# Every picture of "Ground Zero" is evidence of explosives used.



## creativedreams (Dec 2, 2009)

Every picture of "Ground Zero" is evidence of explosives used.

*EVERYTHING* but the steel was exploded into a huge pyroclastic cloud of dust *BEFORE* it even hits the ground.

If everything *WASN'T* exploded into dust then the rubble pile of the Twin Towers at Ground Zero would have been *HUGE *and *MUCH HIGHER *than it was.


----------



## Zoom-boing (Dec 2, 2009)

No they're not.


----------



## WillowTree (Dec 2, 2009)

creativedreams said:


> Every picture of "Ground Zero" is evidence of explosives used.
> 
> *EVERYTHING* but the steel was exploded into a huge pyroclastic cloud of dust *BEFORE* it even hits the ground.
> 
> If everything *WASN'T* exploded into dust then the rubble pile of the Twin Towers at Ground Zero would have been *HUGE *and *MUCH HIGHER *than it was.



Name names, give us the details or stfu!


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 2, 2009)

Listen to the Narrators Contents:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nc5_5IJek8"]YouTube- 9/11 WTC North Tower Exploding[/ame]

These buildings didn't collapse symetrically and concentrically at almost freefall speeds.


----------



## Zoom-boing (Dec 2, 2009)

WillowTree said:


> creativedreams said:
> 
> 
> > Every picture of "Ground Zero" is evidence of explosives used.
> ...



Willow, he did in another post.  He said 'a lot' of people and 'more than a handful' of people believe that 9/11 was an inside job.  There's yer proof!


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 2, 2009)

This is *NOT *a simple collapsing building from fire and damage.

Something is clearly blowing all the vertical structure out of the way.

Even  a *Physicist *that worked for *NASA* for almost 30yrs said:... * "*seeing the huge pyroclastic cloud of pulverized concrete dust and the massive structural members being hurled horizontally leaves *no doubt *in my mind the World Trade Center buildings were brought down by *explosives*.*"*


*Seven Senior Federal Engineers say Explosives Used on World Trade Centers:*
Seven Senior Federal Engineers and Scientists Call for New 9-11 Investigation


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 2, 2009)

If it was just a normal collapse without explosives pulverizing and spreading everything out before it hit the ground then the rubble pile would have been *MUCH* higher.


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 2, 2009)

HOLY COW!!!!!!!!!!!

I HAVE CHILLS RUNNING DOWN MY SPINE!!!!!!!!!

In the last few minutes he portrays absolute proof of how it works and how easy Media control is that sways the emotions of the masses...

WTF!!!!!!!!!!!

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Db2te1u8Dgs"]YouTube- World Trade Center Building 7 - The Evidence - Read notes âº[/ame]


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 2, 2009)

Why would NIST try to forensically analyse collapse without the building plans? *NO* where in their product does it say they had *plans*.

Why would  NY state courts let guiliani steel the NYC building plans when NIST needed them for engineering analysis?  They ignored federal and state freedom of information laws.

Why would thousands of tons of steel(evidence) go to India and China when the US steel industry needs the steel?


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 2, 2009)

Questioning and asking for a new investigation into 9/11 is the MOST patriotic thing to do for fellow American citizens and government alike.

What is so wrong with a new and independent investigation?

Follow the money trail to the debunking propaganda on TV and Popular Mechanics.

Why is there a propaganda campaign to try and sway votes against asking for a new investigation instead of just having one?

EVERY American deserves clarity and closure on 9/11 and *NOT* a sneaky and secretive government approach.


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 2, 2009)

There are decisions made all the time as to picking and chosing battles with estimates on the amount of life lost in soldiers and collateral damage.

Loss of life either military or civilian is just a numbers game when it comes to war and *world *strategies.

9/11 may be just a case of sacrificing a pawn for a strategic square on the world's chessboard.


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 2, 2009)

Tom Leppert the CEO for Turner Construction which did many months of  construction renovation work on the World Trade Center buildings up to the very day of 9/11 went on to be appointed by George Bush to the President's Commission on White House Fellows.
Turner Construction Company
[url=http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/fellows/about/commission.html]White House Fellowships: Commission Members[/URL]

Turner Construction worked hand and hand with Controlled Demolition Inc(CDI) on many demolition projects.

Look at the website for Controlled Demolition Inc and it states right in there that part of their work includes "classified" work for the U.S. Department of Defense on sensitive projects both domestically and internationally.
Controlled Demolition, Inc. | Government

Turner Construction Company *AND* Controlled Demolition Inc *BOTH* helped performed clean-up at ground zero in which all the steel (evidence) got shipped overseas mostly to China, except for a few hand picked pieces to be sent to NIST for inspection and for part of a memorial ship. 

Turner Construction had a main office located in the third sub-basement of Tower 1. Turner Construction had been performing construction renovation work in various parts throughout the WTC centers and had occupied various office spaces.

A WTC property assessment described some of the renovations as work upon steel support columns within and around elevator shafts of both WTC Towers.

Turner Construction also constructed the new headquarters for the Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) which manages a laboratory for energetics, explosive materials, propellents, etc and the only reliable source of aluminum nano-powders(nano-thermite) in the United States.
http://manganaro.com/projbovt.html


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 2, 2009)

Renovations to strengthen the Pentagon and they *ONLY* do the part of the building that is involved in the 9/11 incident?

I found this article in the archives of USA Today......Here is a direct quote from the article:

"Luck  if it can be called that  had it that the terrorists aimed the Boeing 757 at the only part of the Pentagon that already had been renovated in an 11-year, $1.3 billion project meant to bolster it against attack. That significantly limited the damage and loss of life by slowing the plane as it tore through the building and reducing the explosion's reach."

Here is the USA Todays link to the article from its archives.

USATODAY.com - Pentagon repairs to cost $700 million

Renovations to strengthen the Pentagon and they *ONLY* do the part of the building that is involved in the 9/11 incident?


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 2, 2009)

The *THREE *World Trade Center buildings fell only a few seconds slower than a ball would have if dropped from the tops of the buildings.

This is why *MANY* physicists around the world are saying it leaves almost NO room in the equation for any structural resistance of the many vertical steel support columns. 

This is why *MANY* physicists around the world are saying the NIST Report that explained the building collapses literally re-writes physics.

The NIST Report was headed by Bush's personal friend Frank Gayle and had many engineers telling Frank it was wrong before he even released it. The Administration has refused to allow NIST to look at the possibility of explosives used to remove the support columns symetrically and concentrically to allow the collapse speeds to be had.

















Collapse of Building #7 compared to controlled demolition





Collapse of Building #7 compared to controlled demolition


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 2, 2009)

Here is a simple comprehensive example that depicts how the NIST investigation went when Bush appointed his personal friend to head the NIST Report and collapse investigation.

The Administration specifically instructed him to *NOT* look at the possibility in explosives in the collapses....even though there are countless witnesses live on the news who heard many explosions.


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 2, 2009)

EVERY picture of Ground Zero where the Twin Towers stood is evidence of explosives being used in the fact that almost NOTHING is left but a sea of steel.........and this happened before it even hits the ground!

Look at this picture below.....*EVERYTHING* except the steel was *EXPLODED* into pulverized dust before it even hit the ground and settled in a thick layer of dust throughout the city.


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 2, 2009)

Even in this live video right after the collapses there is NOTHING left but the steel and EVERYTHING including the steel rod reinforced concrete exploded  into dust.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaNHuwGAG1I"]YouTube- 9/11:  WTC Building 7 WILL COLLAPSE  reports ABC News, Before It Happened[/ame]


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 2, 2009)

Even the Governor makes a statement about how he is baffled about how there is *NO CONCRETE...*

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDuBi8KyOhw"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDuBi8KyOhw[/ame]


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 2, 2009)

My new favorite video:

Architect Richard Gage slams the 9/11 debunking director...

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbrs4N7FXoo"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbrs4N7FXoo[/ame]


----------



## Fizz (Dec 2, 2009)

creativedreams said:


> Every picture of "Ground Zero" is evidence of explosives used.
> 
> *EVERYTHING* but the steel was exploded into a huge pyroclastic cloud of dust *BEFORE* it even hits the ground.
> 
> If everything *WASN'T* exploded into dust then the rubble pile of the Twin Towers at Ground Zero would have been *HUGE *and *MUCH HIGHER *than it was.



you have us all convinced you are a complete moron. pyroclastic clouds come from volcanoes. are you now claiming a volcano caused the WTC collapse?

nothing was exploded. there are no explosives. the only evidence you have shown us is that you dont have a fucking clue what you are talking about.


----------



## Christophera (Dec 2, 2009)

creativedreams said:


> Why would NIST try to forensically analyse collapse without the building plans? *NO* where in their product does it say they had *plans*.



Yes, incredible that they would attempt such.  Then they hired Bazant et al to try and explain "collapse" because they could not make the numbers work.

In the final revision, June 21, 2007, "concrete ... core walls" are mentioned.  That revision is no longer available at northewestern U.  Why would that be?  I feel it is because Bazant was trying to prevent a historical shaming by allowing a deception regarding the structural designs of the Twins to control their analysis.

Here is the text of the revision.

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11bazant.et.al_6.21.7.html

Consider the NIST disclaimer.  It states they did their analysis from "anecdotal evidence", but does not mention plans.



creativedreams said:


> Why would  NY state courts let guiliani steal the NYC building plans when NIST needed them for engineering analysis?  They ignored federal and state freedom of information laws.



Indeed, why would a state court allow the plans for public buildings that supposedly collapsed killing thousands of innocent people be taken from public offices?????  That in itself is a crime.



creativedreams said:


> Why would thousands of tons of steel(evidence) go to India and China when the US steel industry needs the steel?



Such a fact shows how important it was to NOT have Americans witnessing the damage to the steel.  Or, thermite leaves a very specific amorphous surface.  Much like taking a slab of paraffin and dipping it in molten wax.  Rounded, non linear.


----------



## Christophera (Dec 2, 2009)

creativedreams said:


> Why would NIST try to forensically analyse collapse without the building plans? *NO* where in their product does it say they had *plans*.



Yes, incredible that they would attempt such.  Then they hired Bazant et al to try and explain "collapse" because they could not make the numbers work.

In the final revision, June 21, 2007, "concrete ... core walls" are mentioned.  That revision is no longer available at northewestern U.  Why would that be?  I feel it is because Bazant was trying to prevent a historical shaming by allowing a deception regarding the structural designs of the Twins to control their analysis.

Consider the NIST disclaimer.  It states they did their analysis from "anecdotal evidence", but does not mention plans.



creativedreams said:


> Why would  NY state courts let guiliani steal the NYC building plans when NIST needed them for engineering analysis?  They ignored federal and state freedom of information laws.



Indeed, why would a state court allow the plans for public buildings that supposedly collapsed killing thousands of innocent people be taken from public offices?????  That in itself is a crime.



creativedreams said:


> Why would thousands of tons of steel(evidence) go to India and China when the US steel industry needs the steel?



Such a fact shows how important it was to NOT have Americans witnessing the damage to the steel.  Or, thermite leaves a very specific amorphous surface.  Much like taking a slab of paraffin and dipping it in molten wax.  Rounded, non linear. 

US steel workers in mills would have known and taken samples of residue.  Analysis wouldhave shown thermite.  With free Americans, seeking to protect their Constitution is possession of such evidence, the investigation could never have been controlled.

So, despite the serious economic needs of the US steel industry, GWB shipped it overseas.  With GPS on the trucks to make sure ALL of it went to the docks.

Sick.


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 2, 2009)

Fizz said:


> [
> you have us all convinced you are a complete moron. pyroclastic clouds come from volcanoes. are you now claiming a volcano caused the WTC collapse?



Way to try and twist and play words to try and discredit my statements...is this how you really interpret what I said?......No wonder you have no clue.

Funny how no matter where *ANYONE* lands on the intelligence curve *EVERYONE* still has a self perception of being smart.

It is moron's like you with this flawed self perception that are truly destroying this country.

What is sad is that many great people are trying to keep America great and moron's like you still get to enjoy the rewards.


----------



## Christophera (Dec 2, 2009)

Fizz said:


> you have us all convinced you are a complete moron. pyroclastic clouds come from volcanoes. are you now claiming a volcano caused the WTC collapse?




You are utilizing a cognitive distortion in attempting to make an erroneous conclusion.

Pyroclastic clouds only require masses of highly heated particulate such as volcanoes emit.

Here is a government dust analysis that is actually very good.  It has been copied and re posted in its entirity.

9-11 dust analysis, smoke aerosol lower manhatten

You will notice that silica, portland and other minerals found in concrete were "bonded with iron".  Such takes tremendous heat and pressure such as what would be present with high explosive very near the high tensile steel rebar I know was in the concrete core walls.

You will notice that chromium is also present in significant quantities.  High tensile stel is up to 30% chromium.


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 3, 2009)

I'm going to start posting articles that have nothing to do with 9/11 truth and say how they were surprised at the scene of "ground zero" about how there was nothing but steel left.

A View From Ground Zero

A volunteers account:

Dmytro Doblevych took a 10hr drive from Detroit to Manhatten's Ground Zero to volunteer to help.

Dmytro with other volunteers helped deliver water and ice to Ground Zero from Seamen's Church Institute starting the day after the 9/11 disaster.......

*"*It was the most monstrous and surreal view I will ever see*."*

*"*There was a gigantic foundation pit, filled to the brim with mutilated metal. There was no concrete. The gigantic cloud filling Manhatten was from the buildings concrete floors, pulverized into dust, which settled as a thick layer on the roads, sidewalks and buildings for many blocks away*."*


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 3, 2009)

This guy explains the debunking strategy going on


Joel M. Skousen  Former U.S. Marine Corps fighter pilot.  Commercial pilot.  Aircraft flown: McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom, Douglas A-4 Skyhawk, Grumman F-9 Cougar, North American T-2C Buckeye, various civilian planes.  Member, Experimental Aircraft Association.  Member, Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association.  Former Chairman of the Conservative National Committee in Washington DC and Executive Editor of Conservative Digest.  

Essay Debunking the Debunkers 2/14/05: "For over a decade now, the PTB [Powers That Be] have used an odd vehicle to do their debunking on a variety of issues - Popular Mechanics Magazine (a Hearst publication).  I suppose they are targeting the back-yard mechanic and auto-enthusiast crowd, who are often prone to accepting conspiracy facts and theories. 

In the March 2005 issue, PM magazine singled out 16 issues or claims of the 9/11 skeptics that point to government collusion and systematically attempted to debunk each one.  Of the 16, most missed the mark and almost half were straw men arguments - either ridiculous arguments that few conspiracists believed or restatements of the arguments that were highly distorted so as to make them look weaker than they really were. ... 

I am one of those who claim there are factual arguments pointing to conspiracy, and that truth is not served by taking cheap shots at those who see gaping flaws in the government story ... 

There is significant evidence that the aircraft impacts did not cause the collapse [of the Twin Towers] ... 

The issues of the penetration hole [at the Pentagon] and the lack of large pieces of debris simply do not jive with the official story, but they are explainable if you include the parking lot video evidence that shows a huge white explosion at impact. This cannot happen with an aircraft laden only with fuel.  It can only happen in the presence of high explosives."


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 3, 2009)

Puts in a statement about controlled press too

Commander Dennis Henry, U.S. Navy Reserve (ret), BS CE, PE  Retired from U.S. Navy Reserve, Civil Engineering Corps after 20 years of service.  Retired Licensed Professional Engineer, State of Missouri.  34 years of service as a City Engineer, designing bridges, roadways, storm, sanitary sewers, and traffic signals. 

"Being a civil engineer and understanding the laws of physics, I know that a building cannot fall at free fall speed without the floors already falling also giving no resistance.  I wish our Congressmen were as smart, and also showed some backbone and got a truly independent investigation going.  Also, this 911 truth movement has shown to me that our press is as every bit controlled and spits out as much propaganda as I thought Pravda did for the old Soviet Union.  My eyes have been awakened to many things, and I have come to learn that we do not live in as free a country as I thought we did, and with the passage of the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, it has become even less so."


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 3, 2009)

Canada's CBC airs 9/11 doubts on National Televesion:

CBC which is the 60 minutes of Canada spent the entire program airing doubts of the American 9/11 on their National Primetime News Television.

Wow can you imagine the impact this will have on Canada's population toward wanting to know the truth for 9/11.....

The Unofficial Story | CBC News: the fifth estate

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkYlbpS-vVI&feature=player_embedded]CBC - The Fifth Estate - The Unofficial Story - Pt 1-5[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4xhrJyKGQ8&feature=video_response]CBC - The Fifth Estate - The Unofficial Story - Pt 2-5[/ame]


CBC - The Fifth Estate - The Unofficial Story - Pt 3-5



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjxrGUujXVc&feature=video_response]CBC - The Fifth Estate - The Unofficial Story - Pt 4-5[/ame]


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XcaORNbh4A&feature=video_response]CBC - The Fifth Estate - The Unofficial Story - Pt 5-5[/ame]


----------



## Fizz (Dec 3, 2009)

Christophera said:


> Fizz said:
> 
> 
> > you have us all convinced you are a complete moron. pyroclastic clouds come from volcanoes. are you now claiming a volcano caused the WTC collapse?
> ...



even by your own definition you are wrong. pyroclastic clouds come from volcanoes. even if it just came from heat it still wasnt a pyroclastic cloud on 9/11. it was caused by the collapse, not by heat.

its just more propaganda and lies by the twoofers!!


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 3, 2009)

Fizz said:


> Christophera said:
> 
> 
> > Fizz said:
> ...



Pyroclastic clouds are finely pulverized rock that are exploded into the air and spreads throughout an area.......concrete is a form of rock......


----------



## Trojan (Dec 3, 2009)

creativedreams said:


> Every picture of "Ground Zero" is evidence of explosives used.
> 
> *EVERYTHING* but the steel was exploded into a huge pyroclastic cloud of dust *BEFORE* it even hits the ground.
> 
> If everything *WASN'T* exploded into dust then the rubble pile of the Twin Towers at Ground Zero would have been *HUGE *and *MUCH HIGHER *than it was.



Do you even know what a pyroclastic cloud is?

Honestly, I think some ignorant wannabe truther wrote this one and everyone since is just copying and pasting.  Any rational thought would reveal this is a lie.


----------



## Trojan (Dec 3, 2009)

creativedreams said:


> Pyroclastic clouds are finely pulverized rock that are exploded into the air and spreads throughout an area.......*concrete is a form of rock*......



Ah no, concrete is not a form of rock, but thanks for showing how ignorant you are.


----------



## Fizz (Dec 3, 2009)

creativedreams said:


> Pyroclastic clouds are finely pulverized rock that are exploded into the air and spreads throughout an area.......concrete is a form of rock......



no. 

and nothing was exploded into the air since there were no explosives.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 3, 2009)

creativedreams said:


> This guy explains the debunking strategy going on
> 
> 
> Joel M. Skousen  Former U.S. Marine Corps fighter pilot.  Commercial pilot.  Aircraft flown: McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom, Douglas A-4 Skyhawk, Grumman F-9 Cougar, North American T-2C Buckeye, various civilian planes.  Member, Experimental Aircraft Association.  Member, Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association.  Former Chairman of the Conservative National Committee in Washington DC and Executive Editor of Conservative Digest.
> ...



LOL You guys make this so easy.

JoelSkousen.com: Analysis of Strategic Threats



> THE PHONY DEMISE OF THE SOVIET UNION
> 
> This last great ruse by Russia was a carefully planned gesture, not unlike previous attempts by Lenin and Stalin to put on a more human face in order to secure needed technology transfers and monetary assistance from the West.
> 
> ...



Does your man even realize that there is no more USSR or East Germany? He's as big a nut case as some of the truthers I've seen post on these boards.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 3, 2009)

And your buddies accuse me of never looking at what you guys post.

If you had opened the link the paper is titled:

ANALYSIS OF STRATEGIC THREATS

IN THE CURRENT DECADE

(2000-2010)


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 3, 2009)

SFC Ollie said:


> LOL You guys make this so easy.
> But in 1986 the Russians secretly moved in more modern, shorter-range SS-23s to deep underground bunkers in East Germany
> 
> Does your man even realize that there is no more USSR or East Germany? He's as big a nut case as some of the truthers I've seen post on these boards.



Did you miss the part where he was talking about *1986*


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 3, 2009)

Now how in the world did my post get above yours?


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 3, 2009)

SFC Ollie said:


> Now how in the world did my post get above yours?



I deleted to reformat and reposted right as you posted.


----------



## manu1959 (Dec 3, 2009)

creativedreams said:


> Even in this live video right after the collapses there is NOTHING left but the steel and EVERYTHING including the steel rod reinforced concrete exploded  into dust.
> 
> YouTube- 9/11:  WTC Building 7 WILL COLLAPSE  reports ABC News, Before It Happened



what part of the wtc was steel reinforced concrete....

would you point out the rebar cages to me i am sure you have photos....


----------



## Toro (Dec 3, 2009)

World renowned explosives experts Protec tells you why there is no evidence of an explosion at the WTC.

http://www.implosionworld.com/Article-WTC STUDY 8-06 w clarif as of 9-8-06 .pdf


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 3, 2009)

Toro said:


> World renowned explosives experts Protec tells you why there is no evidence of an explosion at the WTC.
> 
> http://www.implosionworld.com/Article-WTC STUDY 8-06 w clarif as of 9-8-06 .pdf



He is the *ONLY* one and he has proven ties to military operations.

Do some research on the links and political ties to the debunking propaganda.

Why so much effort into a debunking propaganda campaign instead of just a new investigation?

Sickening........


----------



## Toro (Dec 3, 2009)

How the buildings collapsed, by Dr James B. Calvert, Associate Professor Emeritus of Engineering, University of Denver, Registered Professional Engineer, State of Colorado No.12317



> The World Trade Center towers used neither a steel skeleton nor reinforced concrete. They were designed as square tubes made of heavy, hollow welded sections, braced against buckling by the building floors. Massive foundations descended to bedrock, since the towers had to be safe against winds and other lateral forces tending to overturn them. All this was taken into consideration in the design and construction, which seems to have been first-rate. An attempt to damage the buildings by a bomb at the base had negligible effect. The strong base and foundation would repel any such assault with ease, as it indeed did. The impact of aircraft on the upper stories had only a local effect, and did not impair the integrity of the buildings, which remained solid. The fires caused weakening of the steel, and some of the floors suddenly received a load for which they were not designed.
> 
> What happened next was unexpected and catastrophic. The slumped floors pushed the steel modules outwards, separating them from the floor beams. The next floor then collapsed on the one below, pushing out the steel walls, and this continued, in the same way that a house of cards collapses. The debris of concrete facing and steel modules fell in shower while the main structure collapsed at almost the same rate. In 15 seconds or so, 110 stories were reduced to a pile 9 stories high, mainly of steel wall modules and whatever was around them. The south tower collapsed 47 minutes after impact, the north tower 1 hour 44 minutes after impact. The elapsed times show that the impacts were not the proximate cause of collapse; the strong building easily withstood them. When even one corner of a floor was weakened and fell, the collapse would soon propagate around the circumference, and the building would be lost.
> 
> It is clear that buildings built in this manner have a catastrophic mode of failure ("house of cards") that should rule out their future construction. It is triggered when there is a partial collapse at any level that breaks the continuity of the tube, which then rolls up quickly, from top to bottom. The collapse has a means of propagation that soon involves the whole structure, bypassing its major strengths and impossible to interrupt. There is no need for an airliner; a simple explosion would do the job. There were central tubes in the towers, for elevators and services, but they appeared to play no substantial role in the collapse, and were not evident in the pictures or wreckage.



The Collapse of Buildings


----------



## Ringel05 (Dec 3, 2009)

creativedreams said:


> Every picture of "Ground Zero" is evidence of explosives used.
> 
> *EVERYTHING* but the steel was exploded into a huge pyroclastic cloud of dust *BEFORE* it even hits the ground.
> 
> If everything *WASN'T* exploded into dust then the rubble pile of the Twin Towers at Ground Zero would have been *HUGE *and *MUCH HIGHER *than it was.



The pharmacy called.  Your Thorazine is ready.


----------



## manu1959 (Dec 3, 2009)

how many buildings in the world have been built similar to wtc.....


----------



## Toro (Dec 3, 2009)

Another paper by Zdenek P. Bazant, F.ASCE, and Yong Zhou.  Bazant is a professor of Civil Engineering at Northwestern



> The 110-story towers of the World Trade Center were designed to
> withstand as a whole the forces caused by a horizontal impact of
> a large commercial aircraft ~Appendix I!. So why did a total collapse
> occur? The cause was the dynamic consequence of the prolonged
> ...



http://www.civil.northwestern.edu/people/bazant/PDFs/Papers/405.pdf


----------



## Fizz (Dec 3, 2009)

creativedreams said:


> Why so much effort into a debunking propaganda campaign instead of just a new investigation?
> 
> Sickening........



so start a new investigation. whats the big deal? nobody is stopping you.


----------



## Toro (Dec 3, 2009)

manu1959 said:


> how many buildings in the world have been built similar to wtc.....



There must be thousands.


----------



## manu1959 (Dec 3, 2009)

creativedreams said:


> Puts in a statement about controlled press too
> 
> Commander Dennis Henry, U.S. Navy Reserve (ret), BS CE, PE  Retired from U.S. Navy Reserve, Civil Engineering Corps after 20 years of service.  Retired Licensed Professional Engineer, State of Missouri.  34 years of service as a City Engineer, designing bridges, roadways, storm, sanitary sewers, and traffic signals.
> 
> "Being a civil engineer and understanding the laws of physics, I know that a building cannot fall at free fall speed without the floors already falling also giving no resistance.  I wish our Congressmen were as smart, and also showed some backbone and got a truly independent investigation going.  Also, this 911 truth movement has shown to me that our press is as every bit controlled and spits out as much propaganda as I thought Pravda did for the old Soviet Union.  My eyes have been awakened to many things, and I have come to learn that we do not live in as free a country as I thought we did, and with the passage of the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, it has become even less so."



a civil engineer that designs traffic signals is certainly an expert on higrise curtainwall construction failure.....


----------



## Toro (Dec 3, 2009)

From Thomas W. Eagar and Christopher Musso. Eagar is a professor of engineering at MIT.  



> There have been numerous reports detailing the cause of the World Trade Center Tower collapse on September 11, 2001. Most have provided qualitative explanations; however, simple quantitative analyses show that some common conclusions are incorrect; for example, the steel could not melt in these flames and there was more structural damage than merely softening of the steel at elevated temperatures



Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation


----------



## Toro (Dec 3, 2009)

Purdue study supports collapse, not bombing.



> A computer simulation of the 2001 World Trade Center attacks supports a federal agency's findings that the initial impact from the hijacked airplanes stripped away crucial fireproofing material and that the weakened towers collapsed under their own weight.
> 
> The two-year Purdue University study, funded in part by the National Science Foundation, was the first to use 3-D animation to provide visual context to the attacks, said Christoph Hoffmann, a professor of computer science and one of the lead researchers on the project.
> 
> ...



Purdue study supports WTC collapse findings - USATODAY.com

Here is the simulation.

[youtube]gH02Eh44yUg&loc[/youtube]


----------



## Toro (Dec 3, 2009)

From Tim Wilkinson, Professor of Civil Engineering, University of Sydney.



