|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> This Is Too Much /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1369166401 Message started by Starlifter on 05/21/13 at 13:00:01 |
|
Title: This Is Too Much Post by Starlifter on 05/21/13 at 13:00:01 This is too much ....I'm still laughing...Donald Rumsfeld has written a new book. Its called "Rumsfelds Rules: Leadership Lessons in Business, Politics, War and Life". (Publisher: Broadside Books) wait, wait...here's a description of the book, "The legendary leadership guide, distilled from a lifetime of wisdom and experience in government and business." Seriously??????!!!!!!!!! ROFLMAO. |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by Serowbot on 05/21/13 at 13:36:59 I think I'll get a copy for my reading room... I can use the pages as wipe... ;D... |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by Pine on 05/21/13 at 13:53:21 soooo chapter 14.. the day I shot someone in the butt.... Really Rumsfield???? talk about politicians believing their own bull... |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by srinath on 05/21/13 at 16:22:18 033A3D36273C21530 wrote:
Rumsfield too ? I thought that was Cheney. BTW he was on the radio a few weeks ago. He sounded like an A$$ even promoting the book. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by Pine on 05/22/13 at 07:38:08 bah Sri your probably right... now that I think about it.. cant tell the two ego-maniacs apart... |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/22/13 at 17:11:49 4E584F524A5F52493D0 wrote:
Wouldnt recommend that. Likely get more on than off.. Rumsfeld, what a sick, disgusting piece of crap.. |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by Starlifter on 05/22/13 at 18:59:22 Amen! and then some. |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by RatdogWillie on 05/23/13 at 06:44:40 Rumsfeld as CEO of Searle Laboratories, is responsible for bring the health harmful drug ASPERTAME to the world. Searle Laboratories is the conglomerate that manufactures aspartame. Also on September 10, 2001, Rumsfeld held a press conference to disclose that over $2,300,000,000,000 in Pentagon funds could not be accounted for. Rumsfeld stated: "According to some estimates we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions." Such a disclosure normally might have sparked a huge scandal. However, the commencement of the attack on New York City and Washington the very next morning assured that the story conveniently remained buried. The area of the Pentagon attacked contained the accountants that were searching for the missing money. The missile had to loop around the building to hit that area, and not take a direct path and hit the section that would have targeted the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Rumsfeld. |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by Paraquat on 05/23/13 at 09:21:59 I think you and JOG are going to get along nicely. --Steve |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by WebsterMark on 05/23/13 at 14:28:24 oh sweet Jesus; please not another one..... |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/25/13 at 10:30:38 The area of the Pentagon attacked contained the accountants that were searching for the missing money. The missile had to loop around the building to hit that area, and not take a direct path and hit the section that would have targeted the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Rumsfeld. This is known. That it makes some cringe is not my fault. |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by RatdogWillie on 05/25/13 at 12:29:17 Let's review the governments official story in under 5 minutes. We never seem to hear anymore than bits and pieces, so here it is laid out truthfully, and easy for anybody to follow. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuC_4mGTs98 |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by Starlifter on 05/25/13 at 15:08:58 Got to agree. |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by WebsterMark on 05/25/13 at 17:48:17 well, that was 4 minutes and 56 seconds of crap. I can make a video about any major event, use a cute little tone of voice, quick editing and make a case for just about anything theory I want. Oklahoma City tornado not real but a fake? Sure, give me some time and I'll work up a 'theory' that's got the same credibility as 9/11 truthers. I don't know why you guys are so gullible about stuff like this. You are believing the equivalent of going to a junkyard and 'finding' evidence for a theory you've already created and not the other way around. By the way, the guy up the street from me works for Boeing; was on the Pentagon grounds that day and he, along with several overs, saw the plane flying low. Never saw the impact because he was on other side, but the jet never reappeared. It is 100% beyond doubt a jet hit the pentagon, not a missile. |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by Starlifter on 05/25/13 at 19:37:27 ...sure, sure webby, keep sucking on that FOX teat and get back to us when you can think for yourself. |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by RatdogWillie on 05/25/13 at 21:16:15 447671606776615E726178130 wrote:
