issues. I would have helped with your reduced reading skills.


So personal insults is really all you guys have left huh? How many times did I ask where the wings and passengers are? Why has no one even tried to answer that???? Thomas claims a plane went in there and wants me to prove it did not and now you are giving me surveys and then get all upset when I respond? We already played this game. You already got all upset when I answered you before. It is old now.


You may believe what you wish. You are unable to prove any of your theories as you have no evidence. What you have are demands. "Where are the passengers?" On 911, they were dying inside the Pentagon along with military and civilian employees. Many responders and rescue teams witnessed the carnage but didn't release the photos for ghouls and voyeurs to inspect. Flight 77 hit the Pentagon with people onboard.


Prove it. I do not know what went in there. I do not know what happened that day. I do not know where the passengers went. You claim to, so prove it.


As much as you would like to revel in a huge conspiracy, there is none here. You'll just have to make it up as you go. Ask CIT for help on this, they have a lot of experience.


Then proving it should be cake for you.

You and Thomas seem to think that calling my intelligence into question somehow makes you smart or your empty points valid. Sorry, but calling me stupid does not make me stupid, no matter how you word it. You cannot prove your little fantasy about flight 77, can you?

You cannot explain where the wings went.

You cannot prove that anything you said about the passengers is true. What did you base it on? What report told you that? What evidence was looked at?

You cannot even prove that it was AA77.

If you could do any of these things, you would stop being a so obnoxious and stop avoiding them and just do it already. Your story about AA77 is a fantasy, a farce, a fairy tale. It is all made up. That is why you cannot and will not even try to prove it.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 08:00 PM
link   
A couple of knowledgeable independent aerospace engineers went to the trouble of identifying the mangled engine components seen in photographs of the wreckage.

This site has detailed pages addressing unsubstantiated claims made by those attempting to prove otherwise:


www.aerospaceweb.org...

we have studied two key pieces of wreckage photographed at the Pentagon shortly after September 11 and found them to be entirely consistent with the Rolls-Royce RB211-535 turbofan engine found on a Boeing 757 operated by American Airlines. The circular engine disk debris is just the right size and shape to match the compressor stages of the RB211, and it also shows evidence of being attached to a triple-shaft turbofan like the RB211. While many have claimed the wreckage instead comes from a JT8D or AE3007H turbofan, we have shown that these engines are too small to match the debris. Furthermore, we have studied what clearly looks like the outer shell of a combustion case and found that its fuel injector nozzle ports match up exactly to those illustrated in Boeing documentation for the RB211-535 engine. There is simply no evidence to suggest these items came from any other engine model than the RB211-535, and the vast majority of these engines are only used on one type of plane -- the Boeing 757.

[…]

those believing in conspiracy suggest that these small items were planted and the lack of more substantial debris is proof of a cover-up. If a 757 truly hit the Pentagon, they argue, then where is the rest of the two engines? This argument ignores the simple fact that a lack of photos of other engine parts does not mean that none existed, only that other engine components were either not photographed or the photos have not yet been released.

[…]

.. an additional picture was released as an exhibit during the Zacarias Moussaoui terrorist trial in 2006. This photo clearly includes a sizeable and relatively intact portion of a gas turbine engine.
This debris appears to contain two rotating engine disks with part of the engine's central shaft protruding forward. Behind the two disks is another component called a frame. Frames are fixed, non-rotating components that provide attachment points holding the engine together. This debris must come from the aft section of an engine given the shape of the blade attachment points visble along the circumference of the two rotating disks. These attachments have a highly cambered, or curved, banana-like shape indicative of the blades used in the turbine section of a jet engine. The blades used on fan and compressor stages, by comparison, have a much straighter and less curved shape.

The RB211-535 engine used on the 757 contains five turbine disks--three low pressure turbines that power the fan, one intermediate pressure turbine driving the intermediate pressure compressors, and one high pressure turbine that turns the high pressure compressors. The debris shown here contains two of the three low pressure turbines and possibly the remains of the third. The protruding shaft also appears to be composed of two separate shafts of differing diameter. A small portion of the inner shaft, from the engine's low pressure system, appears to protrude from inside a second larger diameter shaft surrounding it. This larger diameter shaft corresponds to the intermediate pressure system and would connect to an additional turbine disk that is no longer attached.


M



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 08:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by jthomas


You claim the wreckage is NOT from AA77. How do you know? Show us? Where are the statements of those who recovered the wreckage?

C'mon, man, put your money where your mouth is.



And this does not make you a weazel how? Put your money where your mouth is. All you have to do is prove that wreckage is from AA77. Your case is supposedly true so it should not be an issue to prove it. I already know you will not be proving it, therefore confirming that your little story is false.

Come on man!, put your money where your mouth is.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 08:09 PM
link   
reply to post by mmiichael
 


No they did not. They did not identify any part as being from AA77. Not one. Read it yourself.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 08:14 PM
link   
Well I just watched the "NATIONAL SECURITY ALERT - SENSITIVE INFORMATION" by the Citzen Investigation Team, on Youtube.
I am impressed. They've done a good job and now it seems clear to me what happened.

