Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by budaruskie
Though I usually walk away from someone who doesn't address the statements, presented. Further, responds much like you did, by addressing a
statement with a question that is a non-issue. However, I feel compelled at this time to address your question.
So with that, I would have to conclude that your opinion, or thoughts would be skeptical at best. Though I agree with you in one aspect, it would be
nice to see the video, which in turn would allow for a conclusion to be drawn. But the problem I see, with your previous responses, is that you
appear to want to see this video, but though we do not have access to that evidence, which prevents anyone to ascertain what happened, it would seem
you wish to decry possible theories as to what happened. I'm not saying the OS is truth, but to denounce one possible outcome, for another, is
laughable at best.
Why you seemed so upset, which btw, If you felt offended because you assumed i was being sarcastic in my previous post, was not meant to be offensive
in any way. Still if that's the way you felt, sounds more like a personal problem.
If the only constructive response you can conjure up, by refraining from answering a statement addressed to you, by asking a question and refusing to
discuss further without your questioned being answered, further suggests you need to walk away from your keyboard, and address your maturity levels.
Which most fellow readers would most likely agree, was childish in nature.
Honestly, your writing style is hard to understand. I believe your answer to my very basic question is however in this post, so I will respond
My question was: What is my opinion and what do I believe...in regards to the Pentagon event on 9/11 of course.
Your answer was(I think): " I would have to conclude that your opinion, or thoughts would be skeptical at best."
The truth: My belief is that something did explode at the Pentagon. I do not know what it was. Some people say they saw a plane, some even say they
saw it hit the Pentagon, and I believe they are being honest. However, others say they saw different planes (different sizes, in different places,
different markings) as well as other planes (grey C-130), and many do not say they saw it actually strike the Pentagon; I also believe they are
telling the truth. I have no way of giving any one witness more credibility than another, so I can't base my belief entirely on eyewitness testimony
because then I would have no clear picture. But, it does appear that some sort of vehicle was flying towards the Pentagon, that is the only completely
agreed upon idea I can find.
So, I think its reasonable to look at the photographic and video evidence. What I see is a hole about 20 or so feet wide and a fire in the first
pictures taken. I think its worth noting, that there is no obvious plane wreckage in these photos, but that doesn't mean necessarily that it isn't
there. What is there, is pictures of security cameras that have a reasonable chance of catching the plane in their field of view. So, in my opinion,
its reasonable to want to see the footage they did record...BUT THE GOV'T WON'T SHOW IT. This immediately makes me wonder why. What are the possible
reasons for the gov't not providing evidence that would support its case? However, I'm forced to keep looking at AVAILABLE evidence instead.
Ultimately, there are photos of small pieces of debris that reasonably looks like parts of an airplane to me...this is the evidence that seemingly
supports the OS. But again, I can't help but notice how little of it there is, how small those pieces actually are, and the complete lack of large
sections of engine, wing, tail section, etc as well as the missing giant skid mark on the grass. To this day, I have not seen ANYTHING that isn't
small enough to be carried into place by 1-2 people. That doesn't mean that the entire gov't and military sat down and planned out a nefarious
deception, but it does mean that only 1-2 people could
have nefariously decepted us all with careful planning. I also see a hole on an inside
ring that is roughly the same size as the original hole in the outside wall that OS guys tell me was created by landing gear. Maybe it was, but what
about all of the columns inside the outer ring those things would have had to dodge or destroy to get there? Why did this landing gear, which to my
knowledge consists of a single steel rim, create such a large symmetrical hole? Why does the first reporter on scene say unequivocally, that there is
no evidence of a large jet anywhere? Ultimately, why would such an enormous plane crash have so little evidence?
On top of that, there are many other aspects of the event that have official explanations that lead me to be at the very least, skeptical. For
How could a pilot with no training on that type of aircraft fly it so precisely? My grandfather and father are both pilots and they think its
ridiculous to assume that they could do it. Numerous other experienced pilots, including at lest one who has actually flown that particular
not just one like it, say that its official flight path was impossible. Why would they all say this?
How could such a pilot fly the plane beyond its known capabilities in regards to speed and maneuverability?
How come it was never intercepted?
Why did it disappear, then reappear on radar?
Why did air traffic controllers say they thought it was a military aircraft because of its speed and maneuverability?
Why was the crime scene immediately tampered with and literally covered up with dirt as quickly as possible?
Why would an official say a missile struck, when he really meant a plane; especially when so many damn fool conspiracy sites claim it was a
Why did a guy from Rolls Royce say that a piece photographed at the scene wasn't a piece from one of his engines, if it really was?
Why did it strike the only portion of the Pentagon reinforced for such an attack?
Why did it strike the only portion of the Pentagon with all of the recorded data regarding Rummy's 9/10 speech?
Where is the evidence of passengers at the scene?
Why would a woman who was in that particular office say she walked out of the hole in the outer wall if she didn't, and why doesn't she say that she
believed it was a passenger jet that created it?
Why is there no plane on the security gate footage or the hotel footage?
There are many other questions to be answered, but it doesn't do any good to list any more at this time. The fact of the matter is ONE clear video of
a plane impacting the outer wall would answer many of these questions. If that is what happened, then I believe that somewhere a camera caught it on
video. If that really is the case, then the gov't would have this footage and should have released the footage long ago, to support their own
I really can't make it any clearer than that.