> This photograph shows the south tower just as it is collapsing.  It is evident that the building is falling over to the left.  The North Tower collapsed directly downwards, on top of itself.  The same mechanism of failure, the combination of impact and subsequent fire damage, is the likely cause of failure of both towers.  However, it is possible that a storey on only one side of the South Tower initially collapsed, resulting in the "skewed" failure of the entire tower.
> 
> The gigantic impact forces caused by the huge mass of the falling structure landing on the floors below travelled down the columns like a shockwave faster than the entire structure fell.  The clouds of debris coming from the tower, several storeys below the huge falling mass, probably result from the sudden and almost explosive failure of each floor, caused by the "shockwave".



New York Architecture Images- World Trade Center


----------



## Toro (Dec 3, 2009)

From W. Gene Corley, of the American Society of Civil Engineers, and Jonathan Barnett.



> Why the World Trade Center Towers Fell
> 
> * It was the simultaneous fires, on multiple floors, rather than burning jet fuel (much of which was consumed in the initial fireballs), that weakened the structural steel elements enough to precipitate the collapse.
> * Robust and redundant steel framing, adequate and well-lighted stairways, and emergency training contributed to the towers' resilience and the safe egress of occupants.
> * Lightweight fireproofing, probably blown off of the structural steel, sprinkler supply pipes severed by flying debris, gypsum wallboard around the stairwells, which collapsed and blocked access, and the grouping of stairwells in the buildings' core, which increased their vulnerability to a single impact, may have contributed to the collapse or hindered the escape of occupants above the impact zones.



WPI - Transformations: Why the World Trade Center Towers Fell


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 3, 2009)

I dare say that Toro took some people to school tonight.


----------



## manu1959 (Dec 3, 2009)

SFC Ollie said:


> I dare say that Toro took some people to school tonight.



toro found his bic lighter and his can of right guard.....


----------



## Toro (Dec 3, 2009)

Largest demolition ever.



> With the press of a button at 5:47 PM on October 24, 1998, Detroit Mayor Dennis Archer dropped the J.L. Hudson Department Store from his city&#8217;s skyline and into the history books and record books.
> 
> Hudson&#8217;s was the tallest department store in the country and was second in square footage only to Macy&#8217;s anchor Store in New York. It dominated the retail market in the city through the 1970&#8217;s before closing its doors in 1983.
> 
> The store was built in 12 separate stages, the first in 1911 and the last in 1946. The complex had two retail basements and 23 above grade retail floors, including mezzanines. Two additional basements and six upper stories in a tower, provided storage and mechanical support for the 2.2 million square foot building. In all there were 33 levels in the structure.



Controlled Demolition, Inc. | Buildings

The one department store had 33 floors and mezzanines, and was 2.2 million square feet.  

Each WTC tower had 110 floors and 3.8 million square feet each.  

World Trade Center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Now look at the preparation of the demolition team on the department store above.  



> Under CDI direction, Homrich/NASDI&#8217;s 21 man crew needed three months to investigate the complex and four months to complete preparations for CDI&#8217;s implosion design. During that period, the lower two basements of the structure were filled with engineered fill and the perimeter basement walls bermed to 1st basement level with soil to support perimeter walls which would surely have failed under soil and hydrostatic loads once the horizontal support of the Hudson&#8217;s internal structure was removed by the implosion.



They spent seven months getting ready _before_ they wired the building.



> CDI&#8217;s 12 person loading crew took twenty four days to place 4,118 separate charges in 1,100 locations on columns on nine levels of the complex. Over 36,000 ft of detonating cord and 4,512 non-electric delay elements were installed in CDI&#8217;s implosion initiation system, some to create the 36 primary implosion sequence and another 216 micro-delays to keep down the detonation overpressure from the 2,728 lb of explosives which would be detonated during the demolition.



It then took 12 people nearly a month to place 4000 charges at 1100 locations with 36,000 ft of detonating cord, 4500 delay elements, and 2700 lbs of explosives to blow up the department store.  

Yet, we are to believe from the foilers that the WTC - totaling 220 floors and more than 3 times the square footage of the department store - was blown up by people who place massive amounts of detonations throughout the building, whom nobody ever saw coming in and out of buildings that employed 50,000.  Whereas it took a demolition team eight solid months of working at a department store less than a third the size of the WTC, there is zero, zip, nada evidence of anyone actually, you know, working to blow up the WTC.

FFS.


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 3, 2009)

Why would NIST try to forensically analyse collapse without the building plans? *NO* where in their product does it say they had *plans*.

Why would  NY state courts let guiliani steel the NYC building plans when NIST needed them for engineering analysis?  They ignored federal and state freedom of information laws.

Why would thousands of tons of steel(evidence) go to India and China when the US steel industry needs the steel?


----------



## manu1959 (Dec 3, 2009)

eight months to analyze wire and demo a building one third the size of the wtc......the buidlings were hit what 7 months after bush took office.....hmmmmmmmmmmmm


----------



## Toro (Dec 3, 2009)

Interactive to show you how both towers fell, from Stephen Keeling, Institute for Mathematics and Scientific Computing, Karl-Franzens University of Graz

An Interactive Simulation Comparing Models of the Fall of the World Trade Center Towers


----------



## Toro (Dec 3, 2009)

I have the link to Columbia's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, where the seismology department measured the wavelengths from the earth's vibrations when the towers fell.  They concluded that had there been a bomb, the seismographs would have spiked.  That did not happen.  Instead, the seismographs showed a crescending wave consistent with a building collapse.  I'll post it if I can find it.


----------



## manu1959 (Dec 3, 2009)

creativedreams said:


> Why would NIST try to forensically analyse collapse without the building plans? *NO* where in their product does it say they had *plans*.
> 
> Why would  NY state courts let guiliani steel the NYC building plans when NIST needed them for engineering analysis?  They ignored federal and state freedom of information laws.
> 
> Why would thousands of tons of steel(evidence) go to India and China when the US steel industry needs the steel?



tell me how many structural steel recycling facilities are there in the united states......

those letters don't reference any building plans....


----------



## Fizz (Dec 3, 2009)

creativedreams said:


> Why would NIST try to forensically analyse collapse without the building plans? *NO* where in their product does it say they had *plans*.


do you know that the NIST didnt have the building plans or is this just another whacko assumption of yours with absolutely no basis in reality.

Where does the NIST say they didnt have the plans?


----------



## Tom Clancy (Dec 4, 2009)

I think this Thread proves that creativedreams is a moron that blindly follows Propaganda like no other.

You sir, are an insult to the Families of the Deceased and the Deceased themselves. 


Get off your high horse and keep reading more Left wing Propaganda.


----------



## eots (Dec 4, 2009)

Tom Clancy said:


> I think this Thread proves that creativedreams is a moron that blindly follows Propaganda like no other.
> 
> You sir, are an insult to the Families of the Deceased and the Deceased themselves.
> 
> ...



don't pretend you speak for the victims families...

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hf33g9ep4YU[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzC3QI8JenU[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5QoaDasnOA[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rukxI_GLc3w[/ame]


----------



## Tom Clancy (Dec 4, 2009)

eots said:


> Tom Clancy said:
> 
> 
> > I think this Thread proves that creativedreams is a moron that blindly follows Propaganda like no other.
> ...



Who said i was? 

Of course it's an insult. Saying your son/daughter/mother or father was killed by our Greedy government and it was all to start a war for oil and Global domination isn't an insult? 

Rightt... 

You're just another one of those who think they know everything..


----------



## eots (Dec 4, 2009)

an insult to those guilty elements within the government complicit with the crime ?


----------



## Fizz (Dec 4, 2009)

eots said:


> an insult to those guilty elements within the government complicit with the crime ?



first you need to prove there are guilty elements within the government complicit with the crime. then we can talk about it being an insult.


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 4, 2009)

New York's Bernard Kerik a 9/11 hero Police Chief  recently jailed...

Bernard Kerik was Chief of Police under a 9/11 hero Mayor Rudy Giuliani and now faces 142 years in jail and fines of almost $5 million dollars in convicted on all charges.

New York's 9/11 hero secretly accepted more than $250,000 in renovations to his apartment from a construction firm with suspected mafia ties while he was Corrections Department Commissioner under Mayor Rudy Giuliani through 9/11.

New York '9/11 hero police chief' jailed - Telegraph

I want to add something to this that perhaps is another piece to the 9/11 puzzle......


Tom Leppert the CEO for Turner Construction which did many months of  construction renovation work on the World Trade Center buildings up to the very day of 9/11 went on to be appointed by George Bush to the President's Commission on White House Fellows.
Turner Construction Company
[url=http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/fellows/about/commission.html]White House Fellowships: Commission Members[/URL]

Turner Construction worked hand and hand with Controlled Demolition Inc(CDI) on many demolition projects.

Look at the website for Controlled Demolition Inc and it states right in there that part of their work includes "classified" work for the U.S. Department of Defense on sensitive projects both domestically and internationally.
Controlled Demolition, Inc. | Government

Turner Construction Company *AND* Controlled Demolition Inc *BOTH* helped performed clean-up at ground zero in which all the steel (evidence) got shipped overseas mostly to China, except for a few hand picked pieces to be sent to NIST for inspection and for part of a memorial ship. 

Turner Construction had a main office located in the third sub-basement of Tower 1. Turner Construction had been performing construction renovation work in various parts throughout the WTC centers and had occupied various office spaces.

A WTC property assessment described some of the renovations as work upon steel support columns within and around elevator shafts of both WTC Towers.

Turner Construction also constructed the new headquarters for the Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) which manages a laboratory for energetics, explosive materials, propellents, etc and the only reliable source of aluminum nano-powders(nano-thermite) in the United States.
http://manganaro.com/projbovt.html


----------



## Gamolon (Dec 4, 2009)

creativedreams said:


> Why would NIST try to forensically analyse collapse without the building plans? *NO* where in their product does it say they had *plans*.



Here's a quote from LERA website. Leslie Robertson's firm.
LERA | WTC - Sept. 11, 2001



> World Trade Center and NIST
> 
> "In response to the WTC tragedy, the National Institute of Standards and Technology is conducting a three-part plan: a 24-month building and fire safety investigation to study the factors contributing to the probable cause (or causes) of post-impact collapse of the WTC Towers (WTC 1 and 2) and WTC 7; a research and development program to provide the technical basis for improved building and fire codes, standards, and practices; and a dissemination and technical assistance program to engage leaders of the construction and building community in implementing proposed changes to practices, standards and codes. Also it will provide practical guidance and tools to better prepare facility owners, contractors, architects, engineers, emergency responders, and regulatory authorities to respond to future disasters."
> 
> *LERA participated in the development of a database of structural information for the two towers of the World Trade Center (WTC1 and 2)*.



How would LERA have participated in the development of a structural information database without plans and bills of materials???


----------



## rightwinger (Dec 4, 2009)

WillowTree said:


> creativedreams said:
> 
> 
> > Every picture of "Ground Zero" is evidence of explosives used.
> ...




Boy ....WTC 7 looks like it is taking quite a pounding there. I hope it survived


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 4, 2009)

rightwinger said:


> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> > creativedreams said:
> ...




Sorry, but I have to inform you that it caught fire and fell down. Not a thing they could do to save it.


----------



## manu1959 (Dec 4, 2009)

SFC Ollie said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > WillowTree said:
> ...



ya...but that was after it was hit by debris destroying several floors of stuctural support and knocking out the fire supression system....


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 4, 2009)

manu1959 said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



True, but he didn't ask that.


----------



## eots (Dec 4, 2009)

the damage to the wtc played no role in the NIST collapse scenario ...fires alone ...first time in history


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 4, 2009)

Here I am just showing proof of many months of access to the World Trade Center buildings support structures for many months prior to the support structures failing symmetrically and concentrically at almost freefall speeds. 


For months prior to 9/11 both the Twin Towers had the largest elevator modernization in history going on.

The core of the towers housed the elevators and contained 47 steel columns running from the bedrock to the top of the tower.

World Trade Center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

EDITOR'S OVERVIEW -- WORLD TRADE CENTER -- ELEVATOR WORLD NOVEMBER 2001

The owner of the company that did the largest elevator modernizations in both the World Trade Center buildings was associated with Bush and Donated regularly to the Republicans and Bush's campaign.

Robert Baamonde - $3,000 in Political Contributions for 2000


----------



## Fizz (Dec 4, 2009)

creativedreams said:


> The owner of the company that did the largest elevator modernizations in both the World Trade Center buildings was associated with Bush and Donated regularly to the Republicans and Bush's campaign.
> 
> Robert Baamonde - $3,000 in Political Contributions for 2000



holy crap!! thats your proof? the owner of the company was a republican?!!! 

HAHAHAHAHahahahaha

this is the funniest forum i have ever read in my life!! some of the things that get said here i couldnt come up with in my wildest imagination.

gee, i wonder how many other americans donated at least $3000 to republicans.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 4, 2009)

Fizz said:


> creativedreams said:
> 
> 
> > The owner of the company that did the largest elevator modernizations in both the World Trade Center buildings was associated with Bush and Donated regularly to the Republicans and Bush's campaign.
> ...




Fizz, you just can't make this shit up. It's real, they live among us.


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 5, 2009)

These two new videos show absolute proof of explosives used to bring down the World Trade Center Buildings.

This footage came right from the history channel itself....

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_B_Azbg0go"]YouTube- South Tower Smoking Guns[/ame]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PBVhxnkK6s8"]YouTube- South Tower Smoking Guns (Follow-up)[/ame]


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Dec 5, 2009)

More indisputable proof explosives brought the towers down the disinfo agents like gomer pyle cant debunk.
People with demolition expertise questioning 9/11


----------



## Liability (Dec 5, 2009)

So...

the jet airliners that got flown into the twin towers were just part of a clever cover story to conceal that individuals inside the shadow gubmint of Amerika were actually doing the deeds.

And these shadow boys cleverly got al qaeda to declare war on us in time to have some otherwise utterly ineffectual Islamshitbrains trained to hijack and fly said jetliners from Mass to NYC and into both towers (putting aside the Pentagon and the failed effort in PA for the moment).  

The Islamofucktards NEVER thought to ask the shadow-fuckers from inside Amerika, "Why the devil should we commit silly acts of suicide if you already have the buildings wired to go?"  Just tell the American people that WE did it and we'll be more than happy to take credit for it but it won't cost us any of our 'soldiers.'"

Somebody over on the Troofer Aisle, please handle that inquiry!


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Dec 5, 2009)

disinfo agent Liar ability,was wondering how long it would be before you came here to one of these 9/11 threads.lol.


----------



## eots (Dec 5, 2009)

Liability said:


> So...
> 
> the jet airliners that got flown into the twin towers were just part of a clever cover story to conceal that individuals inside the shadow gubmint of Amerika were actually doing the deeds.
> 
> ...



the evidence says wtc 7 was brought down by controlled demolition not office fires as far as the rest of your rambling goes ..all I can say is your understanding of the workings of a false flag operation are so distorted and inane that they are not worth addressing


----------



## Liability (Dec 5, 2009)

eots said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > So...
> ...



Inane ramblings is your stock in trade.

It the Twin Towers were not brought down by the effects of the fires caused by the jet liners crashing into them, then they must have been wired.

As for WTC7, we know it was struck by debris and caused to go up in flames, in an inferno that was barely controlled in ANY way due to the fact that responders had other pressing duties on their hands.  There is still not a single solitary shred of credible evdeence that anyone wired WTC 7 or planted ANY explosives in it.  Not one sigle solitary shred.

False flag?

Either it was done by outsiders or it was done by insiders (or they somehow managed to cooperate).

If it wasn't done by the Islamoshit, then your thesis HAS to be that it was done by traitorous scum INSIDE Amerika.  Yet you are utterly unable to describe WHO would do such a thing, what they wuld even HOPE to accomplish or how they went about it all without getting caught well before 9/11/2001.

You are a lying scumbag retard piece of fucking  shit.  Ad that's the last time I have any kind words about you.


----------



## Tom Clancy (Dec 5, 2009)

...


> All the people who would have to be involved in order to pull this massive conspiracy off...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## eots (Dec 5, 2009)

Liability said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Liability said:
> ...



[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65Qg_-89Zr8[/ame]


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 6, 2009)

SFC Ollie said:


> Fizz, you just can't make this shit up. It's real,



You are defending a story put out by people who try and get themselves pardons before they leave office.

Why do you defend against a new investigation into people of the likes of this?

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBUkxvfL_eE"]YouTube- CNN BUSH UNITED NATIONS[/ame]


----------



## Big Black Dog (Dec 6, 2009)

creativedreams said:


> Every picture of "Ground Zero" is evidence of explosives used.
> 
> *EVERYTHING* but the steel was exploded into a huge pyroclastic cloud of dust *BEFORE* it even hits the ground.
> 
> If everything *WASN'T* exploded into dust then the rubble pile of the Twin Towers at Ground Zero would have been *HUGE *and *MUCH HIGHER *than it was.



So, what you're telling me is the two airplanes didn't crash into the towers?  Seen it with my own eyes.  I think the only thing exploading are the brain cells inside your noggin!


----------



## eots (Dec 6, 2009)

Tom Clancy said:


> ...
> 
> 
> > All the people who would have to be involved in order to pull this massive conspiracy off...
> ...




fuck what a dumb uninformed individual you are..you want military..FBI...CIA
well here you go Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report


----------



## eots (Dec 6, 2009)

Big Black Dog said:


> creativedreams said:
> 
> 
> > Every picture of "Ground Zero" is evidence of explosives used.
> ...



where does this imbecile get the Idea anyone here is saying the towers were not hit by planes ?? is it stupidity or intentional ???


----------



## Fizz (Dec 6, 2009)

eots said:


> where does this imbecile get the Idea anyone here is saying the towers were not hit by planes ?? is it stupidity or intentional ???



they are pretty much mutually exclusive. 

how do you fly an airplane into the exact floor that has the explosives wired to blow up first? how does the wiring for a controlled demolition survive an airplane hitting it?

or...

how do you send people into a raging inferno with explosives and have them wire them up??

please explain how either scenario works in detail.


----------



## eots (Dec 6, 2009)

The proof of controlled demolition is there the evidence for building did it fires is not it is up to an investigation to answer how the explosives were planted..but to dismiss it as impossible is nothing more than denial


----------



## Liability (Dec 6, 2009)

eots said:


> The proof of controlled demolition is there the evidence for building did it fires is not it is up to an investigation to answer how the explosives were planted..but to dismiss it as impossible is nothing more than denial



id-eots cannot post a coherent sentence, yet is miffed that folks don't buy his moronic conspiracy theory.

There is still not a single solitary shred of credible evidence that any explosives were used, nor of WHO would do it, nor why, nor how, nor when.

It is such a monumentally irrational bit of lunatic conspiracy theory, in fact, that not one of the TROOFERS is willing to even address those questions.

Quite simply put, it is a virtual certainty that nobody did *or could have* planted all the demolition materials needed within any time-frame consistent with nobody having noticed their presence prior to the attacks.  And the logistics involved of _*coordinating*_ that bit of impossibility with the Islamoshitfuckers' attacks using hijacked jet airliners?  Wow.  We'd need a few more universes to calculate those odds.

Id-eots remains a lying moron piece of fucking shit.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 6, 2009)

eots said:


> The proof of controlled demolition is there the evidence for building did it fires is not it is up to an investigation to answer how the explosives were planted..but to dismiss it as impossible is nothing more than denial




It's impossible!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Why can't you think for just a moment about all the prove you have been shown, and all the answers to questions that you just don't have.

There was no way in hell to plant 100 tons or more of explosives in those buildings and have a controlled demo with:

1. Planes hitting the buildings.
2. No one working in the buildings getting suspicious.
3. No one of the thousands who would have to be in on it not talking.

It simply is IMPOSSIBLE!!!!!


----------



## Fizz (Dec 6, 2009)

eots said:


> The proof of controlled demolition is there the evidence for building did it fires is not it is up to an investigation to answer how the explosives were planted..but to dismiss it as impossible is nothing more than denial



yes it is. it is EXACTLY what an investigation is for.

its not impossible that huge meteors came down and hit the WTC towers too but its also highly unlikely and there is no evidence for it. so how much time and resources should be wasted proving meteors didnt do it?


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 6, 2009)

9/11 inside job said:


> disinfo agent Liar ability,was wondering how long it would be before you came here to one of these 9/11 threads.lol.


and 9/11 rimjob proves himself a fucking moron once again


----------



## eots (Dec 6, 2009)

Fizz said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > The proof of controlled demolition is there the evidence for building did it fires is not it is up to an investigation to answer how the explosives were planted..but to dismiss it as impossible is nothing more than denial
> ...



don't read well do you ? and your analogies are as inane and pointless as you and it is indeed impossible the meteors caused the collapse.. imbecile


----------



## eots (Dec 6, 2009)

SFC Ollie said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > The proof of controlled demolition is there the evidence for building did it fires is not it is up to an investigation to answer how the explosives were planted..but to dismiss it as impossible is nothing more than denial
> ...



people in the building did report suspicions and strange activity and you know this...your estimation is thousands in on it...this is a fallacy.. with the highest technology's and a group of people skilled at covert operations and it is far from impossible which is why so many highly ranked intelligence from military CIA and FBI have spoken out...where is bin laden ? why are his secrets not reveled ??


----------



## Tom Clancy (Dec 6, 2009)

eots said:


> people in the building did report suspensions and strange activity and you know this...your estimation is thousands in on it...this is a fallacy..the highest technology's and a group of people skilled at covert operations and it is far from impossible which is why so many highly ranked intelligence from military CIA and FBI have spoken out...where is bin laden ? why are his secrets not reveled ??



Do I have to post this again? 


*Don't you think someone would've come out and blown the whistle? 

just like Watergate and Iran/Contra etc etc.... 

Please.. Your Ignorance makes me laugh. 
*


Tom Clancy said:


> ...
> 
> 
> > All the people who would have to be involved in order to pull this massive conspiracy off...
> ...


----------



## Fizz (Dec 7, 2009)

eots said:


> Fizz said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



there is just as much evidence that meteors caused the collapse as there is explosives. exactly the same amount.

its not that i dont read well. the problem is that you dont explain well. are you saying that if an investigation found evidence of explosives they would not ask how the explosives got there? thats fairly moronic. or am i misunderstanding what you are saying?


----------



## eots (Dec 7, 2009)

Liability said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > The proof of controlled demolition is there the evidence for building did it fires is not it is up to an investigation to answer how the explosives were planted..but to dismiss it as impossible is nothing more than denial
> ...



fuck you ..useless **** I stand proudly with these patriots

Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report

and you stand with this puppet king

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOMKdILRM5I[/ame]


----------



## eots (Dec 7, 2009)

Fizz said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Fizz said:
> ...



I am saying only an independent investigation will revel the the details...but the evidence that building fires did it is just not there and the evidence for controlled demolition is

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-grSVHgwbY[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNgNptRgCok[/ame]


----------



## elvis (Dec 7, 2009)

eots said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



save the c-word for old rocks and chris.


----------



## Fizz (Dec 7, 2009)

eots said:


> I am saying only an independent investigation will revel the the details...but the evidence that building fires did it is just not there and the evidence for controlled demolition is



i can show you the fire. can you show me the explosives?


----------



## Tom Clancy (Dec 7, 2009)

Tell me Eots, have you read the post i posted twice? 

Where are the folks who blew the buildings up? 

Oh, and while you're at it, look at the list and tell me what happened to those other folks.. I mean honestly, at least one of them would come out with the "Truth" you keep talking about.


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 7, 2009)

Tom Clancy said:


> Tell me Eots, have you read the post i posted twice?
> 
> Where are the folks who blew the buildings up?
> 
> Oh, and while you're at it, look at the list and tell me what happened to those other folks.. I mean honestly, at least one of them would come out with the "Truth" you keep talking about.


he'll say fear of death, but yet HE doesnt fear death for trying to "expose them"


stupid troofers are totally fucking INSANE


----------



## eots (Dec 7, 2009)

Tom Clancy said:


> Tell me Eots, have you read the post i posted twice?
> 
> Where are the folks who blew the buildings up?
> 
> Oh, and while you're at it, look at the list and tell me what happened to those other folks.. I mean honestly, at least one of them would come out with the "Truth" you keep talking about.



where is bin laden ?  why are his secrets not reveled ?


----------



## eots (Dec 7, 2009)

DiveCon said:


> Tom Clancy said:
> 
> 
> > Tell me Eots, have you read the post i posted twice?
> ...



no its insane to think that they are going to start murdering people on message boards or people from the patriots site


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 7, 2009)

eots said:


> Tom Clancy said:
> 
> 
> > Tell me Eots, have you read the post i posted twice?
> ...


bin laden is likely dead
we havent seen nor heard from him in YEARS


most likely he died when tora bora was incinerated


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 7, 2009)

eots said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > Tom Clancy said:
> ...


not if they didnt have a problem killing nearly 3000 people(and potentially more) on 9/11
you piss-ants wouldnt be a pimple in their way if they were this all powerful conspiracy you seem to believe exists


----------



## Tom Clancy (Dec 7, 2009)

eots said:


> Tom Clancy said:
> 
> 
> > Tell me Eots, have you read the post i posted twice?
> ...



Umm.. You mean you really don't believe him being the Mastermind behind all this? 

And i'm talking about the people within the United States. 

Oh and where is Bin Laden? Probably still around West Pakistan or East Afghan.


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 7, 2009)

Tom Clancy said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Tom Clancy said:
> ...


these troofers are delusional paranoids


----------



## eots (Dec 7, 2009)

no bin laden was not the master mind ..bin laden cant order the FBI to back off investigation or order a stand down and why is bin laden  not betrayed ,,how does he keep this massive conspiracy and his location secret all this time...I mean we all know secrets cant be kept...right ?


----------



## Tom Clancy (Dec 7, 2009)

DiveCon said:


> Tom Clancy said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



Touché.


----------



## eots (Dec 7, 2009)

these deniers are in denial and are in need of therapy and deprogramming


----------



## Tom Clancy (Dec 7, 2009)

eots said:


> no bin laden was not the master mind ..bin laden cant order the FBI to back off investigation or order a stand down and why is bin laden  not betrayed ,,how does he keep this massive conspiracy and his location secret all this time...I mean we all know secrets cant be kept...right ?




Last wills? Talking about the men who so Brave sacrificed their lives for Allah to kill the Evil Americans, and Allah promised that paradise. remember? what is it? 42 Virgins? 

You're a Sheep. 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Fr3rA_KKyk&feature=player_embedded[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kqpZGBOKZQ&feature=player_embedded[/ame]


----------



## Tom Clancy (Dec 7, 2009)

eots said:


> these deniers are in denial and are in need of therapy and deprogramming


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 7, 2009)

eots said:


> these deniers are in denial and are in need of therapy and deprogramming


so says one of the chief deniers of reality


----------



## eots (Dec 7, 2009)

DiveCon said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Tom Clancy said:
> ...



then the videos would be fake


----------



## eots (Dec 7, 2009)

Tom Clancy said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > no bin laden was not the master mind ..bin laden cant order the FBI to back off investigation or order a stand down and why is bin laden  not betrayed ,,how does he keep this massive conspiracy and his location secret all this time...I mean we all know secrets cant be kept...right ?
> ...



well that's just pure fantasy..millions in rewards..rivals..division in the Muslim world...but in your brain washed opinion..the Muslim is immune to these things ..so what you really mean is only Muslims can keep secrets ...I see but what of the tortured confessions could they not be tortured as to where is bin laden ???


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 7, 2009)

eots said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


there have been NO VIDEOS since tora bora


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 7, 2009)

eots said:


> Tom Clancy said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


see, it isnt a secret to the muslims, they proudly declare it


----------



## Tom Clancy (Dec 7, 2009)

eots said:


> Tom Clancy said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



Of course it's fantasy, but that's how Jihadist's are, if you haven't noticed.. 