Please tell me what is not true to the "official conspiracy theory" as presented in the 4 minutes and 56 seconds video. Am I really supposed to believe "the guy up the street" any more than I believe an offical "un-named source"? Here is what hit the Pentagon: http://thewebfairy.com/911/pentagon/frames/boston.com/pentagon1_big.jpg http://www.edwardsdavid.com/media/msnbc/images/msnbc_911_pentagon_plane_vid_060512b.jpg Save the images to your photos. These photos are from frame one of the five frames of video released by the Pentagon March 2002. Frames 2 thru 5 show the ball of fire increasing in size. Frames 2 thru 5 also show a white exhaust trail leading into the fireball and dissipating in each sequential frame. Now open frame one http://thewebfairy.com/911/pentagon/frames/boston.com/pentagon1_big.jpg in your pictures an ENLARGE IT. Okay, look above the orange traffic cone on the right. See the the white squiggly object above the cone? That is the exhaust of a jet engine. The exhaust is exiting in a vortex pattern due to the jet turbine. The jet engine is at the rear of an object traveling more than 500 miles per hour. Now look at the tan colored box next to the right hand orange cone. That is a parking ticket dispenser. Yes, I am certain. I did work in one of the offices that was hit in the early 80's. If you look at were the white jet exhaust meets the dark object above the ticket dispenser, you will see that this object has a "V" shaped tail like this: http://www.samaa.tv/NewsPictures/2012122664017_samaa_tv.jpg |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by WebsterMark on 05/26/13 at 06:13:20 think for yourself. think for yourself?!!! Are you kidding me you freaking moron? You have no ability to do anything except follow the liberal line. Some cockamamie conspiracy theory is what you are expected to believe so you follow it completely oblivious to how stupid it makes you look. You couldn't articulate an original thought if your life depended on it. |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by WebsterMark on 05/26/13 at 06:16:14 Am I really supposed to believe "the guy up the street" Yes. Tell me why he and hundreds of other people saw a jet flying low into the Pentagon are lying about it. Hundreds. |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by srinath on 05/26/13 at 07:11:18 6C5E59484F5E49765A49503B0 wrote:
Star - Yea you better not disagree with the webster. Else you be Freaking Moron ... I dont buy the conspiracy myself, but JOG has posted so much about it, and no one seems to be turning "troofer" so I'll go back to playing with my LED's. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by RatdogWillie on 05/26/13 at 09:13:53 506265747362754A66756C070 wrote:
You stated that the guy up the street saw a jet fly into the Pentagon as did others. He was on the other side of the Pentagon. The object that hit the Pentagon http://www.edwardsdavid.com/media/msnbc/images/msnbc_911_pentagon_plane_vid_060512b.jpg was traveling low and in access of 500 miles per hour. It flew on a path down along the Potomac River past Arlington, across the 14th Street Bridge and circled over Crystal City and Pentagon City in order to hit the section that was under going re-enforcement and held the offices that were searching for the missing 2.3 trillion dollars in missing Pentagon funds. If I had been outside and on the other side of the Pentagon when it screamed over head and then the media reported that a hijacked airliner had hit the Pentagon, I would most likely think that what I had seen streaking above me against the bright sunny sky so nosily, and so very fast, was the airliner since every media outlet claimed was an airliner. Later I would have known that I was wrong to assume that it was an airliner, because I am a curious person. I would have started reading everything I could find and examining every photo of the attack that I came across. I did so even though I was about 10 miles away that morning when it happened. Having served during the Viet Nam war, I know that my government is not always truthful. The The Gulf of Tonkin, the USS Liberty cover up and Operation Northwoods are a few examples. |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by RatdogWillie on 05/26/13 at 09:23:04 675552434455427D51425B300 wrote:
Wow! Think for myself....that I do sir, but judging from your posts, it is easy to deduce that you have difficulty doing so. You offer no evidence to support your position and resort to name calling. I believe that my posts on this thread and other threads that I have posted on at SuzukiSavage.com reflect some of my original thoughts. As for cockamamie conspiracy theories, I refer you to the youtube link I posted before: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuC_4mGTs98. Now there is a real doozy of a conspiracy theory! Once again, I invite you to please explain just what in that video is not true. |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/26/13 at 18:25:31 & yet, every pilot interviewed said that maneuver would be impossible & the plane simply can NOT make those speeds that low. |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by WebsterMark on 05/27/13 at 05:56:32 If I had been outside and on the other side of the Pentagon when it screamed over head and then the media reported that a hijacked airliner had hit the Pentagon, I would most likely think that what I had seen streaking above me against the bright sunny sky so nosily, and so very fast, was the airliner since every media outlet claimed was an airliner. Later I would have known that I was wrong to assume that it was an airliner, because I am a curious person. I would have started reading everything I could find and examining every photo of the attack that I came across. I did so even though I was about 10 miles away that morning when it happened. I have a few questions for you Ratdog. 