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.

 

9/11 The Pentagon “Where are the FACTS!

page: 6
14
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 16 2010 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by MolecularPhD

Once again; "WHERE is the EVIDENCE?" conjecture; and the theories of people not attached to the direct investigation simply agreeing with the Government statements (not official report or findings).


OK. Hi MolecularPhD.
I have to ask you for something first in order to offer an answer to your request. ""Where is the evidence??""
The evidence is available and as a matter of fact, a big portion of it is actually public. Not all evidence is public because as it has been discussed there are matters of pending trials and National Security that can´t allow for that.
But in order for us to be discussing this evidence you´d have to answer
some questions.
1.- What are the sources of evidence that you would consider acceptable?
2.- Are any Government offices worthy of your trust for showing or discussing or reporting on the events and the handling of evidence?
3.- What proportion of eyewitnesses reporting a pax. plane, versus witnesses reporting something else would turn those witnesses reports not reliable?

The reason I ask you this is because when you are given the information that you request, you will probably not accept the source as a reliable one.
Let me just run a few by you:
The FBI, the Defense Department, American Airlines, United Airlines, first responder teams, police officers, firemen, NTSB (National Transportation Safety Board), FAA (Federal Aviation Administration), NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology), air traffic controllers.

So, please just tell me a couple of sources that you would trust and take their information as acceptable and reliable.





posted on May, 16 2010 @ 04:27 PM
link   
delete

[edit on 16-5-2010 by Six Sigma]



posted on May, 16 2010 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by MolecularPhD
 


I have a question for you sir .

Where is the evidence that all of those airplane parts were 'planted' at the Pentagon ?

There are numerous photos of aircraft parts in the wreckage , but there are still those that deny that an airliner hit the Pentagon .

To be fair , where is the evidence that anything other than an airliner hit the Pentagon ?

We have photos of aircraft parts , but that isn't good enough ., so please produce some photos of missile parts or whatever it is that you believe hit the building .

And remember , cut and dried evidence only .



posted on May, 16 2010 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by MolecularPhD
Jim took one look at the photo and said “That is not my engine!”; well folks that was it for me.




From that day forth I have tried to find the truth as to what really hit the Pentagon.


Well, this one, "WAS IT", for me.

sites.google.com...




posted on May, 16 2010 @ 08:01 PM
link   
reply to post by okbmd
 


Where is the evidence that all of those airplane parts were 'planted' at the Pentagon ?


Where is your proof they belong to said planes?


There are numerous photos of aircraft parts in the wreckage , but there are still those that deny that an airliner hit the Pentagon .


For all we know, those photos could have been taken at any airplane bone yard.

You have some photos of some aircraft parts. Do they identify as belonging to said planes, [color=gold]no they don’t.

Do we know where, when, by whom, these photos where taken, [color=gold]no we do not.


To be fair , where is the evidence that anything other than an airliner hit the Pentagon ?


To be fair what proofs do you have that an airliner hit the pentagon.


We have photos of aircraft parts, but that isn't good enough. so please produce some photos of missile parts or whatever it is that you believe hit the building .


Yes, you have photos and you are right, it is not good enough! Like I said where is the chaine of evidences? Of whom, how, where, when, what time, and so on…

I could give you photos of a missal hitting the pentagon and you will ask me the same questions of where did I get them from, who took the photos, what day was it, and what time, and what location and so on… You would not accept anything until you could see it is un-tampered and went through the chain of evidences proper protocols.


And remember , cut and dried evidence only .


You are demanding what we are demanding, cut and dry.





[edit on 16-5-2010 by impressme]



posted on May, 16 2010 @ 09:14 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


Your replies to me seem to become more and more bizzare each time that you respond to anything I say .

Has this become personal to you , or what ? Do I not have the same rights here as you do ?

Airplane 'bone-yard' ? Looks to me as though that is indeed the Pentagon in all of the photos I have seen .