The Jet flew low enough to convince onlookers that it was flying straight at the Pentagon, so anone with any sense ducks for cover if they're close enough to see what's going on. At the instant it flies over the building, with feet to spare, some kind of missile hits the ground floor of the Pentagon. There are witnesses who saw the plane fly off from the other side of the building directly after the explosion, FFS.

What happened to the passengers is not a question that is much fun thinking about.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 08:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 




What proof to you have that a plane hit the pentagon?

The same proof you do.


GOOD! You have just admitted there is no evidences thank you Jthomas for finally answering my question. That’s right I have the same PROOF as you have so why do you continue to support a lie?


I was just delighted that Jthomas has finally admitted that he has no proof that a plane crashed at the pentagon. Jthomas clearly states (The same proof you do.) In that case, my proof, which is well-researched material, which proves no plane, could have crashed at the pentagon the way the government claims it did.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 09:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 



So personal insults is really all you guys have left huh?


Of course it is, the OS believers have no evidences to support their fairytales. They are whining because you are to smart and you did your research into 911. They are angry at you because you can think logically on your own and you will not believe in the spoon fed lies, that Glen Beck, or O’Reily, and Fox News spins for the government propaganda brain washing machines.

There is no evidence to support the OS fairytales and they know it. They are in Denial or they are the gatekeepers of the truth. Since there is no evidence, the only thing left is to ridicule, insult, and lie to you and they hope you will GO AWAY!
Stop asking truthful questions.
Stop telling the TRUTH!
Stop proving we are lying to you all.
Not one single debunker will EVER be able to prove a plane crashed at the pentagon and the reason why they can’t is because, the FBI destroyed, or buried the evidences that they did have. The real reason it was all destroyed is because it was not flight 77, it was bone yard scraps, and the FBI knows there are no serial numbers that will match their phantom plane.

Jthomas and the likes can cry all they want but until I see airplane debris with matching serial numbers belong to said plane, and the FBI showing us the other Boeing 757 engine, to start proven the OS of the pentagon is true. The FBI needs to explain how thousands of tons of an airliner went plowing threw the floor of the pentagon without leaving so much as a scratch on the floor.
I have yet to see any Debunker EVER explained any of these question away to any satisfaction.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 09:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lillydale
reply to post by mmiichael
 


No they did not. They did not identify any part as being from AA77. Not one. Read it yourself.


No way of knowing if they tried to indentify visible serial numbers on fnd ouparts. But I guess that can be faked.

They would have to submit the same plane parts to similar extreme treatment and then plant them by the Pentagon.

And somehow AA77 which took off somehow disappears though no radar spotted that. The astounding claim is there weren't passengers, crew, and hijacker bodies and parts in the wreckage, though many did see burned bodies still strapped into seats. That was faked using other dead bodies? The labs falsified their analysis?

All those people from the plane disappear from the face of the earth. Presumably dead now after 8 years. AA77 is never seen either.

So who are you accusing of murdering those people on AA77? This is a serious accusation. What evidence do you have?

M


[edit on 11-9-2009 by mmiichael]



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 06:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by jprophet420
reply to post by jthomas
 


I directly demonstrated it.


Then point me to it.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 07:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lillydale

Originally posted by jthomas
AA77, a Boeing 757.


and how do you know it was flight 77?


That was easy.


Good, then it should be just as easy to explain how you know it was AA77 a B757.


It's been explained by the preponderance of evidence. Now tell me, where have you've been for the last 8 years?


You are someone to talk about just hearing what people tell you.


You are someone to talk that 8,000 people who were there, plus those who who had direct connection to AA77, are stupid.

Please note that I predicted you would not provide the statements of any of those people and you haven't. Yet you are willing to claim there is no evidence.

The burden of proof remains on your shoulders no matter how much you try to evade it.

Now, refute the evidence that AA77 hit the Pentagon or concede what we know: you cannot.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 07:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lillydale

Originally posted by jthomas


You claim the wreckage is NOT from AA77.


No, I don't. YOU do.


How do you know? Show us? Where are the statements of those who recovered the wreckage?


I asked you for those statements and you REFUSE to present them


And this does not make you a weazel how?


Of course not. You are the one claiming there is no evidence that AA77 hit the Pentagon. Duh.


Put your money where your mouth is. All you have to do is prove that wreckage is from AA77.


How many times do I have to remind you that I do not have to prove any such thing? YOU have to refute the evidence that it did and YOU know it. Pretending that you don't is why your 9/11 Denial Movement is stuck in the same exact place it was 8 years ago - with absolutely nothing to show.


Your case is supposedly true so it should not be an issue to prove it.


The evidence you claim does not exists is available to you. You know that. Pretending that it doesn't exist just confirms the nature of your 9/11 Denial.


I already know you will not be proving it, therefore confirming that your little story is false.


I have no story. YOU do. You want the entire world to believe no evidence exists but you absolutely refuse to demonstrate it.


Come on man!, put your money where your mouth is.


