posted on Oct, 8 2010 @ 12:17 AM
Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Now I know some people at the Pentagon may be incompetent, but if they are having people that have no clue what they are talking about giving tours of
their defenses to top-secret-cleared staff like April, then I guess us truther's continual bitch that no one has been fired for gross negligence or
held responsible for 9/11 applies all the more, doesn't it. And waterboarded confessions don't count, so don't even go there.
I am only going by what I am told, and what I was told is that she didn't see any of these air defenses herself, but was told to her by others, and I
have seen no proof these other people knew what they were talking about either. Personally, I doubt very much the Pentagon had any antiaircraft
defenses before 9/11 becuase although Washington, D.C may be crime ridden, not too many drug dealers would have their own fighter bombers.
...and who in the Pentagon was waterboarded into making a confession? I must have missed that news article.
Well personally, I just think she got so desperate with nowhere else to turn that she ended up having to settle for some not-so-great attorneys
who didn't approach her case with the right angles to have some real teeth. Framed beggars can't be choosers.
No, actually, everything started to go sour for her once she started associating herself with conspiracy Chicken Littles like Jim Marrs and Alex
Jones, who constantly scream the sky is falling from these never ending sinister gov't plots to murder us all. You don't see the corelation?
Oh, well I should have known! :shk: More character assassination. Is that all you've got? Don't you think that we're seeing right through that
now? It's a little more like quoting you is of increasingly dubious value- and you were already off the scale.
It isn't character assassination, it's pointing out that she's consistantly changing her story. First she said she didn't pay any attention to
anything other than tryign to find her infant son, and then she turn around and says she didn't see any aircraft wreckage. Of Course she didn't see
any aircraft wreckage, she was concerned over looking for her infant son and wouldn't have noticed any wreckage, particularly when at that time she
admits she didn't know what happened and only found out when she was at the hospital. First she sues the airlines for her injuries, then she turns
around and claims that airplanes didn't hit the Pentagon to begin with. All during this time, she was inside the Pentagon sitting at her desk not
knowing what was going on outside, while all the people outside from motorists to people in nearby office buildings to even a groundskeeper from El
Salvador specifically saw that it was an airplane that hit the Pentagon. It's blatantly obvious she's getting all this baloney from other people.
Seriously now, are you so desperate in grasping at any straw that even remotely supports your conspiracy claims that you'll even quote this person?
If anyone on the OS side was as wildly inconsistant as Gallop is, you'd be all over them like Rosie O'Donnell on a chocolate cake. You know that and
so do I.
edit on 8-10-2010 by GoodOlDave because: Correcting misspellings to placate the grammar Nazis