IT'S OFFICIAL: Even conspiracy web sites acknowledge it was flight 77 that hit the Pentagon

Oh, for the love of all that is holy, stop being so gullible. No plane hit the Pentagon! We are told that the reason there's no remains of the plane is that the concrete supports shredded the plane into nothing, along with its passengers. In which case I ask what carried on through the three sections of the building and eventually blew a hole into the courtyard before the fourth section of the building? You can't have something destroyed down to the atomic level the moment it passes through the first ring of the building yet somehow be substantial enough to go on and knock holes through a further two rings!!!
In the history of plane crashes nothing is more ridiculous than the events of 9/11 especially concerning the Pentagon.

reply to post by CholmondleyWarner


The only gullible person here is you. Your post shows a distinct lack of knowledge of the facts in regards to Flight 77. The plane wasn't reduced to the atomic level, it left plenty of wreckage behind.

Originally posted by CholmondleyWarner
We are told that the reason there's no remains of the plane

Typical truther lie - how about looking at the pictures that have been posted here many many times before showing Flight 77 wreckage outside and inside the pentagon?

You can't have something destroyed down to the atomic level the moment it passes through the first ring of the building yet somehow be substantial enough to go on and knock holes through a further two rings!!!

Just when you think the truthers with their silly conspiracy theories have gotten as silly as they can, along comes another one even sillier - just where did you get the information that the plane was "destroyed down to the atomic level" from? Which silly website posted that, or is it just something you made up yourself?

Originally posted by impressme

Again, you do not know what I think, unless you are a physic.

I'm not a physic [sic]. But I have read a good number of these:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

And from that sizeable amount of material I am able to work out what you think. Unless of course you're purposely writing about what you don't think.

Like I said:

DNA to what? From where, matched to whom?

Your answer below:

you reject the thorough dna evidence that exists from the Pentagon. Either that or you're pretending it doesn't exist. I'm not sure which

I asked you a simple question from a past statement you made and you cannot, or will not answer it.

Your question is irrelevant to my point. You're asking it to try to discredit the dna evidence, but that's got nothing to do with what I'm saying. I acknowledge that you don't believe it, and I'm not interested in arguing about it. The fact is that evidence exists - in your opinion false evidence - for dna testing at the pentagon.

I'm asking why you wouldn't just do to serial numbered parts what you do with the dna material. Which is what you do above - immediately attempt to discredit it when it is brought up.

I repeat, why would it be harder to fake serial numbered parts than dna evidence?

You, have demonstrated like many OS believers do, that your opinions are the facts based on assumptions and hearsay presentations from the main street media.

I haven't presented any facts. I'm not trying to convince you that the dna is real. I'm attempting to discover why serialised part numbers would help you when dna does not.

I asked you to what were the FBI comparing DNA to? This is a very simple question yet, you cannot give an answer.

I can actually, but it's off topic.

reply to post by TrickoftheShade

Again, you do not know what I think, unless you are a physic.

I'm not a physic [sic]. But I have read a good number of these:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Just because I drive down a particular street it does not mean I live there, want to live there, used to live there, or know someone who lives, lived or will be living there. Just because I watch a certain movie or TV shows, it does not in anyway prove that I agree, disagree, believe the content or enjoy the movie / show. It is foolish of you to make any judgment about what I think by stalking me and tracking my movements on ATS.

I haven't presented any facts. I'm not trying to convince you that the dna is real. I'm attempting to discover why serialised part numbers would help you when dna does not.

Because of the tremendous fire/heat and physical damage at the supposed crash sites, it is virtually impossible to have recovered any useful DNA. Even if they did recover useable DNA, how would the “investigators” match it to any of the supposed hijackers? Do you think that they had a “suspected Arab future flyer hijackers with box cutters” DNA database? They finally admitted they didn’t even have the names of the supposed hijackers. So, tell me again just how they made positive ID’s from the magic DNA!!!
The serial number deal is so simple, even W hisself could have figgered it out. Every vehicle used in flight must have an assigned serial number which is kept on file by the FAA for the purpose of identification and logging information about all problems, repairs, maintenance, etc. related to that particular vehicle. THE SERIAL NUMBER ALONE WILL REVEAL ALL INFO ABOUT THAT VEHICLE unlike DNA which at best, if uncontaminated, could either include or exclude a particular person from a pool of suspects. The problem is that there was no POOL OF SUSPECTS to compare the supposed recovered DNA with.
The FAA could easily create a history to match a serial number they used on 911. It would be possible to create an entire file on a nonexistent plane in a matter of minutes and post it in the appropriate database of commercial airliners. Equally easy would be taking any “black box” and record any data the FAA wanted and also, a CVR could be faked just as easily.

reply to post by dereks

Typical truther lie

You post that same line in many of your posts..
They are NOT lies, they are opinions..

I'm surprised the Mods haven't done something about that...

Originally posted by impressme


Just because I drive down a particular street it does not mean I live there, want to live there, used to live there, or know someone who lives, lived or will be living there. Just because I watch a certain movie or TV shows, it does not in anyway prove that I agree, disagree, believe the content or enjoy the movie / show. It is foolish of you to make any judgment about what I think by stalking me and tracking my movements on ATS.

