Independent Investigation Into Pentagon Attack Yields Alarming Information

Originally posted by mmiichael
Don't even know who McGraw is. This is getting stupid.
You're reported to the Mods.

mmiichael, your disconnect with the thread is obvious.

pteridine tried to claim that the light pole hit the taxi. He tried to use McGraw as a witness that the light pole hit the taxi. Scroll back a dozen or so pages and you should see it.

Considering that pteridine recently posted, I've asked him whether or not he's prepared to prove that the light pole hit the taxi.

Get it now?

Originally posted by tezzajw
pteridine tried to claim that the light pole hit the taxi. He tried to use McGraw as a witness that the light pole hit the taxi. Scroll back a dozen or so pages and you should see it.

Considering that pteridine recently posted, I've asked him whether or not he's prepared to prove that the light pole hit the taxi.

Get it now?

Tragic the outrageous manipulation of that pathetic near senile black taxi driver by the CIT scumbags. Just to sell some lousy videos.

Unless you can provide any form of evidence a light pole didn't go into that taxi's windshield beyond some wild speculations, that's what has been determined.

A camouflaged missile maybe?

Originally posted by mmiichael
Unless you can provide any form of evidence a light pole didn't go into that taxi's windshield beyond some wild speculations, that's what has been determined.

Casual readers, mmiichael is asking all of you to suspend reality, put aside scientific enquiry and accept something that has not been proven. His destruction of logic is quite amusing when you consider his attempt to shift the burden of proof.

The sole burden of proof for anyone who claims that the light pole hit the taxi is upon those people making the claim.

Originally posted by mmiichael
A camouflaged missile maybe?

Huh? If you think that a camouflaged missile hit the light pole, then you'll need to prove it, mmiichael. I don't know why you choose to speculate so much?

Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by mmiichael
Unless you can provide any form of evidence a light pole didn't go into that taxi's windshield beyond some wild speculations, that's what has been determined.

Casual readers, mmiichael is asking all of you to suspend reality, put aside scientific enquiry and accept something that has not been proven. His destruction of logic is quite amusing when you consider his attempt to shift the burden of proof.

The sole burden of proof for anyone who claims that the light pole hit the taxi is upon those people making the claim.

Originally posted by mmiichael
A camouflaged missile maybe?

Huh? If you think that a camouflaged missile hit the light pole, then you'll need to prove it, mmiichael. I don't know why you choose to speculate so much?

Instead of constant yammering tell us what hit the taxi. The taxi with the shattered windshield near the Pentagon not in Conspiracy Dream Land.

Originally posted by mmiichael
Instead of constant yammering tell us what hit the taxi.

I wasn't there. I don't know how the taxi might have suffered the damage that it allegedly suffered.

You claimed that it's been determined a light pole hit the taxi. Prove that this happened.

Show me a single official government story document that details how the light pole hit the taxi.

Originally posted by tezzajw
You claimed that it's been determined a light pole hit the taxi. Prove that this happened.

Show me a single official government story document that details how the light pole hit the taxi.

Here's how things work in the real world.

A plane smashes into a building. People are concerned about saving lives in burning fires.
ambulances need to get through. After there is some control city people and maybe Feds get to work on clearing the roads so traffic can pass. Then they have to deal with things like damage to electrical and water lines.

When there is an airplane crash in a buit up area and massive destruction, people dying, why would anyone feel any need to record a lousy smashed windshield. It's obvious what happened. An extremely low flying plane went by, light poles are knocked over.

There are huge crowds all around. With media reports coming in everyone knows there were a series of attacks on major targets.

Does anyone on the morning of Sept 11, 2001, near the Pentagon, think think or care if some deranged people in the future will think it didn't happen and want photographic evidence? What happened is something the average 5 year old can figure out?

Anyone who possibly thinks there is some other explanation for a random taxi on the road suddenly having a smashed windshield when there's a series of light poles on the ground either needs their head examined or is trying to sell some sensationalistic snake-oil to hopelessly out of touch with reality individuals.


M



[edit on 2-11-2009 by mmiichael]

Originally posted by mmiichael
Here's how things work in the real world... It's obvious what happened. An extremely low flying plane went by, light poles are knocked over.

Here's what should happen in the real world.

mmiichael makes a claim that the light pole hit the taxi. mmiichael should then present his brief of evidence to show how this happened.

So far, mmiichael has not done this. He has failed to support his claim.

Originally posted by tezzajw
reply to post by pteridine

 

pteridine, mmiichael has cleared up some of his misconceptions and admitted that he lied about some of his claims. He retracted them.

You made some specific claims earlier in this thread that you have still not supported or retracted.

You claimed that airline passenger bodies were found strapped to seats.
You claimed that the light pole hit the taxi and you tried to use McGraw as a witness to this.

