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.

 

Pentagon + Global Hawk = 911 attack

page: 5
11
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 8 2010 @ 01:36 PM
link   
 




 



posted on Feb, 8 2010 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1
Lillydale

On page 3 I posted this link to a badly burned body :-

www.vaed.uscourts.gov...

You suggested it was a Pentagon worker rather than a plane passenger. However, when I asked you whether you had any proof of that you did not reply.

Are you now in a position to prove it is not a plane passenger please ?


I did not see that request. I was certainly not dodging it. There is a lot of crap to sift through in all these threads.

Are you saying I am wrong? Do you know who that body belongs to? Did you do any research at all or did you just post a pic and hope it floats? You believe the OS so you must believe something specific about this body that reinforces that belief. Otherwise you would be being delusional and I am sure that is not the case.

You posted the pic as part of a claim. You want me to do your research for you now?
Tell you what, how about you be an adult and go ahead and source your own pic. You thought it was good enough for some kind of argument so please tell us all what you learned about this pic before you posted it.



posted on Feb, 8 2010 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1
Please give me a shred of evidence that the picture I posted was not a plane passenger.


Sorry that I missed this. So let me get this straight. You post a pic claiming it is the body of someone from the plane and then ask me to prove you wrong? How about a SHRED of evidence to back up your BS claim first?



posted on Feb, 8 2010 @ 01:51 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Non the less, we want to see the body's or body bags being removed from the crash site just like all other plane crash sites, but there is non so no body's means that this in not a plane crash but what then?

There is no government documents or talk or NTSB or any government official that talks about any body's that are directly related to the planes destruction that are related to 9/11. There is nothing out there to say that there were people in the planes no evidence of a single person just all talk.

My simple statement stands for you have no way of showing that is's not TRUE.

Simple the hell with the plane or what type of plane where are the body's no body's equal no planes.







posted on Feb, 8 2010 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lillydale

Originally posted by Alfie1
Please give me a shred of evidence that the picture I posted was not a plane passenger.


Sorry that I missed this. So let me get this straight. You post a pic claiming it is the body of someone from the plane and then ask me to prove you wrong? How about a SHRED of evidence to back up your BS claim first?


Lillydale

You miss the point. On page 3 a link was posted to the Z Moussaoui trial exhibits. Impressme responded by saying he had gone all through them but had seen no pics of any dead plane passengers.

I posted a link to this badly burned body part recovered from the Pentagon :-

www.vaed.uscourts.gov...

You jumped in on Impressme's part to say it was a Pentagon worker. When I asked you for any proof there was no reply.

Anyway, to cut to the chase, neither I nor you nor Impressme know whether or not that picture was of a plane passenger or of a Pentagon worker. For obvious reasons of discretion and sensitivity to relative's feelings these pics are not specifically identified.

So, when Impressme went through the Moussaoui trial exhibits and said he did not see any picture of dead plane passengers he was in fact not in a position to say that. I can therefore only conclude, by his criterion, that he was being a lair. And, if he was being a lair about this what else has he been a lair about ?



posted on Feb, 8 2010 @ 02:58 PM
link   
reply to post by REMISNE
 



onboard pneumatic system or a RAT if engine failure?


Except for the two engines (which I hope we can agree to being "onboard" that supply high-pressure bleed air, we have also the APU...three sources.

The RAT is there in case of a DUAL engine failure....N3 sensed in BOTH engines at same time low, while in flight.

It deploys automatically then, and the small propellor spins a small hydraulic pump, plumbed into the CENTER system, for esssential flight controls....in the event that the APU might not be "ON" at the time, because then there'd be electrics for the ELEC HYD pumps...but the RAT comes out regardless. (Hopefully one or both engines can be re-started, for electrics and pneumatics
--- and to keep flying!! --- and of course the APU can be started for electrics as well).

BUT, a simultaneous dual engine failure usually results from a flame-out (heavy rain, etc) or, as was seen in late 1980s, fuel starvation. But that's quite rare, obviously....both examples.

There is also a switch for the flight crew to deploy it, if needed.



posted on Feb, 8 2010 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by dereks
 


I have a question for you.



the above image is from the thread you referenced. I am very confused at how the fuselage of the plane held itself in tact through 6 walls of concrete and re bar, then stopped and vaporized on the spot. You claim this is a verifiable photo of proof that the plane hit the Pentagon, please tell me how on earth that happened. Perfect hole then "poof!"



posted on Feb, 8 2010 @ 04:21 PM
link   
We also have the issue of the black boxes which if I remember where solid state, I have never heard of a crash be it into a mountian the sea or even on land before flight 77 where the boxes where damaged beyond the point of giving any information



posted on Feb, 8 2010 @ 04:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by network dude
Perfect hole then "poof!"


What makes you think the 757 aircraft bits you circled caused that hole in the wall? What is to the right of that photo....



posted on Feb, 8 2010 @ 05:08 PM
link   
"Anyway, to cut to the chase, neither I nor you nor Impressme know whether or not that picture was of a plane passenger or of a Pentagon worker. So, when Impressme went through the Moussaoui trial exhibits and said he did not see any picture of dead plane passengers he was in fact not in a position to say that. I can therefore only conclude, by his criterion, that he was being a lair."

So let me get this straight.

1) Impressme says he did not see any pictures of any dead plane passengers (which have been officially verified, obviously). Here is his quote below:

"there are no photos of any dead passengers"

2) You ADMIT that you DO NOT KNOW if the picture of the dead body is from a passenger on the plane.

3) You accuse Impressme of being a liar because he DID NOT admit that the body part in the picture was that of a plane passenger.