1) Are you telling me hundreds of people say they saw a jetliner fly into the Pentagon, yet what they really saw was a missile, but they were all collectively ‘brainwashed’ because they read the newspaper or heard a news report later saying it was a plane so subconsciously, the image in their memory changed to a jet liner? Is that what you are telling me happened? Are you also telling me that out of hundreds of people, including many career military people, professionals who were used to crisis situations, an ex-Presidential candidate etc, but only you would have the wherewithal to not be fooled like these others who apparently have below average brain power and curiosity? Below are two interview exerts I found. Are you telling me these people changed their stories after hearing news reports? Here’s an interview I found from a Priest. Father Stephen McGraw was driving to a graveside service at Arlington National Cemetery the morning of Sept. 11, when he mistakenly took the Pentagon exit onto Washington Boulevard, putting him in a position to witness American Airlines Flight 77 crash into the Pentagon. "The traffic was very slow moving . . . I was in the left hand lane with my windows closed. I did not hear anything at all until the plane was just right above our cars." McGraw estimates that the plane passed about 20 feet over his car, as he waited in the left hand lane of the road, on the side closest to the Pentagon. "The plane clipped the top of a light pole just before it got to us, injuring a taxi driver, whose taxi was just a few feet away from my car. "I saw it crash into the building . . . it looked like a plane coming in for a landing. I mean in the sense that it was controlled and sort of straight. . . . "There was an explosion and a loud noise and I felt the impact. I remember seeing a fireball come out of two windows (of the Pentagon). I saw an explosion of fire billowing through those two windows." Here’s a second from an employee of the USA Today in their Washington DC office. Shortly after watching the second tragedy, I heard jet engines pass our building, which, being so close to the airport is very common. But I thought the airport was closed. I figured it was a plane coming in for landing. A few moments later, as I was looking down at my desk, the plane caught my eye. It didn't register at first. I thought to myself that I couldn't believe the pilot was flying so low. Then it dawned on me what was about to happen. I watched in horror as the plane flew at treetop level, banked slightly to the left, drug it's wing along the ground and slammed into the west wall of the Pentagon exploding into a giant orange fireball. Then black smoke. Then white smoke 2) Did the news reporters get payoffs to tell the fake story about an airliner? How did that work? 3) What happened to the people on the flight including the wife of the Solicitor General of the US; Ted Olson? Did whoever (Bush and Cheney) fly these people to a secret location, shoot them in the back of the head and burn the bodies? Did they pay them each millions of dollars to go live in secret someplace? Where are they? 4) If this particular part of the building was selected for destruction because they were about to uncover a scam, are you saying the towers in New York were destroyed just as part of a cover up? and JOG; & yet, every pilot interviewed said that maneuver would be impossible & the plane simply can NOT make those speeds that low provide documentation for that statement. show me where 'every pilot interviewed' said that. I call utter BS... |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by RatdogWillie on 05/27/13 at 09:43:10 WebsterMark, before I begin answering you, I must ask. Did you even look at the photos of what hit the Pentagon? http://thewebfairy.com/911/pentagon/frames/boston.com/pentagon1_big.jpg http://www.edwardsdavid.com/media/msnbc/images/msnbc_911_pentagon_plane_vid_060512b.jpg What do you see in these photos that were released by the Pentagon March 7, 2002? I expect an Answer. Now I shall reply to you. Even though you failed to reply with an answer as to what in the video was not true. You instead replied with questions. But questions are good, I certainly have many concerning 9/11/2001, and I certainly don’t have all the answers. Now to begin….. According to the governments’ conspiracy theory, Hani Hanjour is credited with being the airplane's pilot. Three weeks before September 11, Hanjour attempted to rent a Cessna at an airfield