Looks like firefighters too . Are you still holding to the belief that there are hundreds of first -responders who were involved in your cherished conspiracy story ? That is reaching a little bit , don't you think ?

Aircraft parts have been shown inside and around the Pentagon , therefore one can assume that an aircraft was involved .

Please feel free to produce some photos of missile parts , in and around the Pentagon .

Until then , let us leave religion in church , where it belongs , and not create any new ones under the guise of a government conspiracy .

There are actually people who are members on this site who lost loved ones on 9/11. There are eyewitnesses who watched it happen , right here on ATS .

Please don't disgrace them and their losses with your senseless rhetoric of how their loved ones didn't actually die in plane crashes on that day .

Until you can prove that an airliner didn't crash into the Pentagon , then keep in mind what you so arrogantly told me about opinions .

And yes , I will hold you and yours to the same strict standards of proof and evidence that you all demand from those of us who disagree with your absurd fantasies .

I will await patiently for photos / evidence of a missile striking the Pentagon .

Do you think it might take awhile ? I'll go ahead and put coffee on just in case .

Meanwhile , would you like for me to link some more photos of airplane parts at the Pentagon ?

Boneyard ? Be careful there , you're gonna give people the imression that impressme is doing some major research with comments like that .



posted on May, 16 2010 @ 10:15 PM
link   
reply to post by okbmd
 


Today Americans are ruled by propaganda. [color=gold]Americans have little regard for truth, little access to it, and little ability to recognize it. Truth is an unwelcome entity. It is disturbing. It is “off limits”. Those who speak it run the risk of being branded 'anti-American,' 'anti-Semite' or 'conspiracy theorist.’ Truth is an inconvenience for government and for the interest groups whose campaign contributions control government. Truth is an inconvenience for prosecutors who want convictions, not the discovery of innocence or guilt. Truth is inconvenient for ideologues." Unfortunately he casts the blame on the characters of people: "economists sell their souls for filthy lucre. . . . medical doctors who, for money, have published in peer-reviewed journals concocted 'studies' that hype this or that new medicine produced by pharmaceutical companies that paid for the 'studies. . . .' Wherever one looks, truth has fallen to money


globalresearch.ca...


There are actually people who are members on this site who lost loved ones on 9/11. There are eyewitnesses who watched it happen , right here on ATS .


Do you feel this makes you right?


Please don't disgrace them and their losses with your senseless rhetoric of how their loved ones didn't actually die in plane crashes on that day .


You mean these people??



400+ Medical Professionals
200+ Senior Military, Intelligence Service, Law Enforcement, and Government Officials
1,100+ Engineers and Architects
250+ Pilots and Aviation Professionals
400+ Professors Question 9/11
[color=gold]300+ 9/11 Survivors and Family Members

200+ Artists, Entertainers, and Media Professionals


www.patriotsquestion911.com...


Until you can prove that an airliner didn't crash into the Pentagon , then keep in mind what you so arrogantly told me about opinions .


Yet you feel your opinions are truths? And when we question you for proof you just insult us for asking.


And yes , I will hold you and yours to the same strict standards of proof and evidence that you all demand from those of us who disagree with your absurd fantasies .


I do not support a proven lie, the OS. It is a well-known fact that the OS is an absurd fantasy.


I will await patiently for photos / evidence of a missile striking the Pentagon .


I never said I had any, what gives you that idea?


Until then , let us leave religion in church , where it belongs , and not create any new ones under the guise of a government conspiracy .


Religion? What does that have to do with anything that I have written to you?


This debasement of truth stems from two misguided beliefs that many Americans hold. They affect much of American society and define the American psyche. One belief is that the truth emerges from a debate between adversaries. [color=gold]The other is the belief that everyone has a right to his/her own opinion.

Many American activities are based on the these beliefs. In law, the system is called adversarial. The prosecutor and defense attorneys are adversaries. Each side presents its evidence and the truth is somehow supposed to emerge. In journalism it is called balance. Two adversaries are asked to give their sides of an issue, and the truth is somehow supposed to emerge. In politics, it is called the two party system, where the majority party and the minority party, often called the opposition, are adversaries who present their sides of the issue. Again, somehow it is believed the truth will emerge and effective legislation will then be enacted. But it doesn't work, never has, never will.