Why should Impressme admit that the dead body in the picture was that of a plane passenger when you yourself admitted that this fact could not be verified due to sensitivity for the family of the deceased? Are you for real?

There is absolutely no evidence that Impressme lied. However, there appears to be plenty of evidence that you slandered Impressme by calling him a liar. How many more people have you slandered using this underhanded method?

I guess when you have to defend a lie anything is fair game, huh? Even falsely accusing people of lying. Why am I not surprised?



[edit on 8-2-2010 by SphinxMontreal]



posted on Feb, 8 2010 @ 05:09 PM
link   
reply to post by network dude
 


There are no interior partitions on the two lower floors of the Pentagon between the E Ring and exit hold punched into C Ring

Once the E ring wall is breeched is a clear path through the building to the
C Ring




Many researchers have asserted that whatever produced the C-Ring hole had to pass through six masonry walls, since it had to traverse three rings -- C, D, and E. However the exterior walls between the outermost three rings did not go down to ground level, since the intervening light-wells were only three stories deep. The outer three rings were unified on the first and second floors, meaning that the only heavy structures between the facade and the C-Ring wall with the hole were occasional columns. Thus it is plausible that an engine could have passed through the three rings, missing the reinforced concrete pillars, and puncturing the C-Ring wall.


The exit hole was caused by section of main landing gear, one of the
heaviest and strongest sections of an aircraft which came to rest in the
access road outside C Ring





posted on Feb, 8 2010 @ 05:18 PM
link   
reply to post by jpmail
 





We also have the issue of the black boxes which if I remember where solid state, I have never heard of a crash be it into a mountian the sea or even on land before flight 77 where the boxes where damaged beyond the point of giving any information


The cockpit voice recorder was not of the latest solid state type

The boxes, while designed to resist fire and impact, are not indestrucible

The Cockpit voice recorder from AA77 was breeeched and data tape
destroyed

Picture of Cockpit Voice Recorder





In its report on the CVR, the NTSB identified the unit as an L-3 Communications, Fairchild Aviation Recorders model A-100A cockpit voice recorder; a device which records on magnetic tape. The NTSB reported that "The majority of the recording tape was fused into a solid block of charred plastic." No usable segments of tape were found inside the recorder. The Flight Data Recorder failed to record certain parameters with certainty. Among the uncertain parameters was the status of the cockpit door, which showed no sign of having been opened during the hijacking or previous 40 hours, including 11 flights prior to the hijacking.


The flight data recorder survived



posted on Feb, 8 2010 @ 05:19 PM
link   
"The exit hole was caused by section of main landing gear, one of the
heaviest and strongest sections of an aircraft which came to rest in the
access road outside C Ring"

So the landing gear, which apparently had not been lowered (as there was no reason to lower it), miraculously traveled through the underbelly and through the front of the airplane, causing the exit hole? Or maybe, the superstar suicide pilot, who could not fly a Cessna, came swooping down at an alleged 540 MPH with the landing gear lowered just in case he missed the building and landed on the highway?



posted on Feb, 8 2010 @ 05:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
miraculously traveled through the underbelly and through the front of the airplane, causing the exit hole?


What are you babbling about? The plane was shredded, and as the undercarriage is a large chunk of very strong metal it punched a hole through a wall - why do you think that is miraculous? you somehow think if you put a lump of metal inside a paper bag, then burn the bag the chunk of metal should be destroyed exactly like the bag



posted on Feb, 8 2010 @ 05:38 PM
link   
reply to post by jsettica
 


You will not see any pictures of body bags for the reason that most of the victims (Pentagon and AA77) were INSIDE the building

Refer to this chart for location where the remains were found




Also in a violent crash scene most of the remains will be badly fragmented
in what is called "human hamburger" - random scraps of tissue

In addition the Pentagon is a high security military installation - not an open field.

According to protocol the remains were photographed in situ by FBI
evidence teams before being removed to the morgue.

All photograhps are in the custody of the FBI - good luck getting them released



posted on Feb, 8 2010 @ 05:52 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


When exactly was it debunked impressme?



posted on Feb, 8 2010 @ 06:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman


According to protocol the remains were photographed in situ by FBI
evidence teams before being removed to the morgue.

All photograhps are in the custody of the FBI - good luck getting them released


Can you explain why pictures of the dead Pentagon employees are all over the internet then? What is different about those photos of dead bodies at the Pentagon from an attack on 9/11/01?



posted on Feb, 8 2010 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lillydale
Can you explain why pictures of the dead Pentagon employees are all over the internet then? What is different about those photos of dead bodies at the Pentagon from an attack on 9/11/01


All I have seen is dead passengers - care to point to the pictures of dead employees?



posted on Feb, 8 2010 @ 07:22 PM
link   
reply to post by dereks
 


hey dereks,
you had your 757 engine theory debunked.

care to comment?

that engine was blatantly too small to be a 757 engine.

want to apologize for lying yet?



posted on Feb, 8 2010 @ 07:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by Lillydale
Can you explain why pictures of the dead Pentagon employees are all over the internet then? What is different about those photos of dead bodies at the Pentagon from an attack on 9/11/01


All I have seen is dead passengers - care to point to the pictures of dead employees?


So one of you believes the OS because he has all the facts. You believe the OS because you have all the facts. He claims no one will ever see any pictures of any bodies and you claim to have seen pictures of passenger bodies. How do you explain that?

Anyway...you have not seen any such pics. If so you need to post them ASAP as they would be groundbreaking. Please feel free to show us these passenger bodies.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join