the hole in the pentagon..is the big hole in the 911 story

page: 28
62
<< 25  26  27   >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by RoScoLaz
this piece of 'plane wreckage' is in no way burn damaged. nor the grass beneath it.


So, you can determine this from a low res photo? What about all of those jagged edges? What caused that? Were all of those thousands of pieces lying in the background also planted? I guess they hauled it in on an invisible stealth tractor/trailer rig in front of thousands of people. So, you think the First Responders, people on the lawn, and folks on the highway in their cars didn't notice? Wy no, it an everyday occurrance that tractor/trailer rigs drive across the Pentagon lawn loaded with aircraft parts in the aftermath of an airplane crash while people inside are dying and fires are still raging...


Originally posted by RoScoLaz
the metal is pristine, just cut with tinsnips and crumpled up a little.


All of those ripped jagged edges were done with tin snips, huh? And it's just crumpled up a little, huh? My, what big eyes you have.


Originally posted by RoScoLaz
it was placed where it's seen in this pic. it didn't fall there after 'the plane' hit the pentagon. it is a plant. the entire 9/11 official evidences are crap. nothing more. common sense carries more weight than blind acceptance of what 'they' tell you.


If a plane hit the pentagon as you say why would anyone need to plant parts? Do you think the plane that hit the building remained undamaged? I don't see any common sense in this post at all and no one told me what happened. I learned partially from the photos you've posted. No one needed to tell me at all, I see the photos and more.... Speaking of blind......




posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 01:41 PM
link   
reply to post by RoScoLaz
 



Why should it be burnt ? It never spent any time inside the fire ball. In the photo below you can see in flight above the read arrow. Did you know you can track the flight path, of most of the debris, found on the lawn, using security videos ?




posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 02:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Reheat
 


"So, you can determine this from a low res photo?"

yes

"My, what big eyes you have."

no bigger than yours, but plenty more discerning

"If a plane hit the pentagon as you say"

i didn't. note my use of apostrophes around 'the plane'

"why would anyone need to plant parts?"

same reason cops plant drugs. a fit up job



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 02:19 PM
link   
reply to post by waypastvne
 


"Why should it be burnt ? It never spent any time inside the fire ball."

of course it didn't. it never spent any time as part of 'flight 77'



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 02:34 PM
link   
One thing that SCREAMS to me that something is wrong with the whole story is how in the F does a rogue plane hit the pentagon... I mean we are talking about the PENTAGON!!!!

Next thing they are going tell us is that 5 masked men took all the gold from Fort Knox in an ice cream truck after making 500 trips un-noticed.



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 04:02 PM
link   
reply to post by knowledgedesired
 



One thing that SCREAMS to me that something is wrong with the whole story is how in the F does a rogue plane hit the pentagon... I mean we are talking about the PENTAGON!!!!


The Pentagon is nothing but a huge office building

Or did you expect some sooper sekrit stealth laser guns to pop up from the lawn to disintergrate anything which
comes by........



posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by RoScoLaz
this piece of 'plane wreckage' is in no way burn damaged. nor the grass beneath it. the metal is pristine, just cut with tinsnips and crumpled up a little. it was placed where it's seen in this pic. it didn't fall there after 'the plane' hit the pentagon. it is a plant. the entire 9/11 official evidences are crap. nothing more. common sense carries more weight than blind acceptance of what 'they' tell you.


edit on 14/6/12 by RoScoLaz because: (no reason given)


Yep definately Placed there...'Staged' Photo if you will...



posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 01:45 PM
link   
reply to post by knowledgedesired
 
Not only did the 'plane' reach the pentagon unmolested, not one person in authority lost their job, and some were even promoted. But, there's no proof of govt. involvement. Just like there's no proof that OJ slashed two people to death.



posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 07:03 PM
link   
reply to post by dillweed
 


What was going to"molest" flight 77? And how do you hold someone responsible for decisions made long before 2001?



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 02:01 PM
link   
So was it true that there was only ONE Camera that contains footage of the Plane?



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 03:57 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


I actually thought it was a secure US facilty that should be protected....silly me.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 04:24 PM
link   
reply to post by knowledgedesired
 


It was. By the planes that USED to sit alert all over the country. The Pentagon has no restricted airspace, no super secret missile batteries, etc. The flight path to Reagan National goes almost over the corner of the Pentagon. If you had missile batteries there, it would be too risky. One malfunction, and bam, there goes a plane with 250 people on it.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by knowledgedesired
reply to post by thedman
 


I actually thought it was a secure US facilty that should be protected....silly me.