What a ridiculous analogy. The only conclusion one could draw is that you write what you don't think. Which would explain your more extraordinary ramblings I suppose.

By the way, you're contributing to a public forum. It's not necessary to "stalk" you to read your stuff.

The FAA could easily create a history to match a serial number they used on 911. It would be possible to create an entire file on a nonexistent plane in a matter of minutes and post it in the appropriate database of commercial airliners. Equally easy would be taking any “black box” and record any data the FAA wanted and also, a CVR could be faked just as easily.

edit on 20-2-2011 by impressme because: (no reason given)

So why do you want the serial numbers? So that you can immediately pronounce them fake?

reply to post by TrickoftheShade

What a ridiculous analogy. The only conclusion one could draw is that you write what you don't think. Which would explain your more extraordinary ramblings I suppose.

If you “think” that the government is telling the truth then why haven’t any of you debunkers presented any evidence to back up their story after 10 years?

So why do you want the serial numbers? So that you can immediately pronounce them fake?

Are you kidding? Perhaps, you believe every pilot and aviation expert who is interested in the truth to 911 only wants the government’s evidence so they can deny it? If anyone is spewing “extraordinary ramblings” I believe everyone on ATS will agree you just did a wonderful job of demonstrating it yourself.

Your post has nothing to do with the given topic. Why don’t you explain to me why you believe in the OS of the Pentagon crash? I would like to see what kind of evidence that is so credible that it would keep you from asking any questions?

Originally posted by impressme


If you “think” that the government is telling the truth then why haven’t any of you debunkers presented any evidence to back up their story after 10 years?

There is tonnes of evidence for the traditional theory of what occurred. I love it when you say there isn't "any". Are you serious? Do you really think there is absolutely no evidence at all that 19 islamists captured planes and crashed them into the WTC and the Pentagon?

Because if that's the case then I'm afraid you prove my point. Only someone who is able on strict faith to see any corroboration for the OS as automatically false would be able to think the way you do. You have to have made your mind up that absolutely anything that conflcits with your solemn world view must be invented.

Are you kidding? Perhaps, you believe every pilot and aviation expert who is interested in the truth to 911 only wants the government’s evidence so they can deny it? If anyone is spewing “extraordinary ramblings” I believe everyone on ATS will agree you just did a wonderful job of demonstrating it yourself.

But you just wrote this!

The FAA could easily create a history to match a serial number they used on 911. It would be possible to create an entire file on a nonexistent plane in a matter of minutes and post it in the appropriate database of commercial airliners. Equally easy would be taking any “black box” and record any data the FAA wanted and also, a CVR could be faked just as easily.

You clearly believe that serial numbers would corroborate the OS, and are therefor not to be trusted. So you would throw them out immediately.

Which makes me wonder why you want them in the first place? Just so you can say they're fake?

Your post has nothing to do with the given topic. Why don’t you explain to me why you believe in the OS of the Pentagon crash? I would like to see what kind of evidence that is so credible that it would keep you from asking any questions?

edit on 21-2-2011 by impressme because: (no reason given)

There's really no point. The evidence has been dealt with in extraordinary detail, most notaby in catherder's thread. Any evidence that supports the plae hitting the building conflicts with your basically religious view and so you'll need to find some way to allow yourself not to believe it.

In that sense it's not that constructive conversing with you about the evidence. So all I'm doing here is pointing out to you that there's little worth in you demanding different evidence since you'll always just find a pretext on which to reject it. You've already done so with the serial numbers and you don't even have them.

reply to post by TrickoftheShade

You've already done so with the serial numbers and you don't even have them.

That is completely untrue!
Your assumptions of me are wrong; I have researched many parts of the 911 events in the past six years. I have presented many credible scientific reports and evidence proving the government has lied to the American people about 911. You can make up all the lies about me all you want, however it will not make the Truth go away.

I don’t care what you think of me or my opinions because it has no relevance to the OP. Apparently you are not here to discuss the given topic
If all you’re looking for is someone to feed your negative assumptions, then I suggest you find someone else to entertain you.

reply to post by g146541


Exactly! It's like people don't want to see what is right
in front of them .

What makes me laugh about those who are protecting the government by defending their lies is the fact that they feel because they give a link to some site which is against the conspiracy theory it therefore proves the point! They do it time and time again... What they don't seem to understand is that for every link they post refuting the conspiracy the believers can post a similar link which, at first glance, proves the conspiracy! Posting links doesn't prove anything... All you can do is use your common sense.

reply to post by

TrickoftheShade


Why is it that you attack everyone who does not agree with the "OS" of 9-11?

You have a hardon for impressme who has posted more credible evidence than anyone else,

If your deluded brain can actually see a 757 hitting the Pentagon, you must be either a liar or a moron. I don't believe the latter.

Whatever the reason, you are foolish to think that a 757 hit thew Pentagon. I guess you believe the DOD cleanup boyz did a rush job to make it all look good.