If Osama or any Al Qaeda leader knew about a so called 9/11 Conspiracy they would've already said, "We didn't do shit, that's all Bush and his Admin plotting against the US to Invade Afghan and Iraq" 
Right.. 

Well actually, A Taliban detainee in Pakistan claims to have information about Osama Bin Laden's whereabouts in January or February of this year..

BBC News - Bin Laden 'seen in Afghanistan in early 2009'


----------



## Fizz (Dec 7, 2009)

DiveCon said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


here i go and flip the coin to be on the side of the conspiracy wackos but i think it is possible that we DID get him at tora bora and didnt make it public. we may have killed him or we may have him in custody.

i'm not a strong believer in that but i do consider it.


----------



## eots (Dec 7, 2009)

Tom Clancy said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Tom Clancy said:
> ...



LOL..and people claim they saw Elvis at Wally mart


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 7, 2009)

Fizz said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


its not that "we didnt make it public" it's more likely a case of "nothing left to prove it"

do you have a clue what happens in a thermobaric explosion?

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/thermobaric.htm


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 7, 2009)

eots said:


> Tom Clancy said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


hey, something we can agree on


----------



## Tom Clancy (Dec 7, 2009)

eots said:


> Tom Clancy said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



You're comparing Osama and Elvis.. 

Now you're being insane. 

Osama admitted himself he was the Mastermind. 

Bin Laden: Yes, I did it - Telegraph

Online NewsHour Update: Bin Laden Admits 9/11 Responsibility, Warns of More Attacks -- October 29, 2004



> A tape aired by Al-Jazeera television Friday showed al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden admitting for the first time that he orchestrated the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks and saying the United States could face more.






> "We decided to destroy towers in America," he said. "God knows that it had not occurred to our mind to attack the towers, but after our patience ran out and we saw the injustice and inflexibility of the American-Israeli alliance toward our people in Palestine and Lebanon, this came to my mind."




*EDIT:* Also, This Bastard killed my fellow Spanish Citizens on March 11th. was that also an Inside job? Right... Oh! and lets not forget England..


----------



## eots (Dec 7, 2009)

Tom Clancy said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Tom Clancy said:
> ...



the tapes are so clearly fake and in his first statement he denied any involvement...I'm not saying there are not terrorist or that bin laden was not one...just not one capable of an event of this magnitude and the fact is without a series of unprecedented failures both before and on 9/11 the plan would of been a complete failure ..how could the man in the cave plan that ??


----------



## Tom Clancy (Dec 7, 2009)

eots said:


> Tom Clancy said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



haha, so with showing him Clearly say he was the mastermind and then Zawahiri also praising the Martyrs clearly makes it fake..

Come on, now you're being Delusional.... wait.. you were always being Delusional.


----------



## eots (Dec 7, 2009)

he goes from right handed to left handed..his beard is long and grey ..then it is short and black his nose is pointed and long then its broad and flat..they are fakes..without question


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 7, 2009)

eots said:


> he goes from right handed to left handed..his beard is long and grey ..then it is short and black his nose is pointed and long then its broad and flat..they are fakes..without question


more delusions


----------



## Tom Clancy (Dec 7, 2009)

Wow.. no comment. 

With facts you still point out that they're fakes..


----------



## Fizz (Dec 7, 2009)

eots said:


> the tapes are so clearly fake and in his first statement he denied any involvement...I'm not saying there are not terrorist or that bin laden was not one...just not one capable of an event of this magnitude and the fact is without a series of unprecedented failures both before and on 9/11 the plan would of been a complete failure ..how could the man in the cave plan that ??


if i remember right he denied it as the USA was preparing to invade afghanistan to come get him. remember, its prefectly ok for muslims to lie to infidels.

ok, lets skip the "man in a cave" thing, because he wasnt really living in caves, and get right to your point.

why couldnt a he plan an attack of this magnitude? after all, it is not the first attack he planned. it wasnt the last, unfortunately. the plan isnt all that complicated. train a few guys to fly planes and give them a few guys for some muscle when on board.

in fact, the plan wasnt all that successful. they only hit 75% of what they wanted to hit. i dont think they thought the buildings would actually collapse. (although the 93 bombing apparently attempted to knock one tower into the other). 

its certainly an infinitely less complicated mission that wiring a building for explosives and having airplanes crash into the buildings then setting off silent explosives powerful enough to knock down the towers. it starts exactly where the planes hit and charges needed to either be placed during a raging inferno or the demolitions needed to be rewired after a plane takes out several floors of the building.

....and i actually believe that this is what the twoofers really are in denial about. something this catastrophic can be caused by such a simple plan with so few people involved. therefore it MUST be a huge conspiracy.


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 7, 2009)

Fizz said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > the tapes are so clearly fake and in his first statement he denied any involvement...I'm not saying there are not terrorist or that bin laden was not one...just not one capable of an event of this magnitude and the fact is without a series of unprecedented failures both before and on 9/11 the plan would of been a complete failure ..how could the man in the cave plan that ??
> ...


yeah, they didnt go to the caves till AFTER the 9/11 attacks
but Eots and his delusional fuck buddies dont seem to understand common sense facts'


----------



## eots (Dec 7, 2009)

well you remember wrongly he denied the attacks as did the taliaban  and your assessment of the simplicity of flying planes into buildings as not be a of great magnitude in its complexity just shows your simplistic understanding...the list of prior knowledge is unbelievable ..even to the point of several citizen average Joe's reporting the activities of the hi-jackers..nevernind the FBI and CIA...and then the the 18 destined to die..not an easy task despite your beliefs every Muslim is a suicide bomber...to find individuals capable of doing this operation ..willing to die..with the stealth to fly under the radar for years of training and planning required would be no simple task for an individual ..then being assured of being successful in taking control of the plans with nothing but razor blades..and then of course,,an unprecedented failure of NORAD is essential for even minimal success...if it was simple why are not all the _islamofascist _just wanting to die for their 42 virgins..simply getting on planes hijacking and crashing them ??..they could do it here or anywhere in the world...it is as  easy now as it was then to get a small sharp object on a plane


----------



## Liability (Dec 7, 2009)

9/11 inside job said:


> disinfo agent Liar ability,was wondering how long it would be before you came here to one of these 9/11 threads.lol.



The Troofers are the only purveyors of disinformation in this "discussion."

Rimjob has not even a hint of credibility since, like all of these dioshonest fucking asswipe Troofers, everything he says in support of his moronic thesis depends on lies and the willingness of everyone else to suspend reason.

Sorry, Rimjob, but your idiotic application is -- as always -- once again denied.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 7, 2009)

eots said:


> no bin laden was not the master mind ..bin laden cant order the FBI to back off investigation or order a stand down and why is bin laden  not betrayed ,,how does he keep this massive conspiracy and his location secret all this time...I mean we all know secrets cant be kept...right ?


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 7, 2009)

eots said:


> Tom Clancy said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...




Why does everyone think that UBL was the man in the cave? They went to the caves after the invasion of Afghanistan. UBL had quite a nice little secure compound he lived in prior to the attacks.


----------



## Gamolon (Dec 7, 2009)

Did you miss this Creative.



Gamolon said:


> creativedreams said:
> 
> 
> > Why would NIST try to forensically analyse collapse without the building plans? *NO* where in their product does it say they had *plans*.
> ...


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 7, 2009)

SFC Ollie said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > no bin laden was not the master mind ..bin laden cant order the FBI to back off investigation or order a stand down and why is bin laden  not betrayed ,,how does he keep this massive conspiracy and his location secret all this time...I mean we all know secrets cant be kept...right ?



So why did it take them *7 YEARS* to explain the building collapses?




That is because they had to figure out how to re-write physics.

Even  a *Physicist *that worked for *NASA* for almost 30yrs said:... * "*seeing the huge pyroclastic cloud of pulverized concrete dust and the massive structural members being hurled horizontally leaves *no doubt *in my mind the World Trade Center buildings were brought down by *explosives*.*"*

*Seven Senior Engineers say NIST Reprort re-writes physics:*
Seven Senior Federal Engineers and Scientists Call for New 9-11 Investigation











Here is a simple comprehensive example that depicts how the NIST investigation went when Bush appointed his personal friend to head the NIST Report and collapse investigation.

The Administration specifically instructed him to *NOT* look at the possibility in explosives in the collapses....even though there are countless witnesses live on the news who heard many explosions.


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 7, 2009)

more totally stupid shit from a fucking moronic troofer asshole


----------



## eots (Dec 7, 2009)

SFC Ollie said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > no bin laden was not the master mind ..bin laden cant order the FBI to back off investigation or order a stand down and why is bin laden  not betrayed ,,how does he keep this massive conspiracy and his location secret all this time...I mean we all know secrets cant be kept...right ?



when supposed grown men are reduced to posting a brigade of smiley faces I know its really because they have no real answer


----------



## eots (Dec 7, 2009)

DiveCon said:


> more totally stupid shit from a fucking moronic troofer asshole



same with responses like this


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Dec 7, 2009)

Tom Clancy said:


> ...
> 
> 
> > All the people who would have to be involved in order to pull this massive conspiracy off...
> ...



I love it how disinfo agents Ollie and Fizz worship fellow disinfo agent Tom Clancy here also sent here to propagate the lies of the 9/11 commission,how they accept what the corporate controlled news station NOVA and popular mechanics say whos editor is the cousin of then Homeland security chief under Bush as the ultimate truth. the disinfo agents logic here is doesnt matter what credible people such as firefighters,first responders,police officers,hundreds of architects and enginners,witnesses and demolition experts say,their logic is if the corporate controlled media and the government agencys said it it happened this way,its automatically true. "rolls on floor laughing."


----------



## Liability (Dec 7, 2009)

9/11 inside job said:


> Tom Clancy said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



In other words, Rimjob has ZERO ability to address ANY of the things that logic requires get addressed in order for his stupid-ass baseless conspiracy shit to even have a hope of ever making any sense.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Dec 7, 2009)

Tom Clancy said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > Tom Clancy said:
> ...



Touche? ,the fact that you agree with ditzcon that we are delusional and paranoid for not accepting the lies and propaganda of government agencys and what the corporate controlled media says instead listeing to what credible experts such as first responders,firefighters,demolition experts and hundreds of architects and enginners say shows your as big of a moron as ditzcon,ollie and fizz are. You Bush dupes need to look in the mirror when calling someone paranoid and delusional accepting THEIR versions.


----------



## Liability (Dec 7, 2009)

9/11 inside job said:


> * * * *
> 
> I love it how disinfo agents Ollie and Fizz worship fellow disinfo agent Tom Clancy here also sent here to propagate the lies of the 9/11 commission,how they accept what the corporate controlled news station NOVA and popular mechanics say whos editor is the cousin of then Homeland security chief under Bush as the ultimate truth. the disinfo agents logic here is doesnt matter what credible people such as firefighters,first responders,police officers,hundreds of architects and enginners,witnesses and demolition experts say,their logic is if the corporate controlled media and the government agencys said it it happened this way,its automatically true. "rolls on floor laughing."



Let id-eots answer Rimjob:  "when supposed grown men are reduced to posting a brigade of smiley faces I know its really because they have no real answer."  Id-eots, 12/07/2009, earlier in THIS very thread.


----------



## Fizz (Dec 7, 2009)

9/11 inside job said:


> ...that we are delusional and paranoid for not accepting the lies and propaganda of government agencys and what the corporate controlled media says instead listeing to what credible experts such as first responders,firefighters,demolition experts and hundreds of architects and enginners say shows your as big of a moron as ditzcon,ollie and fizz are. You Bush dupes need to look in the mirror when calling someone paranoid and delusional accepting THEIR versions.



you *are NOT* delusional and paranoid for following the majority of experts, first responders, demolition experts, etc.

*you are delusional and paranoid* for following the lunatic fringe that ignore all evidence contrary to their pre-conceived conspiracy theory.

you are delusional and paranoid for thinking explosive charges could survive a plane crashing thorugh a building they were wired in but they would still work perfectly and silently without any flashes.

you are delusional and paranoid for thinking the same people that planned the 93 world trade center bombing, the bombings in kenya and tanzania, the foiled bojinka plot, the bombing of philippine airlines 434, the USS Cole bombing, the bombings in Bali, the expat compound attack in saudi arabia, the train bombings in madrid, the hilton hotel in egypt, and the UK bus and train attacks were somehow duped into the 9/11 attacks so our government could blow up some of our own buildings and kill americans. this was so they had a reason to go after the people that did all these other attacks.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 7, 2009)

9/11 inside job said:


> Tom Clancy said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...




Your hundreds against our 10's of thousands. if not Hundreds of thousands.


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 7, 2009)

SFC Ollie said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Tom Clancy said:
> ...


troofers call everything that disagrees with their delusions "lies"


----------



## Tom Clancy (Dec 7, 2009)

9/11 inside job said:


> Tom Clancy said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Dec 7, 2009)

again the disinfo agents ONLY interest in 9/11 is what the corporate controlled media and government agencys have to say,NOT what credible experts in their fields have to say.priceless.I love it!!!!!!!!!!!! lol you agents crack me up with your logic.hahahahahahahahahaha "rolls on floor laughing."


----------



## Tom Clancy (Dec 7, 2009)

9/11 inside job said:


> again the disinfo agents ONLY interest in 9/11 is what the corporate controlled media and government agencys have to say,NOT what credible experts in their fields have to say.priceless.I love it!!!!!!!!!!!! lol you agents crack me up with your logic.hahahahahahahahahaha "rolls on floor laughing."


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 7, 2009)

9/11 inside job said:


> again the disinfo agents ONLY interest in 9/11 is what the corporate controlled media and government agencys have to say,NOT what credible experts in their fields have to say.priceless.I love it!!!!!!!!!!!! lol you agents crack me up with your logic.hahahahahahahahahaha "rolls on floor laughing."


when 99.9% of the experts say you are a fucking idiot, i would tend to agree with them


----------



## Toro (Dec 7, 2009)

9/11 inside job said:


> again the disinfo agents ONLY interest in 9/11 is what the corporate controlled media and government agencys have to say,NOT what credible experts in their fields have to say.priceless.I love it!!!!!!!!!!!! lol you agents crack me up with your logic.hahahahahahahahahaha "rolls on floor laughing."



You know what cracks me up?  Someone who posts 1550 posts on a message board, and 1540 posts are on the same topic.


----------



## eots (Dec 7, 2009)

Toro said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > again the disinfo agents ONLY interest in 9/11 is what the corporate controlled media and government agencys have to say,NOT what credible experts in their fields have to say.priceless.I love it!!!!!!!!!!!! lol you agents crack me up with your logic.hahahahahahahahahaha "rolls on floor laughing."
> ...



you mean like divemorncon and his 1000 post that say nothing but truther moron or you and your 1000 stupid post of your ..._observations_


----------



## Tom Clancy (Dec 7, 2009)

eots said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



Excuse me, We bring facts, Physics, and Logic, unlike you, you post about pilots and other folks wanting to investigate, that's just observation, not fact, Let's not forget you keep calling us the idiots and Brainwashed, but if you haven't realized it's you the one who is Close minded, idiotic and Brainwashed.. 

Tell me sir, do you also believe that Flight 93 was shot down? Do you also believe that Flight 77 was a missile? 

You're in Denial, and of course Desperation.


----------



## Toro (Dec 7, 2009)

eots said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



Id-eots has 9380 posts, and at least 9000 posts are on 9/11.

That makes him well-rounded by twoofer standards.


----------



## eots (Dec 9, 2009)

HERE  ARE SOME FACTS FOR YOU TOTO


Only saw plane (possibly from far away location), could not see pentagon, light poles or impact, either deduced or are lying OR do not directly mention or CONFIRM seeing an impact:
Susan Carroll (on metro platform at Reagan National)
Allen Cleveland (on subway metro train at Reagan National)
Meseidy Rodriguez (metro platform at Reagan National)
Steve Snaman (Ft McNair)
Michael Tinyk (CONTACTED/CONFIRMED by CIT US Patent and Trademark office in Crystal City)
Greta van Susteren (on the roof of a parking structure at National Airport)
Clyde A. Vaughn, Army Brig. Gen. (Saw the plane loitering over Georgetown, DC, )
Don Chauncey (small commuer plane)
Henry Ticknor (Rt 50, only saw plane for a moment-mad that people misrepresent)
Michael James -POV confirmed (Columbia Pike curve, trees blocked view)
Isabel James -POV confirmed (Columbia Pike curve, trees blocked view)
Mark Eastman
D.S. Khavkin (saw small commerical craft from back on Columbia Pike in highrise)
Allan Wallace (ran when plane came in, admits DID NOT see impact)
Mark Skipper (ran when plane came in, admits DID NOT see impact)
Steve Eiden (out on 395 loop)
Capt Steve McCoy (CONTACTED/CONFIRMED by CIT at 395 and Glebe Rd)
Andrea Kaiser (CONTACTED/CONFIRMED by CIT at 395 and Glebe Rd)
Ann Krug (Hoffman-Boston Elementary)
Mary Lyman
Oscar Martinez (saw plane, claims he only heard it hit, no confirmation to seeing)
Kirk Milburn (deceased, died in Motorcycle accident-CONTACTED/CONFIRMED by CIT, could not see impact or light poles)
Linda Plaisted
Alfred S. Regnery (watched it disappear behind bridges and concrete barriers)
Joseph Royster
Darb Ryan, Vice Admiral
Elizabeth Smiley
Steve Snaman
Dewey Snavely, Sgt.
Levi Stephens
Greta van Susteren 
Phillip Sheuerman (CONTACTED/CONFIRMED by CIT, on 395, only saw plane for brief moment, did not see impact)
Phillip Thompson (does not mention seeing impact, only fireball)
Thomas J. Trapasso (CONTACTED/CONFIRMED by CIT1400 S. Barton, dubious conflicting witness and can't see Pentagon from location)
Richard Benedetto (claims he did not see impact from Rt 27)
Terry Morin (up at Navy Annex)
James Ryan (And you saw it hit the Pentagon? No, at that point it went down because I was approaching a hill.)
Darb Ryan (quote only says "when out of the corner of my eye I saw the airplane" , the writer for Aviation Week adds 'a split second before it struck'.)
Mickey Bell (did not know what had happened)
Don Scott (did not and could not see pentagon or impact, confirmed by CIT)
Ralph Banton
Michael DiPaula ("sounded like missile", reporter adds detail about plane roaring into view, not in position to make determination on impact)
Lon Rains ("sounded like a missile")
John Thurman,Army Major who works in the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff
Daniel McAdams (only heard)
Dennis Smith (no direct confirmation of impact, may actually support flyover)
Dawn Vignola (SPOKE TO CIT IN PERSON, claimed the plane was white seemed, could not debunk north side)
David Battle
Mike Gerson
Cheryl Hammond (saw the big American Airlines plane and started running)
Dan Creed (up on Columbia Pike, no view of Pentagon or impact)
James Keglovich (no indication or CONFIRMATION that he actually saw the impact)
Aydan Kizildrgli (no indication or CONFIRMATION,writers words, his quotes do not allude to ACTUALLY seeing the impact)
Lincoln Liebner (at entrance to building in south parking lot, cannot see impact from there.-also claims plane hit helicopter which it did not)

Claims they "Saw" impact of "plane"/large airliner-were in a position to possibly confirm one:
1. Deb Anlauf (CONTACTED by CIT, would not return call)
2. Donald Bouchoux (military consultant. CONTACTED by CIT, spoke with and left message with son, would not return call)
3. Mike Walter (had dinner with CIT)
4. Sean Boger (CONFIRMED the north side, impact deduced we believe)
5. Pam Bradley (unconfirmed account/witness)
6. Hugh "Tim" Timmerman (Dawn Vignola's roomate, unavailable for comment)
7. James R. Cissell
8. Daryl Donley
9. Bobby Eberle (came forward well after the event, Jeff Gannon's boss)
10. Penny Elgas
11. Mary Ann Owens
12. Scott Perry
13. Frank Probst (CONTACTED/INTERVIEWED by CIT)
14Noel Sepulveda, Navy Master Sgt. (claims plane lowered landing gear and hit light poles with landing gear)
15. G. T. Stanley (unconfirmed name/witness)
16. Steve Storti
17. Carla Thompson (unconfirmed name/witness)
18. Dave Winslow, AP Radio reporter (CONTACTED by CIT, did not return call)
19. Terrance Kean (Unreachable)
20. Dave Marra (dubious, questionable witness-claims plane cartwheeled into building)
21. Mark Petitt (VERY dubious account)
22. Aziz El Hallou (Debunked lying witness, proven to be at Navy Annex)
223. Robert A Leonard(driving northbound in the HOV lanes on I-395; Pentagon is on the left. The plane vanished, absorbed by the building, and there was a slight pause. Then a huge fireball rose into the sky.")
24. Mitch Mitchell, Ret. Army Col., CBS news correspondent (account is problematic)
25. Mike Dobbs (according to writer, not confirmed, not his own words)
26. Joe Harrington (seems like it made impact before Wedge-in South Parking lot)
27. Rick Renzi (corrupt congressman, listed as law student, has plane "dive bombing", very peculiar account)


"Saw" a plane & impact from far away, but DID NOT see a second plane/jet shadowing/chasing and veering away as the impact happened:
28. Steve Anderson, USA Today Editor (saw impact from USA Today building)
29.Don Wright (a commuter plane, two-engined )
30.Don Chauncey (small commuter plane)
Steve Gerard (saw small corporate jet with no markings) (CONTACTED/CONFIRMED/INTERVIEWED by CIT)
31. Lesley Kelly, Cmdr. U.S. Navy (Ret.) (near impossible to see the plane approach from DC)
32. James Robbins (a national-security analyst & NRO contributor for National Review, William F Buckley (CIA) publication saw silver flash, "diving in an unrecoverable angle")
Ken Ford (prop plane flying up river from National) 
33.Christopher Munsey, Navy Times reporter 

(30 TOTAL WHO COULD HAVE SEEN OR CLAIM TO HAVE SEEN IMPACT)

Claims plane an American Airlines:
Richard Benedetto
James R. Cissell
Dennis Clem
Mike Dobbs, Marine Cmdr.
Penny Elgas
Cheryl Hammond
Joe Harrington
William Lagasse (CONTACTED/CONFIRMED by CIT)
Lincoln Leibner, Army Major
Elaine McCusker
Mitch Mitchell, Ret. Army Col. CBS news correspondent
Terry Morin, Former USMC aviator (CONTACTED by CIT, would not return phone calls)
Christopher Munsey, Navy Times reporter
Vin Narayanan (CONTACTED/CONFIRMED/INTERVIEWED by CIT)
John O'Keefe (CONTACTED/CONFIRMED/INTERVIEWED by CIT)
Steve Riskus
Mike Walter
Joel Sucherman (CONTACTED/CONFIRMED/INTERVIEWED by CIT)
Frank Probst (CONTACTED/CONFIRMED/INTERVIEWED by CIT)
James Ryan
Steve Storti
Tim Timmerman
Michael Tinyk (dark orange and blue) (CONTACTED/CONFIRMED by CIT)
Alan Wallace (white airplane with orange and blue trim) 
Ian Wyatt
Afework Hagos (according to writer)(CONTACT ATTEMPTED by CIT)

(25 total)


----------



## Fizz (Dec 9, 2009)

interesting. just out of curiousity, how many claim to have seen a missile?


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 9, 2009)

fizz said:


> interesting. Just out of curiousity, how many claim to have seen a missile?


none


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 9, 2009)

OK we are making progress, you admit there are numerous eyewitnesses to the impact. And it didn't hurt at all.


----------



## Fizz (Dec 9, 2009)

i'm curious as to where this list came from and what the criteria were for some of the comments. for instance "Mitch Mitchell, Ret. Army Col., CBS news correspondent (account is problematic)"..

is it problematic because he is military? news correspondent? some other reason?

i would like to see how independent the compiler of the list is.


----------



## Toro (Dec 9, 2009)

I have to admit, I'm not an Internet Cut 'N Paste Master like eots, but I'm going to give it the ol' college try.

One list of people who saw the plane slam into the Pentagon, and quotes of what they saw.  

Ann Krug's kindergarten class at  
Hoffman-Boston Elementary School  nearly one mile away from the Pentagon, saw the plane descend outside the classroom's window, about two miles from the Pentagon.
  "I actually pointed it out and said: 'Look at this plane; look at how low it's flying,' "
    "And then we all saw it come down."
... Memorial page for Robert Joseph Hymel, husband of the School Principal
... Account by courtesy of the Washington Post, November 15th, 2001 :
  Students playing outside at recess saw the plane flying low over them minutes before it hit the building,
... Arlington County In The News'  December 11th,
Dennis Clem, Deputy Director, Directorate for Information Systems and
Services, Defense Intelligence Agency.
"There was a commercial airliner that said American Airliners over the side of it flying at just above treetop height at full speed headed for the Pentagon.
From a mail message from 'Isopodia'.
Zinovy Pak, Russian Munitions Agency director, was on his way to the Pentagon for negotiations over U.S. funding for a southern Urals chemical weapons destruction facility when he "saw a plane crash into the building."
404
Moscow Times, November 21, 2001 - Yevgenia Borisova (Lexis Nexis)
(text mirror) http://www2.hawaii.edu/~julianr/lexisnexis/pak.txt
From National Airport

Van Susteren face Greta van Susteren, CNN legal analyst and anchor of "The Point,"
was on the roof of a parking structure at National Airport, with her husband.:
"We saw a plane near the Pentagon and then heard this 'boom' "

Irish Times, 9/12/01 (Lexis Nexis)
(text mirror) http://www2.hawaii.edu/~julianr/lexisnexis/irishtimes1.txt

Clevelnd face Allen Cleveland of Woodbridge Virginia looked out from a  Metro train going to National Airport Station, to see a jet heading down toward the Pentagon.
  "I thought, 'There's no landing strip on that side of the subway tracks,' " Before he could process that thought, he saw "a huge mushroom cloud. The lady next to me was in absolute hysterics."
  " .  . a silver passenger jet, mid sized"
    See also: What's all this about the C-130 ?