So do these adversaries have the right to their own opinions? The belief that everyone has a right to his/her own [color=gold]opinion is ludicrous. If your bank sends you a notice saying that you've overdrawn your account, can you counter with, "[color=gold]Not in my opinion"? If this maxim had any validity, truth and falsehood would have equal value. No dispute could ever be settled because the facts don't matter. Yet many in America seem to hold this view.

[color=gold]The point is that no debate between adversaries will reveal the truth if neither is willing to check the facts, or as is often the case in politics, just lying. But why would adversaries do that? In a legal action, because both sides want to win and will reveal only what is favorable to their sides. "[color=gold]As everybody knows, at least one of the lawyers in every case in which the facts are in dispute is out to hide or distort the truth or part of the truth, not to help the court discover it. . . . The notion that in a clash between two trained principle-wielders, one of whom is wearing the colors of inaccuracy and falsehood, the truth will always or usually prevail is in essence nothing but a hang-over from the medieval custom of trial by battle and is in essence equally absurd."


globalresearch.ca...

These principles also apply to the [color=gold]OS believers as well, not just the Truth movement.

[edit on 17-5-2010 by impressme]



posted on May, 17 2010 @ 09:11 AM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


" This debasement of truth stems from two misguided beliefs that many Americans hold. They affect much of American society and define the American psyche. One belief is that the truth emerges from a debate between adversaries. [color=gold]The other is the belief that everyone has a right to his/her own opinion. "

Just for clarification , do you agree with the context of the above quote that you posted ?

Do you hold to the opinion that ..."the belief that everyone has a right to his/her own opinion " is a debasement of truth that stems from a 'misguided belief' ?

You either agree with this , therefore you quoted it , or , you don't agree with it , in which case , why did you quote it ?



posted on May, 17 2010 @ 09:16 AM
link   
reply to post by rush969
 


I would be happy to accept all of those agencies that you listed in your post; as long as their findings had a chain of evidence report attached to the evidence collected which would show the chain of custody as well.

As for plane parts being at the scene you are correct there were plane parts at the scene but, the engine parts shown are not from a RB-211.

Respectfully

MolecularPHD

[edit on 17-5-2010 by MolecularPhD]



posted on May, 17 2010 @ 09:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by okbmd
 


I do not support a proven lie, the OS. It is a well-known fact that the OS is an absurd fantasy.

[edit on 17-5-2010 by impressme]


If it was a proven lie then why do you continue using the petition of people signed who want a new investigation? If it's a proven lie then why even waste the money investigating it again? If it is a proven lie then why did collages like MIT and Perdue do independant investigations which came with results that the OS was possible? Can you point me to any colleges who did independant investigations that support turther theories?

www.purdue.edu...

web.mit.edu...



posted on May, 17 2010 @ 09:59 AM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


" The belief that everyone has a right to his/her own opinion is ludicrous."

Again , do you agree with what you have quoted above ?

'Let's deny ignorance' ?!!! Maybe you should change the credo in your avatar ?

With your support of statements like the above , it begs the question ... Are you in favor of freedom of speech ? Or do you lean towards a Marxist/Socialist form of government ?

Or , to be fair , did you fail to comprehend the dictatorial philosophy that underlies the entire context of which you quoted from ?

I'm sure there are others here who would agree with me when I ask you for clarification on this issue .



posted on May, 17 2010 @ 10:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by impressme

Where is your proof they belong to said planes?


What proof that it belonged to said plane would you actually accept as legitimate proof?