Bowie, Maryland. Suspicious of his dubious 'pilot's license', officials at the airfield insisted he take a chaperoned test-flight before rental would be approved. He failed his test flight miserably. He could neither control, nor properly land the Cessna. In fact, the instructors at the airfield in Maryland said, "It was like he had hardly even ever driven a car. He could not fly at all." And yet, the government demand that we believe Hanjour pulled off a stunt that would press the limits of even the most experienced aviation test pilot. Not only that but we are to believe that Hanjoir fought his way into he thingy pit armed with a razor blade and overcame the 6’4” former Marine combat pilot and the others in the cockpit. Then this man who couldn’t fly a Cessna, managed to fly a complicated commercial airliner from the Ohio/Kentucky border to Washington D.C. flying over 500miles per hour at 7 miles above the ground. Doing so, he successfully managed to find Washington D.C. and entered the most restricted airspace in the world without encountering a single military intercept and that despite the crash of two other known hijacked aircraft into the WTC, and a missing third, being covered on every radio and television station in the country that morning. Having reach the Pentagon, Hanjoir is claimed to bypass the opportunity to not hit the section directly in front of him, the section that contains all the top brass, but chooses instead to make extreme maneuvers that would stress a fighter jet. Then flying +500 mph level just mere feet above the lawn surface, he strikes the FIRST FLOOR. First let me say here that when an airliner lands, it does so at 150mph. At 500mph, the down-wash would be too great to allow control of the plane to keep it level. You asked, “If this particular part of the building was selected for destruction because they were about to uncover a scam, are you saying the towers in New York were destroyed just as part of a cover up? “ Yes and no. Building 7, the Solomon Building, housed many documents relating to numerous SEC investigations. The files for approximately three to four thousand cases were destroyed including 45 active cases, and this destruction benefited the government. Among the destroyed documents were ones that may have demonstrated the relationship between Citigroup and the WorldCom bankruptcy. Also all the files for the ENRON investigation. Perhaps even more interesting than the loss of these case files is the fact that WTC 7's collapse destroyed the OEM's command center on the 23rd floor. Who else benefited from the attacks on the WTC? For one Larry Silverstein who had just signed a 99 year lease for the buildings that were destroyed. The WTC had an asbestos problem that required a major fortune to rectify. Also Larry Silberstein placed terror attack insurance mere weeks before the attacks and collected 7.1 billion dollars. Wow! Now that sure is luck. Another interesting bit of Building 7 information is that both the BBC and Fox News broadcast that it had collapsed 23 minutes before it did. They were given the same script. What’s that Webster? Script you ask? Why yes…. Because whe CNN reporter Aaron Brown starts reading the script as handed to him, he realizes that building 7 is still standing and corrects himself. WebsterMark, you stated, “but only you would have the wherewithal to not be fooled like these others who apparently have below average brain power and curiosity?” No, not only me, judging from the hundreds of articles concerning the Pentagon attack and the many thousands of comments found on the internet, there are many that come to such conclusions and I for one do not consider those that have other conclusions to have “below average brain power” but rather I believe that they have been misinformed. As far as the eye witness reports, I recall that during the first day and days afterwards, the eyewitness reports were very varied, with many differing descriptions including many that claimed the object was too small to have been a commercial airliner. Since removed, the FAA’s own website, for months afterwards also showed that Flight 77 and Flight 11 were not scheduled to have flown on September 11, 2001. |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by WebsterMark on 05/27/13 at 15:26:19 oh Jesus; where to start............ everything you just wrote shows how out of touch with reality you are. I WILL confront you with facts that should show any normal person how silly your position is. Now tonight however.... |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by Midnightrider on 05/27/13 at 15:54:23 If someone can explain that British reporter saying building #7 has fallen 20 minutes before it ever fell I would say JOG is full of sh!t. The building imploded like a professional demolitions expert had done the job. When it come to starting a war our government is not credible. |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by RatdogWillie on 05/27/13 at 17:38:22 4B797E6F68796E517D6E771C0 wrote:
I am looking forward to it! Please don't wait too long. |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by WebsterMark on 05/27/13 at 21:01:29 My comment on a few of your points: And yet, the government demand that we believe Hanjour pulled off a stunt that would press the limits of even the most experienced aviation test pilot. Says who? Provide some type of valid documentation for that statement. Show me military or commercial airline pilots who say the route taken was a purposeful route and very difficult to fly. I’ve not flown a plane but I’ve flown in the cockpit numerous times of smaller planes. If I had to steer a plane into a building, I feel pretty sure I could do it. As far as pressing the limits of the most experienced pilot, the plane clipped lightpost and one wing hit the ground prior to impact. Not exactly perfect; in fact, far from perfect. contains all the top brass, but chooses instead to make extreme maneuvers that would stress a fighter jet couldn’t all these extreme maneuvers in reality be an inexperienced pilot struggling to maintain control? . At 500mph, the down-wash would be too great to allow control of the plane to keep it level. I’ve been to air shows where planes fly overhead at 400+ mph. Explain what you think down-wash is and why a plane cannot fly level to the ground. Besides, the plane did not fly level. As various witness reported, it descended at an angle. it did not fly level for a long period of time. Among the destroyed documents were ones that may have demonstrated the relationship between Citigroup and the WorldCom bankruptcy. Also all the files for the ENRON investigation. Perhaps even more interesting than the loss of these case files is the fact that WTC 7's collapse destroyed the OEM's command center on the 23rd floor. Who else benefited from the attacks on the WTC? For one Larry Silverstein who had just signed a 99 year lease for the buildings that were destroyed. The WTC had an asbestos problem that required a major fortune to rectify. Also Larry Silberstein placed terror attack insurance mere weeks before the attacks and collected 7.1 billion dollars. Wow! Now that sure is luck. Talk like this is the most damaging for your case and makes you look ridiculous. The WTC held literally thousands of offices all conducting some type of business while implies financial dealings in all of them to one degree or another. it would be a surprise if someone did not benefit financially. If Visa is destroyed tomorrow, I benefit. does that make me a suspect? I can go back to the Titanic and make a case it was sunk to save someone money or cash in on insurance by finding a few people who ‘benefited’ from the disaster. As far as the BBC announcing WTC’s collapse before it happened, as they and Reuters have stated over and over, Reuters picked up the news from a local report and passed it along to the on air announcer while they were on the air. It had been known and discussed for several hours the damage the building was going to cause it to collapse sooner or later. This happens all the time in crisis news stories. Ask 50 people about the Columbine shooting and the majority will still recount things as the truth that were said during the ‘fog of reporting’ during the first couple hours which have been absolutely proven to not be true. Look at what was reported after the first couple of hours at Newtown. Or look at the Travon Martin case as a perfect example of things being reported that are still believed to be true, but are not. Because you and others are predisposed to look for evidence, you see this as part of a conspiracy instead of an error that repeats inself to one degree or another at almost every major crisis report. |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by RatdogWillie on 05/28/13 at 04:33:58 152720313627300F233029420 wrote:
Wow! You amaze me. You said I should think for myself, yet you make a statement such as this. My gut reaction is to leave you to figure out just why such a statement is plain asinine, but being a good natured guy I will give you some assistance. The maneuvers made by the object that hit the Pentagon were equivalent to those of a military craft. This is a claim made by Dulles air traffic control personal: http://www.america911.com/flight-77.html .......and this from a guy who had trouble with http://www.micheloud.com/FXM/flying/Scans/PanelManuel2.gif yet was a flying ace with this:[urlhttp://farm3.static.flickr.com/2660/3702489917_041a31ee4f.jpg[/url] Too FUNNY! Thanks for the laugh! |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by RatdogWillie on 05/28/13 at 04:36:35 0B393E2F28392E113D2E375C0 wrote:
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/ |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by WebsterMark on 05/28/13 at 04:52:55 At 9:30 a.m., flight controllers at Dulles Airport in Washington, D.C., spotted a fast moving plane, but they did not know that it was Flight 77; they thought that it was a military aircraft. They follow its movements carefully. Is this the evidence you claim tells you :The maneuvers made by the object that hit the Pentagon were equivalent to those of a military craft |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by WebsterMark on 05/28/13 at 04:53:59 WebsterMark wrote on Yesterday at 21:01:29: My comment on a few of your points: And yet, the government demand that we believe Hanjour pulled off a stunt that would press the limits of even the most experienced aviation test pilot. Says who? Provide some type of valid documentation for that statement. http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/ i'm not going to read a book; give me chapter and verse. |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by WebsterMark on 05/28/13 at 04:59:20 Also, explain to me again how hundreds of witness who saw the plane fly into the building are wrong. Your previous attempt amounts of Harry Potter type spells cast by news reporters. Explain to me the photos and testimony of people on the ground who saw aircraft parts. Where are the passengers and crew of the jet. were they killed or what? And since I'm sure you don't buy into the BBC's explanation of why they made an false announcement about the WTC 7 collapse, explain to me who and why in the BBC was complicit in the conspiracy which must have included literally hundreds of different people, none of whom have talked about what would be the biggest scandal in the history of the nation if not the world. |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by RatdogWillie on 05/28/13 at 05:27:42 734146575041566945564F240 wrote:
Plane at air shows fly fast and low, but not mere inches above the ground as object that hit the Pentagons first floor would have had to do. We looked at frame one of the 5 frame video clip earlier, now let's take a look at Frame TWO:http://http://martinfrost.ws/htmlfiles/pentagon_cctv.jpg As the single jet engine exhaust trail shows, the object fly level while hugging the ground. And you believe that a massive airliner was able to strike the first floor, leaving a 16 foot circular hole, not break many of the windows near that hole, and the wings and tail section did not break off, and the heavy large engines did not wind up leaving holes were they would have entered the walls, yet they did not stay outside either. http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/PentagonBA1.jpg ...and the lawn remained on scathed. http://www.thewebfairy.com/killtown/images/pentalawn/pl12.jpg Next I suppose you will tell me that they identified the scrambled remains of Hani Hanjour and his cohorts with DNA. But we do have proof that he was at an airport that day: http://pentagonmemorial.org/sites/all/themes/pmf/timelines/9-11-timeline/images/timeline_460-content/image003.jpg Unfortunately it was not an airport involved in the 9/11 attacks, it was at the airport in Portland, Maine. Funny that CNN, FOX, NBC, CBS and all the other BS's didn't bother to mention that. MORE: http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/hanjour.html |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by RatdogWillie on 05/28/13 at 05:53:21 192B2C3D3A2B3C032F3C254E0 wrote:
First you tell me what chapter and verse the 9/11 Commissioners address the collapse of Building 7. |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by RatdogWillie on 05/28/13 at 05:55:28 4B797E6F68796E517D6E771C0 wrote:
Yes.... that plus the 360 degree high speed dive is not one that an airliner was designed to do. |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by RatdogWillie on 05/28/13 at 06:35:15 6C5E59484F5E49765A49503B0 wrote:
http://killtown.911review.org/flight77/debris.html. It seems strange that the wings and tail would enter the small entrance hole and disintegrate, yet a only few small torn un-scorched pieces of aluminum would scatter outside. As I mentioned before. I worked in the Pentagon. There are many cameras on the roof. Why is it that we have not seen images from even one? |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by RatdogWillie on 05/28/13 at 06:53:29 360403121504132C00130A610 wrote:
You’re absolutely right. I agree with you 100%. It is impossible to totally cover up a conspiracy so massive. That’s why I know about it. What you must understand is that they don’t have to cover it up totally. Even a bucket that has a few leaks can still do the job of carrying water from here to there. They only need to fool some of the public, which isn’t hard to do when you control the major networks and newspapers. The percentage that do figure it out (and the fewer still who will dare to speak their minds about it) can be very easily marginalized with the propaganda label “conspiracy theorist.” Folks such as you will never take us critical thinkers seriously because you want to be part of the majority. This is known as groupthink. I have read thru some of your other post on SuzukiSavage.com. I get the impression that you enjoy making a stand for your beliefs, yet you answer questions with questions, make demands for proof, yet fail to back your statements with proof. Conversing with you is an exercise in futility. |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by WebsterMark on 05/28/13 at 07:14:44 Plane at air shows fly fast and low, but not mere inches above the ground as object that hit the Pentagons first floor would have had to do. I’ve been to air shows where planes fly overhead at 400+ mph. Explain what you think down-wash is and why a plane cannot fly level to the ground. Besides, the plane did not fly level. As various witness reported, it descended at an angle. it did not fly level for a long period of time. You did not answer my question directly. You did what truthers always do and what your video did which is to dodge specific issues and use innuendo as opposed to directly confronting logical evidence against your claim. I asked you what you think down-wash is and why a plane cannot fly level near the ground. I also told you the plane did not fly level as indicated by the fact light poles were broken off and the wing hit the ground first. Witness describe the jet as descending fast, not flying level for a long period of time. We looked at frame one of the 5 frame video clip earlier, now let's take a look at Frame TWO:http://martinfrost.ws/htmlfiles/pentagon_cctv.jpg]http://http://martinfrost.w...