Meseidy Rodriguez  confirms "it was a mid size plane".
... Video by Craig Cola / Edited by: Chet Rhodes / washingtonpost.com
... http://mfile.akamai.com/920/rm/thepost.download.akamai.com/920/nation/091101-5s.ram
... http://www.newsbytes.com/news/01/170005.html
His brother in-law also saw a jetliner flying low over the tree tops near Seminary Rd. in Springfield, VA. (four miles to the South West of the Pentagon, down Interstate 395) and soon afterwards a military plane was seen flying right behind it.
... http://www.spooky8.com/reviews.htm
Susan Carroll   "I was standing on the platform high above the airport awaiting a Metro subway train to my office in the heart of the district, on Constitution Avenue, admiring the lovely blue skies when I saw the plane hit and the fireball and explosion at the Pentagon. At first, I didn't believe what I saw. At about the same time, the train approached the platform, and I remember turning to a fellow passenger and asking, 'What should we do?' "
jacksonville.com / Phillip J. Milano / Sept 11th 2002

From across the River

Joe Hurst, is general manager of the Oval Room restaurant at Lafayette Square,
..."  But he doesn't really complain about business. "I saw it go overhead, the plane," says Joe Hurst, describing the American flight that circled the White House.
    His assistant saw it dive into the Pentagon as he drove to work.
"Last week, I was having flashbacks," he says.
Boston Globe, 9/21/01 article by Brian McGrory (Lexis Nexis)
(text mirror) http://www2.hawaii.edu/~julianr/lexisnexis/hurst1.txt
Lt. Col. Stuart Artman, 44, a licensed commercial airline pilot of the Army Reserve and engineer in Winter Haven, Florida, was walking near the Washington Monument when he saw a plane fly low over the city.
  "I saw the plane that hit the Pentagon. It went behind some trees."   Then he saw the smoke.
The Ledger, Lakeland, FL, 9/15/01 - by Joy Murphy (Lexis Nexis)
(text mirror) http://www2.hawaii.edu/~julianr/lexisnexis/artman.txt

Sen. Patty Murray (D, Washington) was in a meeting with other Senate leaders.
"From a window in the meeting room, she saw a plane hit the Pentagon."
Seattle Times, December 9, 2001 (Lexis Nexis)
(text mirror) http://www2.hawaii.edu/~julianr/lexisnexis/murray.txt
 Tri-City Herald / Les Blumenthal and John Stang / Sept. 12th (google.com cache)
Gus , a painter who immigrated from Greece 25 years ago, was working across the Potomac.
"I was working Tuesday," he says. "I saw the plane. Low. Too low. Fast.
Cox News Service / September 15, 2001 / Paul Reid (Lexis Nexis)
(text mirror) http://www2.hawaii.edu/~julianr/lexisnexis/gus.txt
"Nightlite" wrote:
I live three miles from the pentagon, I heard that plane go over my
house moments before it hit.
google newsgroup message

A live Interviewee said:
  "I did see, myself a plane, about half hour ago, circling over the Capitol, now whether that may have been..."
Captain Joseph Candelario, USA a first year student in the Family Nurse Practitioner Program watched from the River by Fort McNair.
  I noticed a large aircraft flying low towards the White House. This aircraft then made a sharp turn and flew towards the Pentagon and seconds later crashed into it.
http://www.dragonslair.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/77/ffdd.html#Bell

Steve Snaman, manager of the datacom division for Walker Seals, would usually be working at the Pentagon but happened to be watching from Fort McNair as the jetliner came in low at full throttle, banked left and smashed into the wall of the Pentagon.
  "We saw the plane hit the Pentagon.  My first reaction was to get on the Nextel to reach my men, but I couldnt get a signal. They were in Wedge One."
... 'Electrical Contractor' Industry News article.
http://www.necanet.org/whats_new/report.cfm?ID=1005
... Article from NECA News, October 3, 2001

  See also associate: Mickey Bell 
Scott P. Cook  was at work on the fifth floor of the Portals building, at 1280 Maryland Avenue SW, Washington DC. immediately opposite to the Pentagon across the River.
  We didnt know what kind of plane had hit the Pentagon, or where it had hit. Later, we were told that it was a 757 out of Dulles, which had come up the river in back of our building, turned sharply over the Capitol, ran past the White House and the Washington Monument, up the river to Rosslyn, then dropped to treetop level and ran down Washington Boulevard to the Pentagon
  I cannot fathom why neither myself nor Ray, a former Air Force officer, missed a big 757, going 400 miles an hour, as it crossed in front of our window in its last 10 seconds of flight.
September 11, 2001
  See also:   What's all this about the C-130 ?
Ken Ford, a State Department employee, watched from the 15th floor of the State Department Annex,  just across the Potomac from the Pentagon.
  We were watching the airport through binoculars, he said, referring to Reagan National Airport, a short distance away. The plane was a two-engine turbo prop that flew up the river from National. Then it turned back toward the Pentagon. We thought it had been waved off and then it hit the building.
... delawareonline.com  newsday article by Ken Fireman  Sept 11  (.pdf  file)
... Information for Ireland or abroad, travel, entertainment listings, sports news, games, puzzles, recipes, TV listings and more - Ireland.com
  James S Robbins a national-security analyst & 'nationalreviewonline' contributor:
  "I was standing, looking out my large office window, which faces west and from six stories up has a commanding view of the Potomac and the Virginia heights."
  "The Pentagon is about a mile and half distant in the center of the tableau. I was looking directly at it when the aircraft struck. The sight of the 757 diving in at an unrecoverable angle is frozen in my memory, but at the time.
  " I did not immediately comprehend what I was witnessing. There was a silvery flash, an explosion, and a dark, mushroom shaped cloud rose over the building."
  "I was there. I saw it. That is my entire rebuttal."
... nationalreview.com  Rebuttal  written by Robbins,  April 9, 2002 8:55 a.m.
Lesley Kelly, Cmdr. U.S. Navy (Ret.), Gresham,
"On Sept. 11, I was standing in a break room of an office . . . in downtown D.C., when I looked out the window to see an airplane descend into the side of the Pentagon, where the Navy offices where five friends and colleagues of mine were located." oregonlive.com /

From the Navy Annex area
Mr. Arnesdotter, father of a Villa Augustina School 8th grader, e-mailed a poem from his work place, a nearby building. having seen the plane hit.
'News & Events' / 'Eighth Grade Quilt' / Thursday, November 1st
James Mosley, 57, was four stories up on a scaffold, washing the windows of the Navy Annex building when the plane flew overhead.
  ``The building started shaking, and I looked over and saw this big silver plane run into the side of the Pentagon,'' said the ``It almost knocked me off. I couldn't believe it.''
... Story by Glen Justice, Laura Smitherman and Tony Capaccio in Washington at (202) 624-1984
with reporting by Dan Goldstein and John Rega. /wfs / Sept 11
mailto:gjustice@bloomberg.net
Vice Adm. Darb Ryan,  Chief of Naval Personnel, was in his office at the Navy Annex about halfway between Trapasso's home and the Pentagon.   Having learned that New York had been attacked, he was on the telephone recommending the evacuation of the Pentagon
  "when out of the corner of my eye I saw the airplane"
Aviation Week & Space Technology: June 17, 1995 (sic)?  / Pentagon Attack Hits Navy Hard / w48.htm
Steve Mondul, a special Assistant to the Transportation Commissioner reports that the plane came directly overhead the DOT's Smart Traffic Center, an inconspicuous two-story brick building up a hill from the Pentagon.
November 2001 Focus - September and Beyone: Highway Agencies Respond to Keep America Mobile and Secure
http://www.arra.org/downloads/ARRA2001Newsletter_3.PDF
Madelyn Zakhem, executive secretary at the STC, had just stepped outside for a break when she saw
  '... an airliner coming straight up Columbia Pike at tree-top level.  "It was huge!  It was silver.  It was low -- unbelievable! I could see the cockpit. I fell to the ground, I was crying and scared,"
http://www.roadstothefuture.com/VA_Sept21.txt

    Sergeant Maurice L. Bease, 24, had worked around Marine aviation long enough to know what a fly-by was, and it sounded like one as he stood outside his office near the Pentagon on Sept. 11. Turning around expecting to see a fighter jet fly over, he saw only a split-second glimpse of a white commercial airliner streaking low toward the building, and him! He did not even have time to duck before it plowed into the side of the Pentagon around the corner and about 200 yards from where he stood.

.. 'Leatherneck' Marine's Magazine / By Maj Fred H. Allison, USMCR (Ret) / © 2001

Albert Hemphill,  a BMDO (Ballistic Missile Defense Organization) staff member watched from from the Navy Annex: 
  As I stood there, I instinctively ducked at the extremely loud roar and whine of a jet engine spooling up. Immediately, the large silver cylinder of an aircraft appeared in my window, coming over my right shoulder as I faced the Westside of the Pentagon directly towards the heliport. The aircraft, looking to be either a 757 or Airbus, seemed to come directly over the annex, as if it had been following Columbia Pike - an Arlington road leading to Pentagon. The aircraft was moving fast, at what I could only be estimate as between 250 to 300 knots. All in all, I probably only had the aircraft in my field of view for approximately 3 seconds.
  The aircraft was at a sharp downward angle of attack, on a direct course for the Pentagon. It was "clean", in as much as, there were no flaps applied and no apparent landing gear deployed. He was slightly left wing down as he appeared in my line of sight, as if he'd just "jinked" to avoid something. As he crossed Route 110 he appeared to level his wings, making a slight right wing slow adjustment as he impacted low on the Westside of the building to the right of the helo, tower and fire vehicle around corridor 5.
...Email posted to www.ournetfamily.com/WarOnTerror webmaster
Copy of message / Sept 12 4:20 PM
Kim Dent, 33, an administrative assistant at Ballistics Missiles of Defense, across the street from the Pentagon , was looking out the window with some co-workers. .
  "We saw the shadow of a plane. We heard the engine. We all said, 'That plane is flying kind of close."
... 'Nation' article:  09/11/2001 - Updated 07:05 PM ET / © Copyright 2002 USA TODAY

  Ian Wyatt.  a 1999 graduate of Mary Washington College was walking to his federal job.
  He glanced into the sky just as a commercial airplane roared by about 100 yards off the ground.
  " I was so scared I thought it was coming after me and just ducked for cover,"
   "It was going so fast and it was so low," he said, standing on Army-Navy Drive.
  "..incredibly loud jet engines flying very low over the highway.."
  "..it looks like a silver, an American Airlines twin engined plane.."
  " ... I could then hear cars squealing all around and people were just stunned."
... Fredericksburg.com - Terrorists attack Pentagon
... Poynter Online

Scott Perry of Spotsylvania County heard a plane's engines rumbling above the NavyAnnex building where he works, so he looked out his window, which faces the Pentagon.
  "It was coming straight into the wedge,"
  "I saw it crash. There was about five seconds of disbelief, and the next thing I heard was, down the hallway, a friend of mine screaming."
  "There's a picture in my mind that probably won't go away for a long time,"
... By ELIZABETH PEZZULLO and JANET MARSHALL / Sept 12, 5:36 am / © The Free Lance-Star Publishing Company.
  Terry Morin, a former USMC aviator, Program Manager for SPARTA, Inc was working as a contractor at the BMDO offices at the old Navy Annex.
  Having just reached the elevator in the 5th Wing of BMDO Federal Office Building (FOB) #2. He heard "an increasingly loud rumbling"
  "One to two seconds later the airliner came into my field of view. By that time the noise was absolutely deafening."
  The aircraft was essentially right over the top of me and the outer portion of the FOB (flight path parallel the outer edge of the FOB). Everything was shaking and vibrating, including the ground. I estimate that the aircraft was no more than 100 feet above me (30 to 50 feet above the FOB) in a slight nose down attitude. The plane had a silver body with red and blue stripes down the fuselage. I believed at the time that it belonged to American Airlines, but I couldnt be sure. It looked like a 737 and I so reported to authorities.
  Within seconds the plane cleared the 8th Wing of BMDO and was heading directly towards the Pentagon. Engines were at a steady high-pitched whine, indicating to me that the throttles were steady and full. I estimated the aircraft speed at between 350 and 400 knots. The flight path appeared to be deliberate, smooth, and controlled. As the aircraft approached the Pentagon, I saw a minor flash (later found out that the aircraft had sheared off a portion of a highway light pole down on Hwy 110). As the aircraft flew ever lower I started to lose sight of the actual airframe as a row of trees to the Northeast of the FOB blocked my view. I could now only see the tail of the aircraft. I believe I saw the tail dip slightly to the right indicating a minor turn in that direction. The tail was barely visible when I saw the flash and subsequent fireball rise approximately 200 feet above the Pentagon. There was a large explosion noise and the low frequency sound echo that comes with this type of sound.     Associated with that was the increase in air pressure, momentarily, like a small gust of wind. For those formerly in the military, it sounded like a 2000lb bomb going off roughly ½ mile in front of you. At once there was a huge cloud of black smoke that rose several hundred feet up. Elapsed time from hearing the initial noise to when I saw the impact flash was between 12 and 15 seconds.
  " ...the aircraft had been flown directly into the Pentagon without hitting the ground first or skipping into the building. "
Lifestyle | LIVESTRONG.COM
Race Matters - Report from a Marine Corps Officer on the attack on the Pentagon
La Verne Le Grand, 60, resident of Washington D.C., was riding in a car on the Columbia Pike "and saw the plane crash into the Pentagon." Since then, she has been admitted twice to Washington Hospital Center for treatment of severe anxiety.
Washington Post - October 14, 2001
http://www2.hawaii.edu/~julianr/lexisnexis/legrand.txt
Dan Creed . . . and two colleagues from Oracle software were stopped in a car near the Naval Annex, when they saw the plane dive down and level off.   'It was no more than 30 feet off the ground, and it was screaming. It was just screaming. It was nothing more than a guided missile at that point,'
    Creed said. 'I can still see the plane. I can still see it right now. It's just the most frightening thing in the world, going full speed, going full throttle, its wheels up,' Creed recalls."
Ahwatukee Foothills News / Doug Murphy Staff Writer /
See also:  Hearsay:  'Doug Graham'..
Elizabeth Smiley, 29, a graduate of Pendleton High School, Oregon, was walking the one mile home from her metro stop at the Pentagon instead of taking the bus, returning from work as an intelligence operations specialist with Civil Aviation Security at the Federal Aviation Administration FAA headquarters.    "I saw the plane not more than 200 feet over my head,"
http://www.mvonline.com/midvalleyextra/091201/volunteers.html
... By SHELLY INGRAM for the East Oregonian /  11-24-01
Jose Velasquez, a Costa Rican native runs the NEXCOM Citgo gas station (between the Pentagon and the Navy Annex) open only to Department of Defense personnel.
  "I knew something was wrong. The planes come more from the north and west [to land at Reagan National Airport] not from the south. And not so low.  It was like an earthquake,"
  "By the time I got outside all I could see was a giant cloud of smoke, first white then black, coming from the Pentagon,"
  Velasquez says the gas station's security cameras are close enough to the Pentagon to have recorded the moment of impact. "I've never seen what the pictures looked like,  The FBI was here within minutes and took the film."
... by Bill McKelway  / Copyright 2001 Richmond Times-Dispatch / Dec. 11,
"Rick M."  and his daughter after stopping at a Citgo gas station were driving a second time around the flyover loop to get back onto I-395, heading north.
"When we rounded the corner to head back to the highway we heard a sound like a missile and the plane flew in front of us by about 200 ft at ground level. I turned my head to the right and saw it crash into the Pentagon about 200 yards away. We felt the heat from the explosion!"
aande.com / copy of message sent Sept 9th
Sgt. William Lagasse, a pentagon police dog handler, the son of an aviation instructor, was filling up his patrol car at a gas station near the Pentagon when he noticed a jet fly in low.  He watched as the plane plowed into the Pentagon.
  Initially, he thought the plane was about to drop on top of him -- it was that close. Lagasse knew something was wrong. The 757's flaps were not deployed and the landing gear was retracted.
  ... By Avis Thomas-Lester, Washington Post Staff Writer, / November 8th 
"I saw the aircraft above my head about 80 feet above the ground, 400 miles an hour. The reason, I have some experience as a pilot and I looked at the plane. Didn't see any landing gear. Didn't see any flaps down. I realized it wasn't going to land. . . . It was close enough that I could see the windows and the blinds had been pulled down. I read American Airlines on it. . . .I got on the radio and broadcast. I said a plane is, is heading toward the heliport side of the building."
ABC Nightline - 9/11/02 Transcript (Lexis Nexis)
(mirror) http://www2.hawaii.edu/~julianr/lexisnexis/lagasse1.txt
  From buildings nearby
Spec. Mike Ryan had been in his barracks, (at Fort Myer) watching newscasts of the New York crash, when a plane flew very low over his base, he reported.  Those on base initially thought the plane was going to crash on them, he added.
The Herald.of Randolph VT / 13th Sept.
Linda Plaisted, an artist, was sitting at her desk at home
less than one mile from the Pentagon.
  "...I jumped up from my chair as the screeching and whining of the engine got even louder and I looked out the window to the West just in time to see the belly of that aircraft and the tail section fly directly over my house at treetop height. It was utterly sickening to see, knowing that this plane was going to crash. The sound was so incredibly piercing and shrill- the engines were straining to keep the plane aloft. It is a sound I will never stop hearing- and I now imagine the screams of the innocent passengers were commingled with the sounds of the engines and I am haunted. I was unaware at this time that the World Trade center had been attacked so I thought this was "just" a troubled plane en route to the airport. I started to run toward my front door but the plane was going so fast at this point that it only took 4 or 5 seconds before I heard a tremendously loud crash and books on my shelves started tumbling to the floor.
where were you | september 11th, 2001 / contribution #1148
  ".. I actually saw and heard the ill-fated aircraft fly over my house at great speed and just above the treetops seconds before it crashed..."
from a message posted by Linda Plaisted 9/11/2001 05:08:41 PM

Ralph Banton, 79, on a house porch a little more than a mile away, heard a jet flying directly overhead, very low.
  "It sounded like it was jetting instead of slowing down,"
firehouse.com / Helen O'Neill, / AP Special Correspondent, / Updated: Sept 11 - 8:52p
hawkeye.com / By Robert Burns (AP)
cjonline.com / By Robert Burns (AP) Last Modified: 5:58 p.m. 9/11/2001
pantagraph.com / ibid..

Michael Tinyk , 32, a lawyer, was at work on the 10th floor of the U.S. Trademark Office in Crystal City, when he saw a dark orange and blue commercial airliner just above the tree line "coming in lower and lower" on what he instantly registered as the "wrong side" of the flight path to the airport.
"There was no reason for a plane to come in that low, that fast" ... The plane took "a flight path straight up 395," and Tinyk thought to himself, "Oh, my God. They're going after the Pentagon. Oh, my God."
The Providence Journal-Bulletin, Sept. 13, 2001 (Lexis Nexis)
(text mirror) http://www2.hawaii.edu/~julianr/lexisnexis/tinyk.txt

Div Devlin wrote:
  " . . .   As we sat upon the bed watching [television] in absolute silence my oldest son, John aged 12, pointed out the window yelling, "Dad look how low that plane is!" I looked but saw nothing and was sure it was just another of the myriad of low flights on their final approach into the airport. While looking out the window a low rumble was heard and smoke began to billow up into the sky. "
from:  First Hand Account:
Posted Tuesday, September 18, 2001 at 12:59PM CST:
Aerynth Atheneaum >> Archives > September 2001

Tom Trapasso, 41, lives in Arlington Village, less than a mile from the Pentagon, thus accustomed to helicopters and commuter planes flying overhead but he knew this was no fly-by.
  ``I was out on my deck talking to my mom when I saw the plane. 'There were no wheels down. It was screaming loud and going very fast. I said `Oh my god,' and ran into the house to take cover and heard the loud explosion and felt the ground shaking. I told my mom: `We're under attack here.'''
Page Not Found | UCLA Anderson School of Management
  "It disappeared over the trees, and I heard a boom".
http://www.aviationnow.com/content/publication/awst/20010917/aw48.htm
Steven Gerard, was at work in the Justice Department, across the highway from the Pentagon :
  "Out of the corner of my eye, I saw this plane coming down.   I was talking on my cell phone to my wife about how close I was to the airport and then I saw the fireball."
http://216.239.39.100/search?q=cach...ilycamera.com/news/terror/sept01/11aclr1.html
Jwssica Wehrman / © Scripps Howard News Service / Sept 11
Scripps Howard News Service / Sept. 11
Daniel and Cynthia McAdams said they were sitting in their living room having coffee in their third-floor condominium in Arlington, Va., south of Columbia Pike, just two - two and a half miles from the Pentagon when they heard a plane fly directly over head, loud and low.
http://www.delawareonline.com/newsjournal/local/2001/09/pdf/09112001EXTRA2.pdf
As reported in the Irish Times / Ken Fireman / Sept 11
Video recording of Live CBS News report  (c.f. 17 minutes from, start)

Carla Thompson, works in an Arlington, Va., office building about 1,000 yards from the crash. 
  "I glanced up just at the point where the plane was going into the building,"
... by Matea Gold and Maggie Farley / 9/12/2001 / from Los Angeles Times
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-091201main.story
Steve Anderson, Director of Communications, USA Today [http://www.dragonslair.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/77/sanderson@usatoday.com]
  "I witnessed the jet hit the Pentagon on September 11.
From my office on the 19th floor of the USA TODAY building in Arlington, Va., I have a view of Arlington Cemetery, Crystal City, the Pentagon, National Airport and the Potomac River. ... 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."
Posting to September 11th Message Board
Greg A. Lohr Staff Reporter, / © 2001 American City Business Journals Inc / Sept 14.

Don Wright  said
  "It was about 9.35 and I was looking out .. our 12th floor windows at 1600 Wilson Boulevard, in Rosslyn, Virginia ... and I watched this ...it looked like a commuter plane, two engined ... come down from the south real low ... proceed right on into the Pentagon."
  "and I watched it come very low over the trees and it just dipped down ... come over right over 395, right into the Pentagon.
  Real Audio:   Eyewitness Don Wright describes the Pentagon attack -- South Florida Sun-Sentinel.com
or  http://www.newsday.com/news/local/n...on-witness-ra.realaudio?coll=ny-top-headlines
or  http://www.sunspot.net/news/custom/attack/sns-worldtrade-pentagon-witness-ra.realaudio
or  Norwalk Advocate - Home - The Advocate
Dave Winslow, AP Radio Reporter was in his 10th-floor apartment of a 17-floor block in Pentagon City:
  "I heard this enormous sound of turbulence. . .As I turned to my right, I saw a jumbo tail go by me along Route 395. It was like the rear end of the fuselage was riding on 395. I just saw the tail go whoosh right past me. In a split second, you heard this boom. A combination of a crack and a thud. It rattled my windows. I thought they were going to blow out. Then came an enormous fireball."
The Washingtonian, September 2002 (Lexis Nexis)
(text mirror) http://www2.hawaii.edu/~julianr/lexisnexis/winslow1.txt
He saw "the tail of a large airliner ."
...  AP release:   "As a result, AP members were first to know
that it was an American Airlines jet that had gone down"
...  Ron Fournier story "last updated at 11:57 a.m"  Sept 11.
...  Guardian UK follow up report, Sept 10.

  See also: Hearsay:  "C.G." wrote:  etc.

"K.M." a Pentagon City resident was getting ready to go to the Pentagon.
  " ... listening to the news on what had happened in New York, and just happened to look out the window because I heard a low flying plane and then I saw it hit the Pentagon. It happened so fast... it was in the air one moment and in the building the next."
bbc.co.uk  / 14 Sept, 11:14 GMT 12:14 UK

Terrance Kean, 35, an architect who lives in a 14-story building nearby, heard the loud jet engines and glanced out his window.
  "I saw this very, very large passenger jet," said the architect, who had been packing for a move. "It just plowed right into the side of the Pentagon. The nose penetrated into the portico. And then it sort of disappeared, and there was fire and smoke everywhere. . . . It was very sort of surreal."
... washingtonpost.com  Mary Beth Sheridan, Staff Writer / Sept 12

D. S. Khavkin, lives in Arlington, in a high-rise building on the eighth floor with a panoramic view of the Pentagon and downtown Washington, DC..
  "... my husband and I heard an aircraft directly overhead. At first, we thought it was the jets that sometimes fly overhead. However, it appeared to be a small commercial aircraft. The engine was at full throttle.
First, the plane knocked down a number of street lamp poles, then headed directly for the Pentagon and crashed on the lawn near the west side of the Pentagon."
"More eyewitness accounts".bbc.co.uk / Sept 13 07:38 GMT 08:38 UK

Donald "Tim" Timmerman, watched from across Interstate 395:
  "I was looking out the window; I live on the 16th floor, overlooking the Pentagon, in a corner apartment, so I have quite a panorama. And being next to National Airport, I hear jets all the time, but this jet engine was way too loud. I looked out to the southwest, and it came right down 395, right over Colombia Pike, and as it went by the Sheraton Hotel, the pilot added power to the engines. I heard it pull up a little bit more, and then I lost it behind a building.   And then it came out, and I saw it hit right in front of -- it didn't appear to crash into the building; most of the energy was dissipated in hitting the ground, but I saw the nose break up, I saw the wings fly forward, and then the conflagration engulfed everything in flames. It was horrible.
What can you tell us about the plane itself?
  It was a Boeing 757, American Airlines, no question.
You say that it was a Boeing, and you say it was a 757 or 767?  
  7-5-7.
757, which, of course..
  American Airlines.
American Airlines, one of the new generation of jets.
   Right. It was so close to me it was like looking out my window and looking at a helicopter. It was just right there. . .
cnn.com   TRANSCRIPT
Commemoratewtc.com - commemorate wtc Resources and Information.This website is for sale!

Steve Patterson, 43, is a graphics artist who works at home in a 14th-floor apartment in Pentagon City.  While watching events unfold on TV he saw a silver commuter jet fly past his window about 150 yards away, approaching from the west about 20 feet off the ground,
  He said it appeared to him that a commuter jet   which appeared to hold about eight to 12 people, headed straight for the Pentagon but was flying as if coming in for a landing on a nonexistent runway.
  The plane, which sounded like the high-pitched squeal of a fighter jet, flew over Arlington cemetery so low that he thought it was going to land on I-395.
  "at a frightening rate ... just slicing into that building."  He saw bright orange flames shoot out the back of the building.
Barbara Vobejda  Washington Post Staff Writer / Sept. 11, 4:59 PM
  However, Joel Skousen reported that:
  "I have, so far, been unable to locate a Steven Patterson in the Pentagon City area of Arlington, Va. None of the graphic design firms in the area that I called have heard of him. Barbara Vobejda told me she didnt have a contact number for him either since his testimony was picked up by one of the dozens of "stringers" they had out in the field that day interviewing people on the ground.
WORLD AFFAIRS BRIEF / March 8, 2002
"Steven G" <cyclesail@yahoo.com> working on the 5th floor of an office tower in Pentagon City happened to be next to a window facing the Pentagon talking on a cell phone to his wife
  "...I saw the jet just before it crashed. Something big and silver, nose down going aimed
like a dart straight into it.
New York people ... accounted for?? - rec.food.drink.beer | Google Groups
I so sorry !!!! - rec.bicycles.racing | Google Groups
Mrs. Deb Anlauf, resident of Colfax, Wisconsin, was in her 14th floor of the Sheraton Hotel, (immediately west of the Navy Annex) when she heard a "loud roar":
"Suddenly I saw this plane right outside my window. You felt like you could touch it; it was that close.... Then it shot straight across from where we are and flew right into the Pentagon. ...  When it hit, the whole hotel shook."
leadertelegram.com / Julian Emerson and Eric Lindquist / 9th Dec. 20001
The Associated Press State & Local Wire - 9/12/01 (Lexis Nexis)
(text mirror) http://www2.hawaii.edu/~julianr/lexisnexis/aunlaf2.txt
The Associated Press State & Local Wire - 9/13/01 (Lexis Nexis)
(text mirror) http://www2.hawaii.edu/~julianr/lexisnexis/aunlaf.txt

Michelle Miller  who works in the Freedom Forum building in Roslyn, Virginia near the Pentagon, saw the fire and smoke after the plane crash.
  Miller said a co-worker watched the plane descend toward the military headquarters and said "Oh my God, they've just got the Pentagon. He saw the plane dive straight into the Pentagon. All I had to do was stand up at my desk and I saw it."