When can we all expect proof or a retraction from you?

I see you are still trolling tezza. When someone asks you what your theory is, are you still playing the "Gee-I-don't-know-but-nothing-is-proven-to my-satsfaction-card?"
Plane went overhead very low. Lightpoles fell down as stated by witness. Plane hit Pentagon. How else would the lightpoles fall at that time if the plane did not hit them? What is your theory?

I provided a link to a wtness that said the bodies were strapped in the seats. There are no photos posted for your voyeuristic happiness.

By the way, I like your avatar. Who is holding your head?

Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by mmiichael
Here's how things work in the real world... It's obvious what happened. An extremely low flying plane went by, light poles are knocked over.

Here's what should happen in the real world.

mmiichael makes a claim that the light pole hit the taxi. mmiichael should then present his brief of evidence to show how this happened.

So far, mmiichael has not done this. He has failed to support his claim.

Why don't you grow up. There isn't instant online proof of every bit of trivia a Truther can try to seize on to avoid reality.

Do you have proof there was anything else that hit the taxi? Do you even have proof there was an actual taxi? Maybe an already smashed car painted to look like one and towed to the scene? Maybe the whole thing was staged like the light poles being pulled out of the pavement?
Like the imaginary missile and the planted plane parts?

If there was no plane knocking down poles while flying into the Pentagon what alternative is offered?

Are you capable of providing any information on anything?

Originally posted by mmiichael


Does anyone on the morning of Sept 11, 2001, near the Pentagon, think think or care if some deranged people in the future will think it didn't happen and want photographic evidence? What happened is something the average 5 year old can figure out?
M
[edit on 2-11-2009 by mmiichael]

Holy Moly M.
I always thought you were older than that.
Thought if you saw history in the making being even a youth you would have taken a few snaps just for the gipper.
Guess normal or above is left to the truthers.

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
Guess normal or above is left to the truthers.

"Normal or above" what? Gullibility? After looking at the link in the OP, I am convinced that the National Inquirer is selling stories that are too unbelievable for their paper. Alarming Information, no less.

Originally posted by pteridine
I provided a link to a wtness that said the bodies were strapped in the seats. There are no photos posted for your voyeuristic happiness.

You have not been able to confirm what that witness allegedly saw. Who's body was found strapped to an airline seat? Exactly where was it alleged to have been found?

Your claim that one witness saw bodies strapped to seats does not constitute a proof, pteridine. Even you should know that.

As for the light pole hitting the taxi... well, you didn't even try.

At least mmiichael had the courage to retract his claims and admit that he lied about them.

Originally posted by mmiichael
Do you have proof there was anything else that hit the taxi? Do you even have proof there was an actual taxi? Maybe an already smashed car painted to look like one and towed to the scene? Maybe the whole thing was staged like the light poles being pulled out of the pavement?
Like the imaginary missile and the planted plane parts?

You've posed lots of questions that you might also like to answer, mmiichael.

However, I'm not interested in those, as you've not proven, or even tried to prove, that the light pole hit the taxi. You have not provided one official government story document that describes the light pole hitting the taxi.

Why is it so difficult for you to prove your claims?

Originally posted by mmiichael

Originally posted by aristocrat2

Originally posted by mmiichael
Thousands of people did witness the plane crash at the Pentagon and were involved in the cleanup aftermath days and weeks later.

UNTRUE. The witnesses are but a handful. Also, just because there was a big mess does not mean that it was caused by a plane impacting. Furthermore, most witnesses witnessed the plane fly over, but some state that this did not result in impact or that the flight path was different.

I'm sorry, I deal with facts but not Truther denial.

FACT. 8000 people were on the scene within minute and/or assisted in the cleanup of the plane crash at the Pentagon.

Among them:

wtc7lies.googlepages.com...

Alexandria VA Fire & Rescue, American Airlines, American Red Cross, Arlington County Emergency Medical Services, Arlington County Fire Department, Arlington County Sheriff's Department, Arlington VA Police Department, Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms, DiLorenzo TRICARE Health Clinic staff, DeWitt Army Community Hospital staff, District of Columbia Fire & Rescue, DOD Honor Guard, Environmental Protection Agency Hazmat Teams, Fairfax County Fire & Rescue, FBI Evidence Recovery Teams, FBI Hazmat Teams, Federal Aviation Administration, Federal Disaster Medical Assistance Teams, FEMA 68-Person Urban Search and Rescue Teams Maryland Task Force 1, New Mexico Task Force 1, Tennessee Task Force 1, Virginia Task Force 1, Virginia Task Force 2, FEMA Emergency Response Team, Fort Myer Fire Department, Four U.S. Army Chaplains, Metropolitan Airport Authority Fire Unit, Military District of Washington Engineers Search & Rescue Team, Montgomery County Fire & Rescue, U.S. National Guard units, National Naval Medical Center CCRF, National Transportation Safety Board, Pentagon Defense Protective Service, Pentagon Helicopter Crash Response Team, Pentagon Medical Staff, Rader Army Health Clinic Staff, SACE Structural Safety Engineers and Debris Planning and Response Teams, Salvation Army Disaster Services, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, US Army Reserves of Virginia Beach Fairfax County and Montgomery County, Virginia Beach Fire Department, Virginia Department of Emergency Management, Virginia State Police.