Sorry, the burden of proof is entirely on your shoulders. I have absolutely NO reason to doubt the evidence that conclusively demonstrates that AA77 hit the Pentagon. You, on the other hand want to pretend that no evidence exists and try to shift the burden of proof from your shoulders.

Sorry, that game didn't work 8 years ago and it doesn't work now. You can't hide from the real world.

Now, once again, thousands of people were at the Pentagon in the hours, days, and weeks after 9/11. Over 1,000 of them had direct contact with the wreckage and bodies. You know that is true. You KNOW that they know more about what they saw, handled, removed and sorted than you or I. You KNOW that these thousands of people could easily have contradicted that a 757 hit the Pentagon at anytime in the last 8 years.

And they are just the people who were on the scene.

YOU want us to believe that these people, and every family member and friend of the passengers and crew are being duped. But you cannot demonstrate it. And when asked to, you weasel and squirm away.

Now, either put your money where your mouth is or fess up. You can start here with a detailed, factual debunking of this:

wtc7lies.googlepages.com...

You can contact any of those people with direct contact with the wreckage, evidence, and damage. NO ONE is preventing you.

And don't make excuses and attempt to shift the burden of proof again, because when you try to go out into the real world you are going to have to deal with the evidence you claim does not exist.

Get to work.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 07:30 AM
link   
reply to post by jthomas
 


Well see you actually have to look at the picture. When you do, you can see the serial number on the part. It does not match the serial number of the plane.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 08:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Karilla
There are witnesses who saw the plane fly off from the other side of the building directly after the explosion, FFS.


No, there are not any. CIT has refused for three years to present any eyewitnesses from all around the Pentagon who witnessed any aircraft "fly over and away from the Pentagon."

Ranke has none and knows it.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 08:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by jprophet420
reply to post by jthomas
 


Well see you actually have to look at the picture. When you do, you can see the serial number on the part. It does not match the serial number of the plane.


Support your claim.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 11:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael

Originally posted by Lillydale
reply to post by mmiichael
 


No they did not. They did not identify any part as being from AA77. Not one. Read it yourself.


No way of knowing if they tried to indentify visible serial numbers on fnd ouparts. But I guess that can be faked.


Yes there is a way of knowing. Read the report. They did not identify any of the parts by serial numbere. That is their statement.


They would have to submit the same plane parts to similar extreme treatment and then plant them by the Pentagon.


All they had to do was get some bent and burned pieces of plane. Do you really think they would not have such access?


And somehow AA77 which took off somehow disappears though no radar spotted that. The astounding claim is there weren't passengers, crew, and hijacker bodies and parts in the wreckage, though many did see burned bodies still strapped into seats. That was faked using other dead bodies? The labs falsified their analysis?


Who saw dead bodies strapped into seats? Nice claim that has never been backed up.

When did AA77 leave radar and where was it and heading where? You will like the answer if you are willing to look any of this up.

Who paid the labs? Who runs the labs? Where are these bodies?


All those people from the plane disappear from the face of the earth. Presumably dead now after 8 years. AA77 is never seen either.

So who are you accusing of murdering those people on AA77? This is a serious accusation. What evidence do you have?

M


No one is accusing anyone of anything. If you go home and your family has been shot and stabbed and the police investigate the stab wounds, find nothing and close the case, would you be satisfied? They could do far more with gunshot wounds and bullet fragments but they just stop with many questions unanswered. Would you be cool or would you still want to know the truth? Would you want them to look into every thing they could to find out what really happened?

I have made no accusation, myself. I have asked questions. Impressme, jprophet, lilly, all seem to be curious. We want to know everything that really happened that day. I am not satisfied because none of the SOP was followed that day and no one can explain why.

If you really want to respond, tell me where the wings went.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by jthomas

Originally posted by Karilla
There are witnesses who saw the plane fly off from the other side of the building directly after the explosion, FFS.


No, there are not any. CIT has refused for three years to present any eyewitnesses from all around the Pentagon who witnessed any aircraft "fly over and away from the Pentagon."


Did you watch the video I posted? It has an interview with one of the Pentagon security guys who was on the far side of the building and left as soon as the explosion occurred. He saw what he assumed to be a second plane, which he describes as "a commercial air-liner" which continues to fly away from the scene. Just watch the video before making such outrageously argumentative claims. Denying something exists when one has just seen it is very bad form, you know.

[edit on 11-9-2009 by Karilla]



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Karilla

Did you watch the video I posted? It has an interview with one of the Pentagon security guys who was on the far side of the building and left as soon as the explosion occurred. He saw what he assumed to be a second plane, which he describes as "a commercial air-liner" which continues to fly away from the scene. Just watch the video before making such outrageously argumentative claims. Denying something exists when one has just seen it is very bad form, you know.

[edit on 11-9-2009 by Karilla]


So you didn't bother to read what I wrote.

IF any jet flew over and away from the Pentagon there would not just be one person who claimed to have seen a "flyover." Just what part of that still confuses you? Go back and review my posts for the last year on this subject.

Either produce the evidence of any "flyover" or admit that there was none.

Sheesh...

[edit on 11-9-2009 by jthomas]



new topics

top topics



 
215
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join