Catherine Edwards Sanders lives "just a short distance from the Pentagon".
"Witnesses Describe Pentagon Crash" / By Jeff Johnson / September 11, 2001
She wrote:  "It was just the most frightening sounding thing. All of the sudden I heard this really loud plane. It sounded like it was going to crash into my house. I heard the drone of the engine and all of the sudden I heard this 'boom,' this really loud crash." http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPentagon.asp?Page=\Pentagon\archive\200209\PEN20020911b.html

Steve Storti, who used work as a fire lieutenant in Cranston , was asleep in Crystal City apartment when he was roused by a phone call from a friend
". . . 'What's going to happen next,' Storti, 46, recalls thinking as he stood on his balcony. Then he caught the glint of silver out of the corner of his eye.
He looked up to see a passenger plane with the trademark stainless-steel fuselage and stripes of American Airlines.
Time seemed to slip into slow motion as he watched the plane cross over Route 395, tip its left wing as it passed the Navy annex, veer sharply and then slice into the Pentagon. 'I remember thinking that whoever is flying this knows what theyre doing,' Storti said. "The plane traveled straight as an arrow.'(sic)
When it had plunged in as far as its tail fin, there was huge explosion"
projo.com / Barbara Polichetti / 12 Sept 2002
  From vehicles on the highways

"Engine 101 actually saw the jetliner plow into the northwest side of the Pentagon. The radio crackled, Engine 101emergency traffic, a plane has gone down into the Pentagon.
jems.com -- The Online Emergency Services Resource
  one firefighter on board noticed a plane flying too low as they drove past the Pentagon.
http://www.disasterrelief.org/Disasters/010912pentagon/
  "Captain Steve McCoy and the crew of ACFD Engine 101 were en route to a training session in Crystal City, traveling north on Interstate 395. Their conversation about the World Trade Center attack earlier that morning was interrupted by the sight and sound of a commercial airliner in
steep descent, banking sharply to its right before disappearing beyond the
horizon."

"Barry Foust and Officer Richard Cox, on patrol in south Arlington County, saw a large
American Airlines aircraft in steep descent on a collision course with the
Pentagon. They immediately radioed the Arlington County Emergency
Communications Center (ECC). ACPD Headquarters issued a simultaneous page
to all members of the ACPD with instructions to report for duty."
Arlington fire department after report  (pdf file)
  On Monday the 17th, the Arlington Police Department released a very short snippet of logging recorder tape, from the radio transmissions:
  " Motor 14, it was an American Airlines plane, uh, headed eastbound over the Pike (Columbia Pike highway), possibly toward the Pentagon."
Recording of contemporaneous police radio communication
http://www.911dispatch.com/terrorism/terrorism.html 
Cox describes the plane flying above his head, 100 ft. from the ground, about a quarter mile from the Pentagon.
"It was low enough for me to see the reflection of cars and trees and buildings on its underside as it passed by. It was low enough for my heart to stop."
http://www.hjpa.org/morenews.html/
Andrea Kaiser, was aboard Arlington County Fire Department Fire Truck 101 returning from a training exercise:
"As I was driving down 95 heading towards the Pentagon, one of my members, teammates, said, 'What is that plane doing?' And by the time I looked up, the plane was moving so fast all I saw was an explosion."
ABC Good Morning America - 10/29/01 Transcript (Lexis Nexis)
(text mirror) http://www2.hawaii.edu/~julianr/lexisnexis/kaiser.txt
"Suddenly, we saw the huge explosion of the crash."
American Red Cross - Page not found
Ret. Army Col. Mitch Mitchell, CBS military consultant, was bringing his wife back from National Airport on Interstate 395 towards the Pentagon:
"Just as we got even with the Pentagon, I looked out to the front and saw, coming straight down the road at us, a huge jet plane clearly with American Airlines written on it, and it looked like it was coming in to hit us. I told my wife, 'It's going to hit the Pentagon.' It crossed about 100 feet in front of us and at about 20 feet altitude and we watched it go in. It struck the Pentagon, and there was no indication whatever that it was doing anything other than performing a direct attack on that building. The landing gear was up. There were no flaps down and it looked like a deadly missile on the final phase of its mission into the building."
"We saw what I estimate to be about the last seven seconds of the flight. It was a straight-in flight, angled slightly down, and there was--there was no intent to turn or to maneuver in any way. It was headed straight for its target and we were helpless to do anything about it but watch."
CBS The Early Show, 9/13/01 - Transcript (Lexis Nexis)
(text mirror) http://www2.hawaii.edu/~julianr/lexisnexis/mitchell.txt
Kristina Weldin, graphic designer for Spirit Creative, Washington D.C.:
"It was like a shadow coming really low to the ground like it was almost directly in line with my rear view mirror, and I just turned my head. . .
From TV via a mail message from 'Isopodia'.
"Henry Ticknor, intern minister at the Unitarian Universalist Church of Arlington, Virginia, was driving to church that Tuesday morning when American Airlines Flight 77 came in fast and low over his car and struck the Pentagon."
  "There was a puff of white smoke and then a huge billowing black cloud"
UU World January/February 2002: 'Hell on Earth', by Donald E. Skinner
Kat Gaines, a Fairfax County Fire & Rescue technician was on her way to a part-time job at Reagan National Airport after working a 24-hour shift at Fire Station 16 in Clifton.   Heading south on Route 110, approached the parking lots to the south of the Pentagon she saw a low-flying jetliner strike the top of nearby telephone poles.   She then heard the plane power up and plunge into the Pentagon.
"Valor Awards Recipients", Great Falls/McLean/Vienna Times / February 2002
Jim Sutherland, a mortgage broker, was on his way to the Pentagon when he saw
  " ... a white 737 twin-engine plane with multicolored trim fly 50 feet over I-395 in a straight line, striking the side of the Pentagon.. "
Jessica Wehrman / Scripps Howard News Service / 09-11-01
http://216.239.39.100/search?q=cach...ilycamera.com/news/terror/sept01/11aclr1.html
Jessica Wehrman / The Albuquerque Tribune.
  Eric M. Jones, 25, a medical student at GW University and volunteer firefighter with the Hyattsville unit of the Prince George's County, Md., Fire and EMS Department, "was driving through nearby Arlington, Va., when he saw the plane slam into the Pentagon's northwest outer wall."
The Associated Press State & Local Wire / July 15, 2002 / Derrill Holly (Lexis Nexis)
http://www2.hawaii.edu/~julianr/lexisnexis/jones2.txt
  Megan Johnson, resident of Bristow, Virginia, was driving on Interstate 395, near the Pentagon when a "plane flew directly in front of her car into the Pentagon." She suffered daily recurring nightmares of the event.
Florida Times-Union, 9/15/01 (Lexis Nexis)
http://www2.hawaii.edu/~julianr/lexisnexis/johnson.txt
  Don Scott, a Prince William County school bus driver living in Woodbridge, was driving eastward past the Pentagon on his way to an appointment at Walter Reed Army Medical Center:
"I had just passed the Pentagon and was near the Macy's store in Crystal City when I noticed a plane making a sharp turn from north of the Pentagon.  I had to look back at the road and then back to the plane as it sort of leveled off.  I looked back at the road, and when I turned to look again, I felt and heard a terrible explosion.   I looked back and saw flames shooting up and smoke starting to climb into the sky."
Washington Post, 9/16/01 (Lexis Nexis)
http://www2.hawaii.edu/~julianr/lexisnexis/scott.txt
  Mary Lyman, 47, of Alexandria, was driving on Interstate 395, past the Pentagon on her way to her job as a lobbyist in Washington.
  "I saw a plane coming what I thought was toward National Airport, which is very close. You see that all the time,"
  "But this one looked different. It was at a very steep angle, and going very fast.
from page A2 of the Boston Globe / 9/12/2001
"I was driving northbound to work in the District on I-395 when the Pentagon was hit.  I actually saw the plane in front of me, coming in at a very steep angle toward the ground and going fast -- I think I actually heard it accelerate -- and then it disappeared and a cloud of smoke started billowing."
Washington Post, 9/16/01 (Lexis Nexis)
http://www2.hawaii.edu/~julianr/lexisnexis/lyman.txt
Philip Sheuerman, a class of 1977 Berkley graduate, is Associate General Counsel for the U.S. Air Force at the Pentagon.
   While exiting the freeway, turning into the parking lot of the Pentagon. he saw a passenger plane descend at increasing speed with its wheels up.
  it was perfectly obvious what (the plane) was going to do.
09.20.2001 - Special Issue: Alumni Bear Witness to Tragedy
Elaine McCusker,associate director, Office of Federal Relations in Washington, D.C. also Co-Chair of the Coalition for National Security Research. She helps represent the University of Washington to the federal government.
  Heading to a 10 a.m. meeting, lining up to cross the 14th Street Bridge she saw
  "a very low-flying American Airlines plane that seemed to be accelerating."
December 2001 Columns Magazine Feature: 9/11 - Seeing the Unimaginable
  "Traffic is normally slow right around the Pentagon as the road winds and we line up to cross the 14th Street bridge heading into the District of Columbia. I dont know what made me look up, but I did and I saw a very low-flying American Airlines plane that seemed to be accelerating. My first thought was just No, no, no, no, because it was obvious the plane was not heading to nearby Reagan National Airport. It was going to crash."
Untitled Document
Pam Bradley, originally from Hitchin, Herts, UK wrote to the BBC:
  "I work in Washington DC area, and was on my way to work, in my car, sitting on a bridge, and saw the plane hit the Pentagon. I am in a complete state of shock".
"More eyewitness accounts" / bbc.co.uk / Sept `13.

  Kirk Milburn, a construction supervisor for Atlantis Co. was on the Arlington National Cemetery exit of Interstate 395.
  "I was right underneath the plane. I heard a plane. I saw it. I saw debris flying. I guess it was hitting light poles. It was like a WHOOOSH whoosh, then there was fire and smoke, then I heard a second explosion."
Barbara Vobejda / Washington Post Staff Writer / Sept. 11, 3:23 PM
Jeffrey Taylor, a lobbyist with the D.C. office of Barnes & Thornburg, was driving to work, listening to news reports. He saw a plane fly over but it didn't register.
  "It was one of those things, you're just so preoccupied,"
http://www.nlj.com/special/wt-dc.shtml
David Marra, 23, an information-technology specialist, had turned his BMW off an I-395 exit to the highway just west of the Pentagon when he saw an American Airlines jet swooping in, its wings wobbly, looking like it was going to slam right into the Pentagon: "It was 50 ft. off the deck when he came in. It sounded like the pilot had the throttle completely floored. The plane rolled left and then rolled right. Then he caught an edge of his wing on the ground."
   There is a helicopter pad right in front of the side of the Pentagon. The wing touched there, then the plane cart wheeled into the building.
http://www.geocities.com/infamy91101/td2.html
time.com / Nancy Gibbs / Sept 12th
  Christopher Munsey, Navy Times reporter , was en route to work.
  ". . I couldnt believe what I was now seeing to my right: A silver, twin-engine American Airlines jetliner gliding almost noiselessly over the Navy Annex, fast, low and straight toward the Pentagon, just hundreds of yards away.
  The plane, with red and blue markings, hurtled by and within moments
exploded in a ground-shaking whoomp,
- Navy News, benefits, careers, entertainment, photos, promotions - Navy Times HOME
Rick Renzi was driving by the Pentagon on the overpass.
  " ... less than 300 yards from the impact site at the Pentagon "
http://www.rickrenziforcongress.com/rick_on_issues.php
"The plane came in at an incredibly steep angle with incredibly high speed,"
http://www.coxnews.com/washingtonbureau/staff/hopgood/091201TERROR-PENTAGON.html
"creaming in at a dive bombing angle"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1590000/video/_1593685_pentagon17_biles_vi.ram
Alfred S. Regnery,  president and publisher of Regnery Publishing, Inc., a sister company of Human Events saw
   ". . a jetliner, apparently at full throttle and not more than a couple
of hundred yards above the ground, screamed overhead."
  " Although airplanes regularly fly over the Pentagon on their way to Reagan National Airport, just a mile or two south, this plane was too low and going too fast. As I watched it disappear behind bridges and concrete barriers I knew it was about to crash. "
http://www.humanevents.org/articles/09-17-01/regnery.html
http://www.humanevents.org/articles/09-17-01/regnery.html
Steve Eiden, a truck driver, had picked up his cargo that Tuesday morning in Williamsburg, Va., and was en route to New York City and witnessed the aftermath. ... He took the Highway 95 loop in the area of the Pentagon and thought it odd to see a plane in restricted airspace, thinking to himself it was odd that it was flying so low.
  'You could almost see the people in the windows,' he said as he watched the plane disappear behind a line of trees, followed by a tall plume of black smoke. Then he saw the Pentagon on fire, and an announcement came over the radio that the Pentagon had been hit."
Copyright © 2001 Baxter Bulletin  (updated 08/10/2001)
Eugenio Hernandez, an AP video journalist, saw the plane crash:
  "I was in my Jeep Cherokee, driving on Route 395 toward DC and listening to NPR. I saw the plane coming down. I didn't have a camera with me. On the left shoulder, I saw this tourist with a video camera. The man was with his wife and son. They were from southern Virginia. He was freaked out completely. He was not recording anything. The camera was facing the ground."
AP Broadcast
The Washingtonian, September 2002 (Lexis Nexis)
(text mirror) http://www2.hawaii.edu/~julianr/lexisnexis/winslow1.txt
Robert A. Leonard, a resident of West Springfield who works near L'Enfant Plaza, was in the HOV lanes of I-395 on his morning commute to work. His car passed the crest of the hill, at the point where Washington comes fully into view and the Pentagon is on the left:
  "I looked in the rearview mirror to check the traffic and saw only a plane, flying very low. I followed it in my left outside mirror. I braked, looked out my left window and saw a large commercial aircraft aiming for the Pentagon."
"The aircraft, so close to the ground, was banked skillfully to the right, leveled off perpendicular to the Pentagon's southwest side, then went full throttle directly toward the building. The plane vanished, absorbed by the building, and there was a slight pause. Then a huge fireball rose into the sky."
Washington Post, 9/20/01(Lexis Nexis)
(text mirror) http://www2.hawaii.edu/~julianr/lexisnexis/leonard1.txt
    Mike Gerson, 38, director of President Bush's speech writing staff, was called in to work from Arlington:
"I got on Interstate 395 and saw the plane come in. I didn't see the actual impact, but 395 curves around the Pentagon, and I saw that plane coming in and said to myself, 'That plane is too low; it's going to crash.' "
Los Angeles Times, 9/11/02 article by Ronald Brownstein (Lexis Nexis)
http://www2.hawaii.edu/~julianr/lexisnexis/gerson1.txt

  Barbara, wife of a friend of CNN correspondent David Ensor, tried to take the Memorial Bridge exit from Interstate 395 when:
"On the left-hand side, there was a commercial plane coming in, and was coming in too fast and the too low, and the next thing we saw was it go down below the side of the road, and we just saw the fire that came up after that."
"It was coming on less than a 45 degree angle, and coming down towards the side of the -- of 395. And when it came down, it just missed 395 and went down below us, and then you saw the boom -- the fire come up from it."
CNN.com - Witnesses to the moments - September 11, 2001
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/audio/witness.pentagon.barbara.wav
    so you believe it was a commercial airliner that was hitting the Pentagon?
  "Yes, and I'm not sure exactly where the Pentagon, where it was in relationship to where the plane went down but they are relatively close to one another. ... whether it hit any part of that pentagon, I'm not sure.
... Video Clip from CNN broadcast   Video collecion Index Page

  A woman driver wanting to exit from Interstate 395 saw
"a commercial plane that came in and was coming too fast and too low and the next thing we saw was it go down below the side of the road and we just saw the fire.."
CNN.com - Witnesses to the moments - September 11, 2001
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/audio/witness.pentagon.barbara.wav

Vaughn face Brig. Gen. Clyde A. Vaughn, deputy director of military support to civil authorities.
was returning to the Pentagon Sept. 11
returned urgently from a meeting, north along Interstate 395 . While exiting the ramp to the Pentagon he
"was scanning the air. There wasn't anything in the air, except for one airplane, and it looked like it was loitering over Georgetown, in a high, left-hand bank," he said. "That may have been the plane. I have never seen one on that (flight) pattern."
CNN.com - Three-star general may be among Pentagon dead - September 13, 2001
  "way, off of Glebe. Got up to the top of the hill, you know, where you're looking down on the Pentagon and across to the Monument and the Capitol and what not.   And out on my left that airliner came right down parallel with us. I watched it track right on in to the Pentagon."
Defense Department Briefing / Sept. 13th. / Transcript (Lexis Nexus)
(mirror) http://www2.hawaii.edu/~julianr/lexisnexis/vaughn.txt
  He pulled his car over and sprinted toward the gaping, flaming hole
  It took me four to five minutes to get there,
govexec.com / Katherine McIntire Peters / Sep. 14
http://www.dtic.mil/armylink/news/Sep2001/a20010919fireheroes.html
Fred Hey, Congressional staff attorney was driving by on Route 50. (Arlington Boulevard)
   "I can't believe it! This plane is going down into the Pentagon!"
he shouted into his cellphone to his boss, Representative Bob Ney (R) of Ohio.
  Ney immediately phoned the news to House Sergeant-At-Arms Bill Livingood, who ordered an immediate evacuation of the Capitol itself.
A Changed World | csmonitor.com
John OKeefe, 25-year-old Northern Virginia commuter, is the managing editor of 'Influence', [http://www.influenceonline.net/about.htm] an American Lawyer Media publication about lobbying.
  Going north up Interstate 395  "..not much more than a football field away"  he  . saw or heard it first -- this silver plane; I immediately recognized it as an American Airlines jet,
  It came swooping in over the highway, over my left shoulder, straight across where my car was heading.
  There was a burst of orange flame that shot out that I could see through the highway overpass. Then it was just black. Just black thick smoke.
  The eeriest thing about it, was that it was like you were watching a movie. There was no huge explosion, no huge rumbling on ground, it just went pfff.
  "  ... and when I got out of the car I saw another plane flying over my head, and it scared ...me, "
http://www.nylawyer.com/news/01/09/091201l.html
http://www.nlj.com/special/wt-dc-side.shtml
    See also: What's all this about the C-130 ?
 Afework Hagos, 26, of Arlington, is a computer programmer, a consultant for Nextel.  On his way to work he was stuck in a traffic jam on Columbia Pike, near the Pentagon when the plane flew over.
  "There was a huge screaming noise and I got out of the car as the plane came over. Everybody was running away in different directions. It was tilting its wings up and down like it was trying to balance. It hit some lampposts on the way in."
Pentagon eyewitness accounts | World news | The Guardian
.  He saw a plane flying very low and close to nearby buildings. "I thought something was coming down on me. I know this plane is going to crash. I've never seen a plane like this so low."
  He said he looked at it and saw American Airline insignia and when it made impact with the Pentagon initially he saw smoke, then flames.
washingtonpost.com

James Ryan, 27, a former US Navy Attache, a computer company employee lives a couple of miles from the Pentagon.  His car wasn't starting so he was on Columbia Pike, looking for a mechanic to fix it.   Looking up overhead to his left, he saw:
  "A silver plane; I could see 'AA' on the tail,  I noticed the landing gear was up..."
how high he was?(sic)
  "within a hundred feet it was very low At that point he tilted his wings, this way [right wing down] and then this way. [left wing down] .... and then straightened out suddenly and hit full gas ... so loud it hurt my ears
"The plane was low enough I could see the windows in the plane .. every detail of the plane.
  "A silver plane, an American Airlines plane; I recognised it immediately as a passenger plane."
  In an interview he imitates the sound of the plane:
Recorded interview - quick load / May 2002.  Recorded interview  - best quality / May 2002.
  Bobby Eberle,  the President and CEO of GOPUSA. [bobby.eberle@gopusa.com]  was visiting Washington. 
  "Riding in a convertible with the top down, I then heard a tremendously loud noise from behind me and to my left. I looked back and saw a jet airliner flying very low and very fast. It's amazing what can run through your mind in just a matter of seconds. As a pilot, I can't help but look at an airplane and think about airplane topics. What I saw sent a shiver down my spine as I realized something was not right
  ....This aircraft was angled downward.  ... its landing gear retracted.
GOPUSA -- File Not Found

  Fred Gaskins,   was driving to his job as a national editor at USA TODAY near the Pentagon when the plane passed about 150 feet overhead.
  "(The plane) was flying fast and low and the Pentagon was the obvious
target,  It was flying very smoothly and calmly, without any hint that
anything was wrong."

  Aydan Kizildrgli, an English language student who is a native of Turkey, saw the jetliner bank slightly. while driving by the Pentagon.
USATODAY.com - Bush vows retaliation for 'evil acts'
  "I was in the car, and there was a big boom,"
   "Everybody was in shock. I turned to the person in the next car and said, 'Did you see that?' Nobody could believe it."

  Richard Benedetto, a USA TODAY reporter, was on his way to work, driving on the Highway parrallel to the Pentagon.
  "It was an American Airlines airplane, I could see it very clearly.
I didn't see any flaps .. looked like just in normal flying mode.
The only thing we saw on the ground outside there was a piece of a   ... the tail of a lamp post.
Recorded interview - quick load / May 2002.  Recorded interview  - best quality / May 2002.
"Then the plane flew right over my head. I said to myself, boy, that plane is going awfully fast.
That plane is going to crash .... The noise was like an artillery shell, not an explosion like a bomb"
The Hartford Courant, 9/12/01 (Lexis Nexis)
(text mirror) http://www2.hawaii.edu/~julianr/lexisnexis/benedetto.txt

  Vin Narayanan, a reporter for USA TODAY was driving near the Pentagon when the plane hit.
  "The plane exploded after it hit, the tail came off and it began burning immediately. Within five minutes, police and emergency vehicles began arriving,"
USATODAY.com - 'I fear for my daughter'
  "At 9:35 a.m., I pulled alongside the Pentagon. With traffic at a standstill, my eyes wandered around the road, looking for the cause of the traffic jam. Then I looked up to my left and saw an American Airlines jet flying right at me. The jet roared over my head, clearing my car by about 25 feet. The tail of the plane clipped the overhanging exit sign above me as it headed straight at the Pentagon.
  "The windows were dark on American Airlines Flight 77 as it streaked toward its target, only 50 yards away."
  "The hijacked jet slammed into the Pentagon at a ferocious speed. But the Pentagon's wall held up like a champ. It barely budged as the nose of the plane curled upwards and crumpled before exploding into a massive fireball."
USATODAY.com - 'Tomorrow always belongs to us'
  See also: What's all this about the C-130 ?

Phillip Thompson  saw bombs and missiles explode overhead when he fought in the gulf war.
  "I was sitting in heavy traffic in the I-395 HOV lanes about 9:45 a.m., directly across from the Navy Annex...
  I heard the scream of a jet engine and, turning to look, saw my drivers side window filled with the fuselage of the doomed airliner. It was flying only a couple of hundred feet off the ground  I could see the passenger windows glide by. The plane looked as if it were coming in for a landing  cruising at a shallow angle, wings level, very steady. But, strangely, the landing gear was up and the flaps werent down.
Sept. 11
See also: C130 report:
  SGT Dewey Snavely, an army engineer platoon leader, was driving along Arlington's Quaker Lane when the radio warned that a third plane was heading his way. Minutes later, jet engines rumbled overhead.
  "The guy I was with looked up and said: 'What the hell is that plane doing?' Then we heard an explosion and the truck rocked back and forth." .
http://www.dtic.mil/soldiers/oct2001/features/aftermath.html
Rodney Washington, a systems engineer for a Pentagon contractor, was stuck in stand-still traffic a few hundred yards from the Pentagon.
  ''It was extremely loud, as you can imagine, a plane that size, it was deafening,''
  "The plane was flying low and rapidly descended, Washington said, knocking over light poles before hitting the ground on a helicopter pad just in front of the Pentagon and essentially bouncing into it."
  It ''landed there and the momentum took it into the Pentagon,'' __ ''There was a very, very brief delay and then it exploded.''
Boston Globe Online / Nation | World / After assault on Pentagon, orderly response
  See also: Hearsay:  Tedd D. Kelly  &  D Adams
  From the Boulevard by the Heliport:

  Steve Riskus was driving to a friend's house to take some pictures, thus well fit to record the disaster.  Less than 1 minute after the American Airlines 757 airplane hit the Pentagon he stopped, climbed the wall of an embankment and took some photos. 
  "I left shortly after the picture were taken in fear of further attacks.  Feel free to contact me anytime if you have questions about my pictures": [http://www.dragonslair.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/77/steveriskus@aol.com]
http://www.criticalthrash.com/terror/crashthumbnails.html 
   "I am sorry to rain on your parade, but I saw the plane hit the building. It did not hit the ground first... It did not hit the roof first... It hit the roof first... It hit dead centre on the side... I was close enough (about 100 feet or so) that i could see the "American Airlines" logo on the tail as it headed towards the building... .. It was not completely level but it was not going straight down, kind of like it was landing with no gear down... It knocked over a few light poles on its way...
  I did not see any smoke or debris coming from the plane.
  I clearly saw the "AA" logo with the eagle in the middle...
  I don't really remember the engine configuration, but it did have those turbine engines on the wing.. and yes, it did impact the Pentagon... There was none of this hitting the ground first crap I keep hearing... It was definitely an American Airlines jet... there is no doubt about that... When i got to work I checked ot out."
  In "Emerging Theories" a Riskus message to the humanunderground.com webmar is reproduced
  "I remember seeing the red and blue stripes running legthwise on the plane."
.Recorded interview - quick load / May 2002.  Recorded interview  - best quality / May 2002.