It may be your fault. Was your Representative and/or Senator one of those who voted for the reduction of Air Defense Fighters on 5 minute alert during the 1990's. Did you tell him/her that you wanted all secure facilities in the US fully protected for airborne threats originating within the US? If you did and he voted otherwise (as most did), did you then work to get him/her out of Office? Do you even know how he/she voted? If you didn't do all of these thing then YOU ARE GUILTY OF NEGLIGENCE and should be held accountable. I think we should lynch all of the guilty bastids, don't you?



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 01:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Reheat
 

That is a bit of a stretch. What isn't a stretch is believing that a country as powerful as ours could scramble jets and evacuate high risk buildings in the 34 minutes between being positive we were under attack and being attacked again.



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by waypastvne
reply to post by RoScoLaz
 



Why should it be burnt ? It never spent any time inside the fire ball. In the photo below you can see in flight above the read arrow. Did you know you can track the flight path, of most of the debris, found on the lawn, using security videos ?




There is nothing to be gleaned from this image or the CCTV footage. It does not show a plane, and until a video appears that does then we can take it that there was none. The onus is on the government to prove they have nothing to hide, but they haven't released any video to give people reason to believe it was a plane.

I don't buy the hole or the placed debris, there are way too many problems with the pentagon. Even the first reporter said it looked like a missile, and said there was not evidence to suggest a plane hit the pentagon. He did suspiciously change his story down the line, like other people, it seems a lot of people changed their stories to suit the OS. I gives the impression that someone made them change their initial accounts. In a court of law that would be highly suspicious.



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by knowledgedesired
 



One thing that SCREAMS to me that something is wrong with the whole story is how in the F does a rogue plane hit the pentagon... I mean we are talking about the PENTAGON!!!!


The Pentagon is nothing but a huge office building

Or did you expect some sooper sekrit stealth laser guns to pop up from the lawn to disintergrate anything which
comes by........



It's a bit more than just a 'guge office building' it's the headquarters of the United States Department of Defence! A building built with security in mind.It even has it's own police!

What did people expect? A higher level of security from such a place like this!

This is an interesting article on the Pentagon's missile defence:
www.wanttoknow.info...



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 10:29 PM
link   
reply to post by thegameisup
 


The building, was built during WWII to be a TEMPORARY office building for the War/Navy Departments. It was SUPPOSED to be turned into a warehouse after the war.


Your article, about the Pentagon's missile defense is manure.
edit on 6-7-2012 by vipertech0596 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 10:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by thegameisup

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by knowledgedesired
 



One thing that SCREAMS to me that something is wrong with the whole story is how in the F does a rogue plane hit the pentagon... I mean we are talking about the PENTAGON!!!!


The Pentagon is nothing but a huge office building

Or did you expect some sooper sekrit stealth laser guns to pop up from the lawn to disintergrate anything which
comes by........



It's a bit more than just a 'guge office building' it's the headquarters of the United States Department of Defence! A building built with security in mind.It even has it's own police!


Since when do police protect anything or anyone against Commercial Airliners being used as a missile? Duh!


Originally posted by thegameisup
What did people expect? A higher level of security from such a place like this!


Since most people here have a disdain for anything military and consistently accuse the military of being in on the conspiracy (false flag attack), it seems rather odd that you are concerned about their welfare. It doesn't matter, does it? It is just rhetoric to stir up anti-government crap, right?


Originally posted by thegameisup
This is an interesting article on the Pentagon's missile defence:
www.wanttoknow.info...


All I needed to know without even reading this tripe is that David Ray Griffin and Peter Dale Scott were on their "team".. The motto here is to Deny Ignorance not promote it. as this piece of garbage does. The author or authors of that site has no clue about SDI in the least. They obviously do not understand it's purpose or it's capabilities. It's amazing that they can even turn on a computer and connect it to the internet. Yes, it is that bad. That you linked to it says more about your own gullibility and complete ignorance that anything you could possibly write in numerous pages here. Thanks for establishing that no one should listen to anything else you have to say... Totally clueless!



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Reheat

All I needed to know without even reading this tripe is that David Ray Griffin and Peter Dale Scott were on their "team".. The motto here is to Deny Ignorance not promote it. as this piece of garbage does. The author or authors of that site has no clue about SDI in the least. They obviously do not understand it's purpose or it's capabilities. It's amazing that they can even turn on a computer and connect it to the internet. Yes, it is that bad. That you linked to it says more about your own gullibility and complete ignorance that anything you could possibly write in numerous pages here. Thanks for establishing that no one should listen to anything else you have to say... Totally clueless!


heh...yeah, that brilliant article saying "Hey! We've been hearing about space based missile defense for decades! Why wasn't that aircraft shot down!" was a real piece of work. Classic Truther logic on display there and the fact that the author had no problems posting that to a public website adds to the hilarity - not to mention the poster who linked to it. The entertainment meter is pegged with this one.





 
62
<< 25  26  27   >>

log in

join