The truth beats you every time and his is no exception. again, you lose.

reply to post by impressme


Okay, I'll take your word for it.

Explain to me why you want the plane's serial numbers if they're so easily falsifiable.

Originally posted by truthcounts
reply to post by

TrickoftheShade

 

Why is it that you attack everyone who does not agree with the "OS" of 9-11?

You have a hardon for impressme who has posted more credible evidence than anyone else,

If your deluded brain can actually see a 757 hitting the Pentagon, you must be either a liar or a moron. I don't believe the latter.

Whatever the reason, you are foolish to think that a 757 hit thew Pentagon. I guess you believe the DOD cleanup boyz did a rush job to make it all look good.

The truth beats you every time and his is no exception. again, you lose.

edit on 23-2-2011 by truthcounts because: (no reason given)

What an interesting, evidence-filled post.

reply to post by impressme


Please, by all means, explain and describe this "easy" process!:

The FAA could easily create a history to match a serial number they used on 911. It would be possible to create an entire file on a nonexistent plane in a matter of minutes and post it in the appropriate database of commercial airliners. Equally easy would be taking any “black box” and record any data the FAA wanted and also, a CVR could be faked just as easily.

You used the word "easily" twice, "easy" once and the phrase regarding creating an entire file on a nonexistent plane in a "matter of minutes".....

Wow!!

Those are some audacious assertions!! Is that how it works in your paranoid fantasy world? I believe someone has confused a Hollywood-type film script concept for real life.

Alas.....I am afraid it is a continuing symptom seen in these posts of yours. Wildly inaccurate, fantastical claims (and others, >chuckle

reply to post by TrickoftheShade


I'd like to see the part numbers for the simple sake of consistency.

The photos I've seen of plane parts are photos of plane parts only really. They don't actually show the parts in their location and context of the "crash".

Of course, being inside the Pentagon, I'd expect they'd, at the very least, be 757 parts... let's check that first! lol

Next, let's make sure those 757 parts are from the actual alleged flight 77 aircraft etc.

So a chain of consistency could be checked.

Now, it doesn't really mean anything, to my mind, if things "check out". Of course they're going to check out! It's if they don't check out that's the thing to check...

Of course they're going to check out... you see? No? OK.

Look, how many people reading here still think that Oswald shot Kennedy? How many? Why not everyone? Weren't we TOLD he did it? And weren't we TOLD that on TV and the radio in 1963? Wasn't there a Commission on it?! Didn't they TELL US what really went down that day?! I think they did. Why it's obvious that's what really happened isn't it?

Maybe "Oswald" was flying the planes that day in 2001. You get me? You see where I'm coming from?

Just because there are plane parts in the Pentagon from a 757 (supposedly, though not clearly shown) and just because those very parts are reported to be (TOLD TO US) from the actual flight 77 that had been a commercial jet years previous, doesn't mean it's TRUE, it flew there, OR that it was 'hijackers' that flew it there, now does it?

NO.

A Hijacker shot Kennedy from behind with a rifle from an office building in Dallas. Oh really? But looking at the Zapruder film, it "looks like" he was actually shot from the front, from perhaps the grassy knoll area etc.

Interesting.

19 Oswalds hijacked 4 planes on 9/11, and crashed one into the Pentagon. Oh really? But when you look at the first shots taken after the "crash" you don't really see any expected wreckage, in fact, it "looks like" no plane even crashed there etc.

Interesting.

Plane parts are photographed, supposedly from a 757 (likely, but I'll get to that) but who knows if the part numbers actually match the actual flight 77 aircraft? I expect they do though... and not because I believe we're being told the whole truth though.

Rather, it's obvious all those things would blatantly match, for you couldn't very well pull off some Massive TV Reported Commission Sanctioned Grand Deception if plane parts from a 737 were found in the Pentagon instead with part numbers that matched the Red Baron's 1917 biplane now could you?!

NO.

And the DNA? Oh that all matched... So, you were in the lab when they CSI'd up the tests? Oh really?

Interesting.

Ph.D Oswald TOLD YOU the Results.

Me, I don't really care about this plane, no plane, thing at the Pentagon. I think it's IRRELEVANT.

Why? Because I think *some* of those Pentagon post "crash" group photos were 'staged' and so consequently, I expect almost *Everything* to MATCH. It's what doesn't match or add up that needs to be examined now, that is, unless you're all really really comfortable with the whole first story TOLD TO YOU that 19 'Oswalds' did 9/11.

Cheers

reply to post by NWOwned


Exactly. There's no point showing any of the evidence to someone who's made up their mind. That's my point precisely.

So I don't understand why someone who thinks that serial numbers are easier to fake than DNA (note I don't demand that you believe the DNA to be real - although of course it is - just that there exists a convincing enough record of it to fool enough people) would bother asking for the serial numbers.

If a plane hit the Pentagon then why is there no plane debris whatsoever?

reply to post by recondoman


You mean aircraft debris like this scattered across the Pentagon lawn .....