  Mike Walter, 46, USA Today reporter, said
  "I was sitting in the northbound on 27 and the traffic was, you know, typical rush-hour -- it had ground to a standstill. I looked out my window and I saw this plane, this jet, an American Airlines jet, coming. And I thought, 'This doesn't add up, it's really low.'
  And I saw it. I mean it was like a cruise missile with wings. It went right there and slammed right into the Pentagon."
CNN.com - Witnesses and leaders on terrorist attacks - September 11, 2001
  "I could read the "AA" on its side. It looked like it was 20, 30 ft. up in the air."
http://www.drama.uga.edu/livingnewspaper/america.html
  "...I saw a big silver plane and those double A's."
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 9/12/01 (Lexis Nexis)   (text mirror) http://www2.hawaii.edu/~julianr/lexisnexis/walter.txt 
"...It turned and then it went around ..it clipped one of these light poles."
  "It went very low into the Pentagon and it went straight. ...   It seemed like it was a slow, graceful bank. 
  "...you could see chinks the wreckage on the ground, pieces of the plane.... it literally disintegrated on impact
  As it went into the side of the building it sheared off the wings....
 ... a cruise missile with wings?
  "I said that as a metaphor. It exploded as you'd imagine a missile to explode. ... It was an American Airlines jet. I watched it go into the building. .. I saw the big 'AA' on the side.."
Recorded interview - quick load     Recorded interview  - best quality
  Joel Sucherman, USAToday.com Multimedia Editor, saw it all: an American Airlines jetliner fly left to right across his field of vision as he commuted to work Tuesday morning.
  It was highly unusual. The large plane was 20 feet off the ground and a mere 50 to 75 yards from his windshield. Two seconds later and before he could see if the landing gear was down or any of the horror- struck faces inside, the plane slammed into the west wall of the Pentagon 100 yards away.
  "My first thought was he's not going to make it across the river to National Airport. But whoever was flying the plane made no attempt to change direction. It was coming in at a high rate of speed, but not at a steep angle--almost like a heat-seeking missile was locked onto its target and staying dead on course."
BigFix SAM Tool Lets Enterprises Track Software Use - Enterprise Applications from eWeek
  "it came screaming across the highway, route 110"
Was it a commercial jet? Do you know how many engines?
  "I did not see the engines, I saw the body and the tail; it was a silver jet with the markings along the windows that spoke to me as an American Airlines jet, it was not a commercial, excuse me, a business jet, it was not a lear jet, ... it was a bigger plane than that.".
CNN.com Specials
Recorded Interview on the 22nd Floor of the USA Today Building / Sept 11th.
  " I heard a sonic boom and then the impact, the explosion.
  " ... There were light poles down. There was what appeared to be the outside covering of the jet strewn about. ... Within about two minutes there were firetucks on the scene.
  " Within a minute another plane started veering up and to the side. At that point it wasn't clear if that plane was trying to manouver out of the air space or if that plane was coming round for another hit.
Audio recorded report, on his way to work
    See also: What's all this about the C-130 ?
 Daryl Donley, Assistant Director of Operations for the National
Symphony Orchestra, caught the event in a photo:
"I could see the windows. I saw the entire plane and then saw it fly right into the Pentagon. A huge fireball and my first thought was I can't photograph this, and then my next thought was well, I'm here, I've got my camera, I have got to photograph this."
CNN 9/8/02, Transcript # 090803CN.V46 (Lexis Nexis)
(mirror) http://www2.hawaii.edu/~julianr/lexisnexis/donley.txt
  "It just was amazingly precise; It completely disappeared into the Pentagon."
http://www.delawareonline.com/newsjournal/local/2001/09/12terrorspreadsto.html

Mary Ann Owens, a newsroom assistant at Gannett News Service, was driving to work in Rosslyn where Gannett Co Inc. were housed.
  "The sound of the engines came so quickly I thought it was another helicopter landing. I looked left to see a large plane barely clear the I-395 overpass. Instantly I knew what was happening, and I involuntarily ducked as the plane passed perhaps 50 to 75 feet above the roof of my car at great speed. The plane slammed into the west wall of the Pentagon, perhaps at the third-floor level. The impact was deafening. The fuselage hit the ground and blew up."
  "...Then I went from car to car asking if anyone had a camera. Four cars down, a woman had a disposable camera. She asked $20. I paid. "
http://citizen-times.com/tradecenter/tradecenter47.shtml
In the terror and tragedyof the attack on America, Gannett people respond a this democrary requires (September 14, 2001)
  "I quickly clicked half the roll; careful not to take too many. I wanted to be ready for the arrival of a second plane, which I was sure would fall from the sky any minute.
  As other cars began moving slowly from the area, I pulled mine over to the west guardrail and got out, camera in hand, an eye on the sky and a finger on the shutter.
  "Looking up didn't tell me what type of plane it was because it was so close I could only see the bottom. Realising the Pentagon was its target, I didn't think the careering, full-throttled craft would get that far.
  Its downward angle was too sharp, its elevation of maybe 50 feet, too low. Street lights toppled as the plane barely cleared the Interstate 395 overpass. The thought that I was about to die was immediate and certain. This plane was going to hit me along with all the other commuters trapped on Washington Boulevard. Gripping the steering wheel of my vibrating car, I involuntarily ducked as the wobbling plane thundered over my head. Once it passed, I raised slightly and grimaced as the left wing dipped and scraped the helicopter area just before the nose crashed into the southwest wall of the Pentagon."
Local London news from around the capital Sept 11th 2002
Christine Peterson, found herself in the thick of last months terrorist
tragedy, and submitted this report:
  ". .  I was at a complete stop on the road in front of the helipad at the Pentagon; what I had thought would be a shortcut was as slow as the other routes I had taken that morning. I looked idly out my window to the left --
and saw a plane flying so low I said, holy cow, that plane is going to hit my car (not my actual words). The car shook as the plane flew over. It was so close that I could read the numbers under the wing."
Alumni Relations Home Page
Michael James, 37, a Navy information technician, watched from his car with his wife Isabelle:
    "The plane came over the top of us and brushed the trees. Then it looked like it hit the helicopter pad and skipped up and went right into the first and second floors."
Rocky Mountain News, September 12, 2001 - M.E. Sprengelmeyer (Lexis Nexis)
(mirror) http://www2.hawaii.edu/~julianr/lexisnexis/james.txt
Mc Graw head   Father Stephen McGraw was driving to a graveside service at Arlington national Cemetery. He estimates that the plane passed about 20 feet over his car, as he waited on the northbound side of Washington Boulevard.
  "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."
  "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.
  "...it looked like a plane coming in for a landing"
Pentagram article / Paul Haring / Sep. 28,
'Pentagon crash eyewitness comforted victims'  by Paul Haring / MDW News Service / Sept. 28,
"I had no awareness of the incoming plane until it was above our cars, having knocked over the street lamp at the edge of the road. After seeing the plane crash a split-second later, I assumed that it was a terrible accident, and, with my holy oil and stole and manual of care for the sick, I left my car, crossed over the other lanes of traffic, which remained at a standstill, and onto the lawn of the Pentagon."
http://www.catholicherald.com/articles/02articles/mcgraw0905.htm

Jim R. Cissell,  a former photojournalist who, for the last three years, has worked for the Freedom Forum Museum in Arlington, a former native of Clifton Ci. drives past the Pentagon every day on his way to work at the Newseum in Arlington, Va. where he heads its Web site.
Tristate residents touched by tragedy
    Sitting in his car on Interstate 110 he saw the blur of a commercial jet and wondered why it was flying so low coming a couple of hundred yards to his left, then cross the road, to plow into the side of the Pentagon.
  ''I thought, 'This isn't really happening. That is a big plane.' Then I saw the faces of some of the passengers on board,'"
   taking out telephone and power lines on its way in, hit the building.
  ''It came in in a perfectly straight line,''
http://www.cincypost.com/attack/cissel091201.html
Capt. G. T. Stanley, of the Defense Protective Service, was on Route 27 getting off the Columbia Pike when he saw the jetliner:
"That plane was screaming. The engines were so loud ... I followed the plane down with my eyes. I saw it hit the building."
Washington Post, October 18, 2001 - by Avis Thomas-Lester (Lexis Nexis)
(text mirror) http://www2.hawaii.edu/~julianr/lexisnexis/stanley.txt

Joseph Royster, interviewed by Cavalier Daily reporters recalled:
"I was on the street driving, and then the plane went over the top of my car, just over the treetops ... It was a big aircraft just on its course."
Cavalier Daily, 9/13/01 - Deirdre Erin Murphy & Kadie Bye (Lexis Nexis)
(text mirror) http://www2.hawaii.edu/~julianr/lexisnexis/royster.txt

Donald R. Bouchoux, 53, a retired Naval officer, a Great Falls resident, a Vietnam veteran and former commanding officer of a Navy fighter squadron, was driving west from Tysons Corner to the Pentagon for a 10am meeting. He wrote:
"At 9:40 a.m. I was driving down Washington Boulevard (Route 27) along the side of the Pentagon when the aircraft crossed about 200 yards in front of me and impacted the side of the building. There was an enormous fireball, followed about two seconds later by debris raining down. The car moved about a foot to the right when the shock wave hit. I had what must have been an emergency oxygen bottle from the airplane go flying down across the front of my Explorer and then a second piece of jagged metal come down on the right side of the car."
Washington Post, Sept. 20, 2001 (Lexis Nexis)
(text mirror) http://www2.hawaii.edu/~julianr/lexisnexis/leonard1.txt

whisper2i@aol.com (Whisper2i) wrote:
  >did you see the plane there?? or parts of it?
  No, but I saw the plane hit the building on 9/11. It was a plan. it was big it was flying low, and it hit the pentagon. I saw it from the front seat of my car on the highway that passes that side of the pentagon. There are parts all over the place, they are all smaller than a US nickle because of the force of the crash.
google.com/groups message board item / On 12 Jun 2002 15:35:23 GMT,

Gary Bauer, a former Presidential candidate, happened to be driving into Washington, D.C. that morning, to a press conference on Capitol Hill.
  I was in a massive traffic jam, hadnt moved more than a hundred yards in twenty minutes.  ...  I had just passed the closest place the Pentagon is to the exit on 395 . . . when all of a sudden I heard the roar of a jet engine."
  I looked at the woman sitting in the car next to me. She had this startled look on her face.   We were all thinking the same thing.   We looked out the front of our windows to try to see the plane, and it wasnt until a few seconds later that we realized the jet was coming up behind us on that major highway.   And it veered to the right into the Pentagon. The blast literally rocked all of our cars.   It was an incredible moment.
massnews.com  /  Amy Contrada  /  December 2001
  "...came from behind us and banked to the right and went into the Pentagon."
Interview with Warren Smith

Penny Elgas was driving to work (at the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation near the White House) headed north stuck in the traffic, almost in front of the Pentagon.
  Hearing a rumble, she looked out of her driver's side window to see the nose of an airplane coming straight at us from over Columbia Pike. "to the side of (and not much above) the CITGO gas station... in slow motion .... toward my car and then it banked in the slightest turn in front of me, toward the heliport.

  ... not more than 80 feet off the ground and about 4-5 car lengths in front of me. It was far enough in front of me that I saw the end of the wing closest to me and the underside of the other wing as that other wing rocked slightly toward the ground. I remember recognizing it as an American Airlines plane -- I could see the windows and the color stripes.
  ... as if it were a paper glider ... it gently rocked and slowly glided straight into the Pentagon. At the point where the fuselage hit the wall, it seemed to simply melt into the building. I saw a smoke ring surround the fuselage as it made contact with the wall. It appeared as a smoke ring that encircled the fuselage at the point of contact and it seemed to be several feet thick. I later realized that it was probably the rubble of churning bits of the plane and concrete. The churning smoke ring started at the top of the fuselage and simultaneously wrapped down both the right and left sides of the fuselage to the underside, where the coiling rings crossed over each other and then coiled back up to the top. Then it started over again -- only this next time, I also saw fire, glowing fire in the smoke ring. At that point, the wings disappeared into the Pentagon. And then I saw an explosion and watched the tail of the plane slip into the building. It was here that I closed my eyes for a moment and when I looked back, the entire area was awash in thick black smoke.
Airplane fragment in patriotic box - September 11: Bearing Witness to History
Statement from Penny Elgas
Bob Dubill, USA Today Executive Editor, (now retired) drove past the Pentagon on his way to work, every morning for years .
  " ...when he saw a jetliner fly over the roadway. It filled his field of vision. The jet was 40-feet off the ground speeding toward the Pentagon. 'The wheels were up and I knew that this plane was not heading for National Airport,'
  'This plane was going to slam into the Pentagon. I steeled myself for the explosion.' "
The Times Herald / John T. Eberth / Sept 19th 2002
http://notice.sbu.edu/articles.htm


----------



## Toro (Dec 9, 2009)

Pretty good C&P, huh?

Not eots-like fer sure, but still, eh?


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 9, 2009)

Toro said:


> Pretty good C&P, huh?
> 
> Not eots-like fer sure, but still, eh?




Not bad at all.


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 9, 2009)

Toro said:


> Pretty good C&P, huh?
> 
> Not eots-like fer sure, but still, eh?


the only thing missing are the youtube videos with scary music and links to Alex Jones websites
LOL


----------



## eots (Dec 9, 2009)

Toro said:


> Pretty good C&P, huh?
> 
> Not eots-like fer sure, but still, eh?



well a bit too lengthy but if you read some of it actually it confirms what I posted


----------



## Fizz (Dec 9, 2009)

eots said:


> well a bit too lengthy but if you read some of it actually it confirms what I posted



sorry. im lost. it confirms what?


----------



## B94 (Dec 9, 2009)

DiveCon said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> > Pretty good C&P, huh?
> ...



If it's not on youtube its got to be fake.


----------



## eots (Dec 9, 2009)

Fizz said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > well a bit too lengthy but if you read some of it actually it confirms what I posted
> ...



that many of the whiteness accounts on closer examination did not see the actual impact of the pentagon and there is conflict on flight path an angle of approach something toto likes to deny


----------



## eots (Dec 9, 2009)

B94 said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > Toro said:
> ...



youtube comments are meaningless many are from news broadcast of from know experts youtube is just a format cut and paste the same..meaningless 
cut and paste is simply posting a portion of an article or report and again just another format for disseminating information as opposed to your inane comments


----------



## Fizz (Dec 10, 2009)

eots said:


> Fizz said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



ahhh.... they only saw a really big plane fly behind the building and then a big explosion and fireball and no more airplane. 

therefore we should discount that and say flight 77 never hit the pentagon??


i noticed on the list that some guy called the people on the phone. if they didnt return his phone call they are no longer a credible witness??


----------



## creativedreams (Dec 10, 2009)

*Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation *

Dr. Quintiere, one of the worlds leading fire science researchers and safety engineers, also encouraged his audience of fellow researchers and engineers to scientifically re-examine the WTC collapses. *I hope to convince you to perhaps become 'Conspiracy Theorists',* but in a proper way, he said. 

In his hour-long presentation, Dr. Quintiere discussed many elements of NISTs investigation that he found problematic. He emphasized, *In every investigation Ive taken part in, the key has been to establish a timeline. And the timeline is established by witness accounts, by information from alarm systems, by any video that you might have of the event, and then by calculations. And you try to put all of this together. And if your calculations are consistent with some of these hard facts*, then perhaps you can have some comfort in the results of your calculations. I have not seen a timeline placed in the NIST report


Dr. Quintiere said he originally had high hopes that NIST would do a good job with the investigation. Theyre the central government lab for fire. There are good people there and they can do a good job. But what I* also thought they would do is to enlist the service of the ATF [Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives], which has an investigation force and a laboratory of their own for fire. And I thought they would put people out on the street and get gumshoe-type information. *What prevented all of this? I think its the legal structure that cloaks the Commerce Department and therefore NIST. And so, *instead of lawyers as if they were acting on a civil case trying to get depositions and information subpoenaed, those lawyers did the opposite and blocked everything. *

*Why were not alternative collapse hypotheses investigated* and discussed as NIST had stated *repeatedly that they would do? ... *


*Spoliation of a fire scene is a basis for destroying a legal case* in an investigation. Most of the steel was discarded, *although the key elements of the core steel were demographically labeled. A careful reading of the NIST report shows that they have no evidence that the temperatures they predict as necessary for failure are corroborated *by findings of the little steel debris they have. Why hasn't NIST declared that this spoliation of the steel was a gross error? 

In my opinion, the WTC investigation by NIST falls short of expectations by not definitively finding cause, by not sufficiently linking recommendations of specificity to cause, by *not fully invoking all of their authority to seek facts in the investigation, and by the guidance of government lawyers to deter rather than develop fact finding. *
OpEdNews - Page 2 of Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 10, 2009)

Yada Yada Yada..... Any actual proof of explosives yet? You know, something that would be presentable in court.


----------



## eots (Dec 10, 2009)

SFC Ollie said:


> Yada Yada Yada..... Any actual proof of explosives yet? You know, something that would be presentable in court.



expert testimony is presentable in court little Ollie


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 10, 2009)

eots said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > Yada Yada Yada..... Any actual proof of explosives yet? You know, something that would be presentable in court.
> ...




Almost all Testimony is presentable in court. Shall we line up the eyewitnesses and see how many heard or didn't hear what? Or saw or didn't see what? I think you would come out on the losing end of that one.


----------



## eots (Dec 10, 2009)

SFC Ollie said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > SFC Ollie said:
> ...



well you would be thinking wrongly and those seeking the truth would welcome that opportunity and have fought tenaciously for it for 8 years


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 10, 2009)

eots said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



I believe we can find more witnesses who will say there were no explosions than you can find that say there were. I also am more than convinced that we will find more people who will say that Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon than those who will say it didn't. Same thing with Shanksville.


----------



## eots (Dec 10, 2009)

ya well that's just it Ollie _you belive.._but what are _the facts_


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 10, 2009)

Facts are that there were 19 hijackers in 4 planes. 2 of them flew into the twin towers, one flew into the Pentagon, and one crashed into a recovered strip mine in PA. 

Facts are that the twin towers collapsed because of the airliners crashing into them and they caused the damage and fires in WTC 7 and it collapsed 5 hours or so later.

 Fact is that several other buildings had to be demolished after the fact.

Fact is that all the passengers and crew of the 4 planes died upon impact at the locations specified. 

Fact is that DNA does not lie.


----------



## Toro (Dec 10, 2009)

Fact is you can't blow up one of the largest structures in the world with a bit of thermite, even "Superthermite."

Fact is the Columbia Earth Laboratory registered seismology readings consistent with a collapse, not a bomb.

Fact is a building with 50,000 people saw no one come in and out of the buildings to wire it for destruction.

Fact is hundreds of people saw a plane crash into the Pentagon.

Fact is no one saw a missile.


----------



## Fizz (Dec 10, 2009)

Toro said:


> Fact is you can't blow up one of the largest structures in the world with a bit of thermite, even "Superthermite."
> 
> Fact is the Columbia Earth Laboratory registered seismology readings consistent with a collapse, not a bomb.
> 
> ...



fact is islamic terrorists admitted to planning and carrying out the attacks.


----------



## Toro (Dec 10, 2009)

Fizz said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> > Fact is you can't blow up one of the largest structures in the world with a bit of thermite, even "Superthermite."
> ...



Yup.  And al-Qaeda was getting pissed off when Iran was trying to steak its street cred.

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Al-Qaeda accuses Iran of 9/11 lie


----------



## eots (Dec 10, 2009)

Toro said:


> Fact is you can't blow up one of the largest structures in the world with a bit of thermite, even "Superthermite."
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Fizz (Dec 10, 2009)

are you saying that al-qeda used thermite?


----------



## kyzr (Dec 10, 2009)

this is a stupid thread too.  Too stupid to reply to.  Is this thread saying that jet liners did NOT impact the WTC towers?  Does the OP have any idea what prep needs to be done before a building is imploded?  You can't just wrap thermite around the freakin elevator shaft.  It all needs to be exposed and wired to collapse at the same time.  I'm curious if this OP author is promoting a conspiracy book too???


----------



## Fizz (Dec 10, 2009)

kyzr said:


> this is a stupid thread too.  Too stupid to reply to.  Is this thread saying that jet liners did NOT impact the WTC towers?  Does the OP have any idea what prep needs to be done before a building is imploded?  You can't just wrap thermite around the freakin elevator shaft.  It all needs to be exposed and wired to collapse at the same time.  I'm curious if this OP author is promoting a conspiracy book too???



i'm going to write a book on all the wackos that are writing books.


----------



## kyzr (Dec 10, 2009)

One question about explosives.  They leave a residue.  Got any explosive residue???  Didn't think so.


----------



## Toro (Dec 10, 2009)

kyzr said:


> this is a stupid thread too.  Too stupid to reply to.  Is this thread saying that jet liners did NOT impact the WTC towers?  Does the OP have any idea what prep needs to be done before a building is imploded?  You can't just wrap thermite around the freakin elevator shaft.  It all needs to be exposed and wired to collapse at the same time.  I'm curious if this OP author is promoting a conspiracy book too???



Right.

It took eight months of prep time to plan and wire a department store far smaller than the WTC towers, yet no one saw anyone at anytime doing anything within a building structure with 50,000 employees to suggest that bombs were being planted.  It just magically appeared.


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 10, 2009)

Toro said:


> kyzr said:
> 
> 
> > this is a stupid thread too.  Too stupid to reply to.  Is this thread saying that jet liners did NOT impact the WTC towers?  Does the OP have any idea what prep needs to be done before a building is imploded?  You can't just wrap thermite around the freakin elevator shaft.  It all needs to be exposed and wired to collapse at the same time.  I'm curious if this OP author is promoting a conspiracy book too???
> ...


correction: TWO buildings with 50,000 people working in EACH and a THIRD with another 20,000+


----------



## eots (Dec 10, 2009)

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eK2rVhOukqM[/ame]


----------



## Fizz (Dec 10, 2009)

eots said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eK2rVhOukqM



holy crap, thats your proof of explosives? building updates? where's the proof of explosives? wheres the proof that this was anything other than what it was supposed to be?

WHERE ARE THE EXPLOSIONS?!!!!!


----------



## eots (Dec 10, 2009)

no it is proof of opportunity to place them ..where are the steel samples that show the temperatures required for structural failure.?.where are the black boxes.?.where is bin laden ?


----------



## eots (Dec 11, 2009)

but after crashing a jet liner into a a skyscraper and it collapsing...oh look its a  terrorist passport a terrorist bandanna and john O'Neil's intact body


----------



## Fizz (Dec 11, 2009)

eots said:


> no it is proof of opportunity to place them ..where are the steel samples that show the temperatures required for structural failure.?.where are the black boxes.?.where is bin laden ?



bin laden is busy making videos taking credit for the WTC destruction so that pretty much makes your other questions a moot point.

to place WHAT?? 

WHERE IS THE PROOF OF EXPLOSIVES?!!! 

here. watch the building buckle without explosions.....

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOGI33HsiCc[/ame]

watch the corner of the building buckle with NO EXPLOSIONS.
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBYnUyx4kw8[/ame]

this is what REAL building demolitions sound like. do you hear any similarity at all?
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79sJ1bMR6VQ[/ame]


_10:06: NYPD officer advises that it isn't going to take much longer before the north tower comes down and to pull emergency vehicles back from the building.

10 NYPD aviation unit reports that the tip of the tower might be leaning.

10 NYPD aviation unit reports that the north tower is buckling on the southwest corner and leaning to the south. NYPD officer advises that all personnel close to the building pull back three blocks in every direction.

10:27: NYPD aviation unit reports that the roof is going to come down very shortly._

can someone please explain to me how explosive demolitions can cause a building to lean even before they are set off?


----------



## eots (Dec 11, 2009)

again moron cant post a link and your videos are total unimpressive all but for the shot of the huge squid  in the first one and there hardly answer the the ridiculousness of finding a passport ,,bandana and body of john O'Neill..but no black boxes


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 11, 2009)

eots said:


> again moron cant post a link and your videos are total unimpressive all but for the shot of the huge squid  in the first one and there hardly answer the the ridiculousness of finding a passport ,,bandana and body of john O'Neill..but no black boxes


there's no squid in the first one
do you even know what a squid IS?
you have told me you did commercial diving, if you dont know what a squid is then that puts THAT claim into question

and the bandana was found in PA from flight 93
and it was a freak occurrence as you have been told


----------



## Fizz (Dec 11, 2009)

eots said:


> again moron cant post a link and your videos are total unimpressive all but for the shot of the huge squid  in the first one and there hardly answer the the ridiculousness of finding a passport ,,bandana and body of john O'Neill..but no black boxes



i can post a link. i simply didnt post a link. you do understand english, right?

do you want to know what is ridiculous? its that abraham lincoln's son's life was saved by the brother of john wilkes booth. how absolutely ridiculous.

but it did happpen. Robert Todd Lincoln - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

see, the problem with all you Twoofers with your official training of watching Cagney and Lacy reruns is that you think real life is like TV. 

_Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't.  -Mark Twain _

(i'm sorry. do you need a link for that?)

finding a passport is not absurd. it is not expected but certainly not out of the realm of possibilities...... mostly because it actually has occurred.


----------



## eots (Dec 11, 2009)

Fizz said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > again moron cant post a link and your videos are total unimpressive all but for the shot of the huge squid  in the first one and there hardly answer the the ridiculousness of finding a passport ,,bandana and body of john O'Neill..but no black boxes
> ...



YES IF YOU POST SOMEThING THE RULES STATE YOU ARE TO POST A LINK GO READ THEM

and the wilks story is not at all that unusual as circles were small in those times...no comparison to not finding black boxes yet another unprecedented event


----------



## Fizz (Dec 11, 2009)

eots said:


> YES IF YOU POST SOMEThING THE RULES STATE YOU ARE TO POST A LINK GO READ THEM
> 
> and the wilks story is not at all that unusual as circles were small in those times...no comparison to not finding black boxes yet another unprecedented event



you forgot to post a link to the rules.


----------



## eots (Dec 11, 2009)

I did not cut and paste the rules so it is not required


----------



## eots (Dec 11, 2009)

DiveCon said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > again moron cant post a link and your videos are total unimpressive all but for the shot of the huge squid  in the first one and there hardly answer the the ridiculousness of finding a passport ,,bandana and body of john O'Neill..but no black boxes
> ...



oh so the odds go up its three  freak finds in plane crashes on 9/11 at different locations and different flights..and your squid line is as lame as scooby doo divers like yourself


----------



## Fizz (Dec 11, 2009)

eots said:


> oh so the odds go up its three  freak finds in plane crashes on 9/11 at different locations and different flights..and your squid line is as lame as scooby doo divers like yourself



you want to talk about odds? ok. lets talk about odds.

what are the odds of wiring an entire building for explosives without anyone noticing?

what are the odds of doing it again for a second building?

what are the odds of being able to do it again for a third building?

what are the odds of a plane crashing into a building in the exact spot that building is wired to explode first?

what are the odds of doing the same exact thing again for the second building?

what are the odds of being able to get the top of a building to noticeably tilt before total collapse?

what are the odds that the same guy that was framed as causing all this would take credit for it anyway?

what are the odds of blowing up a building in front of literally hundreds, if not thousands of cameras and not a single camera catches one single explosion?

what are the odds of being able to do it a second time?

what are the odds of doing it again a third time?

what are the odds that the government was able to pull off the greatest scam ever in front of millions of people live on TV and in person and yet was too stupid to even know where to bring the presidents plane and get air support for it for 40 minutes after it was airborne.

what are the odds that....... oh nevermind..... i am wasting time.... you dont really care about odds..... all you care about is proving the official version wrong and dont really give a shit about the truth. the truth is that all evidence points to the official story being true.


----------



## eots (Dec 11, 2009)

the odds are far better with planning and expertise  than a huge series of unprecedented or phenomenally rare events a occurring one day around one single monumental event by sheer chance as is the supposed case with 9/11


----------



## eots (Dec 11, 2009)

and many of your what are the odds questions are not even valid or true


----------



## Fizz (Dec 11, 2009)

eots said:


> the odds are far better with planning and expertise  than a huge series of unprecedented or phenomenally rare events a occurring one day around one single monumental event by sheer chance as is the supposed case with 9/11



i can prove the events of 9/11 were planned. can you prove explosives were?


----------



## eots (Dec 11, 2009)

you cant prove anything what the hell are you talking about ,,you cant even make a compelling argument for the official story being plausible or support your _building fires did it theory _with any conclusive evidence.. never mind prove it


----------



## Fizz (Dec 11, 2009)

eots said:


> you cant prove anything what the hell are you talking about ,,you cant even make a compelling argument for the official story being plausible or support your _building fires did it theory _with any conclusive evidence.. never mind prove it



actually, my theory is the "TWO BIG FUCKING PLANES CRASHED INTO THE BUILDINGS" theory that you twoofers seem to forget so easy.


----------



## eots (Dec 11, 2009)

wow you are not even certain of that ?


----------



## Fizz (Dec 11, 2009)

eots said:


> wow you are not even certain of that ?



its a bit like trying to be certain of the cause of death of a suicide bomber. i dont care if the bomb caused cardiac damage or brain damage. i am certain the root of the problem is the fucking bomb strapped to his chest.


----------



## eots (Dec 11, 2009)

> Fizz
> its a bit like trying to be certain of the cause of death of a suicide bomber. i dont care if the bomb caused cardiac damage or brain damage. i am certain the root of the problem is the fucking bomb strapped to his chest.




really .._how intresting_

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3u3JSEqNtlg[/ame]


----------



## Fizz (Dec 11, 2009)

funny that you should mention the george washington bridge. i do believe there was something extremely strange going on there as i had a firend there that day. i'll keep the details to myself for now since you probably wouldnt believe me anyway (especially in light of the coincidence of meeting Atta in 2000 in the philippines) but if there is anything i do find strange about 9/11 this is at the top of the list.


----------



## eots (Dec 11, 2009)

Fizz said:


> funny that you should mention the george washington bridge. i do believe there was something extremely strange going on there as i had a firend there that day. i'll keep the details to myself for now since you probably wouldnt believe me anyway (especially in light of the coincidence of meeting Atta in 2000 in the philippines) but if there is anything i do find strange about 9/11 this is at the top of the list.