I've asked you this I don't know how many times and you have consistantly run away from it like vampires run away from sunlight- just WHAT would you accept that would finally convince you that it was in fact a passenger jet that hit the Pentagon? Eyewitness testimony isn't enough. Photographic evidence isn't enough. Aircraft wreckage strewn all over the place isn't enough. The examination of DNA on the remains isn't enough. Their finding the black box identifying it as flight 77 isn't enough. Heck, I've even shown you conspiracy web sites...including the ones YOU go to...that confirm that it was a passenger jet and that wasn't enough. Every time, and I do mean every time, someone provides you with evidence you turn around and demand proof for why the evidence provided to you is true, such as this snippet:

"For all we know, these photos could have been taken at any airplane bone yard".

So I want to know, once and for all, just what evidence will you accept that it was flight 77, and that you will actually accept as legitimate proof without bickering over it frivolously? Up to this point, you have shown that your true agenda is to convince people of this conspiracy fantasia of yours regardless of what the truth really is, so you'll forgive me when I say your true motives for asking for proof is suspect.



posted on May, 17 2010 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


You keep ignoring my posts; the engine part IE.. the internal compressor hub appears to not be from a RB-211; what part of this are you missing? If the hub is not from a RB-211 then what plane; going on your statement that it is a proven fact that a plane hit the building due to the so called physical evidence collected at the scene; (by whom each piece was collected we have no idea their qualifications with handling sensitive evidence of this nature) did in fact hit the Pentagon. You continually bring up circumstantial evidence as evidence but, none of you cite an actual official document that shows chain of evidence, or chain of custody of that evidence.

Until you can put forth an actual document from a real source from the government showing their actual findings on this case; then this case is far from being an open and shut debate.

Thank You

MolecularPHD



posted on May, 17 2010 @ 03:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by MolecularPhD
You keep ignoring my posts; the engine part IE.. the internal compressor hub appears to not be from a RB-211; what part of this are you missing?


I'm not ignoring it. I just don't acknowledge that the statement is correct. I myself am going by the aerospace engineer's writeup that it is in fact an internal compressor from a RB-211, and I know you've seen the report yourself. The analysis wasn't done by the Culinary Institute of America, nor was it done by some Horde guild of World of Warcraft players. It was done by an organization of aerospace professionals who clearly have professional and technical expertise on the subject so I have no reason to doubt their assessment, particularly when their main opponents are a bunch of college kids making internet videos in their dorm rooms.

This is but one point. Another point is of all the eyewitness accounts, from journalists, nearby pilots, taxi drivers, to even an immigrant from El Salvador working the lawns who all specifically saw that it was a passenger jet, many of whom even identified it as being an American Airlines craft. I know you've seen the eyewitness accounts as well, since they've been posted here so often and they're not particularly hard to find with a 30 second google search.

Then, there's the biggest point of all- we know the conspirators had control of at least two or more disposable passenger jets, so it does nothing but add unnecessary layers of obfuscation with no tangible return for them to be sending some missile at the Pentagon and then turn around and plant fake wreckage all over the place, hire false eyewitnesses, and manufacture a fake black box to get everyone to think it was a passenger jet. They can simply use another disposable passenger jet and get all that done for real.

I'm sorry, but I'm going to need more than paranoid delusions of coverups, secret plots, and legions of gov't disinformation agents to accept the idea that it was anything other than flight 77 that hit the Pentagon.



posted on May, 17 2010 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by MolecularPhD

As for plane parts being at the scene you are correct there were plane parts at the scene but, the engine parts shown are not from a RB-211.



Well, at least you're better than some Judy Wood backing loon that has claimed that the rotor was really a hubcap from a Plymouth, and that the airplane skin was really from a blown up horse trailer.

I kid you not.



posted on May, 17 2010 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Joey Canoli
Well, at least you're better than some Judy Wood backing loon that has claimed that the rotor was really a hubcap from a Plymouth, and that the airplane skin was really from a blown up horse trailer.

I kid you not.


I do not doubt you. With my own eyes I have seen one guy post here that the gov't murdered the passengers, chopped up their bodies, and loaded the body parts onto the cruise missile to plant the DNA in the Pentagon. Only Jeffery Dahmer could have come up with mental crap like this.

