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.

 

Flight path of the plane that approached the pentagon

page: 9
6
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 08:18 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 




posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 03:37 PM
link   
reply to post by scott3x
 



Well, all I know is that weedwhacker hasn't posted in this thread in a while. I wonder why...


PLEASE GIVE ME A REASON to post.

Up to now...

There has been NOTHING put forward to firmly contest the facts of the AAL77 approach and impact with the Pentagon....

We have certain individuals who, based ONLY on claims from unsupported "witnessess" allege certain beliefs.

HOWEVER, those few "eyewitness" accounts are trumped by MANY other more reliable eyewitness accounts, and this goes unnoticed and unreported by the North of Citgo" believers....who will seem to resort to ANY effort to support theri belief, up to and including IGNORING anything that conflicts with their mindset.

BUT, it gets worse.....

THOSE who are 'convinced' about he "North of Citgo" ground track, still can't come together to agree on WHAT actually happened!!!!!

There is just a hodgepodge of dis-connected "theories"....when the simplest most obvious choice stares them in the face....!!!!



posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 04:02 PM
link   
Here's to hoping that this post doesn't get mangled by a moderator as well...

reply to post by weedwhacker
 



Originally posted by weedwhacker
We have certain individuals who, based ONLY on claims from unsupported "witnessess" allege certain beliefs.

HOWEVER, those few "eyewitness" accounts are trumped by MANY other more reliable eyewitness accounts,


I have yet to hear of such a witness. Could you name one?



Originally posted by weedwhacker
BUT, it gets worse.....

THOSE who are 'convinced' about the "North of Citgo" ground track, still can't come together to agree on WHAT actually happened!!!!!


I believe they all agree that the plane didn't hit the pentagon, which means that the official explanation is false. If you ever get to the point where you believe even this, I think you would agree that a new, truly indepedent investigation should be done.

[edit on 15-10-2009 by scott3x]



posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 04:23 PM
link   
reply to post by scott3x
 





posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 05:54 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


For future reference, how do you embed youtube videos? I clicked on the 'youtube video' link, but it asked for the youtube number; where can one find that?

Alright, let's start with the first witness in that video, Mike Walter. First of all, CIT and now PFT dismiss the notion that the pentagon was struck by a missile, so I have no argument with the video's claim that he only meant that the plane was 'like' a cruise missile instead of actually being one. The issue is what flight path the pentaplane took, and on that issue, Mike Walter says something that clear contradicts the official story. Starting at around 1:15 in this youtube video, Mike Walter states:

"…I actually heard the jet at first, and then it did a pivot, a bank, and it basically nose dived right into the pentagon."

CIT started a thread, which analyzes the implications of that statement...

Mike Walter's bank-pivot-turn, he is not referring to a mere wing tilt

[edit on 15-10-2009 by scott3x]



posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 07:52 PM
link   
I commend those of this thread that have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the flight path of the plane that approached the Pentagon in the Official story is false. The life and limb of every Coalition Sailor, Airman and valiant Soldier fighting the false wars due to this lie can only benefit from this work and a true jurisprudence INVESTIGATION.
One thing I learned is that any fool can fly a plane LOL



posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 07:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Donny 4 million
 


I respect weedwhacker and believe that for the most part he has maintained a level head. However, I think that after a while, disagreeing with others on this issue can be rather emotionally scarring. Heck, I felt hurt myself for a bit when you and others turned against me for a while, and I'm on your side :-p.

I yearn for a place where people can talk about all this -without- all the harsh words.



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by scott3x
 



I yearn for a place where people can talk about all this -without- all the harsh words.


Doesn't matter, anymore to me...I AM OVER IT!!!

Until (or unless) I get an apology from a certain "Super Mod", then I just don't care anymore.

ATS used to be a fun place....but a continuing example of posts by certain members (not you) you have NO IDEA what they're talking about, but just rant in most unpleasant ways, and IGNORE good, solid contributions by others...makes it difficult to swallow this place, anymore.

MY GOD!!!

It's like a love-fest of stupidity, sometimes...

(not you)

I have seen valued members get fed up (different topics -- sometimes)

I have seen the GAMUT of silly ideas pondered, regarding 9/11....and NO ONE keeps it straight, they just all want to think it was some "GRAND PLAN" of the "PTB"....and facts be damned if they get in the way of a pre-conceived notion...

I am tired of the junk....it's over. Done.

Those who wish to wallow in ignorance??? I'll hold the hose, and help to fill up your mud puddle, so you can roll around in it....



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


I've had some mod trouble recently here myself, as well as with some members; fortunately for me, I'm more prone to see conspiracies in things, which makes things somewhat easier, this being a site that is for people who tend to see things that way.

I've mentioned to you in the past that there are other forums I'm in where I think things are somewhat less rough, one of which has a mod that tends to take the official story side (although he allows both sides of the debate). Why don't you try one of these out? Perhaps a little break from here might do you some good?




top topics



 
6
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join