*ok max..*

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Akwki7Ozbm0[/ame]


----------



## Toro (Dec 11, 2009)

eots said:


> the odds are far better with planning and expertise  than a huge series of unprecedented or phenomenally rare events a occurring one day around one single monumental event by sheer chance as is the supposed case with 9/11



Right, the odds of planning and expertise of 19 guys hijacking four jets in a co-ordinated attack on the same day is far greater than a rare series of events that would have to occur if the conspiracy theorists' were correct.

*That's the point!*


----------



## eots (Dec 11, 2009)

but an incorrect one...19 guys didn't plant passports ..19 guys didn't plan a NORAD stand down 19 guys didn't plan all the intelligence failures and non response to warning from intelligence and even the public required for even limited success.. for  black boxes to vanish..for three buildings to fall..the spoliation of the crime scene ..the withholding of evidence the blocking of investigations..for the death of john O'Neil


----------



## Toro (Dec 11, 2009)

eots said:


> but an incorrect one...19 guys didn't plant passports ..19 guys didn't plan a NORAD stand down 19 guys didn't plan all the intelligence failures and non response to warning from intelligence and even the public required for even limited success.. for  black boxes to vanish..for three buildings to fall..the spoliation of the crime scene ..the withholding of evidence the blocking of investigations..for the death of john O'Neil



The odds of failure in a complex system are far greater than the odds of success in a complex system.  The more complex the system, the odds of failure rises and the odds of success falls in a non-linear fashion.  Conspiracy theories - all conspiracy theories - assume a level of control and influence over random events and underestimates the nature of randomness.  That is why it is far more plausible that 19 guys with box cutters slammed planes into buildings than an elaborate and complex scheme by the government that would require thousands of people to pull off.  The terrorists' plot was simple and exploited the random failures in a complex system. A government conspiracy would have to have been enormously complex, and would have to have been executed in a near-perfect manner.


----------



## eots (Dec 11, 2009)

except it would not succeed based on the plan they were capable of ..a plan can be so simplistic that it is all but sure to fail..they would of been stopped several times over and even if all that failed they would never of got past NORAD


----------



## Toro (Dec 11, 2009)

eots said:


> except it would not succeed based on the plan they were capable of ..a plan can be so simplistic that it is all but sure to fail..they would of been stopped several times over and even if all that failed they would never of got past NORAD



Of course it could succeed.  It did.  Its easy to see how.

Security at airports used to be lax.  After the hijackings in the 70s, everyone learned not to resist.  Nobody would expect hijackers to use box-cutters.  Everyone expects hijackers to use guns so that's what they look for.  Passengers who were hijacked would expect to have been taken to Cuba, not to be slammed into buildings.  Therefore, nobody resists.  And it is difficult to believe so people aren't as vigilant as they would be if they were expecting it.

And how do you now that everything got passed NORAD?  Isn't one of the conspiracy theories that a plane was shot out of the sky over PA?  How do you know that it wasn't blown apart by a fighter?  I don't think it was, but it is the only plausible conspiracy theory.  And if it was, why would a fighter blow it out of the sky and let the other three planes hit buildings?  Why would it not be allowed to hit its next target, whatever it may be?


----------



## eots (Dec 13, 2009)

> Of course it could succeed.  It did.  Its easy to see how.
> 
> Security at airports used to be lax.  After the hijackings in the 70s, everyone learned not to resist.  Nobody would expect hijackers to use box-cutters.  Everyone expects hijackers to use guns so that's what they look for.  Passengers who were hijacked would expect to have been taken to Cuba, not to be slammed into buildings.  Therefore, nobody resists.  And it is difficult to believe so people aren't as vigilant as they would be if they were expecting it


.


getting a sharp object on a plane is still no big task and you ignore the  ample prior warnings and offer no examination of the timeline and the ability to intercept or the many conflicts of critical testimony of key people involved at NORAD and the FAA





> And how do you now that everything got passed NORAD?  Isn't one of the conspiracy theories that a plane was shot out of the sky over PA?  How do you know that it wasn't blown apart by a fighter


 

the stalling of air defense could no longer be contained



> I don't think it was, but it is the only plausible conspiracy theory.  And if it was, why would a fighter blow it out of the sky and let the other three planes hit buildings?  Why would it not be allowed to hit its next target, whatever it may be



same answer...these are theories..only a honest independent investigation with full subpoena power, testimony under oath and subject to cross examination will give definitive answers...the  _absolute certainty _is the official reports are cover-ups,,and almost completely false


----------



## Liability (Dec 13, 2009)

eots said:


> > Of course it could succeed.  It did.  Its easy to see how.
> >
> > Security at airports used to be lax.  After the hijackings in the 70s, everyone learned not to resist.  Nobody would expect hijackers to use box-cutters.  Everyone expects hijackers to use guns so that's what they look for.  Passengers who were hijacked would expect to have been taken to Cuba, not to be slammed into buildings.  Therefore, nobody resists.  And it is difficult to believe so people aren't as vigilant as they would be if they were expecting it
> 
> ...



There was a full, complete investigation.  In fact, its findings and supporting documentation are fairly described as voluminous.  There is nothing of any REAL concern left unaddressed.  There are always, in such investigations, some opportunities for idiots -- such as you -- to cobble some dark sinister mystery out of.  But nothing of any validity.

We know who did it.  Despite your pathetic mewings, we also know who didn't do it.

So, fuck off.


----------



## PixieStix (Dec 13, 2009)

Trojan said:


> creativedreams said:
> 
> 
> > Every picture of "Ground Zero" is evidence of explosives used.
> ...


 
He is having a creative dream


----------



## Liability (Dec 13, 2009)

And there is still ZERO evidence that Bld 7 at WTC was either pulled or explosively demolished.  A massive hole formed in the side of the building of about 20 stories in dimension when parts of the WTC Tower collapsed INTO WTC 7.  Couple that with the manner in which the building was constructed (i.e., the support structure of WTC 7 was irreparably damaged in that collision between the collapsing Tower and WTC 7) AND with the raging inferno that further weakened the building, the WTC collapse was inevitable.  Firefighters and others there prior to the collapse KNEW it was failing and pulled back the responders to avoid further loss of life.

Debunking 9/11 Conspiracy Theories and Controlled Demolition - World Trade Center 7, Building 7

Not one damn bit of ACTUAL evidence supports ANY contention that the buildings (or any of them) were explosively demolished.


----------



## eots (Dec 13, 2009)

Liability said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > > Of course it could succeed.  It did.  Its easy to see how.
> ...



and your proof of this is ?


----------



## Liability (Dec 13, 2009)

eots said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



Try to keep up, you fucking moron.

The 9/11 Commission conducted a very detailed investigation.  In addition, the NIST report is quite clear.

All the blithering blathering nonsensical crap you keep referencing has been totally debunked many times.  The proof of that was shoved down your throat by half a dozen or so folks here on this Board alone,  you fucking lying moron.  That you choose to blithely ignore it  and yet still demand proof shows only what a chump hack you are.

It is impossible to get you to even admit that Bldg 7 collapsed because it got physically so damaged by the portions one of the Towers collapsing INTO it that it lost its structural integrity.  I have already provided CLEAR proof of that which also truly destoys your delusional fantasy of any explosive demolition.  http://www.usmessageboard.com/1804100-post222.html and link therein.

There is no purpose served in you repeatedly demanding proof which you "look at" with fully closed eyes, you dicklesss twerp.

Fuck off.

You scumbag Troofers have not even the most rudimentary understanding of the implications of what you so baselessly maintain.


----------



## eots (Dec 13, 2009)

but both investigators at NIST and the 9/11 commision report denounced them...what of their concerns and NIST says damage played no significant role and building fires alone caused the collapse ..so you don't even know the official lie that you support ??


----------



## Fizz (Dec 13, 2009)

eots said:


> so you don't even know the official lie that you support ??



what lie? provide proof anything in either investigation is a lie.


----------



## eots (Dec 13, 2009)

the report was denounced by the lead investigator for 7 years..as was the 9/11 commission report by many of its members and NIST  claims building fires alone caused the collapse of wtc 7..even though there was no evidence of the temperatures predicted to cause failure..these are facts


----------



## Fizz (Dec 13, 2009)

eots said:


> the report was denounced by the lead investigator for 7 years..as was the 9/11 commission report by many of its members and NIST  claims building fires alone caused the collapse of wtc 7..even though there was no evidence of the temperatures predicted to cause failure..these are facts



so a minority of the investigators didnt agree with the majority. how is that a lie?


----------



## CandySlice (Apr 13, 2011)

Okay, lets say I give any creedence at all to the missile in the pentagon bullshit. Where are the passengers on Flight 77? Do their loved ones think they are on a n extended vacation??


----------



## Mr. Jones (Apr 13, 2011)

CandySlice said:


> Okay, lets say I give any creedence at all to the missile in the pentagon bullshit. Where are the passengers on Flight 77? Do their loved ones think they are on a n extended vacation??


Any relation to "Candycorn" by any chance?


----------



## Mr. Jones (Apr 13, 2011)

Fizz said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > the report was denounced by the lead investigator for 7 years..as was the 9/11 commission report by many of its members and NIST  claims building fires alone caused the collapse of wtc 7..even though there was no evidence of the temperatures predicted to cause failure..these are facts
> ...


 So the 9-11 commission writers now rejecting their report and openly saying they were obstructed and misled is of no consequence to you?
Why do you accept the "report" but they don't?


----------



## Mr. Jones (Apr 13, 2011)

Fizz said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > so you don't even know the official lie that you support ??
> ...


Why don't you provide proof that it is true beyond a reasonable doubt? Parroting propaganda from known liars makes you look an idiotic loyalist that doesn't care about the state of affairs in your own country. 
Facts proving the 9-11 story is not credible have been presented on these forums time and again, and the holes in it exposed. NIST and the others never have proved their theory is correct, and they even admit they can't, yet stooges like you would rather believe the accounts of proven liars to the American people. 
Are you that naive? Or just willfully ignorant of the history of your country's abuses?


----------



## Patriot911 (Apr 13, 2011)

Mr. Jones said:


> Fizz said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



  Still going with this lie, Jones?  Care to show where any of the 9/11 commission writers claim they reject the FINAL report?  All their claims came DURING the writing of the report, not the final report.  You've been shown this numerous times, yet you insist on lying your truthtard ass off over it.  And you wonder why everyone hates you.


----------



## Patriot911 (Apr 13, 2011)

Mr. Jones said:


> Fizz said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


We can't.  We're not experts in the field.  They are.  Yet here you are, a bunch of ignorant fucks pretending like you have intelligence pretending they are all lies.  The burden of proof is on your shoulders, not ours.



			
				Mr. Jones said:
			
		

> Parroting propaganda from known liars makes you look an idiotic loyalist that doesn't care about the state of affairs in your own country.


Yet the only ones doing that are traitorous assholes like you who not only hate this country, but are actively trying to destroy it through sedition.



			
				Mr. Jones said:
			
		

> Facts proving the 9-11 story is not credible have been presented on these forums time and again, and the holes in it exposed.


Yet you can't back up these outlandish claims with any evidence.  That is why everyone makes fun of you and doesn't believe you.  If you had some real evidence, you would probably already have your precious investigation.  



			
				Mr. Jones said:
			
		

> NIST and the others never have proved their theory is correct, and they even admit they can't, yet stooges like you would rather believe the accounts of proven liars to the American people.


So let's get this straight.  NIST says it is a theory and admits they could be wrong, yet YOU claim they are outright lying.  On what basis?  Your expert opinon?  Gage's?  Gage is a fucking moron and only an architect.  Most of his claims are so flawed that any moron can see they are bullshit to convince gullible fucks like you into buying into the grand conspiracy.  Hmmm.  Who to believe?  The ones claiming they might be wrong but have published their theory in great detail or the ones claiming they are absolutely correct and NIST is outright lying, but have zero evidence to back up their claims and have published nothing?



			
				Mr. Jones said:
			
		

> Are you that naive?


No, but you prove you are time and time and time again.



			
				Mr. Jones said:
			
		

> Or just willfully ignorant of the history of your country's abuses?


Oh, that's rich!  So if a COUNTRY does something wrong once, they are automatically guilty of all future crimes.    What a fucking asshole you are, Jones!  Come back when you actually have something of value to write.


----------



## MikeK (Apr 13, 2011)

There are only two possible ways that explosives can be used to collapse a building.

*Method A* (Direct Demolition): requires positioning a massive charge at one side of the base to blow out one side of the foundation causing the building to topple.  This method was employed in an attempt to topple a World Trade Center tower in March, 1993, by Ramseh Yousef, and it would have worked if his explosive charge had been positioned in a different (higher) level of the basement parking garage.  This method of collapsing a structure is easiest and least costly in terms of materials and human effort but the reason it isn't used in populated areas is obvious.  

*Method B* (Controlled Demolition): requires the strategic positioning of measured explosive charges throughout the structure and wiring them to detonate in precisely timed intervals.  The objective of this method, which is comparatively costly and time-consuming, is to effect an _implosion_ of the structure's walls thus producing a totally vertical collapse rather than lateral toppling, which would be catastrophic in a populated area.

*Bottom Line*:  Having learned their mistake from Ramseh Yousef's failed 1993 attempt to topple a WTC tower, if Al Qaeda chose to attack the World Trade Center with explosives logic dictates they would have employed Method A, because direct demolition would have toppled the buildings causing exponentially greater damage in the surrounding areas.  

Those who have stubbornly adhered to the theory that the World Trade Center towers were brought down by _controlled demolition_ should ask themselves why the attackers would have chosen to _minimize_ rather than _optimize_ damage to New York City?  

The controlled demolition theory simply makes no sense.


----------



## Patriot911 (Apr 13, 2011)

MikeK said:


> There are only two possible ways that explosives can be used to collapse a building.
> 
> *Method A* (Direct Demolition): requires positioning a massive charge at one side of the base to blow out one side of the foundation causing the building to topple.  This method was employed in an attempt to topple a World Trade Center tower in March, 1993, by Ramseh Yousef, and it would have worked if his explosive charge had been positioned in a different (higher) level of the basement parking garage.  This method of collapsing a structure is easiest and least costly in terms of materials and human effort but the reason it isn't used in populated areas is obvious.
> 
> ...



Because the truthtards don't believe Al Qaeda was involved, or if they were, they were working under orders of our government.  Apparently our government has no problem killing thousands, but has a hard time toppling buildings.  Then again, why bother to fly a plane into a building.  Imagine the terror of just blowing the buildings with no warning!  One minute the towers are there, next thing you know they're gone along with everyone in them!  

But like you accurately stated, the truthtard theories simply make no sense.


----------



## CandySlice (Apr 13, 2011)

Mr. Jones said:


> CandySlice said:
> 
> 
> > Okay, lets say I give any creedence at all to the missile in the pentagon bullshit. Where are the passengers on Flight 77? Do their loved ones think they are on a n extended vacation??
> ...



More like Dexter with tits.


----------



## CandySlice (Apr 14, 2011)

CandySlice said:


> Mr. Jones said:
> 
> 
> > CandySlice said:
> ...




 Conspiracy theories are the last refuge of the powerless mind. It gives the individual a feeling of control in an uncontrollable world. Let them have their little plots and covert midnight meetings, trench coats and  secret docs only THEY are privy to. Without those things they are nothing.


----------



## slukasiewski (Apr 14, 2011)

creativedreams said:


> Every picture of "Ground Zero" is evidence of explosives used.



What about those airplanes - caught on tape - flying into the buildings, dumb-fuck? And all those people who were on those flights who never came home? 

Take your conspiracy theory and shove it up your ass. 

Grow a brain...


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Apr 14, 2011)

creativedreams said:


> Every picture of "Ground Zero" is evidence of explosives used.
> 
> *EVERYTHING* but the steel was exploded into a huge pyroclastic cloud of dust *BEFORE* it even hits the ground.
> 
> If everything *WASN'T* exploded into dust then the rubble pile of the Twin Towers at Ground Zero would have been *HUGE *and *MUCH HIGHER *than it was.



Think it through. Even explosives couldn't handle a job of this magnitude.500,000 tons of material turned to dust doesn't sound like conventional demolition explosives to me.






How did the demo team get around radio frequency?
How did the explosives survive the initial blast?

SOMETHING with a magnificent amount of energy pulverized those buildings, but explosives wasn't it. At least not any explosives that we're aware of.


----------



## Patriot911 (Apr 14, 2011)

TakeAStepBack said:


> creativedreams said:
> 
> 
> > Every picture of "Ground Zero" is evidence of explosives used.
> ...



Wow.  It must have been something MASSIVE!  It would take something like the potential energy of a 110 story building to pulverize all that concrete to dust!    What a fucking moron!

Why don't you start quoting moonbat Judy's space beam bullshit now?  You've plagerized her before.  Why not do it again?


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Apr 14, 2011)

> This message is hidden because Patriot911 is on your ignore list.



Did you say something?  


Also, how did the demo team wire the place with explosives with a bomb sniffing dog on the premises?






There are far too many errors with the theory of explosives.


----------



## Patriot911 (Apr 14, 2011)

TakeAStepBack said:


> > This message is hidden because Patriot911 is on your ignore list.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



So what do you claim was used?  You claim it couldn't have been a natural collapse.  Now you're claiming it wasn't explosives.  When do you get to the Judy Woods space beam theory?    This is so predictable!


----------



## CandySlice (Apr 14, 2011)

Patriot911 said:


> MikeK said:
> 
> 
> > There are only two possible ways that explosives can be used to collapse a building.
> ...



What blows me away is the overlooked fact of how many people it would have taken to pull off a conspiracy of this size and yet, so far,  nobody has talked. In this day and age of public confession,  24 hr news cycles and everybody wanting their 15 minutes a confession of this magnitude would be just too delicious to resist. I may not know too much about demolitions and explosives but I DO know people.


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Apr 14, 2011)

Are you familiar with compartmentalization?

Do you really think that anyone who has the ability to confess anything would do so? Do you have any idea how easy it would be for the powers that be to stifle such a confession? 
Look at the Roswell scenario. All of those military personnel were told to keep there mouth shut, and they did. Upon retiring and turning 85 years old, suddenly a few of those soldiers spill the beans about what they saw, what they were told and the ramifications of not following orders..

This will all come out one day. probably in another 40 years when it makes absolutely no difference. Just like the gulf of Tonkin and a host of other crimes.


----------



## Patriot911 (Apr 14, 2011)

CandySlice said:


> What blows me away is the overlooked fact of how many people it would have taken to pull off a conspiracy of this size and yet, so far,  nobody has talked. In this day and age of public confession,  24 hr news cycles and everybody wanting their 15 minutes a confession of this magnitude would be just too delicious to resist. I may not know too much about demolitions and explosives but I DO know people.



I agree with you, but I take it one step further.  How are you going to get that many people together willing to commit mass murder on a massive scale without anyone blowing the whistle beforehand?  Remember, the initial estimates of the people killed was in excess of 10,000 and up to 25,000.  The people involved had to know they were dealing with the possibility of that many deaths.  

Oh, it's fun for the truthtards to pretend people, especially anyone working for the government, are automatically that evil and will willingly kill people for money or for country.  Yet nobody can point out to anyone who suddenly got really rich really quick, and people who are rabid about a cause often times become disillusioned over time.  We won't even get into the fact that many of the people in the "standard" conspiracy theories wouldn't be government workers at all.

In summary, a conspiracy of this size would never get off the ground without someone leaking what was about to happen prior to 9/11.  And, like you correctly pointed out, a conspiracy of this size wouldn't last much past the first couple months before someone came forward and announced their part in the attack and how it was a conspiracy.  Surely they could arrange for immunity for their part in bringing down the "bigger fish" in the conspiracy.


----------



## Patriot911 (Apr 14, 2011)

TakeAStepBack said:


> Are you familiar with compartmentalization?


That might work DURING the attack, but after the attack, everyone involved would know their part and would have talked.  After all, they would have been fooled, and not knowingly part of the attack. 



			
				TakeAStepBack said:
			
		

> Do you really think that anyone who has the ability to confess anything would do so? Do you have any idea how easy it would be for the powers that be to stifle such a confession?


Do you have any idea how easy it would be for the powers that be to stifle you?  Why would they let pissants like you get close to uncovering the "truth" when they could just "stifle" you?



			
				TakeAStepBack said:
			
		

> Look at the Roswell scenario. All of those military personnel were told to keep there mouth shut, and they did. Upon retiring and turning 85 years old, suddenly a few of those soldiers spill the beans about what they saw, what they were told and the ramifications of not following orders.


I love it when truthtards try to justify one conspiracy theory by bringing up other conspiracy theories as though they are fact!  



			
				TakeAStepBack said:
			
		

> This will all come out one day. probably in another 40 years when it makes absolutely no difference. Just like the gulf of Tonkin and a host of other crimes.


There was no crime in the Gulf of Tonkin.  More lies from you.  Were we attacked?  Absolutely.  North Vietnam has freely admitted they attacked and suffered a defeat.  Did the ship involved think they were attacked AGAIN?  Absolutely.  Were they?  No.  Did they know that at the time?  No.  It only came out after everything was analized.  By that time LBJ had already addressed Congress.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Apr 14, 2011)

CandySlice said:


> Patriot911 said:
> 
> 
> > MikeK said:
> ...



It's not overlooked, they like to deny that it would take so many people. I would guess it would have taken several thousand to know about it in order to make any of the BS theories happen.


----------



## Patriot911 (Apr 14, 2011)

SFC Ollie said:


> CandySlice said:
> 
> 
> > Patriot911 said:
> ...



There were 7,000 FBI agents on the criminal investigation into 9/11.  This is an undisputed fact.  ALL truthtards claim the FBI covered up 9/11.  So it is more than 7,000 regardless of which theory you want to believe.


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Apr 14, 2011)

The rump rangers ride again......


----------



## Patriot911 (Apr 14, 2011)

TakeAStepBack said:


> The rump rangers ride again......



Ah yes.  The troll returns to prove once again he has no response to the complete ass kicking he already received, and thus has been reduced to one line nonsense.  

When are you going to show us some more plagerizations you claim to have come up with yourself?    The only thing you are an expert at is bullshitting.


----------



## Mr. Jones (Apr 14, 2011)

SFC Ollie said:


> CandySlice said:
> 
> 
> > Patriot911 said:
> ...



And just how many Al Qaeda "terrorists" do you all think it took, to do this attack?  Anyone care to guess? I mean it was a very sophisticated operation after all.


----------



## Patriot911 (Apr 14, 2011)

Mr. Jones said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > CandySlice said:
> ...



They didn't have to plan a massive fake attack involving thousands, fake an attack, cover up their tracks after the fact, and keep everyone quiet about who was involved.  The facts always seem to escape one of your non-existant intelligence.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Apr 14, 2011)

Mr. Jones said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > CandySlice said:
> ...



I would bet less than 30 knew the entire plan. Maybe 50 or 60 involved at some level.


----------



## CandySlice (Apr 14, 2011)

Mr. Jones said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > CandySlice said:
> ...




Actually, MrJones, the plot was simplicity itself. And they had YEARS to perfect it. There are so many real events going on as we speak, why focus on this nonsense?


----------



## CandySlice (Apr 14, 2011)

Patriot911 said:


> TakeAStepBack said:
> 
> 
> > Are you familiar with compartmentalization?
> ...



As I mentioned earlier, it's a pathology. 'Conspiracy theories are the last refuge of the powerless mind. It gives the individual a feeling of control in an uncontrollable world. Let them have their little plots and covert midnight meetings, trench coats and secret docs only THEY are privy to. Without those things they are nothing.'


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Apr 14, 2011)

It took 20 Al-Qaeda members. Hijackers with boxcutters, and the master of evil doers himself, Osama Bin Laden, to carry out their mission. Bin Laden was in his "underground super complex bunker". Complete with munitions, an HVAC system and a total global terror cell control room.

Remeber Rumsfeld's big talk on TV about the underground complex?


----------



## CandySlice (Apr 14, 2011)

TakeAStepBack said:


> Are you familiar with compartmentalization?
> 
> Do you really think that anyone who has the ability to confess anything would do so? Do you have any idea how easy it would be for the powers that be to stifle such a confession?
> Look at the Roswell scenario. All of those military personnel were told to keep there mouth shut, and they did. Upon retiring and turning 85 years old, suddenly a few of those soldiers spill the beans about what they saw, what they were told and the ramifications of not following orders..
> ...



One of my favorite theorys, of course,  is the Kennedy assassination second,  third and 4th gunman postulatons. And trust me, the conspiracy theories started THE NEXT DAY. To date, even with a supposed death bed confession from Santos Traficanti (?), ( 'we should have taken Bobby out') the theory has never been proven. Lets just stick to one ct at a time. You can't prove one ct by raising the spectre of another one. I take it this subject occupies a lot of your time, huh?


----------



## CandySlice (Apr 14, 2011)

SFC Ollie said:


> Mr. Jones said:
> 
> 
> > SFC Ollie said:
> ...




And that's an average of 59 that couldn't kep their mouths shut.


----------



## Liability (Apr 14, 2011)

As a SMALL technical note regarding the dopey thread headline, it is probably true that every photograph from ground zero could constitute evidence that explosives had been used.

Piss-poor unpersuasive evidence.

*Actually*, back here in reality, the photographic, video, eyewitness and forensic analysis evidence of the 9/11/2001 attacks at Ground Zero all suggest, quite reasonably and all but conclusively, that there were *no explosives used.*


----------



## CandySlice (Apr 14, 2011)

Patriot911 said:


> CandySlice said:
> 
> 
> > What blows me away is the overlooked fact of how many people it would have taken to pull off a conspiracy of this size and yet, so far,  nobody has talked. In this day and age of public confession,  24 hr news cycles and everybody wanting their 15 minutes a confession of this magnitude would be just too delicious to resist. I may not know too much about demolitions and explosives but I DO know people.
> ...




Indeed. I agree it would never have gotten to first base in the first place, human nature being what it is. The snitches would have formed a line around the Justice Department wanting to be first to cop immunity from such a heinous act.
To paraphrase Bill Clinton's words, said to the idiot that shouted this out at one of his speeches, ' How DARE you??SHAME on you MrJones'


----------



## Mr. Jones (Apr 14, 2011)

CandySlice said:


> Patriot911 said:
> 
> 
> > MikeK said:
> ...


_
When losing a discussion on the facts of 9/11, a so-called 9/11 "debunker" will often rely on an old canard to "prove" that 9/11 could not have been an inside job: "So many people want their quarter hour of fame that even the Men in Black couldn't squelch the squealers from spilling the beans," write self-satisfied defenders of the government story. According to the logic of this argument, if there are no 9/11 whistleblowers then 9/11 was not an inside 
job._
_
So what if there are 9/11 whistleblowers? What if these whistleblowers come from every level of government and private industry, individuals who have even had their cases vindicated by internal government reports? _

Would that change your mind, or at least get you think objectively?

_....these whistleblowers are not lauded by legislators or trumpeted by the media, but actively suppressed by government officials and the corporate media alike. These courageous insiders have been sidelined, gagged, hounded from their positions and ignored to the point where their stories are virtually unknown among the general public._

A Guide to the 9/11 Whistleblowers

Keep in mind that murderers and powerfully connected criminals, such as those capable of such an attack, would also quite easily be able to stifle and silence almost anyone who speaks out, like this air force officer-
Air Force officer disciplined for saying Bush allowed September 11 attacks


And we have the people on the actual 9-11 commission finally coming out and rejecting the report-Farmer and Kean and others..
The 9/11 Commission Rejects own Report as Based on Government Lies - Salem-News.Com

To the many who have died by mysterious circumstances-

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcRAxnsay58]YouTube - The 9/11 Whistle-Blowers Part I[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvay28lZiHU]YouTube - Mysterious Deaths of 9/11 Witnesses (MUST SEE)[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xca6o38ZNY]YouTube - 9/11 Key Witness Murdered? (Barry Jennings R.I.P.)[/ame]


----------



## Patriot911 (Apr 14, 2011)

9 + years after the attack and truthtards pretend nobody should have died in the intervening years.    When will they ever understand conspiracy theories are not proof of other conspiracy theories and that opinions are not evidence?  It is utterly retarded!


----------



## CandySlice (Apr 14, 2011)

Do you have any idea how easy it would be for the powers that be to stifle you? Why would they let pissants like you get close to uncovering the "truth" when they could just "stifle" you?

Another good point. What makes Jones think a nobody like himself would be allowed to run his mouth if he were actually on to something? Granted there are evil things going on in the world but 911 being an inside job isn't one of them. Sorry.


----------



## Mr. Jones (Apr 14, 2011)

CandySlice said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > Mr. Jones said:
> ...



So then why is irrational to think that 50-60 well placed figures in the positions of power and influence, that no one would dare question, could be involved?
You all overlook that the attacks were pulled off almost flawlessly, only one plane missed its target, the nations defenses were conducting terror training exercises on the same day, and despite being warned of impending attacks certain to come, from all over the world, and conducting more training exercises in the years past, with the same scenario, it was a relative success.  
So 50 -60 radicals pulled off the most sophisticated terror attack on the most heavily funded defenses in the world, with no assistance from any other source? You're nuts.

I believe terrorists were involved, but only as patsies and a diversion.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnihfVw5MOc]YouTube - CIA Veteran says Bin Laden is a diversion and not capable of 9/11 attacks[/ame]

And just who or what is Al Qaeda?

C.I.A. no al-qaeda ever existed - BBC documentary "the power of nightmares" | Polidics.com

Fabled Enemies (Super High Quality, full movie)


----------



## Mr. Jones (Apr 14, 2011)

TakeAStepBack said:


> It took 20 Al-Qaeda members. Hijackers with boxcutters, and the master of evil doers himself, Osama Bin Laden, to carry out their mission. Bin Laden was in his "underground super complex bunker". Complete with munitions, an HVAC system and a total global terror cell control room.
> 
> Remeber Rumsfeld's big talk on TV about the underground complex?



Don't forget he supervised all of this while going through dialysis, with the help of the US. Oh and I forgot to mention that it has been proven and documented that many of the ones involved, who were being tracked by the FBI, were trained in US flight schools, and military bases? Did I get that right?


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Apr 14, 2011)

CandySlice said:


> TakeAStepBack said:
> 
> 
> > Are you familiar with compartmentalization?
> ...



I wasn't attempting to prove another "conspiracy theory" by bringing up Roswell. What i WAS attempting to do, was show how easy it is to keep people's mouths shut.
The diffeerence between the events of 9/11 and "conspiracy theories" is that we have this thing here us humans use called science. But i digress, as I stated above, it makes no difference.

I do enjoy talking hypothesis as to what really happened that day, as my line of work happens to fall in direct line of structure. So it's of importance when there is a bald faced lie being perpetuated onto my science. BTW, my colleagues and I agree on most the points I bring up here. They simply keep it moving while I continue to question. If even half of the docile population would question things once in a while and become active, this type of shit wouldn't happen in the first place.


----------



## Mr. Jones (Apr 14, 2011)

CandySlice said:


> Do you have any idea how easy it would be for the powers that be to stifle you? Why would they let pissants like you get close to uncovering the "truth" when they could just "stifle" you?
> 
> Another good point. What makes Jones think a nobody like himself would be allowed to run his mouth if he were actually on to something? Granted there are evil things going on in the world but 911 being an inside job isn't one of them. Sorry.


 Ah but I just pass on what the real whistle blowers have made known  publicly already, and that is why there are plants, possibly like you to try and deal with forums posters like me and the others.


----------



## CandySlice (Apr 14, 2011)

creativedreams said:


> Here is a simple comprehensive example that depicts how the NIST investigation went when Bush appointed his personal friend to head the NIST Report and collapse investigation.
> 
> The Administration specifically instructed him to *NOT* look at the possibility in explosives in the collapses....even though there are countless witnesses live on the news who heard many explosions.





Congratulations, your dreams are indeed creative.


----------



## CandySlice (Apr 14, 2011)

Mr. Jones said:


> CandySlice said:
> 
> 
> > Do you have any idea how easy it would be for the powers that be to stifle you? Why would they let pissants like you get close to uncovering the "truth" when they could just "stifle" you?
> ...



WOW. Now that's a new one. I've never been suspected of being PART of a conspiracy theory before. I feel so special.
Sorry, Jones, to be part of a conspiracy I'd have to be at least minimally interested in it.


----------



## Mr. Jones (Apr 14, 2011)

CandySlice said:


> Patriot911 said:
> 
> 
> > TakeAStepBack said:
> ...



First of all, the entire governments version IS a conspiracy theory, complete with your secret meetings, and little plots, and secret docs, so (using your link-less quote), it is provided by them to give YOU a feeling of control, in an uncontrollable world. Those who actually are brave enough to look deeper into their conspiracy, are of stronger mind and intestinal fortitude, who aren't afraid of finding what you, who actually are the ones who have the 'powerless mind", are too brainwashed or scared to face.

You lack the will to research, and admit to yourself that this attack was not done by Al-Qaeda, alone, to actually think so is really quite naive.


----------



## CandySlice (Apr 14, 2011)

TakeAStepBack said:


> CandySlice said:
> 
> 
> > TakeAStepBack said:
> ...



What happened that day was a bunch of dingbat radical muslum retards, egged on by their equally radical dopey leader flew planes into buildings and blew them and several thousand good people to smithereens. The main reason being we didn't give Bin Laudin his fair share of credit for Afghanistan in the 80's and he felt miffed.


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Apr 14, 2011)

You go ahead and believe that.


----------



## Patriot911 (Apr 14, 2011)

Mr. Jones said:


> First of all, the entire governments version IS a conspiracy theory, complete with your secret meetings, and little plots, and secret docs, so (using your link-less quote), it is provided by them to give YOU a feeling of control, in an uncontrollable world. Those who actually are brave enough to look deeper into their conspiracy, are of stronger mind and intestinal fortitude, who aren't afraid of finding what you, who actually are the ones who have the 'powerless mind", are too brainwashed or scared to face.
> 
> You lack the will to research, and admit to yourself that this attack was not done by Al-Qaeda, alone, to actually think so is really quite naive.



The rationalizations of a VERY sick mind to justify their bullshit......    Keep it up, Jones!  I am laughing my ass off here!


----------



## Mr. Jones (Apr 14, 2011)

CandySlice said:


> TakeAStepBack said:
> 
> 
> > CandySlice said:
> ...



I was spot on with this one, a really really naive, and brainwashed stooge. You can tell this one also isn't here to discuss this out of concern for its nation, responds without showing any interest or rational about what was linked to it...
You really should educate yourself on the topic that you clearly show no knowledge about before coming here and making an utter fool of yourself.
The problem is a bunch of dingbats in this nation are so far gone in their ability to think for themselves, and realize what is being done to others in their name, and to themselves and families and children, while being robbed of their finances and liberties, that it is impossible
for them to resist the tyranny being imposed on them..they don't even realize what is happening to them.
Again please research the topic, the search function is your friend, as the many links provided to you as a courtesy.


----------



## Patriot911 (Apr 14, 2011)

TakeAStepBack said:


> You go ahead and believe that.



It's far better than anything you've posted, most of which is plagerized from other people in order for you to try and pretend you have intelligence.  Still smarting from being found out as nothing but a lowlife plagerizer?    Keep pretending you're not reading this.  This is fun!


----------



## CandySlice (Apr 14, 2011)

Mr. Jones said:


> CandySlice said:
> 
> 
> > Patriot911 said:
> ...



The quote is link-less because it's my own words, two pages back. (hence the quotation marks) It is not a lack of will, energy or any other quality that keeps me from taking these things too seriously but Occam's Razor that states 'All things being equal the simplest explanation is usually the correct one.'


----------



## Patriot911 (Apr 14, 2011)

Mr. Jones said:


> I was spot on with this one, a really really naive, and brainwashed stooge.


Talking about yourself again?  You should have more self esteem than that!  We all know you only go off conspiracy sites that are known liars themselves.  Acknowledging you have a problem is the first step!



			
				Mr. Jones said:
			
		

> You can tell this one also isn't here to discuss this out of concern for its nation, responds without showing any interest or rational about what was linked to it...


You mean like you actively trying to betray this great nation through sedition?  Why is it when someone stands up for the truth, you sick fucks pretend they are a traitor?  



			
				Mr. Jones said:
			
		

> You really should educate yourself on the topic that you clearly show no knowledge about before coming here and making an utter fool of yourself.


Kicked your ass is what Candyslice did!  Exposed your retarded theories for what they are; the silly rantings of infantile children.



			
				Mr. Jones said:
			
		

> The problem is a bunch of dingbats in this nation are so far gone in their ability to think for themselves, and realize what is being done to others in their name, and to themselves and families and children, while being robbed of their finances and liberties, that it is impossible for them to resist the tyranny being imposed on them..they don't even realize what is happening to them.


More senseless babblings from someone trying to come to grips with how big a loser he is that he has to pretend conspiracies are real just to give his pathetic life some kind of meaning.



			
				Mr. Jones said:
			
		

> Again please research the topic, the search function is your friend, as the many links provided to you as a courtesy.


Candyslice has.  You haven't.  That is proven every time you post.


----------



## CandySlice (Apr 14, 2011)

Mr. Jones said:


> CandySlice said:
> 
> 
> > TakeAStepBack said:
> ...



An UTTER fool, is it? Hey, if that's true you, my friend, are a three ringed circus. Come ON. Just because I don't wish to get in the Bunker with you and predict gloom and doom does not make me uneducated or foolish and it's been noted that when you have to stoop to name calling you have truly run out of information. Do yourself a favor (in front of all these people) and get to know me before you cast your final edict upon my knowledge OR my acumen.
Otherwise it is YOU that looks foolish.


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Apr 14, 2011)

You're misusing Occam's Razor. 
The principle is often inaccurately summarized as "the simplest explanation is most likely the correct one". This summary is misleading, however, since the principle is actually focused on shifting the burden of proof in discussions.[3] That is, the razor is a principle that suggests we should tend towards simpler theories until we can trade some simplicity for increased explanatory power. 
From wiki to make my life easier.

We're clearly passed that point with the events of 9/11.


----------



## Patriot911 (Apr 14, 2011)

TakeAStepBack said:


> You're misusing Occam's Razor.
> The principle is often inaccurately summarized as "the simplest explanation is most likely the correct one". This summary is misleading, however, since the principle is actually focused on shifting the burden of proof in discussions.[3] That is, the razor is a principle that suggests we should tend towards simpler theories until we can trade some simplicity for increased explanatory power.
> From wiki to make my life easier.
> 
> We're clearly passed that point with the events of 9/11.



Really?  All we have from you stupid fucks is opinion with no evidence to back it up.  Once you provide real evidence we can move the discussion past Occam's Razor.  Until then the wildly fantastic bullshit you liars come up with is still nothing more than science fiction and those who try and pretend it is true in order to push an agenda should be exposed as the liars they are.

In the mean time, you can't even tell us what it is you think happened, yet we're suppose to believe you despite Occam's Razor?    Come back when you can tell us what you think brought the towers down now that you claim explosives couldn't explain it.


----------



## CandySlice (Apr 14, 2011)

TakeAStepBack said:


> You're misusing Occam's Razor.
> The principle is often inaccurately summarized as "the simplest explanation is most likely the correct one". This summary is misleading, however, since the principle is actually focused on shifting the burden of proof in discussions.[3] That is, the razor is a principle that suggests we should tend towards simpler theories until we can trade some simplicity for increased explanatory power.
> From wiki to make my life easier.
> 
> We're clearly passed that point with the events of 9/11.



Exacerbated by trying to prove a negative, no less.


----------



## CandySlice (Apr 14, 2011)

Patriot911 said:


> Mr. Jones said:
> 
> 
> > I was spot on with this one, a really really naive, and brainwashed stooge.
> ...



Candyslice has indeed researched this subject. _Ad nauseum_ because on the face of it , it sounds like someone may have had a point. But deeper digging did find the chinks in the armor. And as I stated earlier, what I don't know about demolition and explosives and stress tests is more than made up for with my understanding of what makes people tick. So Occams Razor be damned I stick by my original statement.
MrJones, you are in dire need of some human contact and positive attention.


----------



## CandySlice (Apr 14, 2011)

TakeAStepBack said:


> You go ahead and believe that.



Thank you. Untill a better explanation comes along I'll keep the faith with this miniscule piece of info stacked pile upon pile on top of all the other evidence. Show me something to change my mind and I'll gladly take it into consideration. But just between you and me, right now you just look like MrJones' familiar.


----------



## Mr. Jones (Apr 14, 2011)

CandySlice said:


> Mr. Jones said:
> 
> 
> > CandySlice said:
> ...



Hey you've climbed in bed with the other OCT apologist, while showing no knowledge of the topic, this clearly shows your heard/mob mentality to be _with the crowd_ instead of someone who is more critically thinking, and who shows an actual interest of the points the other side makes. Didn't even take the time to view the links provided you were in such a rush to condemn. It easy to read folks like you.
BTW, I'm not predicting doom and gloom, I am pointing out that it is all around us, and the 9-11 attacks made it worse, wake up


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Apr 14, 2011)

CandySlice said:


> TakeAStepBack said:
> 
> 
> > You go ahead and believe that.
> ...



I'm fine with looking like Mr. Jones in this instance. Clearly he has his thinking cap on. There are also clear differences in opinon between what he believes and what I believe. However, we don't resort to shit flinging against each others discrepancies. Ultimately, our goal is the same. I don't buy the explosives story. Why? Because while it is a quick fix to a complex problem, it leaves a lot of holes that don't add up. 

What do i believe happened on 9/11? All I can do is guess. But one thing remains untainted and clear in my mind and in my knowledge - the official story smells worse than a industrial chicken farm. 

A new, completely independent, scientific investigation into the events of 9/11 needs to be conducted for the clarity of both the people and the science we model our infrastructures around.


----------



## Mr. Jones (Apr 14, 2011)

CandySlice said:


> Patriot911 said:
> 
> 
> > > *Candyslice has indeed researched this subject. Ad nauseum* because on the face of it , it sounds like someone may have had a point. But deeper digging did find the chinks in the armor. And as I stated earlier, what I don't know about demolition and explosives and stress tests is more than made up for with my understanding of what makes people tick. So Occams Razor be damned I stick by my original statement.
> ...


----------



## CandySlice (Apr 14, 2011)

Mr. Jones said:


> CandySlice said:
> 
> 
> > Mr. Jones said:
> ...



 Climbed in bed now! My my, we do overuse our catch phrases, don't we? Next I'll be 'Throwing you under the bus' or some such twaddle.
The problem is I DID read your posts, most for the fourth and fifth time via other sources. What you have presented here is not unique and hardly original. It's a tiresome rehash of the same goobledegook that's been disproved at least a thousand times.
And ps, this is a message board, I am little more than a soundbyte manifesting itself on your computer screen and there are no crowds here to join. ONE person here agrees with me, now if you'll excuse me I have to change the sheets in anticipation of the evenings posts.


----------



## Gamolon (Apr 14, 2011)

TakeAStepBack said:


> CandySlice said:
> 
> 
> > TakeAStepBack said:
> ...



And what goal is that? Making sure the government gets the rap no matter WHAT conspiracy theory is flung around? As long as it takes the fall for something?

You guys make me sick.

If you're after the truth like you claim, you'd ALL be arguing EVERY theory you think is bullshit not just the official story. 

Funny how there are a shitload of different theories out there, but the only one you bastards argue against is the official story. Why is that?

Yeah, you're after the truth. What a bunch of BS. All you truthers with halos over your heads fighting for the people. I guess only when it suits you.

Riggggghhtttttt...


----------



## CandySlice (Apr 14, 2011)

Gamolon said:


> TakeAStepBack said:
> 
> 
> > CandySlice said:
> ...



Okay, now TWO people agree with me.


----------



## CandySlice (Apr 14, 2011)

Mr. Jones said:


> CandySlice said:
> 
> 
> > Patriot911 said:
> ...


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Apr 14, 2011)

Yeah, except there you go again Gamolon, putting words into my mouth and thoughts into my head. The reason you're on ignore in the first place. 

In the same post you ask what the goal IS, I said what it is. I also said that I dont buy the explosives story.  You're the brightest bulb in the room, dude. Maybe you should read my post before you jump the shark and face plant the dock next time.


----------



## CandySlice (Apr 14, 2011)

Gamolon said:


> TakeAStepBack said:
> 
> 
> > CandySlice said:
> ...



_If you're after the truth like you claim, you'd ALL be arguing EVERY theory you think is bullshit not just the official story. _

It's the PET theory theory.


----------



## CandySlice (Apr 14, 2011)

TakeAStepBack said:


> Yeah, except there you go again Gamolon, putting words into my mouth and thoughts into my head. The reason you're on ignore in the first place.
> 
> In the same post you ask what the goal IS, I said what it is. I also said that I dont buy the explosives story.  You're the brightest bulb in the room, dude. Maybe you should read my post before you jump the shark and face plant the dock next time.



Well at least that's something. PS, love the Happy Days ref.


----------



## CandySlice (Apr 14, 2011)

TakeAStepBack said:


> CandySlice said:
> 
> 
> > TakeAStepBack said:
> ...




I can live with that.


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Apr 14, 2011)

I've never once on this board laid claim to any theory. Theories are simply that - theories. The problem with conforming to one theory on a situation like this is, it tends to bring a bias agenda towards the facts and evidence. 

The government is going to have to take some blame here. As there independent team has fraudulently swayed evidence and science to conclude its investigation from a bias platform. That is simply obvious and direct. Whether this was an insided job or not.

Again, what i will continue to push for is a new investigation where ALL of the information is made available to an independent party to assess. Denying that ability only makes it look like there is something to hide.


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Apr 14, 2011)

and now I got a meeting with the Bobs. 

Peace.


----------



## CandySlice (Apr 14, 2011)

Mr. Jones said:


> CandySlice said:
> 
> 
> > Patriot911 said:
> ...


----------



## Patriot911 (Apr 14, 2011)

CandySlice said:


> You are just one nasty little twit when you don't get your way, huh?



He's a nasty little twit regardless of whether or not he gets his way.  Dropped about a dozen times too many on his head when he was a child (yesterday) is my guess.


----------



## Gamolon (Apr 14, 2011)

TakeAStepBack said:


> Yeah, except there you go again Gamolon, putting words into my mouth and thoughts into my head. The reason you're on ignore in the first place.
> 
> In the same post you ask what the goal IS, I said what it is. I also said that I dont buy the explosives story.  You're the brightest bulb in the room, dude. Maybe you should read my post before you jump the shark and face plant the dock next time.



Are you out there arguing against the explosives conspiracy theory like you are the official story? Are you putting people like eots and Mr. Jones on ignore when they use the same tactics as you claim I do? 

If you aren't then you're nothing more than a hypocrite. 

If you are arguing ALL theories with the fervor that you do the official story, please provide me links so I can see and I'll issue you an apology. Until that time, I stand by my assessment that all you care about is the government taking the fall no matter WHAT the conspiracy. 

All your supposed "truth finding" is nothing more than hypocritical bullshit.

So show me where you have debated Mr. Jones, eots, CreativeDreams, Christophera, etc.


----------



## CandySlice (Apr 14, 2011)

Patriot911 said:


> CandySlice said:
> 
> 
> > You are just one nasty little twit when you don't get your way, huh?
> ...





Well, enough of that. This is what kills me about the tin foil hat crowd. They find it hard to stay focused when you question them and they always sink to the lowest common denominator in lieu of discussion. Wonder if he talks to his family like that? Or strangers on the street? Whatdaya wanna bet if he does he spends a lot of time picking himself up off the floor.


----------



## Liability (Apr 14, 2011)

TakeAStepBack said:


> You're misusing Occam's Razor.
> The principle is often inaccurately summarized as "the simplest explanation is most likely the correct one". This summary is misleading, however, since the principle is actually focused on shifting the burden of proof in discussions.[3] That is, the razor is a principle that suggests we should tend towards simpler theories until we can trade some simplicity for increased explanatory power.
> From wiki to make my life easier.
> 
> We're clearly passed that point with the events of 9/11.



Neither clear nor accurate.

We haven't even come CLOSE to "that" point.


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Apr 14, 2011)

Exactly the point.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Apr 14, 2011)

Now wait a minute.

 Takeashit doesn't think it was explosives? 

But s/he knows it wasn't the planes....

And s/he knows that the Government had to have done it.....

But now wants us to guess at how?????


----------



## CandySlice (Apr 14, 2011)

SFC Ollie said:


> Now wait a minute.
> 
> Takeashit doesn't think it was explosives?
> 
> ...



This is the impression I'm getting, Ollie. It's all very mysterious.


----------



## Patriot911 (Apr 14, 2011)

CandySlice said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > Now wait a minute.
> ...



Yes, but Takeashit doesn't have a _THEORY_.  He just knows it wasn't explosives.  Or an unassisted collapse.  

Maybe he should look up the word theory.  Like everything else, he's wrong on this as well.


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Apr 14, 2011)

There go the rump rangers putting words into my mouth and attempting to smear my character. 

Dont you two dude ranchers have traffic to play in or something?

Based on the quote being shown from the 60 year old remedial guy.

I never said that I KNOW the government had something to do with it. I've also said a few times over that I dont BUY the explosives theory. But, it hasn't been put to the test and there are people that  claim to have evidence and that it holds merit. So it should probably be put to the test.

Yes, I know "it wasn't the planes" because the mere premise is proposterous at best. I'm not going to jump back through the fruit loop with you two rump rangers on it though. We've already covered that ground. I dont have the time to entertain you hicks.

And i never wanted anyone to guess at anything. You truly are remedial, Ollie. It's actually sad.


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Apr 14, 2011)

This message is hidden because Patriot911 is on your ignore list.  


I'm sorry, did you say something? 

Anyway, I have an offsite meeting and dinner plans downtown. You two hillbillies try to at least get out of the basement for  afew hours,, mkay?


Peace.


----------



## Patriot911 (Apr 14, 2011)

TakeAStepBack said:


> There go the rump rangers putting words into my mouth and attempting to smear my character.


You have to actually HAVE some character before someone can smear it, Takeashit.  



			
				TakeAStepBack said:
			
		

> Dont you two dude ranchers have traffic to play in or something?
> 
> Based on the quote being shown from the 60 year old remedial guy.
> 
> I never said that I KNOW the government had something to do with it.


Yes.  You've never actually come out and said it.  But if it wasn't a natural collapse, then the government is covering it up.  Why would the government cover up something it had nothing to do with and how do you organize such a massive coverup without some kind of preparation?



			
				TakeAStepBack said:
			
		

> I've also said a few times over that I dont BUY the explosives theory.


You also don't buy the natural collapse theory.  Which means you reject everything and offer nothing.  Makes you as useless as tits on a bull.



			
				TakeAStepBack said:
			
		

> But, it hasn't been put to the test and there are people that  claim to have evidence and that it holds merit.


Yet not one of them has actually PRODUCED said evidence.  I love how you truthtards have absolute faith in your fellow truthtards' honesty.  



			
				TakeAStepBack said:
			
		

> So it should probably be put to the test.


Shouldn't you weigh the evidence first?  Or do you always go off halfcocked?  Oh wait.  Sorry.  Forgot who I was talking to!  



			
				TakeAStepBack said:
			
		

> Yes, I know "it wasn't the planes" because the mere premise is proposterous at best.


So we're suppose to just take your opinion and believe it as unassailable fact?    I don't think so.  You've claimed to be some kind of expert in the field, yet you couldn't even defend your own bullshit.  You had to cut and paste from Judy Wood's bullshit, and then you had to run away when the shit hit the fan.



			
				TakeAStepBack said:
			
		

> I'm not going to jump back through the fruit loop with you two rump rangers on it though.


You haven't jumped the first time, Takeashit.  Plagerism of someone else's work, especially one that has been so thoroughly debunked, isn't jumping unless you are talking about off a cliff.



			
				TakeAStepBack said:
			
		

> We've already covered that ground. I dont have the time to entertain you hicks.


No, you ran away like the chickenshit that you are.  Everyone can see that.  No need to pretend you're not a piece of shit pretender.



			
				TakeAStepBack said:
			
		

> And i never wanted anyone to guess at anything. You truly are remedial, Ollie. It's actually sad.


  Someone bashing another's intelligence by misusing a word is just to rich!

Ollie is "remedial"?!?  Apparently Takeashit thinks this is somehow a gauge of Ollie's intelligence.  A shame remedial isn't a word you use to describe someone's intelligence.


re·me·di·al
&#8194; &#8194;[ri-mee-dee-uhl] 
adjective 
1. affording remedy;  tending to remedy  something. 
2. intended to correct or improve one's skill in a specified field: remedial math. 

  Thanks for the laughs, Takeashit!


----------



## CandySlice (Apr 14, 2011)

Patriot911 said:


> TakeAStepBack said:
> 
> 
> > There go the rump rangers putting words into my mouth and attempting to smear my character.
> ...



Double take did-I-just-see-that moment of the day.


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Apr 14, 2011)

remedial education:

Postsecondary remediation is a controversial issue. As Bahr (Bahr 2008a, pp. 420421) explains, "On one hand, it fills an important niche in U.S. higher education by providing opportunities to rectify disparities generated in primary education and secondary schooling, to develop the minimum skills deemed necessary for functional participation in the economy and the democracy, and to acquire the prerequisite competencies that are crucial for negotiating college-level coursework.

So it looks like Ollie doesn't have to stand alone.


----------



## CandySlice (Apr 14, 2011)

TakeAStepBack said:


> remedial education:
> 
> Postsecondary remediation is a controversial issue. As Bahr (Bahr 2008a, pp. 420&#8211;421) explains, "On one hand, it fills an important niche in U.S. higher education by providing opportunities to rectify disparities generated in primary education and secondary schooling, to develop the minimum skills deemed necessary for functional participation in the economy and the democracy, and to acquire the prerequisite competencies that are crucial for negotiating college-level coursework.
> 
> So it looks like Ollie doesn't have to stand alone.



Remedial is  not a noun. You may NEED remediation but you can't BE remediated.

But thanks for playing. And I loved the big words.


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Apr 14, 2011)




----------



## CandySlice (Apr 14, 2011)

TakeAStepBack said:


>




My grandaddy always said if someone has to use a lot of big words to explain something they are probably trying to sell you something you neither need or want.


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Apr 14, 2011)

is a big word alright.


----------



## CandySlice (Apr 14, 2011)

No. But this mischkadenze is a mouthful.

_remedial education:

Postsecondary remediation is a controversial issue. As Bahr (Bahr 2008a, pp. 420&#8211;421) explains, "On one hand, it fills an important niche in U.S. higher education by providing opportunities to rectify disparities generated in primary education and secondary schooling, to develop the minimum skills deemed necessary for functional participation in the economy and the democracy, and to acquire the prerequisite competencies that are crucial for negotiating college-level coursework.

So it looks like Ollie doesn't have to stand alone. _


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Apr 14, 2011)

Surely. Good luck.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Apr 14, 2011)

TakeAStepBack said:


> There go the rump rangers putting words into my mouth and attempting to smear my character.
> 
> Dont you two dude ranchers have traffic to play in or something?
> 
> ...



Holy Shit,  Curvelight is back!!!!


----------