I have repeatdly said that these conspriacy stories are more of the manifestation of the conspiracy proponent's own personal psyche than they are anything else, and I still stand by my assessment.



posted on May, 17 2010 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

just WHAT would you accept that would finally convince you that it was in fact a passenger jet that hit the Pentagon?


What I find particularly sad, when one dissects a truther's belief system is the strange disconnect from reality on these types of issues.

1- they ask for FBI reports
2- we point out that they testified in court about the conclusions of those reports, but also state that the report itself can't be released to the public, cuz it contains info that can compromise sources
3- truthers don't trust the testimony, they want the reports. Which of course means that they believe that the guys testifying on behalf of the FBI are lying about whether or not 77 actually crashed into the Pentagon

Fine, they can distrust them all they want. Nothing wrong with that. But here's the disconnect - if they believe that the FBI is lying, then asking THEM for THEIR documentation is NOW putting their trust in the FBI again.

IF they believe that the FBI is lying, they should just make the argument that doing so would be useless, since they will just lie about the documentation anyways.

I've yet to see a logical explanation on this issue.



posted on May, 17 2010 @ 04:15 PM
link   
PhD, in all honesty i doubt there is anything that has been released, if it exists at all, that would meet the criteria for the information you're looking for. I've been lurking this thread since you started it and trying to come up with something also and haven't had much luck either.

I looked at the links Jt posted a few pages back and that is probably as close as you're going to get on this board, but it still doesn't qualify and there are quite a few dead links. I even started looking through the 911 Commission Report to find something.

You might have some luck looking through the notes of the report here.(this is html and just scroll down about 3/4 of the page to the bolded 9 Herrorism and Horror notations)

govinfo.library.unt.edu...

Maybe these notations on chapter 9 will give you a clue to find what you're looking for. Good luck, i might even try looking through these later on after dinner. I'll post back if i find something.





[edit on 17-5-2010 by curious_soul]



posted on May, 17 2010 @ 04:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Joey Canoli
 


What I am asking to see is the FBI forensic analysis of the evidence collected at the scene; which in no way is a threat to national security as it is simply a breakdown of the scientific method used to analyze the evidence. Second I would like to see the chain of custody report and the chain of evidence report; which again should be of no threat to National Security but, it would show who, where, and what was collected at the scene; along with the credentials of those that collected that said evidence; which would show their qualifications in doing so. Non of the above constitutes a threat to National Security; if they have nothing to hide plain and simple. Yet every letter that is sent asking for the scientific data to be released and the method in which it was tested; according to the FBI is deemed a matter of National Security; this is outrageous to say the least; you want to put an end to the debate on 9/11; then let the real data reports and the evidence that was collected be reviewed by a team of engineers and scientist that have nothing to gain from doing so. Your claim that an independant panel of experts have reviewed this material is a bold face lie; they have only reviewed what has been given to the public to back up the findings of the Government; they have not reviewed or tested any of the actual material evidence collected at the scene.

After having read all of the posts on this thread; I have come to the conclusion the truth will never be known.

Respectfully

MolecularPHD

By the way the University Professors that did the graphic analysis of a 757 hitting the Pentagon to show that it was possible; made one crucial mistake in their analysis; they left out the two huge RB-211 Engines attached to the wings. This just goes to show your so called professional analysis of the evidence has proven the Government correct; sure if they are allowed to leave out crucial data for the proper analysis of the evidence.



posted on May, 17 2010 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by curious_soul
 


Like you I have been searching the internet high and low; I have gone to every website that claims to have this evidence only to find that they do not. What you get is a bunch of peoples opinions and hearsay but, no real evidence, no real scientific data reports, no official proof of evidence at all, at least nothing that would stand up in the field of science or review by any scientific body that I know of. The very lack of any real hard evidence for analysis is shocking to me; in every other NTSB case I have looked at you can find what I am looking for; strange that you cannot in this one would you not agree?

Respectfully

MolecularPHD




top topics



 
14
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join