Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Ingersoll Pentagon/Cab photos - please help?

page: 12
19
<< 9  10  11   >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 26 2011 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by kwakakev

Thanks for the honesty.


It's less of a case for honesty and more of a case of "if you don't agree with what the hundred eyewitnesses are saying, fine, prove it", and your bickering whether certain pixels on the Pentagon video should be light gray or dark gray is less than satisfying. You have to know this.




There is a lot more than a few missing pixels going on, but is it another small step through this information quagmire. As for taking over the world part, the military has been busy...


Did it ever occur to you that the whole reason why there's an information quagmire is specifically because of these damned fool conspiracy websites pushing out bad information and foolish claims that I've been railing against all along? I saw this with my own eyes when those Loose Change con artists attempted to pass off a photo of people carrying a triage tent into the Pentagon grounds as being some secret blue tarp covered thing being smuggled out of the Pentagon. They even had the gall to snip off the part of the photo that showed the crowds in the background so you couldn't see which direction they were walking. This whole "cruise missile hit the Pentagon" nonsense was invented by some French conspiracy nut trying to sell a bunch of books...and he's never even stepped foot anywhere near the Pentagon.

How can you NOT know these people are just making this crap up?




posted on Jul, 26 2011 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 




It's less of a case for honesty and more of a case of "if you don't agree with what the hundred eyewitnesses are saying, fine, prove it", and your bickering whether certain pixels on the Pentagon video should be light gray or dark gray is less than satisfying. You have to know this.


I am not sure if you have understood my previous posts, but there is about 15 or so frames of what hit the pentagon missing and they are at about twice the resolution of the video that was released. Public access to this information would help silence debate about what actually hit the pentagon. As for the witnesses there are mixed and conflicting reports about what actually happened.



Did it ever occur to you that the whole reason why there's an information quagmire is specifically because of these damned fool conspiracy websites pushing out bad information and foolish claims that I've been railing against all along?


Absolutely, but the government is also lying about what actually happened. There was a lot of resistance and very limited resources with the 9/11 commission considering the scale of the event. WTC 7 was not even mentioned in the report along with many other unresolved questions. Even some of the board members are publicly criticising the commissions investigation and lack of integrity. I have looked into and seen what NIST has had to say about WTC 7 and what ae911truth.org and others have had to say.

WTC 7 was a controlled demolition job
WTC 7 was a controlled demolition job
WTC 7 was a controlled demolition job
WTC 7 was a controlled demolition job
WTC 7 was a controlled demolition job
WTC 7 was a controlled demolition job...

This takes time to prepare and organise. The government, you and others have tried hard to deny this fact, but it is undeniable for anyone who looks into it. The question is now how far did this preparation and organisation go?

Osama Bin Laden was the first suspect, now Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld are the prime suspects along with many others. If you have any other explanation for how WTC 7 could have been controlled demolished that day and attempted to be covered up I would like to hear it. If you want to try and convince me that WTC 7 was not a controlled demolition job you are just wasting your time. This was a very difficult position to arrive at, but the facts are 100% undeniable for those that research it.



posted on Jul, 28 2011 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by kwakakev
I am not sure if you have understood my previous posts, but there is about 15 or so frames of what hit the pentagon missing and they are at about twice the resolution of the video that was released. Public access to this information would help silence debate about what actually hit the pentagon. As for the witnesses there are mixed and conflicting reports about what actually happened.


A) No, I really don't understand your posts. From seeing the frame rate of the entire video we can see it was obviously set at the standard one frame per second or so that security cameras are set, and with the 1/2 second it would take to cross the field of view that the camera covered this means there'd only be the one frame of it. You're manufacturing the accusation that the missing frames were intentionally deleted rather than never having been captured on video all on your own.

B) There are no conflicts in the reports or in the eyewitness accounts. This had been entirely manufactured by the damned fool websites you go to, and you've all but proved that when you quoted some damned fool conspiracy website displaying a by-the-exact-square-foot attack vector of the plane that THEY created on their own from their OWN interpretation of eyewitness accounts. Besides, if memory serves, it was YOU who said you believed it was suspicuous because there was NO conflict in the eyewitness accounts.




I have looked into and seen what NIST has had to say about WTC 7 and what ae911truth.org and others have had to say.

WTC 7 was a controlled demolition job
WTC 7 was a controlled demolition job
WTC 7 was a controlled demolition job
WTC 7 was a controlled demolition job
WTC 7 was a controlled demolition job
WTC 7 was a controlled demolition job...


I said this before and I will say this again- regardless of what you believe or don't believe happened at WTC 7, it plays no relevence whatsoever to what happened at the Pentagon and it certainly gives you no license to be making things up simply for paranoia's sake. Even if you had said the plane that hit the Pentagon was a remote controlled 767 piloted from the ground by black-ops pilots, it would still satisfy your need to interject abject paranoia into the mix and still conform with all the known facts...and yet you're not content with coloring within even those lines.


Osama Bin Laden was the first suspect, now Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld are the prime suspects along with many others. If you have any other explanation for how WTC 7 could have been controlled demolished that day and attempted to be covered up I would like to hear it. If you want to try and convince me that WTC 7 was not a controlled demolition job you are just wasting your time. This was a very difficult position to arrive at, but the facts are 100% undeniable for those that research it.


I have already stated elsewhere that the video of the collapse of WTC 7 showed a pattern of inside-out collapse that no controlled demolitions job has ever been able to perform in all of human history, but this is a Pentagon attack thread, not the WTC 7 collaspe thread, so this topis is irrelevent. Your attempt in claiming conspiracy in the Pentagon attack by using claims of conspiracy somewhere else is circular logic. I shouldn't need to point this out to you.



posted on Jul, 28 2011 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 




You're manufacturing the accusation that the missing frames were intentionally deleted rather than never having been captured on video all on your own.


I have made these conclusions from the information that is available. Previous to this post I did not know what type of video standard was used at the Pentagon. You claim it was an analogue system, the only analogue system I am aware of for use in America is the NTSC standard. If you know the name of the video standard that was used at the Pentagon I can reassess these conclusions.



There are no conflicts in the reports or in the eyewitness accounts.


They are the same in that a plane hit the Pentagon. As for what type of plane and what approach it made is in dispute. The public will have all kinds of theories as to what it was, while the evidence is available and kept hidden from the public these theories will continue.



Your attempt in claiming conspiracy in the Pentagon attack by using claims of conspiracy somewhere else is circular logic. I shouldn't need to point this out to you.


These claims of circular logic just sound like meaningless flashy, rhetoric that fails with any actual intellectual substance. Considering your poor use of logic with WTC 7, no, you do not need to point this out to me.
edit on 28-7-2011 by kwakakev because: fixed quote






top topics
 
19
<< 9  10  11   >>

log in

join