It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable 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: 9
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in


posted on May, 21 2010 @ 02:12 PM

Originally posted by truthseeker911
I think it's ridiculous that there isn't any actual physical evidence of a plane having been there. If a plane had really crashed there would be more parts then just a few "planted" pieces here and there. It's funny how there are thousands of videos of 9-11 in NYC but the government won't show a conclusive video of a plane crashing at the Pentagon.

Why does it take me about 2 seconds to link to aircraft wreckage you have apparently not seen :-

Thousands of pieces, many imbedded in the fabric of the Pentagon. Planted ?, someone has been busy.

posted on May, 21 2010 @ 02:36 PM

Originally posted by benoni
ANY scientific "study" which uses "estimates" left, right and centre is FAR from scientific....

When you estimate something you are guessing.....

How can this be regarded as "scientific" ???


It cannot.....and is hardly regarded as definitive or even accurate!!

Actually, you should look those two words up "guessing" and "estimating". They are two different words and two completely different concepts. Estimates, may, in fact be very accurate without being precise. Those are two words you should also spend some time researching.

I can "estimate" the square footage in a room, I "guess' what the lottery number is going to be.

posted on May, 21 2010 @ 03:18 PM
reply to post by truthseeker911

What? Are we discussing the same events?

I think it's ridiculous that there isn't any actual physical evidence of a plane having been there.

You are stating, if I read you correctly, that there "isn't any actual physical evidence of a plane" at the Pentagon crash site??

Might I suggest a time out?

posted on May, 22 2010 @ 07:04 AM
reply to post by weedwhacker

I don't believe myself that a plane crashed at the pentagon. Because the speed and the crash impact would of taken out half the pentagon. I believe they took out the plane that was headed to the pentagon. something else hit the pentagon. because if a supposed plane can take out the WTC then only a fraction of the pentagon was taken out??

[edit on 22-5-2010 by dragnet53]

posted on May, 22 2010 @ 10:53 AM
reply to post by dragnet53

Okay , let me see if I've got this straight .

'They' took out the plane headed for the Pentagon to keep it from crashing into the Pentagon ?

But , then 'they' turned around and fired a missile or something into the Pentagon ?

Or , did the terrorists also have a missile that they fired into the Pentagon after seeing that 'they' had taken the plane 'out' ?

Sorry , doesn't make sense .

posted on May, 22 2010 @ 01:14 PM
I am thoroughly convinced that 9/11 was an inside job, masterminded by our wonderful government under the reign of #43. However, the no plane theory at the pentagon has always perplexed me. To support this theory, one must conclude that the people aboard Flight 77 were assassinated and made to look like they were in a plane crash and then their bodies were planted at the Pentagon along with destroyed parts of the airplane. It seems crazy to think that an operation would like that would go unnoticed. What do people that support this theory believe happened to the 64 passengers and crew and how do they explain the charred corpses found at the site?

new topics

top topics
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in