Truthers scrupulously avoid checking out any of these sources. Because the people they might contact them will just tell them they're full of it.

Those in trapped denial choose to live there. No data supplied will change that.

Maybe age and increasing self-awareness can help.

Good luck.
M

Pretty good and fancy manipulation of absolutely nothing again M.
Point to one, Just ONE mikey that has ever stood the scrutiny of a court of LAW. Oh yeah you would accept the word of a used car salesman.
One that has answered to the American taxpayer.
You are not even a taxpayer. Who cares about your bull?
Nobody on these threads. Just look at the stars.
You don't even have back up any more.

reply to post by tezzajw


Whose body? How would the person who saw the body know who it was? Too much trolling has played havoc with your logic circuits. The body was located in the Pentagon, since you asked.
Why don't you exercise your brain and come up with your theory of what happened. Flyover, cruise missile, bombs, flying lamp posts, or whatever you think happened.
Did I tell you I liked your avatar?

[edit on 11/2/2009 by pteridine]

Originally posted by pteridine
Whose body? How would the person who saw the body know who it was?

Exactly my point, pteridine! How does the person who allegedly found the body know who's body it was? Without a positive ID on the body, then it is not possible to show that any airline passenger body was found strapped to a seat.

Nothing that you have provided in any way at all has proven that any passenger bodies were found strapped to airline seats.

You have failed to prove this claim.

You have not attempted to prove your claim that the light pole hit the taxi.

hmm, reading a bit of this thread, i keep seeing the same thing..


blah blah different flight path, blah blah blah wings, blah blah..

now.. these 9-11 freakos haven't been able to actually come up with any facts or hyothesis outside of half baked armchair crap, or even produce anything that could fit the instance better than the current explanation.

lok, i don't think people give a crap if the plane was 5 feet to the south from what the current explanation is, nor are the 911 freakos explanations any better.

so, thusly, does anyone think that anyone has a better explanation, or do peopel think hammering on a different, flawed and uninspired view of the events will make people believe, if they hammer and harp on them long enough? apparently, it isn't working.

this 3 year sham of a study was flawed from the get go, discard it like the rest of the crap these so called truthers dream up on a daily basis.

reply to post by tezzajw

A passenger plane struck the Pentagon at high speed. The damage was consistent with this. Witnesses saw it happen. People who were on the plane are gone from the earth. There is no rationale for a conspiracy and complex machinations of bombs, flyovers, missiles, etc.
What is your position? Is your theory that airline seats with bodies were planted in the Pentagon? Do you have a theory or are you still in the troll mode of raising questions without committing to a position?

You still haven't proven to anyone that Melbourne exists.

Originally posted by pteridine
You still haven't proven to anyone that Melbourne exists.

Right...

You fail to prove that passenger bodies were found strapped to airline seats.

You fail to prove that the light pole hit the taxi.

The 'best' retort that you have is that I have failed to prove that Melbourne exists.

Learn to debate, pteridine. It's clear that you're out of your depth, as you can not substantiate your claims and your use of off-topic, diversionary rubbish to bolster your argument certainly does not help your cause.

Originally posted by tezzajw
You fail to prove that passenger bodies were found strapped to airline seats.

You fail to prove that the light pole hit the taxi.

The 'best' retort that you have is that I have failed to prove that Melbourne exists.

Learn to debate, pteridine. It's clear that you're out of your depth, as you can not substantiate your claims and your use of off-topic, diversionary rubbish to bolster your argument certainly does not help your cause.

Your favourite word is "fail."

This snotty attitude may work on a 9/11 thread in a conspiracy forum but doesn't go far in the outside world. It may be what keeps people locked to their computers for salvation. Where else will anyone bother to listen for more than a couple sentences?

We haven't seen anything from you disproving the 500 hundred things you attempt to question. A child with a pile of gravel can throw stones. Implied is a lack of the ability to do anything beyond linking to some conspiracy drone.

Anyway you help reinforce the highly negative perception of Truthers and explain why more open-minded balanced people think they're a joke.

This will likely provoke a torrent of malicious badmouthing. But does anyone rational really care?


M




[edit on 3-11-2009 by mmiichael]