[/url] As the single jet engine exhaust trail shows, the object fly level while hugging the ground. And you believe that a massive airliner was able to strike the first floor, leaving a 16 foot circular hole, not break many of the windows near that hole, and the wings and tail section did not break off, and the heavy large engines did not wind up leaving holes were they would have entered the walls, yet they did not stay outside either. http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/PentagonBA1.jpg ...and the lawn remained on scathed. http://www.thewebfairy.com/killtown/images/pentalawn/pl12.jpg As the single jet engine exhaust trail shows, the object fly level while hugging the ground. First the link did not work, but I've seen the photos before and they prove nothing. The circled object is barely visible and is unidentified and does not show anything conclusive. And you believe that a massive airliner was able to strike the first floor, leaving a 16 foot circular hole The hole was 75’ before the wall collapsed; not 16’. not break many of the windows near that hole; Many windows were broken, many were not. They were blast proof design. I have seen devastating car accidents where the strangest things seem untouched. In an earthquake, some windows break, others do not. and the wings and tail section did not break off, and the heavy large engines did not wind up leaving holes were they would have entered the walls, yet they did not stay outside either. Plane parts were found throughout the Pentagon wreckage. Now again, as truthers usually do, you skip questions you have no answer to which MUST be answer for you to have any validity. Here's the first; what happened to the crew and passengers of the airliner? |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by WebsterMark on 05/28/13 at 07:15:55 http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/ i'm not going to read a book; give me chapter and verse. First you tell me what chapter and verse the 9/11 Commissioners address the collapse of Building 7. absolutely not. you're the one who thinks they have all the 'facts' lined up. You point me to them. I'm not jumping all around and let you dodge questions you can't answer. |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by WebsterMark on 05/28/13 at 07:28:31 Conversing with you is an exercise in futility. as I said, you and other truthers make claims using innuendo and then run and hide when you have to explain them. Folks such as you will never take us critical thinkers seriously because you want to be part of the majority. no, folks such as me have a brain and understand how silly and illogical your position is. We also understand that when confronted with logical arguments against your conspiracy theory, you run away which is what you are about to do. 1) Now, tell me where the passengers and crew are? 2) Tell me how my neighbor; an engineer for many years with a military background saw a missile and called his wife to tell her about it. Shortly afterwards, he read a news story or saw a telecast telling him it was a jet that hit the Pentagon so he changed his memory to a jet and somehow convinced his wife that he said "I saw the jet" and not "I saw the missile? when he called her" 3) Give me a realistic explanation of how this process he underwent was duplicated by hundreds of other witness who saw the jet fly into the building yet were 'lead astray' by news reports? 4) Tell me why there is identifiable aircraft wreckage at the site? |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by RatdogWillie on 05/28/13 at 07:34:47 0F3D3A2B2C3D2A15392A33580 wrote:
|
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by RatdogWillie on 05/28/13 at 07:38:48 5D6F68797E6F78476B78610A0 wrote:
Whatever...... I have better things to do now than spin my wheels going nowhere in an attempt to debate with you. I am glad that I am a "truther" rather than the opposite! |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by WebsterMark on 05/28/13 at 07:56:36 Whatever...... I have better things to do now than spin my wheels going nowhere in an attempt to debate with you. As predicted; running and hiding. |
|
Title: Re: This Is Too Much Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/28/13 at 10:15:06 There are many well trained experts in military & civilian life who agree with We TRuthers. Building 7 is completely avoided in the oFISHYal report,, |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |