# Flight 93 crash fantasy



## saiweril (Nov 6, 2010)

Some board members think most of a 155 foot jet buried deep in the ground... 







and only left a 10 foot deep crater...






along with thinking that the relatively few pieces of debris left on the ground came from the cockpit that had broken off!



> Coroner remembers Sept. 11 - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review
> *Miller* recalled his arrival at the crash site about 20 minutes after the plane plummeted to the earth and described how the aircraft came down at a 45-degree angle. He *explained how the cockpit broke off at impact, bouncing into a wooded area* of about 60 acres. The resulting fireball scorched about eight acres of trees, he said. *The remainder of the plane burrowed deep into the ground*, creating a long, narrow crater.



Talk about


----------



## candycorn (Nov 6, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Some board members think most of a 155 foot jet buried deep in the ground...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You're troubled that you're stupid.  Its probably not your fault.  I blame the schools.


----------



## the machine rag (Nov 6, 2010)

Ok, some of the folks on the plane made cell-phone calls to their loved ones explaining their plight. These folks are now missing presumed dead as their relatives will confirm. Now, if the plane didn't crash then presumably the people who were on the plane are alive somewhere which will come as a shock to their loved ones. And if the plane didn't crash then where is it? The Bermuda triangle perhaps??


----------



## eots (Nov 7, 2010)

the machine rag said:


> Ok, some of the folks on the plane made cell-phone calls to their loved ones explaining their plight. These folks are now missing presumed dead as their relatives will confirm. Now, if the plane didn't crash then presumably the people who were on the plane are alive somewhere which will come as a shock to their loved ones. And if the plane didn't crash then where is it? The Bermuda triangle perhaps??



it seems possible it as blown out of the sky

http://www.pilotsfor911truth.org/


----------



## eots (Nov 7, 2010)

Interview With LtCol. Jeff Latas Former USAF Accident Investigation President


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Nov 7, 2010)

eots said:


> the machine rag said:
> 
> 
> > Ok, some of the folks on the plane made cell-phone calls to their loved ones explaining their plight. These folks are now missing presumed dead as their relatives will confirm. Now, if the plane didn't crash then presumably the people who were on the plane are alive somewhere which will come as a shock to their loved ones. And if the plane didn't crash then where is it? The Bermuda triangle perhaps??
> ...



And yet something like 95 percent of the aircraft was found at the crash site, the cockpit in the woods and the remainder in the ground at the crash site. All the DNA and bodies were discovered there as well.

There is absolutely no radio traffic to support the claim that a US Air force jet shot down the air craft. No evidence in the chain of command that any such order was ever issued. No radar logs placing US Aircraft near the downed Jet before it went down.

If an American Jet shot it down, that would mean the two pilots in the team sent knew about. The radio operator at the air traffic command center knew about, his supervisor knew about. And a long line of chain of command from that command center to the Highest levels of Government knew about it.

There would be logs, radio records, radar records, telephone conversations all as evidence, destroying all that would require a whole new list of people in the know that something was at least fishy going on. Yet 9 years later not a soul has come forward.


----------



## eots (Nov 7, 2010)

RetiredGySgt said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > the machine rag said:
> ...



ya who cares what two different expresidents of the air crash investigation board has to say when we have RGS opinion


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Nov 7, 2010)

eots said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



You mean two men that had ZERO to go on as they were not at all involved in the investigation? Those two? How about you explain how all the people involved in a cover up have been kept silent for 9 years?

Don't forget to explain away the absence of any evidence on the ground the plane was shot down. Or the absence of any evidence in the reconstruction effort. All involving even more people.


----------



## eots (Nov 7, 2010)

RetiredGySgt said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > RetiredGySgt said:
> ...


----------



## eots (Nov 7, 2010)

this is excellent for anyone that really wants to simply take a honest examination of the data 



*Pandora's Black Box - Chapter Two - Flight Of American 77
148 - 3 years ago
Pilotsfor911truth.org presents its first full documentary based on the American 77 Flight Data Recorder as provided by the NTSB following the full flight in real time as it happens in the *


Interview With LtCol. Jeff Latas Former USAF Accident Investigation President


----------



## saiweril (Nov 7, 2010)

the machine rag said:


> Now, if the plane didn't crash then presumably the people who were on the plane are alive somewhere which will come as a shock to their loved ones. And if the plane didn't crash then where is it? The Bermuda triangle perhaps??


Just as I said in my OP, _some board members think most of a 155 foot jet buried deep in the ground and only left a 10 foot deep crater..._


----------



## saiweril (Nov 7, 2010)

RetiredGySgt said:


> And yet something like 95 percent of the aircraft was found at the crash site, the cockpit in the woods and the remainder in the ground at the crash site.


Yep, proved my point again.  

Hey, care to explain how the cockpit remained above ground when the dirt field this alleged crashed happened into was reportedly so uncompacted that the rest of the plane managed to bury through it some 45 feet down below?

This is gonna be good.


----------



## Fizz (Nov 7, 2010)

saiweril said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> > And yet something like 95 percent of the aircraft was found at the crash site, the cockpit in the woods and the remainder in the ground at the crash site.
> ...



so you are claiming everything but the cockpit was buried underground?


----------



## Fizz (Nov 7, 2010)

eots said:


> how has bin laden and crew kept their location and fate secret from worldwide intel after 9 years ?



by not literally depending on THOUSANDS of people to keep a secret. 

i cant believe you are so fucking dumb that you need something that obvious pointed out to you.


----------



## elvis (Nov 7, 2010)

eots said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


----------



## saiweril (Nov 7, 2010)

Fizz said:


> so you are claiming everything but the cockpit was buried underground?


I'm not claiming it, the _government_ is claiming it (your side)!  (see my OP)

, isn't it?


----------



## eots (Nov 7, 2010)

elvis said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > RetiredGySgt said:
> ...


----------



## daveman (Nov 7, 2010)

RetiredGySgt said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > the machine rag said:
> ...


Not to mention the ammo troops that loaded 2 AIM-9s on the fighter and unloaded only 1.  They keep careful track of missiles by serial number.


----------



## Obamerican (Nov 7, 2010)

daveman said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


WOW!!! Then give us the missing serial number or are you just pulling this one out of your ass too?


----------



## eots (Nov 7, 2010)

Obamerican said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > RetiredGySgt said:
> ...



oh bullshit... we have recordings destroyed by the faa ..we have unrecovered
 black boxes..we have missing trillions from the pentagon


----------



## Obamerican (Nov 7, 2010)

eots said:


> Obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


And we have idiots like you that are SOOOOOOOOOOOOO much smarter than everyone else. Idiot.


----------



## slackjawed (Nov 7, 2010)




----------



## eots (Nov 7, 2010)

Obamerican said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Obamerican said:
> ...



apparently smarter than you,which is evident in the fact it cause me great concern when two ex presidents of he U.S air crash investigators board and several military crash investigators and parts authoritys criticize the investigation to the magnitude they have


----------



## Obamerican (Nov 7, 2010)

eots said:


> Obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


WOW!! You think you're smarter than me because YOU believe other people? How does that work? If I think Hitler was full of shit but YOU think that the Russians were right than that makes you right? Is that how that works?

People have OPINIONS!!!!!!!!! That doesn't make them right! Grow up, little man. BTW your pony tail looks like shit.


----------



## eots (Nov 7, 2010)

Obamerican said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Obamerican said:
> ...



No I am smarter. because I realize the significance of experts at this level expressing such controversial opinions and do not require strawmen or the  feel the need to evoke of Hitlers name in a flailing attempt to distract from logic and reason


----------



## Obamerican (Nov 7, 2010)

eots said:


> Obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


Sorry. I can't take you seriously. You come across as a pot head who has "reality" issues. Have a bag of Doritos on me.


----------



## eots (Nov 7, 2010)

obamerican said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > obamerican said:
> ...



and you come across as a simple minded person given to little imaginings


----------



## eots (Nov 7, 2010)

these guys smarter than you as well



[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBJXzXW_o2E[/ame]


----------



## eots (Nov 7, 2010)

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQlEjkRskdA&feature=related[/ame]


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Nov 8, 2010)

eots said:


> elvis said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


----------



## eots (Nov 8, 2010)

eots said:


> elvis said:
> 
> 
> > millions in reward money and yet no one speaks ? ...not one word
> ...


----------



## elvis (Nov 8, 2010)

It's true.  There was a malfunction with the quoting function.


----------



## daveman (Nov 8, 2010)

Obamerican said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > RetiredGySgt said:
> ...


You're missing my point.  IF the jet was shot down, there would be a missing serial number and ammo troops who would have a piece of the conspiracy puzzle.

But it wasn't, so there isn't.


----------



## Mini 14 (Nov 8, 2010)

Interesting that the quote was mistakenly attributed to Elvis (which I've seen happen before), because I've been waiting since this thread began for one of the twoofers to tell us that the plane was registered with TSA as "The Lisa Marie"


----------



## saiweril (Nov 8, 2010)

Let me know when you guys want to stop derailing this thread and get back on-topic about the Flight 93 crash being pure fantasy.


----------



## the machine rag (Nov 8, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Let me know when you guys want to stop derailing this thread and get back on-topic about the Flight 93 crash being pure fantasy.



It is the conspiracy theorists like you who are the nut-jobs. We are expected to believe a cover-up involving thousands of individuals..lol..Moreover, not a single individual amongst these thousands of individuals has come forward to expose the supposed conspiracy - this within a revelationary US culture of Jerry Springer-esque proportions.

You people are not only lunatics but you are disrespectful to all the families who lost love ones at the hands of a bunch of terrorists....Shame on you.


----------



## eots (Nov 9, 2010)

the machine rag said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > Let me know when you guys want to stop derailing this thread and get back on-topic about the Flight 93 crash being pure fantasy.
> ...



*wow so your programing took well ...so where is bin laden again ? ..oh ya right...its a secret*


[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtU69oWVNJY[/ame]


*PS...FUCK YOU*


----------



## Fizz (Nov 9, 2010)

eots said:


> Obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



so tell us, you fucking moron, how many of the people you are trying to use to support your view think that the flight 93 crash was a fantasy?

you really are a fucking idiot!!


----------



## Fizz (Nov 9, 2010)

eots said:


> *wow so your programing took well ...so where is bin laden again ? ..oh ya right...its a secret*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


exactly how does not being able to find the criminal change who did the crime?


----------



## the machine rag (Nov 9, 2010)

Fizz said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > *wow so your programing took well ...so where is bin laden again ? ..oh ya right...its a secret*
> ...



Remember, 9-11 conspiracy theorists are irrational paronoid lunatics.


----------



## eots (Nov 9, 2010)

Fizz said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Obamerican said:
> ...



this sentence is not coherent


----------



## eots (Nov 9, 2010)

Fizz said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > *wow so your programing took well ...so where is bin laden again ? ..oh ya right...its a secret*
> ...



either is this one


----------



## eots (Nov 9, 2010)

the machine rag said:


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



well then some of the  most sensitive areas of national security have been headed by paranoid lunatics
Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report


----------



## Bullfighter (Nov 9, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Some board members think most of a 155 foot jet buried deep in the ground...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
There was a second jet hidden in the grassy knoll. As the first jet flew past the book depository, the second jet flew into the front of the first jet causing the first jet to roll back and to the left.


----------



## Bullfighter (Nov 9, 2010)

the machine rag said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > Let me know when you guys want to stop derailing this thread and get back on-topic about the Flight 93 crash being pure fantasy.
> ...


 
Exactly! Mexicans dressed as Muslims (they all look alike) did the killings. It drew the attention of the American people away from the Mexican border so they can sneak in millions of illegals in order to take over the US government.


----------



## eots (Nov 9, 2010)

Bullfighter said:


> the machine rag said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...



all mindless babel to distract from the fact no less than two ex presidents of the U.S air crash investigation board have called the report  a cover up of the actual events


----------



## Bullfighter (Nov 9, 2010)

eots said:


> Bullfighter said:
> 
> 
> > the machine rag said:
> ...


 
And I'll bet they wrote books about it too!

CHE-CHING!!


----------



## eots (Nov 9, 2010)

Bullfighter said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Bullfighter said:
> ...



of course you would your whole belief system is based on incorrect assumptions and "I bets"..but you would be completely wrong


----------



## Bullfighter (Nov 9, 2010)

eots said:


> [
> of course you would your whole belief system is based on incorrect assumptions and "I bets"..but you would be completely wrong


 

Based on your ability to contact the spirit world?


----------



## eots (Nov 9, 2010)

Bullfighter said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > [
> ...



no based on the fact they have not written any books and it was a feeble attempt to not directly address their concerns and instead make up assumptions to try and attack their credibility


----------



## MandyInTN (Nov 9, 2010)

Hi All.

Long time reader, first time poster.

I came across this thread and had to register when I click through to the links for Pilots For 9/11 Truth.

I have a bit of knowledge in aviation and I found this very interesting. This is based on the Flight Data Recorder information for United 93. (I've removed the source url's as I'm not allowed to post them till I have 15 posts.)

PRESS RELEASE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

12/22/07

PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH


UNITED 93 DATA PROVIDED BY US GOVERNMENT DOES NOT SUPPORT OBSERVED EVENTS

Pilots for 9/11 Truth, an international organization of pilots and aviation professionals, petitioned the National Transportation and Safety Board (NTSB) via the Freedom of Information Act to obtain United Flight 93 Flight Data Recorder information, consisting of a Comma Separated Value (CSV) file and Flight Path Animation, allegedly derived from Flight 93 Flight Data Recorder (FDR). The data provided by the NTSB contradict observed events in several significant ways:

   1. The NTSB Flight Path Animation approach path and altitude does not support observations.
   2. All Altitude data on the northern approach contradicts witnesses published by the New York Times.
   3. Witness observations of approach path contradict northern approach as described by Popular Mechanics and the US Govt. Several witnesses observed the aircraft approaching from southeast over Indian Lake and from the south prior to witnessing explosion. Parts found in New Baltimore, 8 miles southeast of crater is a direct contradiction to the northern approach claimed by the US Govt.
   4. Environmental Protection Agency reports no soil contamination of jet fuel after testing 5,000-6,000 yards of earth including 3 ground wells. Smoke plume photographed by a witness does not suggest a jet fuel rich explosion.  
   5. Impact angle according to Flight Data Recorder does not support an almost vertical impact as the govt story and crater suggests.

In May, 2007, members of Pilots for 9/11 Truth received these documents from the NTSB and began a close analysis of the data they contain. After expert review and cross check, Pilots for 9/11 Truth has concluded that the information in these NTSB documents does not support, and in some instances factually contradicts, the official government position that United Airlines Flight 93 created the impact crater as reported, in Somerset County, PA on the morning of September 11, 2001 .According to the US Govt, United Airlines Flight 93 approached Somerset County from the North-Northwest at a high altitude on the morning of September 11, 2001 .  However, many witnesses contradict altitude as well as approach path. Also according to reports, and as the impact crater suggests, United Airlines Flight 93 impacted terrain at an almost vertical 90 degree angle, while the Flight Data Recorder shows a 35 degree angle with up-sloping terrain, further reducing impact angle.

The information provided by the US Government does not support reports of United Airlines Flight 93 approach, impact angles, and lack of jet fuel at Somerset Country, PA.

Pilots for 9/11 Truth is committed to discovering the truth surrounding the events of September 11, 2001 . We have contacted both the NTSB and the FBI regarding these and other inconsistencies. To date, they have refused to comment on, correct, refute, retract or offer side-letters that might explain the discrepancies between what they claim are the data extracted from the FDR of United Flight 93 and the events observed. .As concerned citizens and professionals in the aviation industry, Pilots for 9/11 Truth asks, why have these discrepancies not been addressed by agencies within the United States Government? Pilots for 9/11 Truth takes the position that an official government inquiry into these discrepancies is warranted and long overdue. We call upon our fellow citizens to write to their Congressional representatives to inform them of these discrepancies and call for an immediate investigation into this matter. For more information and in depth analysis please visit pilotsfor911truth.org.

Members of Pilots For 9/11 Truth at pilotsfor911truth(dot)org(slash)core​
Here are just some of their members. (Many more in the link above.)

Captain Russ Wittenberg (ret)
30,000+ Total Flight Time
707, 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, 777, DC-8, L-1049, Learjet 24/25, L-188
Ground Instructor, Advanced Ground Instructor, Instrument Instructor, Flight Engineer Turbojet
Aircraft Dispatcher
Pan Am, United
United States Air Force (ret)
Over 100 Combat Missions Flown
Command time in:
- N591UA (Aircraft dispatched as United 93)
- N612UA (Aircraft dispatched as United 175)

Captain Ross Aimer
UAL Ret.
CEO, Aviation Experts LLC
40 years and 30,000 hrs.
BS Aero
A&P Mech.
B-777/767/757/747/737/727/720/707, DC-10/-9/-8 Type ratings
Command time in:
- N591UA (Aircraft dispatched as United 93)
- N612UA (Aircraft dispatched as United 175)


Commander Ralph Rotten Kolstad
23,000 hours
27 years in the airlines
B757/767 for 13 years mostly international Captain with American Airlines.
20 years US Navy flying fighters off aircraft carriers, TopGun twice
civilian pilot flying gliders, light airplanes and warbirds
Command time in:
- N644AA (Aircraft dispatched as American 77)
- N334AA (Aircraft dispatched as American 11)

John Lear
Son of Bill Lear
(Founder, creator of the Lear Jet Corporation)
More than 40 years of Flying
19,000+ TT
23 Type ratings
Flight experience includes 707, DC-8, 727, L10-11

Jeff Latas
-Over 20 years in the USAF
--USAF Accident investigation Board President
--Flew the F-111, T38, and F-15E
--Combat experience in the F-15E includes Desert Storm and four tours of duty in Northern and Southern Watch
--Weapons Requirements Officer, USAF HQ, Pentagon
--Standard and Evaluations Flight Examiner, Command level
-Currently Captain for JetBlue Airways

Guy S. Razer, LtCol, USAF (Ret)
3,500+ Hours Total Flight Time
F-15E/C, F-111A/D/E/F/EF, F-16, F-18, B-1, Mig-29, SU-22, T-37/38, Various Cvilian Prop
Combat Time: Operation Northern Watch
USAF Fighter Weapons School Instructor
NATO Tactical Leadership Program Instructor/Mission Coordinator
USAF Material Command Weapons Development Test Pilot
Combat Support Coordination Team 2 Airpower Coordinator, South Korea
All Service Combat Identification Evaluation Team Operations Officer
Boeing F-22 Pilot Instructor
MS Aeronautical Studies, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University

Dwain Deets
MS Physics, MS Eng
Former Director, Aerospace Projects, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center
Served as Director, Research Engineering Division at Dryden
Recipient of the NASA Exceptional Service Award
Presidential Meritorious Rank Award in the Senior Executive Service (1988)
Selected presenter of the Wright Brothers Lectureship in Aeronautics
Associate Fellow - American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA)
Included in "Who's Who in Science and Engineering" 1993 - 2000
Former Chairman of the Aerospace Control and Guidance Systems
- Committee of the Society of Automotive Engineers
Former Member, AIAA Committee on Society and Aerospace Technology
37 year NASA career

Lt. Colonel Shelton F. Lankford
United States Marine Corps (ret)
A-4 Skyhawk, KC-130 (10,000+ Hours)
S-2, T-1, F9F, F-11, OV-10, T-2J
303 Combat Missions


----------



## eots (Nov 9, 2010)

yes Indeed..


----------



## Fizz (Nov 10, 2010)

eots said:


> Fizz said:
> 
> 
> > so tell us, you fucking moron, how many of the people you are trying to use to support your view think that the flight 93 crash was a fantasy?
> ...



it isn't a sentence. it's two sentences. both are coherent. perhaps you are not. put down the bong. sorry i used more than 4 words in a row. i know it confuses you when that happens.


----------



## Fizz (Nov 10, 2010)

eots said:


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



if you are going to criticize my english you better make sure your english is correct first, moron.

the word you are looking for is "neither" not "either"!!


----------



## eots (Nov 10, 2010)

Fizz said:


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



i was not criticizing your knowledge of English words, I was criticizing your ability to put these English words into a coherent sentence


----------



## Obamerican (Nov 10, 2010)

eots said:


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


Huh????????????


----------



## candycorn (Nov 10, 2010)

MandyInTN said:


> Hi All.
> 
> Long time reader, first time poster.
> 
> ...



Explain how the DNA from the passengers got there.
Explain why Flight 77 was hijacked and then not used like planes in NYC were.

Just for starters. 

Get busy.


----------



## The Infidel (Nov 10, 2010)

I guess when all the witnesses to the fake moon landing come out... we will see the conspirators in this idiocy come forward too.

Wow.... I want the time I wasted here back.... who do I talk to? (mods?)


----------



## eots (Nov 10, 2010)

candycorn said:


> mandyintn said:
> 
> 
> > hi all.
> ...



I believe it is far more relevant to explain why two former air crash investigation board presidents have condemned the fbi investigation and conclusions along with several military air crash investigators..I would also think a more relevant question would be to explain why the media likes to refer to 9/11 truth as "rosie o'donnells wacky theories" instead of the serious concerns of top air crash investigators ..ect


----------



## eots (Nov 10, 2010)

the infidel said:


> i guess when all the witnesses to the fake moon landing come out... We will see the conspirators in this idiocy come forward too.
> 
> Wow.... I want the time i wasted here back.... Who do i talk to? (mods?)



the idiocy would be if several astronauts came forward to say the moon landing was fake and I simply ridiculed and dismissed them...


----------



## Fizz (Nov 11, 2010)

eots said:


> the infidel said:
> 
> 
> > i guess when all the witnesses to the fake moon landing come out... We will see the conspirators in this idiocy come forward too.
> ...



so how many people have come out and said they were in on the plot but were dismissed, idiot?


----------



## MandyInTN (Nov 11, 2010)

candycorn said:


> Explain how the DNA from the passengers got there.



How do you know the DNA was found where the govt said? Please provide full chain of custody and name. The govt refuses to provide such information.

Also, these articles may be of some interest.

Google - DNA Can Be Fabricated

(sorry, can't post url's yet)



> Explain why Flight 77 was hijacked and then not used like planes in NYC were.



9/11: PENTAGON AIRCRAFT HIJACK IMPOSSIBLE
_FLIGHT DECK DOOR CLOSED FOR ENTIRE FLIGHT _

_(PilotsFor911Truth.org) - Newly decoded data provided by an independent researcher and computer programmer from Australia exposes alarming evidence that the reported hijacking aboard American Airlines Flight 77 was impossible to have existed. A data parameter labeled "FLT DECK DOOR", cross checks with previously decoded data obtained by Pilots For 9/11 Truth from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) through the Freedom Of Information Act.

On the morning of September 11, 2001, American Airlines Flight 77 departed Dulles International Airport bound for Los Angeles at 8:20 am Eastern Time. According to reports and data, a hijacking took place between 08 :50 :54 and 08:54:11[1] in which the hijackers allegedly crashed the aircraft into the Pentagon at 09:37:45. Reported by CNN, according to Ted Olson, wife Barbara Olson had called him from the reported flight stating, "...all passengers and flight personnel, including the pilots, were herded to the back of the plane by armed hijackers..."[2]. However, according to Flight Data provided by the NTSB, the Flight Deck Door was never opened in flight. How were the hijackers able to gain access to the cockpit, remove the pilots, and navigate the aircraft to the Pentagon if the Flight Deck Door remained closed?[3]

Founded in August 2006, Pilots For 9/11 Truth is a growing organization of aviation professionals from around the globe. The organization has analyzed Data provided by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) for the Pentagon Attack, the events in Shanksville, PA and the World Trade Center attack. The data does not support the government story. The NTSB/FBI refuse to comment. Pilots For 9/11 Truth do not offer theory or point blame at this point in time. However, there is a growing mountain of conflicting information and data in which government agencies and officials along with Mainstream Media refuse to acknowledge. Pilots For 9/11 Truth Core member list continues to grow.​_
Go to Pilotsfor911truth.org for sources and to download the data provided by the National Transportation Safety Board, or goto ntsb.gov to request your own directly.


----------



## Fizz (Nov 11, 2010)

MandyInTN said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Explain how the DNA from the passengers got there.
> ...



another fucking idiot already posting shit thats already been debunked a million times.....

here's a clue for you. flight 77 was a 757-2 airframe manufactured in 1991. why dont you find out when the flight deck doors started being monitored in 757-2s before you start repeating the same old stupid bullshit you found on some conspiracy site.


----------



## eots (Nov 11, 2010)

fizz said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > the infidel said:
> ...



multiple seasoned air crash investigators call the investigation a cover up


----------



## Fizz (Nov 11, 2010)

eots said:


> fizz said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



so your answer is NONE. 

you really are a fucking idiot....


----------



## eots (Nov 11, 2010)

> multiple seasoned air crash investigators call the investigation a cover up



the idiot is the one that dismisses this without explanation


----------



## MandyInTN (Nov 11, 2010)

Fizz said:


> here's a clue for you. flight 77 was a 757-2 airframe manufactured in 1991. why dont you find out when the flight deck doors started being monitored in 757-2s before you start repeating the same old stupid bullshit you found on some conspiracy site.



Now learn about Data Frame Layouts -


_Claim - P4T... are not using the proper Data Frame Layout when showing the port location in his diagram. They are using 757-3, they should be using 757-2 which doesn't show a FLT DECK DOOR parameter. AA77 was a 757-2 airplane.

A- Those who make this claim are confusing the Data Frame Layout (DFL) number with Aircraft Type. 757-3b is the proper Data Frame Layout required for N644AA as listed here in the NTSB pdf for N644AA.

ntsb.gov/info/AAL77_fdr.pdf
(bottom of page 2)

United 93 was also a 757-200 aircraft, but used 757-4 Data Frame Layout.

ntsb.gov/info/UAL93FDR.pdf
(also bottom of page 2)

DFL 757-3b (AA77) has the FLT DECK DOOR parameter which is why you see it listed under the parameters in the NTSB pdf and recorded in the data.

DFL 757-4 (UA93) does not list a FLT DECK DOOR parameter, which is why it is not listed in the NTSB pdf nor recorded. 
_​


----------



## saiweril (Nov 11, 2010)

You skeptics still believe a 757 crashed in Shanksville even after I showed you how absurd the official story is of what happened to the plane after it supposedly crashed?  

_Really?!?_


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 11, 2010)

saiweril said:


> You skeptics still believe a 757 crashed in Shanksville even after I showed you how absurd the official story is of what happened to the plane after it supposedly crashed?
> 
> _Really?!?_


are you actually that fucking stupid that you think your little gif actually has credibility?


----------



## Godboy (Nov 12, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > You skeptics still believe a 757 crashed in Shanksville even after I showed you how absurd the official story is of what happened to the plane after it supposedly crashed?
> ...



Do you remember what forum section we're in? Of course he believes it. Anythings possible here in fantasy land, where facts no longer count.


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 12, 2010)

Godboy said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


true, the Id-Eots zone is FULL of em


----------



## Fizz (Nov 12, 2010)

MandyInTN said:


> Fizz said:
> 
> 
> > here's a clue for you. flight 77 was a 757-2 airframe manufactured in 1991. why dont you find out when the flight deck doors started being monitored in 757-2s before you start repeating the same old stupid bullshit you found on some conspiracy site.
> ...



i've already read that. thanks for posting it and proving your flight deck door was not monitored. (let me guess. you have no idea what you just posted).


----------



## saiweril (Nov 12, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > You skeptics still believe a 757 crashed in Shanksville even after I showed you how absurd the official story is of what happened to the plane after it supposedly crashed?
> ...


You're actually debating whether posting gifs adds credibility or not?  

I actually thought you were asking if I was that fucking stupid for still thinking you skeptics still believe the Flight 93 official fantasy story.  I would have apologized for still thinking you guys still believed on that fantasy story.


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 12, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


both
you are that fucking stupid to actually believe your complete fucking nonsense


----------



## saiweril (Nov 12, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


You guys post that same gif.  Are you guys fucking stupid when you do that?



> you are that fucking stupid to actually believe your complete fucking nonsense


You got me confused, I don't believe the official Flight 93 fantasy story.


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 12, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


sorry, who are "you guys"?
i've never posted that stupid gif


----------



## saiweril (Nov 12, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


Have you chastised your fellow skeptic friends here for posting that gif, or are you a hypocrite?

Let me know when you want to get back to debating the topic of this thread since it seems like you still believe in the official Flight 93 fantasy story.


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 12, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


YOU are the only one that has posted it, moron

and the only fantasy story about flight 93 is what you fucking troofer morons post


----------



## MandyInTN (Nov 12, 2010)

Fizz said:


> MandyInTN said:
> 
> 
> > Fizz said:
> ...



I do, do you?

I'll bold the parts you missed.

DFL 757-3b (AA77) *has the FLT DECK DOOR *parameter which is why you see it listed under the parameters in the NTSB pdf *and recorded in the data*.

DFL 757-4 (UA93) does *not list a FLT DECK DOOR parameter*, which is why *it is not listed in the NTSB pdf nor recorded*. 

In other words Fizz,

The data provided by the NTSB for Flight 77 shows the cockpit door closed. It was listed and recorded. It is impossible for a hijack to take place.

Flight 93 did not list the Flight Deck Door, and is not recorded on United aircraft. It is impossible to determine if the aircraft was hijacked.

In further words Fizz - 

DFL number has absolutely nothing to do with aircraft type. DFL 757-3b_1.txt is the custom data frame layout made by American Airlines for N644AA (AA77).

DFL 757-4 is the custom data frame layout made for N591UA (UA93) by United Airlines.

UA93 and AA77 are both 757-200's (not "757-2's"), they use different DFL's because they are not the same exact aircraft nor record the same exact parameters.

In case you're still confused -

AA77 records the Flight Deck Door.

UA93 does not.

Hope this clears it up for you.


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 12, 2010)

MandyInTN said:


> Fizz said:
> 
> 
> > MandyInTN said:
> ...


just because the recorder has the parameter for it, does not mean that it was ACTIVE
since that FDR showed the door being closed for over 20 hours it shows that while the FDR had the parameter, the door itself did not have the sensor


----------



## roomy (Nov 12, 2010)

Some of you half wits wouldn't know the truth if it kicked you in the balls, the rest of you will only know the truth as the last thing someone told you.


----------



## MandyInTN (Nov 12, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> just because the recorder has the parameter for it, does not mean that it was ACTIVE



It does when it is custom made by American Airlines for specific type and tail number.

Again, compare American to United.

American monitors their Cockpit doors, United does not.



> since that FDR showed the door being closed for over 20 hours



It does? The NTSB makes no such claim nor do they provide readable data for the previous flights.

You got that information from some guy in Australia and it has never been confirmed by anyone, let alone the NTSB.

Those who blindly support the govt story, of course take him at his word and never bother to verify the data.

The only flight that has been confirmed is the flight on Sept 11, 2001. It shows the cockpit door closed. Therefore, it is impossible for a hijack to take place.

Please let us know when you get some data which shows the cockpit door open, or any evidence which points to a hijacking taking place.


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 12, 2010)

MandyInTN said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > just because the recorder has the parameter for it, does not mean that it was ACTIVE
> ...


again, it was shown as closed for the entire loop of recording
and never shown as open
you are a complete fucking LOON if you think that is material or pertinent to anything
it clearly shows that the door sensor was either not installed or wasnt working


----------



## MandyInTN (Nov 12, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> again, it was shown as closed for the entire loop of recording
> and never shown as open



Please show us this data. As it has never been verified by anyone. Again, the only flight that was verified is the Sept 11 flight. The cockpit door was closed, It is impossible for a hijack to take place.



> you are a complete fucking LOON



Careful Divecon, your frustration is showing.



> if you think that is material or pertinent to anything



It is provided by the National Transportation Safety Board. It does not support the govt story in many significant ways. That is why so many experts are raising their BS flags on the govt story.

Captain Russ Wittenberg (ret)
30,000+ Total Flight Time
707, 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, 777, DC-8, L-1049, Learjet 24/25, L-188
Ground Instructor, Advanced Ground Instructor, Instrument Instructor, Flight Engineer Turbojet
Aircraft Dispatcher
Pan Am, United
United States Air Force (ret)
Over 100 Combat Missions Flown
Command time in:
- N591UA (Aircraft dispatched as United 93)
- N612UA (Aircraft dispatched as United 175)

Captain Ross Aimer
UAL Ret.
CEO, Aviation Experts LLC
40 years and 30,000 hrs.
BS Aero
A&P Mech.
B-777/767/757/747/737/727/720/707, DC-10/-9/-8 Type ratings
Command time in:
- N591UA (Aircraft dispatched as United 93)
- N612UA (Aircraft dispatched as United 175)


Commander Ralph &#8220;Rotten&#8221; Kolstad
23,000 hours
27 years in the airlines
B757/767 for 13 years mostly international Captain with American Airlines.
20 years US Navy flying fighters off aircraft carriers, TopGun twice
civilian pilot flying gliders, light airplanes and warbirds
Command time in:
- N644AA (Aircraft dispatched as American 77)
- N334AA (Aircraft dispatched as American 11)

John Lear
Son of Bill Lear
(Founder, creator of the Lear Jet Corporation)
More than 40 years of Flying
19,000+ TT
23 Type ratings
Flight experience includes 707, DC-8, 727, L10-11

Jeff Latas
-Over 20 years in the USAF
--USAF Accident investigation Board President
--Flew the F-111, T38, and F-15E
--Combat experience in the F-15E includes Desert Storm and four tours of duty in Northern and Southern Watch
--Weapons Requirements Officer, USAF HQ, Pentagon
--Standard and Evaluations Flight Examiner, Command level
-Currently Captain for JetBlue Airways

Guy S. Razer, LtCol, USAF (Ret)
3,500+ Hours Total Flight Time
F-15E/C, F-111A/D/E/F/EF, F-16, F-18, B-1, Mig-29, SU-22, T-37/38, Various Cvilian Prop
Combat Time: Operation Northern Watch
USAF Fighter Weapons School Instructor
NATO Tactical Leadership Program Instructor/Mission Coordinator
USAF Material Command Weapons Development Test Pilot
Combat Support Coordination Team 2 Airpower Coordinator, South Korea
All Service Combat Identification Evaluation Team Operations Officer
Boeing F-22 Pilot Instructor
MS Aeronautical Studies, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University

Dwain Deets
MS Physics, MS Eng
Former Director, Aerospace Projects, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center
Served as Director, Research Engineering Division at Dryden
Recipient of the NASA Exceptional Service Award
Presidential Meritorious Rank Award in the Senior Executive Service (1988)
Selected presenter of the Wright Brothers Lectureship in Aeronautics
Associate Fellow - American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA)
Included in "Who's Who in Science and Engineering" 1993 - 2000
Former Chairman of the Aerospace Control and Guidance Systems
- Committee of the Society of Automotive Engineers
Former Member, AIAA Committee on Society and Aerospace Technology
37 year NASA career

Lt. Colonel Shelton F. Lankford
United States Marine Corps (ret)
A-4 Skyhawk, KC-130 (10,000+ Hours)
S-2, T-1, F9F, F-11, OV-10, T-2J
303 Combat Missions 

goto pilotsfor911truth.org/core for many more and watch the list grow.

How much experience do you have in aviation Divecon?



> it clearly shows that the door sensor was either not installed or wasnt working



I agree, for United 93, as they do not monitor the Flight Deck Door, nor list it in their custom made Data Frame Layout.

But American does.


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 12, 2010)

MandyInTN said:


> Careful Divecon, your frustration is showing.


dont confuse disgust with frustration
you loons are a dime a fuckin dozen


----------



## MandyInTN (Nov 12, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> dont confuse disgust with frustration
> you loons are a dime a fuckin dozen



So I take it you didn't verify any data as well. Not surprised.

Pilots For 9/11 Truth cover almost every Major Airline, most Regionals, Charter, fractionals and corporate.

They cover every branch of the Military.

Looks like it's the train for you. lol....

You may not want to step into some buildings in America either as there is a list of over 1300 Architect And Engineers who question 9/11, along with Senior Military, and Family Members and Survivors.

patriotsquestion911.com

Go there and watch the lists grow.

There was a point in time where people who thought the earth was flat also called those who claimed it was round as loons.

I guess you think the earth is flat as well?


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 12, 2010)

MandyInTN said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > dont confuse disgust with frustration
> ...


wrong again loon
you are like the flat earthers
you deny fact and logic


----------



## MandyInTN (Nov 12, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> wrong again loon
> you are like the flat earthers
> you deny fact and logic



Actually, Flat Earther's didn't have any data. They had a belief based on what they were told.

When people came back with data saying, "You're wrong, the earth is round, look at the data!", they were called loons by Flat Earther's. Some who provided data were even killed due to the the strong belief of Flat Earther's and their clear frustration with their inability to discuss the data.

Just as you are calling me a loon and visibly becoming enraged because you cannot present any data for your argument, nor discuss the data presented.

Let us know when you get some data or evidence for your argument.

Your decision to sling mud, ad hom's and personal attacks instead of discussing the data and facts, speaks volumes.

In the meantime - watch these lists grow with "loons". Eventually, you'll be afraid to come out of your house because you'll be surrounded by so many "loons".

lol

patriotsquestion911.com


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 12, 2010)

MandyInTN said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > wrong again loon
> ...


i "sling" because thats all you fucking morons are worth


----------



## Fizz (Nov 13, 2010)

MandyInTN said:


> Fizz said:
> 
> 
> > MandyInTN said:
> ...



thanks for proving you have no clue. you dont have the slightest idea what you are talking about.

N644AA (flight 77) was a 757-2 aircraft. the data frame layout can not change that. the data frame layout from a 757-3 is backwards compatible to a 757-2. 

do you follow this so far? (probably not but let's continue anyway).

the cockpit door sensor is monitored and recorded in new B757-3 FDR models but not in the old B757-2 series, so this parameter will always show a meaningless '0' in decoding old B757-2 FDR data using new B757-3 FDR data frame format parameter layouts.


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 13, 2010)

Fizz said:


> MandyInTN said:
> 
> 
> > Fizz said:
> ...


shes an IDIOT that will never get it


----------



## MandyInTN (Nov 13, 2010)

Fizz said:


> N644AA (flight 77) was a 757-2 aircraft.



Wrong.

N644AA is a 757-200 series aircraft. Not a "757-2".

Same with N591UA (Flight 93). Yet N591UA uses 757-4 Data Frame Layout.

Again, Data Frame Layout number designation has nothing to do with aircraft type number.



> the data frame layout can not change that. the data frame layout from a 757-3 is backwards compatible to a 757-2.



Wrong. They are two separate Data Frame Layouts designation numbers which have nothing to do with aircraft type designation.

Again, N591UA (a 757-200 series aircraft) uses 757-4 Data Frame Layout. Does that mean there is a "757-4" type aircraft that uses "757-4 DFL" which is "backwards compatible" to a "757-2"?? No. Because *no such "757-4" aircraft exists*.

I'll say it for the 10th time since it doesn't seem to be sinking it.

Data Frame Layout number designation has nothing to do with aircraft type number.

757-3 is a generic Data Frame Layout made by Boeing.

757-3b_1.txt is the custom made data frame layout made by American Airlines tailored for N644AA based on Airline policy and needs, from the generic Boeing DFL 757-3. Read bottom of page 2. ntsb.gov/info/AAL77_fdr.pdf


*757-4* is a generic DFL made by Boeing. United then custom made their own  DFL from 757-4 into *757UALmap.xls* tailored for their aircraft and airline policy/needs. Read bottom of page 2. ntsb.gov/info/UAL93FDR.pdf

N644AA records the condition of the cockpit door. United does not.



> do you follow this so far? (probably not but let's continue anyway).



I do. Apparently you don't.



> the cockpit door sensor is monitored and recorded in new B757-3 FDR models but not in the old B757-2 series, so this parameter will always show a meaningless '0' in decoding old B757-2 FDR data using new B757-3 FDR data frame format parameter layouts.



Again, you are confusing aircraft type designation with DFL number. They have absolutely nothing to do with each other as proven above.


----------



## Fizz (Nov 13, 2010)

MandyInTN said:


> Fizz said:
> 
> 
> > N644AA (flight 77) was a 757-2 aircraft.
> ...



ok.... let's take this one step at a time until you realize you are an idiot.

when did N644AA, a 757-200, become a 757-300.


----------



## MandyInTN (Nov 14, 2010)

Fizz said:


> ok.... let's take this one step at a time until you realize you are an idiot.
> 
> when did N644AA, a 757-200, become a 757-300.



Never - 

When did N591UA become a 757-400?

Answer. Never.  Because such an aircraft doesn't exist.

For perhaps the 15th time - DFL number designation has nothing to do with aircraft type number.

Let me see if I can make this as simple as possible for you to understand.

Here are the various Data Frame Layouts offered by Boeing and the corresponding aircraft type depending on DFDAU and the parameters airlines wish to record, and/or based on regulation.

i51.tinypic.com/5pjw54.jpg
(copy/paste this to your browser as I cannot post url's yet.)

From there, the Airline picks the Data Frame Layout which corresponds to their DFDAU.

American picked 757-3b, United picked 757-4.

Both are made for a 757-200, both record slightly different sets of parameters based on Airline needs and DFDAU.

The Airline then modifies the Data Frame layout to their specific needs.

American Airlines monitors their Cockpit door status, United does not.

If American did not monitor their Cockpit Doors, they would have chosen DFL 757-4 and modified it from there according to their needs as 757-4 does not list "FLT DECK DOOR" as one of the parameters.

Is it sinking in yet?

Let us know when you have data which proves a hijack took place, as all data currently conflicts with your theory.


----------



## saiweril (Nov 14, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > Have you chastised your fellow skeptic friends here for posting that gif, or are you a hypocrite?
> ...


Why do you lie?...



Fizz / 02-24-2010 said:


> no evidence of what?
> 
> you are the one claiming there was treason.
> 
> PROVE IT!!!!


Your skeptic friend Fizz almost _always_ posts that "cuckoo" gif.  He even posted that gif in his last post in this thread!!!  Talk about being a moron.



> and the only fantasy story about flight 93 is what you fucking troofer morons post


I just posted the official story, so I guess you are agreeing along with me that it's pure fantasy.


----------



## saiweril (Nov 14, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Fizz said:
> 
> 
> > so you are claiming everything but the cockpit was buried underground?
> ...


Bump for Fizz.


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 14, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


thats an emote in the "smiles" for the site moron
you are only proving you are a fucking idiot


----------



## saiweril (Nov 14, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> thats an emote in the "smiles" for the site moron
> you are only proving you are a fucking idiot


Ha ha, _this_ is what you were talking about?! 







OK then, why do you say it doesn't have any credibility towards the official story -- as I assume you meant?


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 14, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > thats an emote in the "smiles" for the site moron
> ...


the reasons are numerous
and clearly you are too fucking stupid to understand


----------



## saiweril (Nov 14, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


Try me.  Any attempt to avoid posting your assertions that there are numerous reasons that crash gif is not credible towards the official story will just show you really don't have any good reasons.


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 14, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


first, the plane is out of scale, second it is asinine to assume a plane would look the same during a crash
you have proven you are too fucking stupid to understand


----------



## saiweril (Nov 14, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> first, the plane is out of scale


_That's_ one of your reasons?!    The scale looks fine to me, but assuming you're correct, who cares?  The purpose of that crash gif is to show how it supposedly crashed into the ground.  Not sure why the scale would really make a difference on that one.  



> second it is asinine to assume a plane would look the same during a crash
> you have proven you are too fucking stupid to understand


Oh brother.  Talk about nit-picking!  The crash gif is just a simple demonstration of the purported official story of how the plane crash.

Are you saying the plane wasn't inverted at the time of the crashed?
Are you saying that the plane from past the cockpit on back didn't bury?

That's what the crash gif is about.


----------



## MandyInTN (Nov 14, 2010)

saiweril said:


> That's what the crash gif is about.



Saiweril - 

If you would like to see a really good analysis done by real and verified professional pilots (some of whom have actual flight time in the airplane which was alleged to have crashed in Shanksville), based on data provided by govt agencies - watch this.

Pandora's Black Box - Flight Of United 93
video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1695850318850681282#
(39 mins runtime)

Has some really good CAD analysis of the impact as well. And it is to scale....


----------



## saiweril (Nov 15, 2010)

MandyInTN said:


> Saiweril -
> 
> If you would like to see a really good analysis done by real and verified professional pilots (some of whom have actual flight time in the airplane which was alleged to have crashed in Shanksville), based on data provided by govt agencies - watch this.
> 
> ...


I did see that.  Thought is was pretty good.  They did a good job of showing that the witness accounts conflicted with with official flight path elevations.

What do you think about that one photo supposedly showing the mushroom cloud caused by Flight 93 crashing?  It looks like smoke from an ordnance blast, but most truthers now seem to think the photo was faked.


----------



## Godboy (Nov 15, 2010)

saiweril said:


> MandyInTN said:
> 
> 
> > Saiweril -
> ...



The truthers change their story more than they change their underwear.


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 15, 2010)

MandyInTN said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > That's what the crash gif is about.
> ...


funny how they recovered 95% of that "alleged" crashed plane from that site


----------



## MandyInTN (Nov 15, 2010)

saiweril said:


> MandyInTN said:
> 
> 
> > Saiweril -
> ...



Looks like ordinance, not a jet fuel rich explosion. The EPA also didn't find any ground contamination of jet fuel. That's impossible if a jet really crashed there.

The angle of explosion also conflicts with the "flight path".

It's all covered in the above film.


----------



## candycorn (Nov 15, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> MandyInTN said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...



And the passenger DNA.....

I swear some people are too stupid for words.


----------



## saiweril (Nov 15, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> funny how they recovered 95% of that "alleged" crashed plane from that site


Says who?


----------



## saiweril (Nov 15, 2010)

candycorn said:


> And the passenger DNA.....


How many photos of the scene showed body parts, or a drop of blood?


----------



## eots (Nov 15, 2010)

candycorn said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > MandyInTN said:
> ...


----------



## saiweril (Nov 15, 2010)

MandyInTN said:


> Looks like ordinance, not a jet fuel rich explosion. The EPA also didn't find any ground contamination of jet fuel. That's impossible if a jet really crashed there.
> 
> The angle of explosion also conflicts with the "flight path".
> 
> It's all covered in the above film.


I saw some diagrams that show the mushroom cloud in her photo lines up closer to the pond than the crater and they estimated that with the wind speed that day, it would have taken about 50 seconds for that cloud to drift that far, even though the lady says she took the photo about 5 seconds after the alleged explosion.

Why do you think they would drop an ordnance on the field near the pond then?  Doesn't seem to make much sense to me.  That guy in Canada who calls everyone spoke to some lady in Shanksville who seems to know for sure the photo is fake.  Did you hear that phone call?...



> A CONVERSATION WITH THE LEVERKNIGHT'S !!!!
> 
> Mrs. Leverknight was one of the first on the scence in Shanksville. Very interesting what she has to say about Val McClatchey's famous photo !
> --------------------------------
> ...


The lack of ground contamination is more evidence nothing crashed there, because they said most of the plane buried deep below the surface.


----------



## saiweril (Nov 17, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > funny how they recovered 95% of that "alleged" crashed plane from that site
> ...


Bump


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 17, 2010)

saiweril said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


the FBI, dipshit
unless you are saying that they are lying
and if so, you'll need PROOF


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 17, 2010)

saiweril said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > And the passenger DNA.....
> ...


^^^ this is just fucking STUPID


----------



## eots (Nov 17, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...



well  we can certainly establish precedents


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 17, 2010)

eots said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


which doesnt prove they lied on that


----------



## eots (Nov 17, 2010)

DiveCon said:


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



no.. it proves it is possible and the possibility can not be discounted


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 17, 2010)

eots said:


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


but that still isnt proof that they are lying


----------



## saiweril (Nov 17, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


Interesting, the FBI makes an extraordinary claim and not only do you seem to blindly believe it, but you say _we_ have to prove their unproven claim wrong!  

OK champ, since you're obviously a little demented, you swallow that they recovered 95% of the 757.  Where was it all?  All I see in the photos taken shortly after the alleged crash were a few pieces here and a few pieces there equaling to more like _5%_ of a 757 scattered around.  WHERE WAS IT ALL?!?


----------



## saiweril (Nov 17, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...


Is that what you say when the evidence goes against your beliefs?  The truth is hard to except with some people.


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 17, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


i have seen photos of a ton of it
you are fucking delusional


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 17, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


no, the evidence supports my beliefs
you delusional fucktard


----------



## saiweril (Nov 17, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > OK champ, since you're obviously a little demented, you swallow that they recovered 95% of the 757.  Where was it all?  All I see in the photos taken shortly after the alleged crash were a few pieces here and a few pieces there equaling to more like _5%_ of a 757 scattered around.  WHERE WAS IT ALL?!?
> ...


Really?  Photos taken right after the alleged crash showing a ton of debris?  I'd like to see those Champ.



DiveCon said:


> no, the evidence supports my beliefs


Let's see here, you bring up the _reported_ DNA as your evidence.  They _said_ they had to identify by DNA because the 44 passengers supposedly got reduced to such small remains.  However, not a single photo _shows_ any body parts, or even a single drop of blood.  But hey, the FBI said so, so... 



> you delusional fucktard


What's with your anger problem?


----------



## elvis (Nov 17, 2010)

My fantasy is that none of the planes crashed and the Towers are still standing.


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 17, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


if you havent seen the evidence by now, there is nothing that i could show you to convince you
you delusional fucktards need serious professional help

and your lying when you claim "i brought up DNA"
i never said anything of the sort


----------



## eots (Nov 17, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...



there might be a ton in the picture of the dumpster of unidentified scraps in the picture of the dumpster but other than that there are pictures of only a few pieces and none of them substantial...you have never seen such photos no one has ever posted any such photos that show any more than that


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 17, 2010)

eots said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


and you are a known delusional LIAR


----------



## eots (Nov 17, 2010)

DiveCon said:


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



post them then.. shit for brains


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 17, 2010)

eots said:


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


how many fucking times do they NEED to be posted for dipshits like you to get it?


----------



## slackjawed (Nov 17, 2010)

DiveCon said:


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



Capt obvious here.....the answer is a minimum of one more time than has already been posted.


----------



## saiweril (Nov 18, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> if you havent seen the evidence by now, there is nothing that i could show you to convince you


Sure you can, show me where all that 95% of plane debris was right after the alleged crash!  Shouldn't be hard to do if that much was really recovered.  



> you delusional fucktards need serious professional help


You should talk!  



> and your lying when you claim "i brought up DNA"
> i never said anything of the sort


Well at least we agree the reported all passengers identified via DNA evidence is total bullocks, especially when no body parts and blood was photographed!


----------



## saiweril (Nov 18, 2010)

eots said:


> there might be a ton in the picture of the dumpster of unidentified scraps


And isn't it a coincidence that the nearest business to the alleged crash was a *SCRAP yard*!!!


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 18, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > if you havent seen the evidence by now, there is nothing that i could show you to convince you
> ...


no, we do NOT agree
i said i didnt bring it up like YOU claimed


----------



## saiweril (Nov 18, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > Well at least we agree the reported all passengers identified via DNA evidence is total bullocks, especially when no body parts and blood was photographed!
> ...


So now you believe the DNA evidence?!

You skeptics bring up the reported DNA all the time.  

Hey when you going to show me where all that 95% of debris was?


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 18, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


I've always believed the DNA evidence, moron
but YOU lied when you claimed I brought it up
there is too much evidence to support it than to NOT believe it
other5wise you must think "they" killed all those poeple at another place and placed it at the site
or that ALL of the people involved in collecting the evidence from the sites are in on it


----------



## saiweril (Nov 18, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> I've always believed the DNA evidence, moron
> but YOU lied when you claimed I brought it up


I meant _you guys_ bring it up.  Don't have a cow, Man.



> there is too much evidence to support it than to NOT believe it


So you're blindly believing the 95% claim with no hard proof!!!!


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 18, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > I've always believed the DNA evidence, moron
> ...


no, i've seen the proof
but you could be shown it and you would deny it


----------



## slackjawed (Nov 18, 2010)

Here is a video of the plane crash:
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Me3uWAzbHZI[/ame]


----------



## saiweril (Nov 18, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> no, i've seen the proof
> but you could be shown it and you would deny it


Let's test your theory out by showing me where all that 95% of debris was right after this so-called crash.


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 18, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > no, i've seen the proof
> ...


ah, so you are different than every other troofer on this board and you would accept evidence?

LOL
yeah, right
sorry, not gonna waste my time


----------



## saiweril (Nov 18, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


You waste your time here with truthers everyday, so don't give me that one. 

95% is a LOT of plane left.  Why is it so hard for you to prove it?

Come on Champ, show me the truth!


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 18, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


its a waste of time to look up the link because i know already you will reject it just like the rest of your pathetic and moronic troofers do
show me why i should believe YOU are any different


----------



## eots (Nov 18, 2010)

no such pictures exist


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 18, 2010)

eots said:


> no such pictures exist


LIAR

but everyone knows you are


----------



## eots (Nov 18, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > no such pictures exist
> ...



divecon is some what delusional and is clearly in need of medication


----------



## Kat (Nov 18, 2010)

eots said:


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



You sure like that word don't you? Prey on your mind a lot, does it?


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 18, 2010)

Kat said:


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


no, its projection


----------



## saiweril (Nov 19, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


Because I can handle the truth, either way it goes.

Come on now.  You're saying mountains of debris was found.  Where was all those mountains of debris right after the crash?   I only see a few dozen pieces scattered here and there.  There should be THOUSANDS of pieces scattered across the ground.  There's hardly anything.  WHERE WAS IT ALL?!?


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 19, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


no, i did not say "mountains of debris" i said the FBI said 95% was recovered

see, you lie even there


----------



## eots (Nov 19, 2010)

divecon is clearly insane


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 19, 2010)

eots said:


> divecon is clearly insane


more projections from Id-Eots


----------



## saiweril (Nov 19, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > Come on now.  You're saying mountains of debris was found.  Where was all those mountains of debris right after the crash?   I only see a few dozen pieces scattered here and there.  There should be THOUSANDS of pieces scattered across the ground.  There's hardly anything.  WHERE WAS IT ALL?!?
> ...


Wait, you don't think 95% of a 757 would yield mountains of debris?! 



eots said:


> divecon is clearly insane


Yes, divecon is clearly


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 19, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


no, it wouldnt, and it wasnt what i said you fucking LIAR

and troofers are the insane asswipes


----------



## saiweril (Nov 19, 2010)

divecon needs to be committed.  he's clearly


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 19, 2010)

saiweril said:


> divecon needs to be committed.  he's clearly


says the clearly insane person that thinks some nefarious "they" caused 9/11 to happen


----------



## saiweril (Nov 19, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Some board members think most of a 155 foot jet buried deep in the ground...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


bump


----------



## Fizz (Nov 19, 2010)

saiweril said:


> bump



you talking about the big pimple on top of your neck?


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 19, 2010)

Fizz said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > bump
> ...


somehow, he thinks posting the same insane bullshit again makes it less insane


----------



## slackjawed (Nov 19, 2010)

It's the agent chri$$y effect


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 19, 2010)

slackjawed said:


> It's the agent chri$$y effect


it seems to permeate the troofer population


----------



## saiweril (Nov 19, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> somehow, he thinks posting the same insane bullshit again


Dude, what I posted was the official story.  You just called it insane bullshit.  Welcome to our side!


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 19, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > somehow, he thinks posting the same insane bullshit again
> ...


you did no such thing you fucking moron


----------



## saiweril (Nov 20, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


What in my OP was not the official story?


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 20, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


so, you support the official story?


----------



## saiweril (Nov 20, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


Don't try to sidestep.  What in my OP was not the official story?


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 20, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


you were ridiculing it, moron
that makes you OP delusional
get it yet, fucktard?


----------



## SFC Ollie (Nov 20, 2010)

http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/flt93debris22sm.jpg





















Does not appear to be an empty hole to me.....


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 20, 2010)

its a waste of time to post all that, Ollie, they have had it all posted for them before and they reject it
like they reject all other reality based experience


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 20, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> Does not appear to be an empty hole to me.....


side note, those must be some very short guys
to look so small in a 10' deep hole


----------



## eots (Nov 20, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/flt93debris22sm.jpg
> 
> 
> 
> ...



that is 95% of nothing and the hole was already there


----------



## SFC Ollie (Nov 20, 2010)

Must be pygmy's.


----------



## eots (Nov 20, 2010)

it is hard to believe all the major steel components of the craft fractured into unidentifiable little pieces but yet they recovered so much uncontaminated dna and 95% of the plane


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 20, 2010)

eots said:


> *it is hard to believe all the major steel components of the craft fractured into unidentifiable little pieces* but yet they recovered so much uncontaminated dna and 95% of the plane


because they DIDNT
this is why you are known to be such a fucking moron


----------



## SFC Ollie (Nov 20, 2010)

eots said:


> it is hard to believe all the major steel components of the craft fractured into unidentifiable little pieces but yet they recovered so much uncontaminated dna and 95% of the plane



Really? Unidentifiable?


----------



## saiweril (Nov 20, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


But you're agreeing that I did portray the official story correctly minus me ridiculing it?


----------



## SFC Ollie (Nov 20, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...



Is your vision OK? Can you not see the wreckage?


----------



## saiweril (Nov 20, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


>


That's from A&E's movie "Flight 93" (pic 15)! 

But it might as well be the photo of the real Shanksville crater, because it's just as ridiculous.


----------



## saiweril (Nov 20, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > Does not appear to be an empty hole to me.....
> ...


That's not the alleged Shanksville crash scene you morons!!! 

Or did they bring in a bunch of Iranians to investigate it?!


----------



## saiweril (Nov 20, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


Yours is apparently not since you included a pic from a movie and a different plane crash!  

You also seem to be the only one who thinks that if the govt staged a plane crash, they wouldn't plant debris.  

Now how about answering my question, did my OP portray the official story correctly minus the ridiculing of the story?


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 20, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > SFC Ollie said:
> ...


ah, so it is


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 20, 2010)

saiweril said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


thats just fucking insane


----------



## saiweril (Nov 20, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> Really? Unidentifiable?


That photo is interesting.  Can you show about where exactly that piece was photographed?


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 20, 2010)

saiweril said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > Really? Unidentifiable?
> ...


yeah, it must have been planted, right?


----------



## eots (Nov 20, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > it is hard to believe all the major steel components of the craft fractured into unidentifiable little pieces but yet they recovered so much uncontaminated dna and 95% of the plane
> ...



yes no serial number


----------



## saiweril (Nov 20, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > SFC Ollie said:
> ...


Yes, the official story there is insane, so the question is, why do you still believe it?  Are you ?


----------



## saiweril (Nov 20, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > SFC Ollie said:
> ...


Prove to me it was photographed at the scene.


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 20, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


no, YOU are fucking insane


----------



## elvis (Nov 20, 2010)

eots said:


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



wow.  where was Neil Bush during all of this?


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 20, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


you are fucking insane
it would be impossible to prove it to YOU


----------



## slackjawed (Nov 20, 2010)

eots said:


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



I agree. Companies that build planes should plan ahead. they should know how many pieces, and what shape all the pieces will be, of any plane when it crashes and make certain each chunk has a serial number on it.
What do you think ?


----------



## SFC Ollie (Nov 20, 2010)

You are right, that one doesn't belong here.

 Not sure about the movie. 

However there are still abundant pictures of the debris field. I will be more than happy to post dozens of them if you are to incompetent to find them. Of course you will simply claim it is all faked anyway. And of course the witnesses who say anything that don't fit what you want to be true are all wrong. We know the drill.


----------



## saiweril (Nov 20, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


No, it would be really easy.  Just post an aerial photo with and arrow pointing to where it was photographed.  Easy peasy.


----------



## eots (Nov 20, 2010)

*Col. George Nelson, MBA, U.S. Air Force (ret) &#8211; Former U.S. Air Force aircraft accident investigator and airplane parts authority.  Graduate, U.S. Air Force War College.  34-year Air Force career.
Licensed commercial pilot.  Licensed airframe and powerplant mechanic*.


Essay: "In all my years of direct and indirect participation,* I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft -*- and in most cases the precise cause of the accident. ... 

The government alleges that four wide-body airliners crashed on the morning of September 11 2001, resulting in the deaths of more than 3,000 human beings, yet not one piece of hard aircraft evidence has been produced in an attempt to positively identify any of the four aircraft. On the contrary, it seems only that all potential evidence was deliberately kept hidden from public view. 

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


----------



## saiweril (Nov 20, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


>


Is any of that supposed to look like plane debris?



>


What does a photo of a shovel and paper on the ground supposed to prove?

If you're trying to prove to us 95% of a 757 was recovered, you're doing a terrible job.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Nov 20, 2010)

eots said:


> *Col. George Nelson, MBA, U.S. Air Force (ret)  Former U.S. Air Force aircraft accident investigator and airplane parts authority.  Graduate, U.S. Air Force War College.  34-year Air Force career.
> Licensed commercial pilot.  Licensed airframe and powerplant mechanic*.
> 
> 
> ...



Out of curiosity, are not the Black boxes hard aircraft evidence?


----------



## saiweril (Nov 20, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> However there are still abundant pictures of the debris field. I will be more than happy to post dozens of them if you are to incompetent to find them. Of course you will simply claim it is all faked anyway. And of course the witnesses who say anything that don't fit what you want to be true are all wrong. We know the drill.


Why don't you answer my question first, did I portray the official story correctly in my OP?


----------



## saiweril (Nov 20, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> Out of curiosity, are not the Black boxes hard aircraft evidence?


Yeah, those are so hard to plant.  

Say, wasn't one of the black boxes photographed still in the hole?


----------



## SFC Ollie (Nov 20, 2010)

saiweril said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > However there are still abundant pictures of the debris field. I will be more than happy to post dozens of them if you are to incompetent to find them. Of course you will simply claim it is all faked anyway. And of course the witnesses who say anything that don't fit what you want to be true are all wrong. We know the drill.
> ...



Actually no you didn't. You quoted the coroner who was making his initial impressions maybe. You are not presenting facts like the debris field scattered into the woods and along the roadway. You do not address the fact that the plane crashed into a reclaimed strip mine which left the ground rather soft. What you did was try to ridicule the official investigation. Without offering any real evidence of anything else.


----------



## saiweril (Nov 20, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > Why don't you answer my question first, did I portray the official story correctly in my OP?
> ...


Oh Jesus, I forgot I'm dealing with skeptics.

Let me try it again:

Of the parts of the official story I posted, did I portray them correctly?


----------



## saiweril (Nov 22, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Of the parts of the official story I posted, did I portray them correctly?


bump


----------



## Fizz (Nov 22, 2010)

saiweril said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > Out of curiosity, are not the Black boxes hard aircraft evidence?
> ...



the question wasn't "how hard is it to plant evidence" and your statement regarding that is completely irrelevant unless you have some evidence it was planted.


----------



## saiweril (Nov 22, 2010)

Fizz said:


> the question wasn't "how hard is it to plant evidence" and your statement regarding that is completely irrelevant unless you have some evidence it was planted.


OK.  Do you think this black box was photographed where it landed, or where someone put it on the ground?


----------



## SFC Ollie (Nov 23, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Fizz said:
> 
> 
> > the question wasn't "how hard is it to plant evidence" and your statement regarding that is completely irrelevant unless you have some evidence it was planted.
> ...



Chances are it was "uncovered" and photographed as soon as it was identified I doubt it was just laying there. Though, who knows. Was it planted?  NO!


----------



## eots (Nov 23, 2010)

and what of.....the terrorist bandanna ?....lol


----------



## eots (Nov 23, 2010)

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wf7PqUxcMuQ[/ame]


----------



## SFC Ollie (Nov 23, 2010)

Wow, talk about misrepresentation. What type of plane was that slamming into a concrete runway?

And the bandanna, stranger things have happened. So why would you plant a bandanna? There were other kinds of paper products / personal effects that were found. I remember one family received back their loved ones wallet. Said it looked undisturbed.


----------



## eots (Nov 23, 2010)

and how was it identified as the terrorist bandanna ? and what are the odds ?


----------



## eots (Nov 23, 2010)

and then this....i_ts all about the air_

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gg_QcBiGi-k&feature=related[/ame]


----------



## SFC Ollie (Nov 23, 2010)

The Odds are astronomical. But far from impossible. How it is identified i don't know, perhaps someone reported that the terrorists were wearing bandannas, That would make sense to me to be able to identify my team members quickly. But I don't know i would have to go back and listen to the tapes or read the transcripts again.

Interesting video, I believe you are learning something.


----------



## saiweril (Nov 23, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> Chances are it was "uncovered" and photographed as soon as it was identified I doubt it was just laying there. Though, who knows.


So you agree that most likely it was placed on the ground by someone's hands before someone photographed it? 



> Was it planted?  NO!


You asked for evidence of my claim, now you just made a claim, so please provide evidence it wasn't planted.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Nov 23, 2010)

saiweril said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > Chances are it was "uncovered" and photographed as soon as it was identified I doubt it was just laying there. Though, who knows.
> ...



The official reports say it wasn't. Show me an official investigation that says otherwise.


----------



## saiweril (Nov 23, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> Wow, talk about misrepresentation. What type of plane was that slamming into a concrete runway?


Wait a minute, are you saying that Flight 93 _didn't_ suffer an extreme crash like that one featured in that video?! 



> And the bandanna, stranger things have happened. So why would you plant a bandanna?


Didn't you see how unblemished that red bandana was?!?  What happened to the terrorist's head that bandana was supposedly wrapped around?!



> There were other kinds of paper products / personal effects that were found. I remember one family received back their loved ones wallet. Said it looked undisturbed.


So only two drivers licenses survived out of the 40 non-terrorist passengers and they just happened to survive pretty well intact?!

A wallet was _given_ back to a family member by the FBI.

Come on man, when are you going to wake up?


----------



## saiweril (Nov 23, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> The Odds are astronomical.


Let us know when your light bulb turns on.


----------



## saiweril (Nov 23, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> The official reports say it wasn't. Show me an official investigation that says otherwise.


So you blindly believe government officials?

And please answer my question:  So you agree that most likely it was placed on the ground by someone's hands before someone photographed it?


----------



## SFC Ollie (Nov 23, 2010)

saiweril said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > Wow, talk about misrepresentation. What type of plane was that slamming into a concrete runway?
> ...



Wake up? I'm awake, and I can actually think for myself. Also I don't place words in others mouths. Because little old me only posted 2 pictures that's the only IDs that survived. Damn am I good or what? Don't have a clue what happened to the terrorists head, and I really don't give a damn.

And yes we know that your masters have told you not to trust or believe the FBI. After all they represent our government. 

Maybe you should watch eots video about air......


----------



## slackjawed (Nov 23, 2010)

Admittedly the twoofers have a tough row to hoe, but they chose it. The "official' story, or the government's account of events is backed by the full power and faith of the US Govt.. The idEOT twoofers keep asking for "proof' the official story is correct.

Anything that the US Govt. backs with it's full power and faith, is more than the idEOT twoofers have. The official story of the events of 911, including the account of the crash of plt 93, as backed by the full faith and power of the USA IS the TRUTH.

It is up to the idEOT twoofers to prove it wrong, not the other way around. Too often the twoofers demand proof of the official story, the proof in the government's account is self evident.

The burden of proof to show that something other than what the US Govt. says happened, is on the twoofers, not the other way around.

The twoofers do not seem to realize this., yet that is the facts Jack!

Twoofers, put up or shut up. Provide your fucking proof!


----------



## saiweril (Nov 23, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> Wake up? I'm awake, and I can actually think for myself. Also I don't place words in others mouths. Because little old me only posted 2 pictures that's the only IDs that survived. Damn am I good or what? Don't have a clue what happened to the terrorists head, and I really don't give a damn.
> 
> And yes we know that your masters have told you not to trust or believe the FBI. After all they represent our government.
> 
> Maybe you should watch eots video about air......


Let me know when you stop avoiding all of my questions.


----------



## saiweril (Nov 23, 2010)

slackjawed said:


> The official story of the events of 911, including the account of the crash of plt 93, as backed by the full faith and power of the USA IS the TRUTH.


So the parts of the official story I posted in my OP is the truth?


----------



## slackjawed (Nov 23, 2010)

saiweril said:


> slackjawed said:
> 
> 
> > The official story of the events of 911, including the account of the crash of plt 93, as backed by the full faith and power of the USA IS the TRUTH.
> ...




The whole story, not cherry picking parts to please your own little ego. The entire thing.

You need to get a fucking life, like the rest of the treasonous little twoofer fucks!


----------



## saiweril (Nov 23, 2010)

slackjawed said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > slackjawed said:
> ...


So the whole story is correct, but just not those parts I "cherry" picked out?!?  Please tell me you're not that stupid!  If the whole story is correct, then any part of it I pick out is going to be correct too.

So again, of the parts of the official story I posted in my OP, are they also correct?


----------



## slackjawed (Nov 23, 2010)

saiweril said:


> slackjawed said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...



Yup, even posted by a dumbass like you, they are still accurate.

the official story is essentially correct. Are there errors? Yes. Do they affect the story as a 'whole'? No.


----------



## saiweril (Nov 23, 2010)

slackjawed said:


> Yup...they are still accurate.
> 
> the official story is essentially correct. Are there errors? Yes. Do they affect the story as a 'whole'? No.


But to be clear, the parts that I posted are all correct?


----------



## saiweril (Nov 23, 2010)

Got all quiet in here all of a sudden.


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 23, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Got all quiet in here all of a sudden.


maybe because you are a proven fucking moronic idiot


----------



## eots (Nov 23, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > Got all quiet in here all of a sudden.
> ...



blah blah blah blah ? fucking moronic idiot


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 23, 2010)

eots said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


fuck off moron


----------



## Fizz (Nov 24, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Fizz said:
> 
> 
> > the question wasn't "how hard is it to plant evidence" and your statement regarding that is completely irrelevant unless you have some evidence it was planted.
> ...



THATS IT?!!! 

thats your evidence? you dont like the PICTURE?!!!!


----------



## Fizz (Nov 24, 2010)

saiweril said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > The Odds are astronomical.
> ...



let us know when you understand statics.


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 24, 2010)

Fizz said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > SFC Ollie said:
> ...


dont hold your breath


----------



## eots (Nov 24, 2010)

Fizz pretends to understand the statistics


----------



## Fizz (Nov 24, 2010)

eots said:


> Fizz pretends to understand the statistics



ok, jackass.... let's see if you understand statistics. 

part 1:
what are the odds of you dying during any specific second since you've been born?
(sorry, that sentence was more then six words long. do you think you can understand it?)


----------



## eots (Nov 24, 2010)

fizz said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > fizz pretends to understand the statistics
> ...



irrelevant...stop pretending


----------



## candycorn (Nov 24, 2010)

slackjawed said:


> Admittedly the twoofers have a tough row to hoe, but they chose it. The "official' story, or the government's account of events is backed by the full power and faith of the US Govt.. The idEOT twoofers keep asking for "proof' the official story is correct.
> 
> Anything that the US Govt. backs with it's full power and faith, is more than the idEOT twoofers have. The official story of the events of 911, including the account of the crash of plt 93, as backed by the full faith and power of the USA IS the TRUTH.
> 
> ...



Yeah, theres 500 pages of proof.  

Theres also this:

U.S.D.C. Eastern District of Virginia
All exhibits entered in Federal District Court.


----------



## eots (Nov 24, 2010)

candycorn said:


> slackjawed said:
> 
> 
> > Admittedly the twoofers have a tough row to hoe, but they chose it. The "official' story, or the government's account of events is backed by the full power and faith of the US Govt.. The idEOT twoofers keep asking for "proof' the official story is correct.
> ...



500 pages of nothing


----------



## Fizz (Nov 24, 2010)

eots said:


> fizz said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


too stupid to answer or too stoned? 

the answer is ZERO since you are still alive.

thanks for playing, moron.


----------



## eots (Nov 24, 2010)

Fizz said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > fizz said:
> ...



no its completely irrelevant


----------



## Fizz (Nov 24, 2010)

eots said:


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


proof please....


----------



## saiweril (Nov 24, 2010)

Fizz said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...


No that's not just it.  I'm just getting started.  Just shows your impatients.  

Since you responded, do you think this black box was photographed where it landed, or did someone put it there on the ground?


----------



## Obamerican (Nov 24, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Fizz said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


Even if they had an independent investigation if it didn't go "your way" you would still cry about it.


----------



## HUGGY (Nov 24, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Fizz said:
> 
> 
> > the question wasn't "how hard is it to plant evidence" and your statement regarding that is completely irrelevant unless you have some evidence it was planted.
> ...



What a coincydink!  The "flight recorder" lands on top! Out in the open..All by it's lonesome.. I bet in the history of *ALL* recorded airplane crashes *THAT* has never happened..  not once..as in NEVER.....!!!!!

GAAAWWWWDDDD!!!!!!! Some of you people are WAY beyond stupid and gulible.. 

Nothing suspicious THERE...move along...


----------



## HUGGY (Nov 24, 2010)

Oh ya... and as Colombo would say..."There is just one more thing M'ame"

If Y'all believe that there was a crash and a fire sufficient to "vaporise" a 757 ..the paint on your fake Flight recorder and all the rocks surrounding it would be charred beyond recognition.  *That* Flight recorder was never in a fire... 

Case closed...

Even if it had been charred in a fire and cleaned up they would certainly not have the means to do it out in the field where it was "found".

You flight recorder pic is a fake...end of story!


----------



## Fizz (Nov 24, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Fizz said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...



it shows my WHAT?!! 

i dont care if it was photographed were it landed, whether it was uncovered, whether the person that found it walked it over to the nearest person with a camera or anything else. 

where is it claimed the photo was taken where it landed?

it doesnt really fucking matter, jackass. it shows shows the minutia you fucking idiots go through to try to justify your preconceived conclusions.

again i ask you.... WHERE IS YOUR PROOF IT WAS PLANTED?!!


----------



## SFC Ollie (Nov 24, 2010)

There is no proof that can show that the flight recorder was not recovered at the scene of the crash of flight 93.


----------



## HUGGY (Nov 24, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> There is no proof that can show that the flight recorder was not recovered at the scene of the crash of flight 93.



There is certainly proof that *THAT* flight recorder was not recovered at the scene.


----------



## HUGGY (Nov 24, 2010)

Fizz said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > Fizz said:
> ...



Where is the evidence it was in a fire that vaporized a 757?


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 24, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> Fizz said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


how could they recover 95% of something that "vaporized"?


----------



## HUGGY (Nov 24, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> > Fizz said:
> ...



How could they recover a flight recorder in a horrible firey crash with absolutely zero evidence of any heat damage?

The only way THAT recorder was in THAT crash is if there was no fuel burning thruout the wreckage.  It's painted moron.  I could char a spot on it with a cigarette lighter.

I have no idea what really happened there but I know a lot about what heat does to metal and painted metal and you can scoff till you are blue in the face.  That recorder was not in a fire.  Denying THAT fact makes YOU the crazy one not me.


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 24, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > HUGGY said:
> ...


everything you said there is the opposite of the truth
thus you didnt say a single fact


----------



## HUGGY (Nov 24, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...



I don't really care what you think. You have shown time and time again to be a fool that is more interested in trying to win debates with repeticious multiple posts that add nothing but your stark immaturity to this and most other topics don't agree with.  You notice that I have not particpated in this thread.  I just happened to see the picture of the supposed flight recorder and decided that some reason and physical rationality needed injected into this discussion as to it's likelyhood that it was in a fiery crash and that possibility is zero.

Carry on fool.  There is nothing to debate on the point I made.


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 24, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > HUGGY said:
> ...


you were wrong
you are the most immature person of this message board


----------



## HUGGY (Nov 24, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...



I don't deny holding my youthful spirit close and protected.  There is a big difference between us though.  My spirit was never broken.  Sure..I'm flippant and glib occasionally my irreverance is not hidden.  You on the other hand have been crushed at some point in time and that is truly sad.  You mistake maturity for someone with a broken spirit that always doubts..plays the safe bet..  Never speaks a thought that may appear off the beaten track.  I know you have them ..everyone does..you are just too afraid to express your curiosity.  I can't blame you for what life or someone you tried to respect did to you.  

My young mind and your pubescent bullying are not the same thing sport.  I know you think they are..they are not.  I would like to offer you sympathy but that would be wasted..your child like ways have been destroyed and replaced with meaness and cynisism. I know miss spelled..I don't give a fuck!  I care about everything and don't give a fuck about anything..  You care about nothing and desperately give a fuck about only how you believe others see you.  But like I said telling you is a waste of time because you have been making excuses for yourself for so long since you were torn down that all you have left is your selfish defense of what even a child knows is not defenseable.

Thanks for the neg rep.  It is a fair reminder that I should know better than to participate in any thread your pathetic bitch ass punk attitude is prevelant.


----------



## saiweril (Nov 25, 2010)

Fizz said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > Fizz said:
> ...


Pretty funny.  You demand proof, then in the next breath say you don't care about the evidence and it doesn't really f'n matter.  Talk about


----------



## saiweril (Nov 25, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> There is no proof that can show that the flight recorder was not recovered at the scene of the crash of flight 93.


If you'd just have patients and answer my questions, you might see the evidence.

Back to that first photo of the black box.  Do you think it was photographed where it landed, or do you think someone set it down there?


----------



## saiweril (Nov 25, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> how could they recover 95% of something that "vaporized"? *Edited By Intense*


Right, how could they recover that much of something when photographs of the scene after the alleged crash, but before the cleanup began shows nothing even close to that amount.  Talk about


----------



## saiweril (Nov 25, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> you are the most immature person of this message board


You should talk!


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 25, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > how could they recover 95% of something
> ...


you PoS., you edited what i said to make it seem different


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 25, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > you are the most immature person of this message board
> ...


i do, and it fits you as well
all fucking troofers are idiots


----------



## saiweril (Nov 25, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


The king of adhom attacks is bitching about a little snarkiness?! 

I get it, skeptics are allowed to act however they want to, but truthers have to act in the most upstanding behavior.  Gotcha champ.

Btw, anytime you want to show proof of that 95% claim...


----------



## saiweril (Nov 25, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> all fucking troofers are idiots


Someone has a little anger-management problem!  

Have you ever seen a shrink for that?


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 25, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > all fucking troofers are idiots
> ...


have you?
you are batshit fucking INSANE


----------



## slackjawed (Nov 25, 2010)

If the twoofers had 18.5% of the brain that rational people have they could actually determine what is evidence and what is bullshit. As it is, twoofers have less than 1% of the brain the rest of us do, and therefore do not have the ability to process information.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Nov 25, 2010)

I doubt that the said flight recorder was simply laying on top of the ground when it was found. It could have been though, We would have to ask the recovery people on the site. Not that it makes any difference. maybe a back hoe uncovered it, or it could have been laying up that road near the small out buildings. I don't know. As far as fire damage, we know there were lots of things undamaged by fire. Stands to reason that something made to survive a crash could do so also.


----------



## HUGGY (Nov 25, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> I doubt that the said flight recorder was simply laying on top of the ground when it was found. It could have been though, We would have to ask the recovery people on the site. Not that it makes any difference. maybe a back hoe uncovered it, or it could have been laying up that road near the small out buildings. I don't know. As far as fire damage, *we know there were lots of things undamaged by fire*. Stands to reason that something made to survive a crash could do so also.



OK I'm coming into this late..indulge me please..  What "things" do we know were undamaged by fire?

I don't even know that there was a fire...Was there?  One cannot tell by looking at the rocks and gravel.  They should all be charred.  A fuel fire with a crash like this spreads fuel all over the place...if there was a fire EVERTHING in the impact area got burned.  I'm not saying DESTROYED.  My point is that some obvious fire damage..charring ..would be evident and obvious on the recorder.  To dismiss this point is rediculous.  No ..It just does not happen like this.  The flight recorder does not "get thrown" away from the wreckage.  Anyone suggesting that has no clue how it is placed in an aircraft.


----------



## saiweril (Nov 25, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> I doubt that the said flight recorder was simply laying on top of the ground when it was found. It could have been though, We would have to ask the recovery people on the site. Not that it makes any difference.
> ...or it could have been laying up that road near the small out buildings. I don't know.


It does make a difference when it was supposedly found 15 feet in the ground, wouldn't you agree?



> maybe a back hoe uncovered it


Uncovered it dirt-free after being found 15 feet down?



> As far as fire damage, we know there were lots of things undamaged by fire. Stands to reason that something made to survive a crash could do so also.


Did _any_ alleged Flight 93 debris suffer any fire debris?!


----------



## eots (Nov 25, 2010)

slackjawed said:


> If the twoofers had 18.5% of the brain that rational people have they could actually determine what is evidence and what is bullshit. As it is, twoofers have less than 1% of the brain the rest of us do, and therefore do not have the ability to process information.



so these award winning who is who of science a engineering recipients from nasa
that conclude the official story is false  do not have the ability to process information ...but you asshats  do ?...lol


----------



## eots (Nov 25, 2010)

*


Dwain Deets, MS Physics, MS Eng &#8211; Former Director, Aerospace Projects, NASA Dryden Flight Research Centerin.*  Before this appointment, he served as Director, Research Engineering Division at Dryden.  Recipient of the *NASA Exceptional Service Award* and the *Presidential Meritorious Raink award* the Senior Executive Service (1988).  Selected presenter of the Wright Brothers Lectureship in Aeronautics, a distinguished speaking engagement sponsored by the American Instiank Award tute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) (1986).  *Included in "Who's Who in Science and Engineering*" 1993 - 2000.  Former Chairman of the Aerospace Control and Guidance Systems Committee of the Society of Automotive Engineers.  Former Member, AIAA Committee on Society and Aerospace Technology. * 37 year NASA career.*



Statement in support of Architects and Engineers petition:
"The many visual images (massive structural members being hurled horizontally, huge pyroclastic clouds, etc.) leave no doubt in my mind explosives were involved [in the destruction of the World Trade Center]."  http://www.ae911truth.org


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


----------



## SFC Ollie (Nov 25, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > I doubt that the said flight recorder was simply laying on top of the ground when it was found. It could have been though, We would have to ask the recovery people on the site. Not that it makes any difference. maybe a back hoe uncovered it, or it could have been laying up that road near the small out buildings. I don't know. As far as fire damage, *we know there were lots of things undamaged by fire*. Stands to reason that something made to survive a crash could do so also.
> ...



I suggest you take a look at the debris field, and at some of the recovered items.


----------



## Fizz (Nov 25, 2010)

eots said:


> *
> 
> 
> Dwain Deets, MS Physics, MS Eng &#8211; Former Director, Aerospace Projects, NASA Dryden Flight Research Centerin.*  Before this appointment, he served as Director, Research Engineering Division at Dryden.  Recipient of the *NASA Exceptional Service Award* and the *Presidential Meritorious Raink award* the Senior Executive Service (1988).  Selected presenter of the Wright Brothers Lectureship in Aeronautics, a distinguished speaking engagement sponsored by the American Instiank Award tute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) (1986).  *Included in "Who's Who in Science and Engineering*" 1993 - 2000.  Former Chairman of the Aerospace Control and Guidance Systems Committee of the Society of Automotive Engineers.  Former Member, AIAA Committee on Society and Aerospace Technology. * 37 year NASA career.*
> ...



Logical Fallacies Appeal to Authority

thanks for playing, jackass. now go sit down.


----------



## eots (Nov 25, 2010)

Fizz said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > *
> ...



*did you even read it...jackass*


However, the informal fallacy occurs only when the authority cited either is not an authority, or  is not an authority on the subject on which he is being cited. If someone either isn&#8217;t an authority at all, or isn&#8217;t an authority on the subject about which they&#8217;re speaking, then that undermines the value of their testimony.

Logical Fallacies Appeal to Authority


----------



## Fizz (Nov 26, 2010)

eots said:


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



Yes, I read it you fucking moron. I also read your quote from the Aerospace engineer talking about a building collapse. 

Obviously you don't have enough functioning brain cells to comprehend what you read. NoW go read what you just quoted from the link again and get back to us once you understand it.


----------



## eots (Nov 26, 2010)

Fizz said:


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



so you think that he is unqualified as an engineer and physicist despite  he fact he has been honored with some of the highest awards ...and the fact he specialized in the advanced aerospace program  in his role as a physicist and engineer actually undermines his credibility when speaking about the physics of a building collapse....thanks for showing you have no real understanding of the concept


----------



## Fizz (Nov 26, 2010)

eots said:


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



no, you fucking idiot. you dont seem to understand the concept at all. (surprise!! surprise!!) 

i'm sure he is a wonderful AEROSPACE ENGINEER. you are using him as an authority for the collapse of the WTC towers. 

are you going to claim the towers were really a space ship??!!
again, he is NOT an authority on structural engineering or building demolitions, which is what you are quoting him talking about.
Logical Fallacies Appeal to Authority


----------



## eots (Nov 26, 2010)

Fizz said:


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



he holds master degrees in physics and engineering he worked as in NASAS advanced space program...and I am telling you a man that can and design build and launch spacecraft can understand the physics of the  a steel framed building and the nature explosive forces..he is being quoted as an authority on physics and engineering as that is clearly what he is....as you are clearly foolish


----------



## SFC Ollie (Nov 26, 2010)

Gee my tower team could erect a communications tactical 150 ft tower in about 4 hours, I guess that means we could have built a high rise in a month or two. same principle isn't it?


----------



## saiweril (Nov 26, 2010)

saiweril said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > I doubt that the said flight recorder was simply laying on top of the ground when it was found. It could have been though, We would have to ask the recovery people on the site. Not that it makes any difference.
> ...


bump for SFC Ollie


----------



## SFC Ollie (Nov 26, 2010)

Don't bump for me, when there is something worth commenting on I will be glad to do so.


----------



## Fizz (Nov 26, 2010)

eots said:


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



You are a retard. You ignore what actual authorities on the subject, structural engineers, say about the building. In your desperate search for an authority that actually might slightly agree with your position you need to search outside of the structural engineering field. You find someone that is an aerospace engineer to disagree with the structural engineers. 

why don't you use the actual structural engineer that designed the buildings? He obviously is an authority on the subject. Not some guy working for NASA.


----------



## HUGGY (Nov 26, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> Don't bump for me, when there is something worth commenting on I will be glad to do so.



Oh.... we will bump you bitch!...when we are good and ready!!!  You may not see it coming... But be assured there are those of us out here WHO WILL BUMP YOU!!!!!


----------



## candycorn (Nov 26, 2010)

hilarious.


----------



## eots (Nov 26, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> Gee my tower team could erect a communications tactical 150 ft tower in about 4 hours, I guess that means we could have built a high rise in a month or two. same principle isn't it?



no its the exact opposite actually any team of monkeys can erect a pre -fab communications tower,but would fail miserably at trying to erect an high rise... conversely someone who could Build high rise would find your little radio tower a breeze..like building a high-rise would  be a easy and mundane task for an engineer and physicist of Deets stature


----------



## eots (Nov 26, 2010)

*Hugo Bachmann, PhD &#8211; Professor Emeritus and former Chairman of the Department of Structural Dynamics* and Earthquake Engineering, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology.  Author and co-author of Erdbebenbemessung von Stahlbetonhochbauten (Seismic Analysis of Concrete Reinforced Structures) (1990), Vibration Problems in Structures: Practical Guidelines (1995), Biege- und Schubversuche an teilweise vorgespannten Leichtbetonbalken (Structural Analysis of Linked Concrete Beams) (1998), Hochbau für Ingenieure. Eine Einführung (Structural Construction for Engineers. An introduction) (2001), Erdbebensicherung von Bauwerken (Earthquake-proofing Buildings) (2002).
Tages Anzeiger Article 9/9/06: "In my opinion the building WTC 7 was, with great probability, professionally demolished," says Hugo Bachmann, Emeritus ETH [Swiss Federal Institute of Technology] - Professor of Structural Analysis and Construction. And also Jörg Schneider, *likewise emeritus ETH - Professor of Structural Analysis and Construction, interprets the few available video recordings as evidence that "the building WTC 7 was with great probability demolished." *
English translation: Home
Original in German: Home


----------



## Fizz (Nov 26, 2010)

eots said:


> *Hugo Bachmann, PhD  Professor Emeritus and former Chairman of the Department of Structural Dynamics* and Earthquake Engineering, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology.  Author and co-author of Erdbebenbemessung von Stahlbetonhochbauten (Seismic Analysis of Concrete Reinforced Structures) (1990), Vibration Problems in Structures: Practical Guidelines (1995), Biege- und Schubversuche an teilweise vorgespannten Leichtbetonbalken (Structural Analysis of Linked Concrete Beams) (1998), Hochbau für Ingenieure. Eine Einführung (Structural Construction for Engineers. An introduction) (2001), Erdbebensicherung von Bauwerken (Earthquake-proofing Buildings) (2002).
> Tages Anzeiger Article 9/9/06: "In my opinion the building WTC 7 was, with great probability, professionally demolished," says Hugo Bachmann, Emeritus ETH [Swiss Federal Institute of Technology] - Professor of Structural Analysis and Construction. And also Jörg Schneider, *likewise emeritus ETH - Professor of Structural Analysis and Construction, interprets the few available video recordings as evidence that "the building WTC 7 was with great probability demolished." *
> English translation: Home
> Original in German: Home



you still don't get it, you fucking moron. You are trying to use people that watched a video or saw a few pictures as an authority on the subject OVER people that actually are authorities on the subject and actually have studied it. You are a fucking idiot!!


----------



## Obamerican (Nov 26, 2010)

Fizz said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > *Hugo Bachmann, PhD  Professor Emeritus and former Chairman of the Department of Structural Dynamics* and Earthquake Engineering, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology.  Author and co-author of Erdbebenbemessung von Stahlbetonhochbauten (Seismic Analysis of Concrete Reinforced Structures) (1990), Vibration Problems in Structures: Practical Guidelines (1995), Biege- und Schubversuche an teilweise vorgespannten Leichtbetonbalken (Structural Analysis of Linked Concrete Beams) (1998), Hochbau für Ingenieure. Eine Einführung (Structural Construction for Engineers. An introduction) (2001), Erdbebensicherung von Bauwerken (Earthquake-proofing Buildings) (2002).
> ...


Eots thinks that copy and paste with bold highlights on names and job titles makes him look smart.


----------



## eots (Nov 26, 2010)

Fizz said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > *Hugo Bachmann, PhD  Professor Emeritus and former Chairman of the Department of Structural Dynamics* and Earthquake Engineering, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology.  Author and co-author of Erdbebenbemessung von Stahlbetonhochbauten (Seismic Analysis of Concrete Reinforced Structures) (1990), Vibration Problems in Structures: Practical Guidelines (1995), Biege- und Schubversuche an teilweise vorgespannten Leichtbetonbalken (Structural Analysis of Linked Concrete Beams) (1998), Hochbau für Ingenieure. Eine Einführung (Structural Construction for Engineers. An introduction) (2001), Erdbebensicherung von Bauwerken (Earthquake-proofing Buildings) (2002).
> ...



as opposed to who?... nist ??other than picture and video what special unseen evidence did they have we are not all privy to ? physics is physics


----------



## eots (Nov 26, 2010)

Obamerican said:


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



no I believes sourcing my opinion with experts and links makes me smarter than you


----------



## Obamerican (Nov 26, 2010)

eots said:


> Obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > Fizz said:
> ...


LOL you said a few days ago that you make very few typos. Almost all of your posts show your intelligence level. I was referencing the fact that you use copy and paste with bold highlights to show you "intelligence" because the stuff you type on your own shows a different side of you.  "believes?"


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 26, 2010)

eots said:


> Obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > Fizz said:
> ...


not when your links dont go to credible sites


----------



## eots (Nov 26, 2010)

Obamerican said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Obamerican said:
> ...



typos are really irrelevant but it is all you can cling to.. I could use a spell check like you and never make mistakes but I prefer to give my best..  you show your ignorance with your lame copy and paste line which is nothing more than sourcing and quoting expert opinion ..something you never do


----------



## eots (Nov 26, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Obamerican said:
> ...



so what are you saying you pissant.. another one of your  diveconspiracy theories ? are you trying to claim that deets is not real or did not sign the petition ..you claim its not credible but you back this accusation with nothing


----------



## eots (Nov 26, 2010)

Obamerican said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Obamerican said:
> ...



There is no question.. I am smarter than you


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 26, 2010)

eots said:


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


no, you fucking moron, the links you post are total bullshit


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 26, 2010)

eots said:


> Obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


clearly the opposite of everything you say is the truth

LOL


----------



## eots (Nov 26, 2010)

DiveCon said:


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



so then deets is real and his statement stands then ? ...fuck you are a confused little man


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 26, 2010)

eots said:


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


no
it isnt
because he doesnt have the credibility in the field
moron


----------



## eots (Nov 26, 2010)

DiveCon said:


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



He has no credibility in the field of engineering and physics ?...really ?


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 26, 2010)

eots said:


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


structural engineering, no


----------



## eots (Nov 26, 2010)

*THE NIST TEAM LEADER*
Dr. Gross attended Cornell University and received the Bachelor of Science and Master of Engineering (Civil) degrees in 1969 and 1970, respectively. Upon receiving his Master's Degree, Dr. Gross joined Pittsburgh-Des Moines Steel Company where he worked on various projects including the analysis and design of an ocean-going LNG containment system, the design of an offshore oil storage facility, and the design of a nuclear containment vessel.In 1975, Dr. Gross returned to Cornell University as a doctoral candidate. He received the Ph.D. Degree in Structural Engineering with a minor in Theoretical and Applied Mechanics in May 1980. 
WTC Project Leaders/Profiles - John L. Gross



*Jörg Schneider, Dr hc &#8211; Professor Emeritus, Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering*, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology.  Former President, Joint Committee on Structural Safety, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology.  Elected member of the *Swiss Academy of Engineering Sciences. * *Former Vice President and honorary lifetime member of the International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering.*
Tages Anzeiger Article 9/9/06: " In my opinion the building WTC 7 was, with great probability, professionally demolished," says Hugo Bachmann, Emeritus ETH [Swiss Federal Institute of Technology] - Professor of Structural Analysis and Construction.  And also Jörg Schneider, likewise emeritus ETH - Professor of Structural Analysis and Construction, interprets the few available video recordings as evidence that "the building WTC 7 was with great probability demolished." 
English translation: Home
Original in German: Home


*Mario Fontana, Dr Sc CE &#8211; Professor of Structural Analysis and Construction, Institute of Structural Engineering*, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology.  Former Director of the Steel Construction Division, Geilinger AG.  Author of more than 40 papers on structural engineering.
Tages Anzeiger Article 9/9/06: "We simply don't know what exactly happened in WTC 7," said Mario Fontana, *sitting Professor of Structural Analysis and Construction *at ETH-Zurich. At conferences of structural analysis experts one has discovered only very little on the collapse of WTC 7. It is at least thinkable that a long, on-going fire could have caused the collapse of the building, according to Fontana." 
English translation: Home
Original in German: Home

*Joseph M. Phelps, MS CE, PE (ret) &#8211; Structural Dynamicist, Charter Member, Structural Engineering Institute of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE*).  Life member, ASCE.  Former member of the Marine Technology Society, the American Society for Oceanography, and the Society of Photo-optical Instrumentation Engineers.  Founder of Phelps/ABC, an engineering and industrial marketing firm.  Former Commissioner of the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District.

Member: Scholars for 9/11 Truth "Research proves the current administration has been dishonest about what happened in New York and Washington, D.C. The World Trade Center was almost certainly brought down by controlled demolitions and that the available relevant evidence casts grave doubt on the government's official story about the attack on the Pentagon."
*
Thomas N. Burnham, M.Arch &#8211; Licensed Architect, State of California.  Architect with over 20 years experience in office building design and construction including high rise structure*s.
Statement in support of Architects and Engineers petition: 

"Since the first time I saw the building collapse on TV, I thought the collapse looked like a controlled demolition."  AE911Truth.org


Signatory: Petition requesting a reinvestigation of 9/11, signed by more than 1,300 Architects and Engineers: 



*Erwin De Jong, MS Mechanical and Structural Eng &#8211; Aerospace and Structural Engineer.*
Statement in support of Architects and Engineers petition:  "From a technical point of view it is not explainable that a steel structure sinks down into its own footprint with obviously no resistance after intense fires or even a plane crash."  AE911Truth.org


Patriots Question 9/11 - Engineers and Architects Question the 9/11 Commission Report


----------



## eots (Nov 26, 2010)

divecon said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > divecon said:
> ...



its about* physics * and the man is clearly one of the best


----------



## Obamerican (Nov 27, 2010)

eots said:


> Obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


The general consensus on this board is that YOU are an idiot.


----------



## Obamerican (Nov 27, 2010)

eots said:


> Obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


My job here is not to post over posted info but to show what an idiot YOU really are.


----------



## eots (Nov 27, 2010)

obamerican said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > obamerican said:
> ...



really...says who ?... Again you show your intellectual weakness and herd mentality...what a handful of monkeys like you think is not relevant to the truth..the truth just is


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 27, 2010)

eots said:


> obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


and you and the truth arent on speaking terms


----------



## Obamerican (Nov 27, 2010)

eots said:


> obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


And YOU are the speaker of "truth"? LOL Whatever, little boy.


----------



## eots (Nov 27, 2010)

divecon said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > obamerican said:
> ...



empty meaningless statement..you wanted specifically structural engineer instead of physic masters and engineer.. I gave them to you..thats the truth ..those that question the work of Gross are equal or superior in there qualifications and experience..thats the truth


----------



## eots (Nov 27, 2010)

obamerican said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > obamerican said:
> ...



just like you lil buddy dwivecon...with your nothing.. Substance-less statement ..do you care to try to rebut the experts I posted.?..no of course you don't..


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 27, 2010)

eots said:


> divecon said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


no, it is a factual statement
you and the truth are not even in the same zip code


----------



## eots (Nov 27, 2010)

divecon said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > divecon said:
> ...



more of dwives drivel to avoid addressing fact


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 27, 2010)

eots said:


> divecon said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


still waiting for you to post your first fact


----------



## eots (Nov 27, 2010)

The fact is there are highly qualified top level military and government and private sector experts in the field of physic, engineering ,air security ,crash investigators NORAD tac directors, iintel and counter terrorism experts...that have all stated publicly and on record the official story and explanation of the collapse are untrue...there is the fact regardless of tour opinion on 9/11
Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 27, 2010)

eots said:


> The fact is there are highly qualified top level military and government and private sector experts in the field of physic, engineering ,air security ,crash investigators NORAD tac directors, iintel and counter terrorism experts...that have all stated publicly and on record the official story and explanation of the collapse are untrue...there is the fact regardless of tour opinion on 9/11
> Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report


still waiting for those facts you claim to post


----------



## Fizz (Nov 27, 2010)

more proof Ediots can't comprehend what he reads.

"Mario Fontana, Dr Sc CE  Professor of Structural Analysis and Construction, Institute of Structural Engineering, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology. Former Director of the Steel Construction Division, Geilinger AG. Author of more than 40 papers on structural engineering.
Tages Anzeiger Article *9/9/06*: "We simply don't know what *exactly* happened in WTC 7," said Mario Fontana, sitting Professor of Structural Analysis and Construction at ETH-Zurich. At conferences of structural analysis experts one has discovered only very little on the collapse of WTC 7. *It is at least thinkable that a long, on-going fire could have caused the collapse of the building, according to Fontana.*"
English translation: Home
Original in German: Home"

of course he didnt know what exactly happened in 2006 BEFORE THE FINAL REPORT WAS RELEASED!!!


----------



## saiweril (Nov 27, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> Don't bump for me, when there is something worth commenting on I will be glad to do so.


Then don't demand evidence if you're just going to ignore it, you hypocrite.  You're a disgrace to the armed forces.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Nov 27, 2010)

saiweril said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > Don't bump for me, when there is something worth commenting on I will be glad to do so.
> ...



Ah, I bet you say that to all the veterans. Fucking moron.


----------



## saiweril (Nov 27, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Some board members think most of a 155 foot jet buried deep in the ground...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well skeptics, do you believe the above (the official story), or not?


----------



## saiweril (Nov 27, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > SFC Ollie said:
> ...


No, only to the hypocrite vets like you and you shouldn't call anyone a moron when you demand evidence and then turn around to ignore it.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Nov 27, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> I doubt that the said flight recorder was simply laying on top of the ground when it was found. It could have been though, We would have to ask the recovery people on the site. Not that it makes any difference. maybe a back hoe uncovered it, or it could have been laying up that road near the small out buildings. I don't know. As far as fire damage, we know there were lots of things undamaged by fire. Stands to reason that something made to survive a crash could do so also.





saiweril said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > I doubt that the said flight recorder was simply laying on top of the ground when it was found. It could have been though, We would have to ask the recovery people on the site. Not that it makes any difference.
> ...




Quote: Originally Posted by SFC Ollie 

Don't bump for me, when there is something worth commenting on I will be glad to do so.

Quote: Originally Posted by saiweril 


Then don't demand evidence if you're just going to ignore it, you hypocrite. You're a disgrace to the armed forces.

Quote: Originally Posted by SFC Ollie 
Ah, I bet you say that to all the veterans. Fucking moron.

Quote: Originally Posted by saiweril
No, only to the hypocrite vets like you and you shouldn't call anyone a moron when you demand evidence and then turn around to ignore it.

I'm so sorry for you, I don't see where i asked you for anything... However, should you ever have any actual evidence many of us would love to hear about it. So far no one here has presented any real evidence that the 911 CR is wrong on any major points. And I seldom ignore anything, it's normally too hilarious for that. 

By the way, the coroners remarks to a reporter do not necessarily mean that is the official story.


----------



## saiweril (Nov 27, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> By the way, the coroners remarks to a reporter do not necessarily mean that is the official story.


Just to confirm, are you saying you don't believe that what the Coroner says actually happened?


----------



## SFC Ollie (Nov 27, 2010)

Haven't a clue, maybe when I get back home from my daughters I'll reread the investigation reports and see what they actually say. While I'm here I kind of limit the computer time.


----------



## saiweril (Nov 27, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> Haven't a clue, maybe when I get back home from my daughters I'll reread the investigation reports and see what they actually say.


How can you dismiss what the Coroner said when you admit you "haven't a clue" and have to reread the investigation reports?

But yes, would like to hear your version of the details of the crash.  You might be the first skeptics to offer up a version.


----------



## Wicked Jester (Nov 27, 2010)

Cool.......Another troofer moron to ridicule and laugh at!


----------



## SFC Ollie (Nov 27, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> Cool.......Another troofer moron to ridicule and laugh at!



He/she/it is pretty funny too.


----------



## Fizz (Nov 27, 2010)

saiweril said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > By the way, the coroners remarks to a reporter do not necessarily mean that is the official story.
> ...



why is it that these dumb fucking twoofers need to quote people on things they are not experts on?? 

fucking Ediots quotes an aerospace engineer on a building collapse and now this fucking moron is quoting a coroner on aircraft debris.


----------



## eots (Nov 27, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> Cool.......Another troofer moron to ridicule and laugh at!



dickless fester you are not capable of ridicule...it is like a child with downs syndrome attempting to ridicule someone...not very effective


----------



## eots (Nov 27, 2010)

Fizz said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > SFC Ollie said:
> ...



why cant fizzle comprehend that DEETS has a master degree in ENGINEERING and PHYSICS...and worked in the ADVANCED aerospace program.. as John Gross from NIST worked in nuclear containment before NIST


----------



## eots (Nov 27, 2010)

fizz said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > sfc ollie said:
> ...



its called an eye wittiness


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 27, 2010)

eots said:


> fizz said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


Deets was at ground zero on 9/11?


----------



## eots (Nov 27, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > fizz said:
> ...


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 27, 2010)

eots said:


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


----------



## eots (Nov 27, 2010)

DiveCon said:


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


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 27, 2010)

eots said:


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


----------



## eots (Nov 27, 2010)

DiveCon said:


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


----------



## Shooter (Nov 27, 2010)

What do you think is smarter?  Truthers or a car tire?


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 27, 2010)

Shooter said:


> What do you think is smarter?  Truthers or a car tire?


the flat tire
it can always be fixed


----------



## slackjawed (Nov 27, 2010)

Shooter said:


> What do you think is smarter?  Truthers or a car tire?



The tire. It doesn't even have to hold air to surpass the twoofers.

You know, it ocurred to me that twoofers are probably breathing up all the 'good' air.......


----------



## Shooter (Nov 28, 2010)

slackjawed said:


> You know, it ocurred to me that twoofers are probably breathing up all the 'good' air.......



I thought the Truthers breahted methane?


----------



## eots (Nov 28, 2010)

Shooter said:


> slackjawed said:
> 
> 
> > You know, it ocurred to me that twoofers are probably breathing up all the 'good' air.......
> ...



so you believe these men breaths methane is that your inane explanation ?
what a loon...

http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/


----------



## Fizz (Nov 28, 2010)

eots said:


> Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > slackjawed said:
> ...



somebody please translate this into english.


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 28, 2010)

Fizz said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Shooter said:
> ...


you should have seen it before he edited it

LOL


----------



## eots (Nov 28, 2010)

Shooter said:


> slackjawed said:
> 
> 
> > You know, it ocurred to me that twoofers are probably breathing up all the 'good' air.......
> ...



as soon as you get someone to translate this...jackass


----------



## saiweril (Nov 28, 2010)

Fizz said:


> why is it that these dumb fucking twoofers need to quote people on things they are not experts on??
> 
> fucking Ediots quotes an aerospace engineer on a building collapse and now this fucking moron is quoting a coroner on aircraft debris.


Because you skeptics are too impatient and jump to conclusions about what we think.  Try to exercise a little patience and maybe you'll just learn something (I know that's a bit of an oxymoron; skeptics learning something).

As long as we are on the subject, are you concurring with Ollie that what the Coroner is saying is wrong?


----------



## SFC Ollie (Nov 28, 2010)

What? I never said he was wrong, do not put words in my mouth. I said I didn't know if what he said was part of the official explanations. But I would reread the reports after I got home from this little holiday trip I am on.

No wonder you folks have problems......


----------



## slackjawed (Nov 28, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> What? I never said he was wrong, do not put words in my mouth. I said I didn't know if what he said was part of the official explanations. But I would reread the reports after I got home from this little holiday trip I am on.
> 
> No wonder you folks have problems......



Mental retardation comes with a whole set of problems that manifest themselves in many different ways.

Being a twoofer on a message board is just one of the many ways that mental retardation shows itself to the public at large.


----------



## saiweril (Nov 28, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> What? I never said he was wrong, do not put words in my mouth. I said I didn't know if what he said was part of the official explanations. But I would reread the reports after I got home from this little holiday trip I am on.
> 
> No wonder you folks have problems......


Oh geez, not this game again.

OK, regardless if it's part of the _published_ official story, did what the coroner describe happen?


----------



## SFC Ollie (Nov 28, 2010)

After I get home and have a chance to look into this...

Is that really that difficult to understand?

I want to know what the good Doctor said in full, so I understand the context. When he said it, and to what reporter. Then of course I want to reread where different parts of the aircraft was actually found. This all has bearing on the actual facts vs remarks made to some reporter somewhere.


----------



## eots (Nov 28, 2010)

all just to distract from the fact that top level military and government veterans call the official conclusions false...if slackassses drivel where true then some of the most sensitive areas in national security and science have been run by those suffering from mental retardation...clearly this is the beliefs of someone not dealing with reality

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


----------



## slackjawed (Nov 28, 2010)

eots said:


> all just to distract from the fact that top level military and government veterans call the official conclusions false...if slackassses drivel where true then some of the most sensitive areas in national security and science have been run by those suffering from mental retardation...clearly this is the beliefs of someone not dealing with reality
> 
> Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report





Thanks eots, for your demonstration of the effects of mental retardation on an otherwise healthy mind.


----------



## saiweril (Nov 28, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> After I get home and have a chance to look into this...
> 
> Is that really that difficult to understand?
> 
> I want to know what the good Doctor said in full, so I understand the context. When he said it, and to what reporter. Then of course I want to reread where different parts of the aircraft was actually found. This all has bearing on the actual facts vs remarks made to some reporter somewhere.


Well what do you personally think happened to the plane after it allegedly crashed?  You guys are saying 95% of it was found.  That's a lot of plane.  It all had to be somewhere.


----------



## eots (Nov 28, 2010)

slackjawed said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > all just to distract from the fact that top level military and government veterans call the official conclusions false...if slackassses drivel where true then some of the most sensitive areas in national security and science have been run by those suffering from mental retardation...clearly this is the beliefs of someone not dealing with reality
> ...



your retardation is clear yes, but the otherwise healthy part...not so much


----------



## slackjawed (Nov 28, 2010)

eots said:


> slackjawed said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



how was turkey day eots?


----------



## eots (Nov 29, 2010)

slackjawed said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > slackjawed said:
> ...



Go fuck yourself....


----------



## slackjawed (Nov 29, 2010)

eots said:


> slackjawed said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



Go ahead, keep that up and I won't invite you to go fishing next spring!


----------



## saiweril (Nov 29, 2010)

Whenever a skeptic gets a chance, can you please explain to me how Flight 93 could crash and 95% of it be recovered when photos of the scene shortly after shows at best 10% of a 757 scattered about?  That's a lot of debris missing.


----------



## HUGGY (Nov 29, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Whenever a skeptic gets a chance, can you please explain to me how Flight 93 could crash and 95% of it be recovered when photos of the scene shortly after shows at best 10% of a 757 scattered about?  That's a lot of debris missing.



90 % of the plane morphed into little molebots due to the force of impact. They dug themselves deep into the core of the earth.  But not all of the bots transformed into burrowing bots...some of them changed into cleanerbots that polished up some of the debris including the flight recorder.  Oh..and others emerged as charcoal eating bots that munched on the remnants of the fire until the recovery crew arrived.


----------



## Fizz (Nov 30, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Whenever a skeptic gets a chance, can you please explain to me how Flight 93 could crash and 95% of it be recovered when photos of the scene shortly after shows at best 10% of a 757 scattered about?  That's a lot of debris missing.



can you please explain why you expect it should not be recovered from the crash scene.


----------



## candycorn (Nov 30, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Whenever a skeptic gets a chance, can you please explain to me how Flight 93 could crash and 95% of it be recovered when photos of the scene shortly after shows at best 10% of a 757 scattered about?  That's a lot of debris missing.



*You read too much into photographs.  

It means one of three things:


The debris wasn't there and it wasn't photographed.
The debris was there and it was photographed but the photos were not released to the general public
The debris was there but wasn't photographed.

I tend to think it was option 3 (the last one).  I believe it was largely because of the rural area where the plane landed.  If Flight 93 were to have crashed into suburban New York City for example with a press that is used to big stories, used to going over the line in photo-journalism and used to seeing corpses, it would have been covered more aggressively.

It also would have been covered by more photographers.  

The lack of photographs is also a symptom of the area where it landed; small town, rural area...fewer CSI types.  

We have a lot of photographs of the wreckage.  Huge amounts.  Enough to convince anybody who is open to being convinced.  The population that stands on the other side is made up of morons, idiots, and cowards to logic.  It is staffed by dumbasses who can't spell the word "conspiracy", doesn't know how to use proper English, and have long since given up trying to debate the topic in the face of overwhelming evidence.  These are the people who believe movies are real; that professional wrestling is a sport, and that popcorn is a good lunch.  

The person who took the photographs on 9/11/01 didn't foresee that these pieces of shit would be wondering about the volume of photographs 9 years after the fact.  For them, most likely, it was a scene that had bodies laying around and those bodies didn't deserve to be photographed and have their memories continuously trampled upon.  Doubtlessly by this time, they knew it was terrorism; not merely a plane crash.  

Personally, I would wager a 2nd or 3rd roll of film is somewhere in Somerset County under wraps and always will be; either in the sheriff's office, the PA Attorney General's office, or most likely in control of the FBI.  That is what you call discretion.  That is what you call scruples.  That is what you call being a fucking human being; something the truther community has given up on long ago.  

The reason you don't see 100% of the photographs is because you don't deserve to see them; and neither do I.  Somehow the whacko, hyper-paranoid truther community has hatched some sort of sense of entitlement out of their lust for blood and their mania to question everything that isn't gift-wrapped and placed on the table in front of them.  This lazy, psychotic, and 100% retarded view of the world--that the evidence of lives lost is owed to you--is the reason only publicity seekers and bona-fide idiots agree with your opinions.  Forget the facts; you have none.

*


----------



## saiweril (Nov 30, 2010)

Fizz said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > Whenever a skeptic gets a chance, can you please explain to me how Flight 93 could crash and 95% of it be recovered when photos of the scene shortly after shows at best 10% of a 757 scattered about?  That's a lot of debris missing.
> ...


What the fock are you talking about?  Talk about


----------



## saiweril (Nov 30, 2010)

candycorn said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > Whenever a skeptic gets a chance, can you please explain to me how Flight 93 could crash and 95% of it be recovered when photos of the scene shortly after shows at best 10% of a 757 scattered about?  That's a lot of debris missing.
> ...


  Now I know you skeptics are clearly insane!   

There were _plenty_ of photos taken that spanned the whole area, including aerials and photos of inside the forest, that would have shown were all this missing debris was.   



> We have a lot of photographs of the wreckage.  Huge amounts.


But you just said "The debris was there but wasn't photographed" you fruitloop.  Make up your friggin mind!  



> For them, most likely, it was a scene that had bodies laying around


There were NO BODIES reported at the Shanksville scene, you friggin idiot!   The coroner reported he didn't even see a drop of blood!!!  



> and those bodies didn't deserve to be photographed and have their memories continuously trampled upon.


Like these taken at the Pentagon?...
Graphic pics are not tolerated on this board.  Leave a link and flag the pics as being graphic.--Meister


> Forget the facts; you have none.


Look who's talking!!!


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 30, 2010)

the Pentagon was not located in a RUAL town
another FAIL


----------



## eots (Nov 30, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> the Pentagon was not located in a RUAL town
> another FAIL



bot it shows there is no sensitivity to taking and publishing pictures of bodies if there are any to take pictures of


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 30, 2010)

eots said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > the Pentagon was not located in a RUAL town
> ...


the difference being small town in PA vs the nations capitol


----------



## Fizz (Nov 30, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Fizz said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...



seriously.

where do you expect 95% of the plane to be recovered from if not the crash site? 

once you answer this we will get to my next point....


----------



## candycorn (Nov 30, 2010)

saiweril said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


And there are plenty of photographs of that wreckage.  



saiweril said:


> But you just said "The debris was there but wasn't photographed" you fruitloop.  Make up your friggin mind!


Fuck you.

You were talking about the supposed discrepancy in 95% of the plane being recovered vs. your belief that there should be photographs of 95% of the recovered plane.  I was trying to enlighten you.  It's a lost cause obviously but hey, I tried.  



saiweril said:


> There were NO BODIES reported at the Shanksville scene, you friggin idiot!   The coroner reported he didn't even se a drop of blood!!!  \


Plenty of DNA and remains; all were collected and returned to the next of kin.  Again, fuck you.



saiweril said:


> > and those bodies didn't deserve to be photographed and have their memories continuously trampled upon.
> 
> 
> Like these taken at the Pentagon?...
> Graphic pics are not tolerated on this board.  Leave a link and flag the pics as being graphic.--Meister




Obviously you're too dense to know what I wrote in my 100% bulletproof retort to your bizarre stance.  

You deserve to die of a very painful disease.  I wish we would put people like you in Gitmo with the terrorists and you could practice youre bending toward Mecca.  I'm sure you'd enjoy it and it would be your first shot at intimacy; ever.

PS: Fuck you.


----------



## saiweril (Nov 30, 2010)

DiveCon said:


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


So it's OK for the government to post gruesome pics of the deceased from the capitol, but not from a small town.  Got it.


----------



## saiweril (Nov 30, 2010)

Fizz said:


> where do you expect 95% of the plane to be recovered from if not the crash site?
> 
> once you answer this we will get to my next point....


I'm still waiting for you sheep to prove 95% of a 757 was recovered there!


----------



## saiweril (Nov 30, 2010)

candycorn loves to dish it out, but can't stand to get any dished back in return.  

What a hypocrite!


----------



## candycorn (Nov 30, 2010)

saiweril said:


> candycorn loves to dish it out, but can't stand to get any dished back in return.
> 
> What a hypocrite!



Fuck you.


----------



## candycorn (Nov 30, 2010)

saiweril said:


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



No fucktard;

Try to keep up.

I'm *guessing* that the small town photographer used some discretion.  You don't know anything about it because it comes from maturity.  

Had he/she taken some; the government would have used them in prosecuting Moussaui as they did with the pictures of the bodies at the Pentagon and the shockingly horrifying video of the bodies falling out of the twin towers.  

Now that is a *guess* about why we see bodies in two places and not in a third.  Its likely a function of discretion and probably staffing as well.  

All DNA from passengers was verified.  The Coroner says so.  You quoted him.  Gee, was he lying when you quoted him?  

Plenty of pictures of the wreckage exist.  You can find them in many places.  This site:

U.S.D.C. Eastern District of Virginia

Is from the Moussaui exhibits and all are public record entered into Federal District Court. They were not challenged by the defense attorneys.


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 30, 2010)

saiweril said:


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


strawman
no one ever said that you fucking moron


----------



## DiveCon (Nov 30, 2010)

candycorn said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


troofer are too fucking stupid to understand that simple concept


----------



## eots (Dec 1, 2010)

candycorn said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > divecon said:
> ...



so this would be your theory then ?..a candycornsporacy ?...that small town photographers  conspired to not fully photograph the scene or bodies ...because it was insensitive ??


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 1, 2010)

eots said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


holy shit you are dumb


----------



## Obamerican (Dec 1, 2010)

eots said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


You tin foil hat crowd post "maybe this happened" and "it could've been" crap ALL of the time!! Thanks for proving just how biased YOU are, little boy.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 4, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > Whenever a skeptic gets a chance, can you please explain to me how Flight 93 could crash and 95% of it be recovered when photos of the scene shortly after shows at best 10% of a 757 scattered about?  That's a lot of debris missing.
> ...


The funny thing is that is about as believable as the official story!


----------



## saiweril (Dec 4, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> After I get home and have a chance to look into this...
> 
> Is that really that difficult to understand?
> 
> I want to know what the good Doctor said in full, so I understand the context. When he said it, and to what reporter. Then of course I want to reread where different parts of the aircraft was actually found. This all has bearing on the actual facts vs remarks made to some reporter somewhere.


Ever going to get around to this?


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 4, 2010)

saiweril said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > After I get home and have a chance to look into this...
> ...



Don't be mad at DiveyDowner.  He just wants everyone to respect the Gubmint...unless of course it is headed by a black guy...

The main obsticle one faces in unravelling this "whodunit" is the thousands of items that cannot be reconciled so the amature detectives start off looking crazy as if THEY came up with the mountain of disinformation and missing facts.  All we know fo sho is that two planes crashed into the WTC.  Everything else has been plowed so deep under that the only rational path to take is to take the easy path and just let it go.

We will NEVER know the truth any more than what we know for sure about a simple assacination as Kennedy's.  This thing is a thousand times more complicated and buried a thousand times deeper.


----------



## candycorn (Dec 4, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > SFC Ollie said:
> ...



I'm not sure who your "we" is but my "we" knows much more about 9/11.  My "we" knows 4 planes crashed, who hi jacked them, who was on the planes, how they pulled it off, where they crashed, and that there were no survivors.  Your "we we" is full of morons, anti-semites, and people who just are looking for attention by acting foolish.  

I'll agree that your "we" has zero facts and only innuendo.  But conspiracies only work when they are not complex; any and all theories trotted out by your we (when someone on your "we" has the stones to actually write down what they think happened) involve a laundry list of players.  Unless you would like to spell out what your "we" believes happened


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 4, 2010)

candycorn said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...



Why do you bother to respond to a post of mine when you know that I am much smarter than you and have far more experience in "The Field" being a pilot.  I just got done saying that the intelligent path is to just let it go.  That does not mean buying your hack bullshit.  I rarely come around to these threads because it just depresses me to think of how stupid people like you are.


----------



## candycorn (Dec 4, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > HUGGY said:
> ...



It frightens me that others trust their life to someone like you who can't put 2 and 2 together.  

Lets see, Flight 77 is missing but we have a debris field at the Pentagon....  What does that tell you?  It tells the rest of the world that Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon but if you want to go in a different direction, thats your business.  You sound as dumb as your avatar looks.

To continue on...all of the wreckage...100%...EN-TOTO...EVERY FUCKING BIT...matches AA77 all the way down to the paint of the plane.   What does that tell you?  It tells the rest of the world that Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon but if you want to go in a different direction, thats your business.  You sound as dumb as your avatar looks.

To continue on...all of the DNA gathered there, 100%...EN-TOTO...EVERY FUCKING IT...matches victims at the Pentagon or the passengers save for 5 sets belonging to the five hi-jackers.   What does that tell you?  It tells the rest of the world that Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon but if you want to go in a different direction, thats your business.  You sound as dumb as your avatar looks.

To continue on...Air Traffic Controllers--you may have heard of them--all of them there, 100%..EN-TOTO...EVERY FUCKING ONE tracked AA77 into the Pentagon airspace but not leaving it.   What does that tell you?  It tells the rest of the world that Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon but if you want to go in a different direction, thats your business.  You sound as dumb as your avatar looks.

That you don't come around spreading your "wisdom" cheapens the experience of posting here not one iota.  There is nothing you can teach me about this subject.  Save yourself further embarrassment and turn off your computer Sheila.


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 4, 2010)

candycorn said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Been flying since 76 cupcake.. I'll stand on my safety record.

But since YOU brought it up...  your sig line spills the beans as to what you are really here for and what you are all about.  

Think you obssess about conspiracies much?


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 4, 2010)

Yep when I can dig through all the nutcase conspiracy sites and find the real investigations I'll let you know.

And damn,  I actually believed Huggy was too intelligent to be a truther.


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 4, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> Yep when I can dig through all the nutcase conspiracy sites and find the real investigations I'll let you know.
> 
> And damn,  I actually believed Huggy was too intelligent to be a truther.



Maybe I'm intelligent enough..and maybe I'm ......NOT!!!!!! 

I don't even know what a "truther" is.  I do know the hole at the pentagon is too small.  I do know that the flight recorder "recovered" from shanksville was not in a fire.

I watched in real time as the second plane hit the towers..which I have been to the top of.

I do know a little something about plane crashes after reading about thousands of them. 

I know a bit about how the airplane world works having been a pilot for over 35 years. 

I do know that airplanes crashing into gravel and rocks do not "burrow" thier way underground.

I do not KNOW why there are some huge gaps in the evidense.  I do not care why.  I only come here because it is easy to find stupid threads to criticise here and sometimes I just feel mean!!!


----------



## candycorn (Dec 4, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > HUGGY said:
> ...



I'll stand by the plane if you're in the cockpit.  Love to point out the casual relationship you idiots have with the truth.  

Please don't comment on what you don't know about; and you know nothing about 9/11


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 4, 2010)

candycorn said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Oh right like YOU DO??  Go fuck yourself cupcake.  I'll comment about any damn thing I want to within the rules here at USMB.  Are you a pilot?  Of course not....you simple ass bitch.  Don't try to lecture me on subjects related to flying.  It makes you look dumber than you usually do..I know...hard to believe...but true.


----------



## candycorn (Dec 4, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > HUGGY said:
> ...



We're talking about crashes and the evidence they produced and the evidence you're seemingly ignoring shit-for-brains.  Or do you really want to stand on "well gee the planes landed somewhere and we have drones--painted to look like planes, planted DNA, everybody is lying, paid off," bullshit?


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 4, 2010)

candycorn said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



I don't have to know ALL of the evidense.  Every scap of evidense in a plane crash has to stand alone and in concert with all of the other pieces of evidense.  If any one piece of evidense is absolutely wrong then the whole of the evidense is wrong and any conclusion drawn on that set of evidense is flawed.  The recorder was never in a fire.  That makes the Shanksville conclusions flawed.

The hole at the Pentagon was WAY too small.  That makes the conclusions drawn on that set of evidense flawed.  

It is really THAT simple.  It does not matter how much OTHER supporting evidense has been added to either crash site.  Airplane crashes are NOT debatable.  The evidense is all that matters.  If the two examples I have isolated cannot be fully explained then NONE of the crash investigation can be trusted.  

You can post your nonsense till the end of time.  It will not change what I just pointed out.


----------



## Paulie (Dec 4, 2010)

candycorn said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



What exactly is your obsession with the conspiracy forum here?

You're just as fucking whacked out as the ones you argue with.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 4, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > HUGGY said:
> ...



So every piece of that plane that does not show marks from a fire could not have been in the plane crash? OK Huggy put down the crack pipe.


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 4, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...


Yeah, the flight recorder couldn't have possibly been thrown away from the fire......And, a hole in the Pentagon couldn't have possibly appeared smaller, seeing as though the plane was travelling at FULL SPEED with the landing gear up when it sliced into the building like a knife........One does not need an advanced degree in physics to fully understand that a slower moving plane with the wheels down would have caused a much bigger hole than a plane travelling at full speed with the wheels up.

Once again, these twoofer claims are repeatedly debunked........Unless the only "experts" relied up on are former this' and retired thats' who NEVER were involved in the investigation.......Or of course, the one "expert" they put up who was found to be in the advanced stages of alzheimers when he made his fully debunked "claims"


LMAO!


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 4, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > HUGGY said:
> ...


just curious, which one was that?


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 4, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > HUGGY said:
> ...



It doesn't matter to me what some other experts said.  At 500 knots a wing does not "fold" back.


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 4, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > SFC Ollie said:
> ...


I'll have to look for it, Dive. It's in one of these loony threads........One of the older ones for sure.

Seriously, eots or one of these fools put up his "claims" as facts......It was then found that he was in the latter stages of alzheimers when he made the "claims"


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 4, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > Wicked Jester said:
> ...


that wasnt the infamous Dr Jones, was it?


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 4, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > SFC Ollie said:
> ...


whats funny is that i dont know who has made any claims that the "wings folded back"


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 4, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> > Wicked Jester said:
> ...


Haven't seen that claim either.........One must remember that there is an obvious slice in the towers where you can clearly see the where the wings and fuselge went through.....The towers weren't built like pentagon.....It wasn't reinforced like the pentagon. No doubt when that plane hit the pentagon, the wings sheered off on impact and virtually disinigrated........Wings are primarily hollow, reinforced every couple of feet with steel ribs. That's why you can literally watch them bow and flex in flight......No doubt they completely disintegrated on impact......And this was fully proven on the nat-geo special that debunked all the BS.


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 4, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


Not sure what is his name was.....I'm looking for it....It's in one of these threads......I'm watching football at the same time i'm posting and looking......It may take awhile.


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 4, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > HUGGY said:
> ...


the purdue simulations showed the wings shredding on impact with the outer walls of the pentagon


----------



## eots (Dec 5, 2010)

wicked jester said:


> divecon said:
> 
> 
> > wicked jester said:
> ...



of course dickless fester will never back this empty statement with anything specific


----------



## eots (Dec 5, 2010)

divecon said:


> wicked jester said:
> 
> 
> > divecon said:
> ...



got a link to that dwivy ?


----------



## eots (Dec 5, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > HUGGY said:
> ...



YOU CANT KEEP THE PENTAGON OR WTC STRAIGHT..AND THE COMMENT OF WINGS FOLDING BACK WAS FROM SOME BULLSHIT STATEMENT FROM A USA TODAY REPORTER POSTED BY ONE OF YOU FOOLS...FUCKING MORONS..DONT PRETEND...

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0vxc50xAbk&feature=related[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ln97NJV44xs[/ame]


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 5, 2010)

eots said:


> divecon said:
> 
> 
> > wicked jester said:
> ...


they've been posted for you before
moron
i will not waste my time posting them for you again
you will only reject them like all you fucking moron s do


----------



## eots (Dec 5, 2010)

divecon said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > divecon said:
> ...



no.. You just told the same lie before you useless ****


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 5, 2010)

eots said:


> divecon said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


so you deny ever seeing the Purdue University simulation?

that would make you a fucking LIAR
because i KNOW they have been posted in threads you've been in


----------



## Obamerican (Dec 5, 2010)

eots said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


But if the same reporter had said that he saw a missile hit the Pentagon YOU would be quoting him, you fucking shit stain.


----------



## eots (Dec 6, 2010)

Obamerican said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Wicked Jester said:
> ...



So what now you support the clown that says he says he saw  the wings fold back and enter the hole all at 500 mph ?


----------



## eots (Dec 6, 2010)

Obamerican said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Wicked Jester said:
> ...



So what now you support the clown that says he says he saw  the wings fold back and enter the hole all at 500 mph ?


----------



## eots (Dec 6, 2010)

Obamerican said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Wicked Jester said:
> ...



So what now you support the clown that says he says he saw  the wings fold back and enter the hole all at 500 mph ?


----------



## saiweril (Dec 7, 2010)

Ollie?  Ever going to give us the story as you said you would when you got back home?


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 7, 2010)

Once I actually wade through the tons of garbage that has cluttered up the searches for the official reports I want to see, I might do that. It is not a high priority to me right now.


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 8, 2010)

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIZ205ccX8M[/ame]


----------



## saiweril (Dec 8, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> Once I actually wade through the tons of garbage that has cluttered up the searches for the official reports I want to see, I might do that. It is not a high priority to me right now.


How can you be supporting the whole official story if you don't even know what it is?

Scenario:
Truthers:  Flight 93 didn't crash
Skeptics:  yes it did.  prove it didn't
Truthers:  the scene conflicts with the official story, such as this, this, this, etc
Skeptics:  ah, er, well, I don't really know the official story, but it did crash.

See your problem?


----------



## saiweril (Dec 8, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Some board members think most of a 155 foot jet buried deep in the ground...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


bump


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 8, 2010)

saiweril said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > Once I actually wade through the tons of garbage that has cluttered up the searches for the official reports I want to see, I might do that. It is not a high priority to me right now.
> ...



No I don't, since the statement I and many others have made is that the 911 commissions report and other official reports got all the main points right. You are talking about where one piece of the puzzle was found and one persons comment to a reporter. Those are not main points. DUH!


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 8, 2010)

saiweril said:


> bump


Let me ask you a question.  You seem to be in complete disbelief that a plane flying into the ground could bury itself with the only visible parts being very small.  What if it happened before?  Or since?  Would you believe it then?  Or would you continue to claim it is all a lie simply because you can't believe it could happen?


----------



## saiweril (Dec 8, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> No I don't, since the statement I and many others have made is that the 911 commissions report and other official reports got all the main points right. You are talking about where one piece of the puzzle was found and one persons comment to a reporter. Those are not main points. DUH!


Refresh me on those main points.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 8, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > bump
> ...


Not necessarily, but let's hear about this other crash that was similar cause I've searched around and never came across a crash similar to the make-believe Shanksville one.


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 8, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Patriot911 said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...



I see.  So even if someone can show you a crash that in almost every way was identical to flight 93 you would continue your bullshit that it couldn't have happened.  Wow.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 8, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> I see.  So even if someone can show you a crash that in almost every way was identical to flight 93 you would continue your bullshit that it couldn't have happened.  Wow.


Just because something "could have" happened, doesn't mean it did.  Another crash could said to be _exactly_ like another reported one.  Doesn't mean they other one happened unless all the details were proven, not just written about.

So let's see your crash comparison to the make-believe Shanksville one.  Let's at least establish they were indeed _similar_.


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 8, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Patriot911 said:
> 
> 
> > I see.  So even if someone can show you a crash that in almost every way was identical to flight 93 you would continue your bullshit that it couldn't have happened.  Wow.
> ...



Well, I believe it will be a waste of time since you've already admitted you won't necessarily be swayed by evidence.  Typical.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ff7h7Ll8Dl4]Flight 1771[/ame]


----------



## saiweril (Dec 8, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> Flight 1771


I see two glaring differences that doesn't make that crash similar.  

1) I see no evidence that most of that plane got buried.  You can see that there is TONS of debris strewn on the ground compared to the Shanksville scene which relatively few debris strewn across the ground and the reported reason for that is most of Flight 93 buried into the mushy ground there.

2) the one you posted didn't leave any wing scars in the ground.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 8, 2010)

LOL, it must have been exactly the same in all the gory details in order for the truthers to believe anything. Oh and don't forget It had to have been planted. You know all those millions of parts from Flight 93 must have been trucked in without anyone seeing them.... 

Fruitcakes, they must be fruitcakes.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 8, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> all those millions of parts from Flight 93 must have been trucked in


What millions of parts?


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 8, 2010)

saiweril said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > all those millions of parts from Flight 93 must have been trucked in
> ...



You've seen all the pictures before, why do you even have to ask?


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 8, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Patriot911 said:
> 
> 
> > Flight 1771
> ...



Who said there was no evidence above ground?  They had people scouring the countryside for days picking up all the debris from Flight 93.  

Evidence of the primary debris field.
"There was a crater in the ground that was really burning. *There were pieces of fuselage and clothing all over the area, burning*, said Peterson. He said he didn't see any debris longer than a couple of feet long.

State Trooper Tom Spallone of Greensburg have confirmed that the plane was United Flight 93, a 757, that departed this morning from Newark en route to San Francisco. It crashed in a ravine near an abandoned strip mine in what some witnesses described as a fire ball. The site is between Shanksville and Bucktown, near Diamond T Coal Co., in Friedens. 

Spallone said the plane was still smoldering at 12:30. He said officials were trying to keep people from scene and confirmed that there are no survivors. *He said the "debris field spread over an area size of a football field, maybe two footballs fields."* The impact of the crash was so severe that the biggest piece of debris he has seen there is no bigger than 2 feet. 

As for the presence of "wing scars", what of it?  What does that prove?  I couldn't see a clear view of the crater from above, so how do you know there were no wing scars?

What this crash DOES show quite clearly is that a plane can come in fast and obliterate itself into a relatively small crater with small pieces of debris all over the place.

So how about it?  Is the crash of Flight 1771 close enough to the crash of Flight 93 to show that a plane crash site can indeed look like the one in Shanksville?  Or are you going to continue to insist the crash scene couldn't have happened that way.


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 8, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


>



I think you got confused with this one.  That is part of the cockpit from Pan Am 103 blown up over Lockerbie Scotland.  The rest of the pictures are indeed from Shanksville.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 8, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


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



OOps... I do that now and then, Sorry.


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 8, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> OOps... I do that now and then, Sorry.


No worries.  Everyone makes mistakes.  Even truthtards.  They just do it every post.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 8, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > SFC Ollie said:
> ...


What is a dumpster full of unidentified rusted scrap metal supposed to prove?  You do know the nearest business to the scene was a metal scrap yard, right?  What a coincidence, huh?  And as been pointed out about this photo, how many pieces do you see that show United Airlines colors?



>


What was that part about fruitcakes again?



>


Oh wow, total proof Flight 93 crashed there. 



>


What is this photo supposed to show?



>


Is there supposed to be plane debris in that photo?


----------



## saiweril (Dec 8, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> Who said there was no evidence above ground?


Yeah, who said that?



> As for the presence of "wing scars", what of it?  What does that prove?


Have you ever seen a plane crash leave wing scars before?



> What this crash DOES show quite clearly is that a plane can come in fast and obliterate itself into a relatively small crater with small pieces of debris all over the place.


As would be expected.  What's your point?



> So how about it?  Is the crash of Flight 1771 close enough to the crash of Flight 93 to show that a plane crash site can indeed look like the one in Shanksville?  Or are you going to continue to insist the crash scene couldn't have happened that way.


How much of 1771 buried?


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 8, 2010)

I'm done wasting my time with you. You see the debris as clear as anyone else does and want to play games. Well numbnuts I have better things to do with my time. Enjoy your game.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 8, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> I'm done wasting my time with you. You see the debris as clear as anyone else does and want to play games. Well numbnuts I have better things to do with my time. Enjoy your game.


The dumpster photo.  I see a bunch of unidentified rusty debris, none with United Airlines colors.

The forest photo.  I don't see any plane debris.  I see a shovel and white paper.

The cabin photo.  The only things I see close to being plane debris are two small silver scraps.  What color was Flight 93 again?

Your evidence of millions of United Airlines 757 debris at the scene is failing pretty bad.


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 8, 2010)

Ya' know, it must really suck for these troofer loons to live their lives in total fear and paranoia....I actually feel a lil' sorry for 'em.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 8, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> Ya' know, it must really suck for these troofer loons to live their lives in total fear and paranoia....I actually feel a lil' sorry for 'em.


The people with fear and paranoia are the ones who only respond with ad hom attacks.  I would expect more from a Ranger.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 8, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> Ya' know, it must really suck for these troofer loons to live their lives in total fear and paranoia....I actually feel a lil' sorry for 'em.



I don't, I'm ready to give up on them as hopeless and let the guys in the white coats worry about them.


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 8, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > Ya' know, it must really suck for these troofer loons to live their lives in total fear and paranoia....I actually feel a lil' sorry for 'em.
> ...


Hey, you don't see this RANGER shitting on the memories of all who died on that day by spouting off with bullshit conspiracy crap.......THERE WAS NO CONSPIRACY other than the conspiracy of those terrorists who pulled off the attack.

You people have yet to come up with even one example of solid evidence.....NOT ONE....Everything you loons throw up is completely debunked......You people throw up conspiracy BS from complete nutjobs you people claim are experts......Do you understand how many people it would have taken to pull off such a conspiracy, from the top government to the local levels.......You're talking thousands and, you can't come up with even ONE of those thousands who would be willing to talk and admit.

You people are dirt......You're shitting on all those who died......You're shitting on my fellow brothers and sisters in arms who have given life and limb to fight the scourge of terrorism since that day.

Get a fuckin' life, and professional help for your paranoid delusions!


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 8, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> LOL, it must have been exactly the same in all the gory details in order for the truthers to believe anything. Oh and don't forget It had to have been planted. You know all those millions of parts from Flight 93 must have been trucked in without anyone seeing them....
> 
> Fruitcakes, they must be fruitcakes.


don't insult fruitcakes like that

Alton Brown would be SO disappointed by that


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 8, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Patriot911 said:
> 
> 
> > Who said there was no evidence above ground?
> ...



Thanks for proving my point, saiweril.  I knew you would dismiss evidence that your claim was wrong simply because you didn't want to accept the fact you were wrong.  You were shown an accident with an almost identical outcome, yet you still insist that Flight 93 couldn't have crashed there.  That is just amazingly retarded.  

You dismiss evidence of pictures taken at Shanksville because you "can't identify the parts".  Who can?  Are you claiming someone came in moments before the collapse and distributed 11 dumpsters worth of debris and then buried a bunch of plane parts into a 45' hole and then covered it back up?  

This is why truthtards are beneath contempt.  They dismiss evidence for retarded reasons because it is not, nor has it ever been about the truth for them.  It is about pushing an agenda.  It is about using the deaths of three thousand Americans to push their anti-government / anti-Jew / anti-<insert favorite boogie man here>.  

See, this is how it went.

Never been a plane crash like Flight 93.

Yes there has.  Here it is.

Flight 93 didn't have any debris and there are "wing scars".  

Flight 93 had debris.

No it didn't.  I demand proof!

Here's photo evidence of the crash scene with debris scattered all over it.

None of the parts say "Property of United Airlines" or is painted in UAL colors and I don't know specifically what plane parts they are.

See how retarded that line of reasoning is?  One by one your lies are shot down, yet you continue to make up excuses so you don't have to accept the truth.  That, saiweril, is what makes you a truthtard.


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 8, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > LOL, it must have been exactly the same in all the gory details in order for the truthers to believe anything. Oh and don't forget It had to have been planted. You know all those millions of parts from Flight 93 must have been trucked in without anyone seeing them....
> ...



OOOOH!!!  Yeah, don't mess with Brown.  He will fricassee you in a heartbeat!  I don't know what all is involved when you fricassee someone, but it sounds painful!  Gotta be worse than waterboarding!


----------



## saiweril (Dec 8, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > Patriot911 said:
> ...


The only points proven are that you sidestep questions, misinterpret things and run with it, and can't tell when you've been proven wrong.

How about you go back and answer my questions to see what I mean?


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 8, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Patriot911 said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...



What is the point?  You've aready proven beyond any shadow of a doubt that you will just ignore what was said and come up with lameassed excuses like "the debris wasn't painted in UAL colors".  

You started by claiming you never found a crash that looked like Flight 93.  I showed you one. 

You claimed there was nothing outside the crater in the Flight 93 crash.  You were proven wrong.

You pretended the evidence was invalid because you couldn't identify parts.  Never mind that some of the pictures were used to actually convict a man to life in prison which means the pictures heald up to the standards of evidence to be used in a court of law.  

So yes.  We could go down this path of me showing you evidence, you dismissing evidence based on your opinion or a retarded reason, me showing you how retarded your reasons are and then answering your questions yet again.  But what is the purpose?  You're obviously not going to change your mind.  You are clearly not here for the truth and are willing to lie your ass off to prove it.  We know that.  We can see that.  And now so can anyone else reading this thread.  That was my purpose.  To expose you as the unthinking and uncaring person you are; someone willing to dismiss the evidence to push the agenda and damn the consequences.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 8, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > Patriot911 said:
> ...


The point is it will show how wrong you've been on so many things.  So hop to it.


----------



## eots (Dec 8, 2010)

*Col. George Nelson, MBA, U.S. Air Force (ret) &#8211; Former U.S. Air Force aircraft accident investigator and airplane parts authorit*y.  Graduate, U.S. Air Force War College.  34-year Air Force career.
Licensed commercial pilot.  Licensed airframe and powerplant mechanic.
Essay: "In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft -- and in most cases the precise cause of the accident. ... 

The government alleges that four wide-body airliners crashed on the morning of September 11 2001, resulting in the deaths of more than 3,000 human beings, yet not one piece of hard aircraft evidence has been produced in an attempt to positively identify any of the four aircraft. On the contrary, it seems only that all potential evidence was deliberately kept hidden from public view. &#8230; 

With all the evidence readily available at the Pentagon crash site, any unbiased rational investigator could only conclude that a Boeing 757 did not fly into the Pentagon as alleged. Similarly, with all the evidence available at the Pennsylvania crash site, it was most doubtful that a passenger airliner caused the obvious hole in the ground and certainly not the Boeing 757 as alleged. &#8230; 

As painful and heartbreaking as was the loss of innocent lives and the lingering health problems of thousands more, a most troublesome and nightmarish probability remains that so many Americans appear to be involved in the most heinous conspiracy in our country's history."   Physics911, by Scientific Panel Investigating Nine-Eleven, 9/11/2001

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


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 8, 2010)

Any of you troofers care to explain the following away?.......C'mon, lets hear it......Were the ATC's in on your lil' conspiracy?.......We're the pilots of the other planes in on your lil' conpiracy?.......Is the pilot reporting seeing the plane and the aftermath in on the conspiracy?

C'mon, lets play.....Lay it out!.....We'll get into the cell phone calls and communications between the flight attendent and United Center later.......Buth then, i'm sure you idiots will claim that the terrorists getting their asses kicked by the passengers were all part of Bush's conspiracy.

[ame]www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyyXUDUsqqU[/ame]


----------



## saiweril (Dec 8, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> Were the ATC's in on your lil' conspiracy?.......We're the pilots of the other planes in on your lil' conpiracy?.......Is the pilot reporting seeing the plane and the aftermath in on the conspiracy?


I don't believe any of them were.


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 8, 2010)

eots said:


> *Col. George Nelson, MBA, U.S. Air Force (ret)  Former U.S. Air Force aircraft accident investigator and airplane parts authorit*y.  Graduate, U.S. Air Force War College.  34-year Air Force career.
> Licensed commercial pilot.  Licensed airframe and powerplant mechanic.
> Essay: "In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft -- and in most cases the precise cause of the accident. ...
> 
> ...



A jackass's opinion is still just an opinion; proof of nothing.


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 8, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Patriot911 said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...



You have yet to show one thing I've gotten wrong.  You HAVE, however, gotten numerous things wrong.  Like pretending nothing like Flight 93 ever happened before.... or no debris outside the crater..... did you forget those things already?   The other thing you've done is dismissed obvious evidence that your claims were wrong.  Awwww...   Poor baby!


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 8, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > Were the ATC's in on your lil' conspiracy?.......We're the pilots of the other planes in on your lil' conpiracy?.......Is the pilot reporting seeing the plane and the aftermath in on the conspiracy?
> ...


So, explain it!........C'mon, you say it didn't crash there........A pilot saw the plane and aftermath...There are tons of pictures of the smoke cloud....How could that be if it never happened?

Is that recording of the communications a fake?

C'mon.......let's hear your theory on how it was faked.


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 8, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > *Col. George Nelson, MBA, U.S. Air Force (ret)  Former U.S. Air Force aircraft accident investigator and airplane parts authorit*y.  Graduate, U.S. Air Force War College.  34-year Air Force career.
> ...


Once again, nothing but another "retired" moron........Next we'll see a "former" something or other thrown up as an "EXPERT"

These clowns are friggin' laughable!


----------



## eots (Dec 8, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> Patriot911 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



So expert veterans with exemplary records that disagree with you are morons  that make you want  throw up ?and an air crash investigator is not an EXPERT on air crashes.....ok then


----------



## eots (Dec 8, 2010)

*Lt. Col. David Gapp, U.S. Air Force (ret) &#8211; Retired Pilot and Qualified Aircraft Accident Investigator.  Served as President, Aircraft Accident Board*. Military aircraft flown: McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom, Cessna T-37 Dragonfly "Tweet", Northrup T-38 Talon.  3,000+ total hours flown.  31 years of U.S. Air Force service.  One year as commercial pilot for Continental Airlines. Commercial aircraft flown: ATR-42.
Member: Pilots for 9/11 Truth  Association Statement: "Pilots for 9/11 Truth is an organization of aviation professionals and pilots throughout the globe that have gathered together for one purpose. We are committed to seeking the truth surrounding the events of the 11th of September 2001. Our main focus concentrates on the four flights, maneuvers performed and the reported pilots. We do not offer theory or point blame. However, we are focused on determining the truth of that fateful day since the United States Government doesn't seem to be very forthcoming with answers."
Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report


----------



## saiweril (Dec 8, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> You have yet to show one thing I've gotten wrong.  You HAVE, however, gotten numerous things wrong.  Like pretending nothing like Flight 93 ever happened before.... or no debris outside the crater..... did you forget those things already?   The other thing you've done is dismissed obvious evidence that your claims were wrong.  Awwww...   Poor baby!


I'm trying to help you not put your foot any farther in your mouth.  Please go back and answer my last questions before you make yourself look any more foolish.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 8, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> A pilot saw the plane and aftermath


Which pilot?



> There are tons of pictures of the smoke cloud....How could that be if it never happened?


Produce two.



> Is that recording of the communications a fake?


Between the ATC and the cockpit?  I don't believe so.


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 8, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Patriot911 said:
> 
> 
> > You have yet to show one thing I've gotten wrong.  You HAVE, however, gotten numerous things wrong.  Like pretending nothing like Flight 93 ever happened before.... or no debris outside the crater..... did you forget those things already?   The other thing you've done is dismissed obvious evidence that your claims were wrong.  Awwww...   Poor baby!
> ...



You can't even help yourself not look like a jackass.  How do you expect to help anyone else?    Truthtards and their egos.  What a joke!  How about admitting there have been crashs like Flight 93?


----------



## saiweril (Dec 8, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Patriot911 said:
> 
> 
> > Who said there was no evidence above ground?
> ...


bump for Parrot911


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 8, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > A pilot saw the plane and aftermath
> ...



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9ag6brfWro]Captain O'Brian[/ame]


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 8, 2010)

saiweril said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > Patriot911 said:
> ...


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 8, 2010)

eots said:


> So expert veterans with exemplary records that disagree with you are morons  that make you want  throw up ?and an air crash investigator is not an EXPERT on air crashes.....ok then



Nope.  Expert veterans who lie their asses off about the facts are morons.  If you would like I can point out even more of these moron assholes who have what appear to be excellent credentials, yet lie their asses off to the point where not even YOU could defend them.  It doesn't matter if they disagree with me or not.  What matters is the truth.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 8, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > Wicked Jester said:
> ...


According to that video, a military pilot saw an AA757 heading towards the Pentagon and then an explosion in the building.  What does that have to do with an alleged UA757 in Shanksville?


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 8, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > A pilot saw the plane and aftermath
> ...


Which pilot?.....Uh the pilot on the recrding who said he had direct visual on 93, then was told by ATC that 93 dropped off radar, then asked pilot of the plane if he still had visual, the pilot said no he lost it in a turn, ATC then asked if he could see anything on the ground, pilot then responded after a pause that he did see the smoke plume..........That pilot!.......It's all on the recording.

Produce 2?.....Be right back!

You don't believe the recording is fake?........Then explain how 93 never crashed at Shanksville, please!........It's pretty obvious on that recording that yes, 93 crashed into that field.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 8, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> You said most was underground.  This was false.


Most of Flight 93 didn't bury?



> Nope.  Not many planes are driven into the ground at high speed either.  So what's your point?


I thought you said 1771 & 93 were similar?



> Don't know.  You can't say how much of 1771 was buried just like you can't say how much of Flight 93 was buried.  So how are you going to compare the two?  Guestimate?


There are many reports that most of Flight 93 buried.  I see no evidence much of 1771 buried at all.  Part of this evidence is at that scene there tons more debris scattered there than at Shanksville, even though 1771 was a much smaller plane.  That makes these two crashes extremely different.


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 8, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > Wicked Jester said:
> ...


that was the pilot of the private jet that ATC asked to investigate, right?


----------



## saiweril (Dec 8, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> Which pilot?.....Uh the pilot on the recrding who said he had direct visual on 93, then was told by ATC that 93 dropped off radar, then asked pilot of the plane if he still had visual, the pilot said no he lost it in a turn, ATC then asked if he could see anything on the ground, pilot then responded after a pause that he did see the smoke plume..........That pilot!.......It's all on the recording.


And which pilot was that?



> Produce 2?.....Be right back!


K, looking forward to em.



> It's pretty obvious on that recording that yes, 93 crashed into that field.


How so?


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 8, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


I believe so....He wasn't going by a commercial call sign.


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 8, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > Which pilot?.....Uh the pilot on the recrding who said he had direct visual on 93, then was told by ATC that 93 dropped off radar, then asked pilot of the plane if he still had visual, the pilot said no he lost it in a turn, ATC then asked if he could see anything on the ground, pilot then responded after a pause that he did see the smoke plume..........That pilot!.......It's all on the recording.
> ...


Dude....Go listen to the recording.........THAT PILOT!

http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/images/flight93/plume_val1.jpg
All other pictures found are basically the same......Except for the ones taken by the media first responders that are stills taken of recordings.......A smoking field, fire and police everywhere......You know, the usual scenes after a PLANE CRASH!


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 8, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > So expert veterans with exemplary records that disagree with you are morons  that make you want  throw up ?and an air crash investigator is not an EXPERT on air crashes.....ok then
> ...


Truth is, many of those so called "experts" are opportunists looking to make a quick buck. Just because they are ex-this, former that or, retired this and thats does not deem them automatically credible........They find gullible fools like these troofer idiots and feed them whatever the hell they want to hear.

Hell, Jesse Ventura is making a killing off these gullible fools!......And these fools don't even realize it.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 8, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> Dude....Go listen to the recording.........THAT PILOT!


OK, which one?



> http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/images/flight93/plume_val1.jpg
> All other pictures found are basically the same......


OK, but you said:



Wicked Jester said:


> *There are tons of pictures of the smoke cloud*....How could that be if it never happened?


and I asked for just two since that should be really really easy to do if there were "tons" of pics of the smoke cloud.  You produced one pic.  I'd like to see a second pic of the smoke cloud if there are so many as you claimed.



> Except for the ones taken by the media first responders that are stills taken of recordings.......


  huh?



> A smoking field, fire and police everywhere......You know, the usual scenes after a PLANE CRASH!


If you staged a plane crash at a field, wouldn't you have all those 3 components too?


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 8, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > Dude....Go listen to the recording.........THAT PILOT!
> ...


The plane crash was staged?......Then where is the fucking PLANE?.......Where are all the crew and passengers?........Does Bush have a few stashed on his property in Crawford?........Cheney have a few stashed in his basement?

What's up with that?

You're making the claim that it never crashed.......It's in your court to prove it......PROVE IT!

You've had 9 years and 3 months....Same goes for your so called "experts"........Let's hear it with actual FACTS!

Enough of this bullshit!........You're shitting on the memories of a hell of a lot of people here......Put up, or simply shut up!


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 8, 2010)

Conspiracy theorists blog that Flight 93 photo is fake


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 8, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> Conspiracy theorists blog that Flight 93 photo is fake


Ya see, buddy.......not only are these loons shitting on the memories of ALL who died that day, they are shitting on people who were simply witnesses telling what they saw.....That lady took a picture....the troofer loons have made her life a living hell.

It's disgusting!

They are subversive fucking idiots.....NOTHING MORE!


----------



## eots (Dec 8, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> Patriot911 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



we have been questioning and investigating the events of 9/11 long before  Jesse Ventura


----------



## eots (Dec 8, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > Conspiracy theorists blog that Flight 93 photo is fake
> ...



GO FUCK YOURSELF...and do not pretend you speak for the victims and families

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


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 8, 2010)

eots said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > Patriot911 said:
> ...


and you STILL have ZERO evidence to back up your theories


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 8, 2010)

eots said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


what they actually want, if you bothered to read their website, is political prosecutions
they do not claim it was an inside job or that any of the buildings were controlled demos


----------



## eots (Dec 8, 2010)

> Wicked Jester;3065330]
> 
> 
> 
> ...



SO THE MEN AND WOMAN FEATURED HERE ARE SUBVERSIVES ?

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


----------



## saiweril (Dec 8, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > Wicked Jester said:
> ...


Um, yeah.  You couldn't get that from the title of this thread??? 



> Then where is the fucking PLANE?.......Where are all the crew and passengers?........


Why would you think I would know?


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 8, 2010)

eots said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


I did three tours in the M.E........I proudly served those victims and families, you subversive lil' dirtbag......And i've got a few of the enemy under my belt......Got a lil' revenge on the lil' motherfuckers who are responsible, in honor of those victims and families.

You on the other hand, are doing nothing but making a mockery of those victims and families........PUNK!


----------



## saiweril (Dec 8, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > Conspiracy theorists blog that Flight 93 photo is fake
> ...


We have?


----------



## eots (Dec 8, 2010)

wicked jester said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > wicked jester said:
> ...



blow it your yer ass...you served the military industrial complex...a grocery boy..sent to collect a bill


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 8, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


read the story


----------



## eots (Dec 8, 2010)

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2FqgyLZeaY[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_NmRhwfqm0[/ame]


[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIrvhVDICZc&feature=related[/ame]



[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6Ls6sifFJo&feature=related[/ame]


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 8, 2010)

eots said:


> wicked jester said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


No asshole.....A highly successful chef and restaurant owner who got pissed and re-enlisted to go help wreak havok on the fuckers who did the dirty deed........And trust me, we RANGERS wreaked serious havok on those lil' goat herding motherfuckers.

What have you done, besides piss on the memories of all who died that day?


----------



## saiweril (Dec 8, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > Wicked Jester said:
> ...


Val McClatchey snapped the single picture with her new digital camera.
"I didn't even aim. I was just like, 'Oh, my God,' " she said. 
She dropped the camera, jolting the battery loose
She had no idea what she'd captured until the state police put a call out to people in the area, asking for photos, debris and other evidence. She took a printout of her photo to the police, she said, and, within an hour, FBI agents were at her house.
She copyrighted her photo
and involved in a copyright lawsuit against The Associated Press.
Copies are available upon request, with proceeds going to the charity Heroic Choices, formerly the Todd Beamer Foundation.
she has no idea how many hundreds or thousands of dollars the photo has raised for the Heroic Choices charity. 
She operates on the honor system, she says, and simply forwards the checks to them. 
Representatives from the charity did not return calls requesting comment.
Mrs. McClatchey has begun accepting some money, on account of her copyright action against The Associated Press, which, she says, distributed her photo without her permission.
"So here I am, in the middle of this nasty lawsuit," she said. "I have kept some of the money, because now I have some legal fees.


Yeah, nothing suspicious there.


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 8, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


What's suspicious about it?

Oh, that's right......The photo only further debunks the claims of you subversive troofer loons.

Fuckin' LMAO!


----------



## eots (Dec 8, 2010)

wicked jester said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > wicked jester said:
> ...



lol...clown


----------



## saiweril (Dec 8, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...






> Oh, that's right......The photo only further debunks the claims of you subversive troofer loons.


How does it do that?


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 8, 2010)

eots said:


> wicked jester said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


Yeah, you are a clown!........No doubt about it!........I'll give ya' credit it though, for admitting it!


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 8, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


what do you call suspicious ?


----------



## saiweril (Dec 8, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


There, I bolded it for you since apparently you weren't able to see it.


----------



## candycorn (Dec 8, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


----------



## saiweril (Dec 8, 2010)

candycorn said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


Yeah, that story is crazy, isn't it?


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 8, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


thanks for showing once again why troofer morons are pretty much ignored by the general public


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 8, 2010)

saiweril said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


Not at all........She took a very historic photograph on one of this great countries darkest days......She did the smart thing and copyrighted it.

Unfortunately, your fellow troofer loons have made the lady's life a living hell for it.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 8, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


Cause the general public can't handle the truth?  Question, why do you dedicate so much of your life not ignoring us?


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 8, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


because i enjoy exposing you morons for the morons you are


----------



## saiweril (Dec 8, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


That's your life's calling?  Wow.


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 8, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


no, its just a hobby


----------



## eots (Dec 8, 2010)

divecon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > divecon said:
> ...



so you enjoy exposing yourself ?..._weird_


----------



## eots (Dec 8, 2010)

divecon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > divecon said:
> ...



your hobby is self humiliation ?


----------



## Obamerican (Dec 8, 2010)

eots said:


> divecon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


Yours seems to be.


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 8, 2010)

There were many things about 9/11 and the investgation that were not transparent.  

Why did Bush and Cheney insist on secret non recorded non under oath testimony where they HAD to go together or they wouldn't go at all?  

If they wanted a truthfull investigation thier demands would have never been requested.  THEY acted guilty of SOMETHING.  What who knows but they clearly were not co operating in the investigation.

Many of the crime scenes leave much to be desired as far as comon sense and reason is concerned.

Anyone that thinks the whole thing has been explained fully and investgated thoroughly is a fool.

What this country needs is a truly independant investigation by experts in the field and probably from foreign countries because it seems impossible to get a straight answer from the politicians and ex politicians that were involved in the first so called investigation.

No matter what you hack assholes think you need to hide for whatever purpose the American public deserves a thorough and truthfull investigation.  It does not matter anymore what Bush or Cheney want.  They should be questioned as if they were criminals because that's how they acted in the first go round.  The investigation should have absolute power of supoena.  Everyone involved from top to bottom has to be thoroughly questioned.  They need to show ALL of the tapes of the plane going into the pentagon.  There is NO way they don't have perfectly good video of that crash site.  Nothing has been shown that proves it was a 757.  They could kill all the bullshit with an honest and Full report.  Until that has happened all you apologist hacks can go fuck youselves.


----------



## Obamerican (Dec 8, 2010)

HMMMM, I find it interesting that most 9/11 "truthers" can't spell "their". They either spell it "there" or "thier". I'm thinking under 30 years old and public education.


----------



## Obamerican (Dec 8, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> There were many things about 9/11 and the investgation that were not transparent.
> 
> Why did Bush and Cheney insist on secret non recorded non under oath testimony where they HAD to go together or they wouldn't go at all?
> 
> ...


Blow me you fucking asshole. There are ten of you fucks, at most, that don't know how to use the word "their" properly.


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 8, 2010)

Obamerican said:


> HMMMM, I find it interesting that most 9/11 "truthers" can't spell "their". They either spell it "there" or "thier". I'm thinking under 30 years old and public education.



Fuck you.  You punk ass little bitch.

Come on over to my world and learn something.


----------



## Obamerican (Dec 8, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> Obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > HMMMM, I find it interesting that most 9/11 "truthers" can't spell "their". They either spell it "there" or "thier". I'm thinking under 30 years old and public education.
> ...


I've seen your punk ass avatar before, you fucking shit stain. I KNOW who you are, you worthless waste of oxygen.


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 8, 2010)

Obamerican said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> > There were many things about 9/11 and the investgation that were not transparent.
> ...



Only a faggot would care if a word is spelled incorrectly.  So I guess you are a faggot.  That means my suggestion that you go fuck yourself has already been taken care of.  Carry on fucking yourself faggot.


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 8, 2010)

Obamerican said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> > Obamerican said:
> ...



I've been to one other forum.  If you have been there then you don't need to waste any time.  I have never made any secret of where I am and who I am.  I like this forum better because it lends itself to describing little cum slurpers like yourself.  After 15 years one would think one of you stupid queers would have had the nutsack to PROVE your point.


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 9, 2010)

Obamerican said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> > Obamerican said:
> ...



I can't say I recognise you just from the trail your pussy leaves...  Be more specific.  If you think you know me don't be afraid..tell the good people what you think you know.


----------



## candycorn (Dec 9, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> There were many things about 9/11 and the investgation that were not transparent.
> 
> Why did Bush and Cheney insist on secret non recorded non under oath testimony where they HAD to go together or they wouldn't go at all?


Because they could.  If you'd been in the same situation, you would have done it too.  



HUGGY said:


> If they wanted a truthfull investigation thier demands would have never been requested.  THEY acted guilty of SOMETHING.  What who knows but they clearly were not co operating in the investigation.



Either you're ignorant of the political realities of the situation or you're just flat out ignorant.  From your choice of words, I guessing the latter.  



HUGGY said:


> Many of the crime scenes leave much to be desired as far as comon sense and reason is concerned.


Pure nonsense.  



HUGGY said:


> Anyone that thinks the whole thing has been explained fully and investgated thoroughly is a fool.


Okay...explain it fully then.  Let me guess, you can't can you.  Put up or shut up.



HUGGY said:


> What this country needs is a truly independant investigation by experts in the field and probably from foreign countries because it seems impossible to get a straight answer from the politicians and ex politicians that were involved in the first so called investigation.


What this country needs is a modification of the First Amendment protecting free speech as long as it is responsible.  By the way, it's "independent".



HUGGY said:


> No matter what you hack assholes think you need to hide for whatever purpose the American public deserves a thorough and truthfull investigation.  It does not matter anymore what Bush or Cheney want.  They should be questioned as if they were criminals because that's how they acted in the first go round.  The investigation should have absolute power of supoena.  Everyone involved from top to bottom has to be thoroughly questioned.


As they were.



HUGGY said:


> They need to show ALL of the tapes of the plane going into the pentagon.  There is NO way they don't have perfectly good video of that crash site.


Ignorance on your part shows again.


HUGGY said:


> Nothing has been shown that proves it was a 757.


Every shred of evidence points toward not only a 757, but it being AA77.  Explain the light poles.



HUGGY said:


> They could kill all the bullshit with an honest and Full report.


Sending the twoofers to Gitmo so you can be closer to your idols would do it too....just a thought.



HUGGY said:


> Until that has happened all you apologist hacks can go fuck youselves.



Sticks and stones loser.  And you claim you're a pilot?  Not buying it.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 9, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> There were many things about 9/11 and the investgation that were not transparent.
> 
> Why did Bush and Cheney insist on secret non recorded non under oath testimony where they HAD to go together or they wouldn't go at all?
> 
> ...














SO that's not an engine part and a wheel from a 757?


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 9, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> > There were many things about 9/11 and the investgation that were not transparent.
> ...



That is not a wheel from a 757.  Count the slots.  8 slots on the left 9 slots on the right.  There are 5 slots center to center in your supposed crash wheel.  There are 6 slots C yo C in the supposed 757 LG you displayed.  They are NOT the same wheel.  Your crash wheel is much smaller.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 9, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > HUGGY said:
> ...



Must be from some truther blog.





Aerospaceweb.org | Ask Us - Pentagon & Boeing 757 Wheel Investigation


----------



## candycorn (Dec 9, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > HUGGY said:
> ...



Matches perfectly.

What about the lightpoles?  What knocked them down?  And where is AA77?  Why were ATCs able to track the plane into the Pentagon airspace but not out of it?  What about the DNA.  

Just for openers.


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 9, 2010)

Who pays you to go around and focus on talking down 9/11 questions?  That's all you do.  Not even your so called truthers are ONLY interested in 9/11.  Seems odd.  Seems obsessed.  Seems paid for.

There are many valid questions.  You are not the answer to them.


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 9, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> Who pays you to go around and focus on talking down 9/11 questions?  That's all you do.  Not even your so called truthers are ONLY interested in 9/11.  Seems odd.  Seems obsessed.  Seems paid for.
> 
> There are many valid questions.  You are not the answer to them.



Wow.  So your bullshit got shot all to hell, so now you have to attack the poster.  It is a common truthtard tactic.  A rather disgusting one I might add.  You might think I am being hypocritical, but I'm not.  I haven't had my claims shredded like you just did.  I'm pointing out your dishonest tactics for anyone who might have missed them.  

Funny how I always see truthtards talking about questions, yet they always reject the answer.  Either that or they just run with the answer they want regardless of the facts supplied.  That is what makes them truthtards; a willingness to ignore the facts and the truth in order to pursue their own agendas.


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 9, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> > Who pays you to go around and focus on talking down 9/11 questions?  That's all you do.  Not even your so called truthers are ONLY interested in 9/11.  Seems odd.  Seems obsessed.  Seems paid for.
> ...



There are many unanswered questions.  You can go fuck yourself as well.


----------



## candycorn (Dec 9, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> Who pays you to go around and focus on talking down 9/11 questions?


They tried to pay me.  I said, "Keep it, I like to earn my money".  You idiots don't put up much of a struggle.  You'd do yourself a monster favor by agreeing to keep your mouth shut and run away like a dog with it's tail between it's legs.  



HUGGY said:


> That's all you do.


Hardly:

USMB.
Total Posts: 1,685 
Posts Per Day: 3.57 

Political Forum
Total Posts: 1,167 
Posts Per Day: 1.47 


A.W.E.com
No Official Stats but about 4.8 posts per day

So "all I do" is actually make 11 posts a day.  Everyone lethal to the poster, granted.  I prefer to have quality posts and your tantrum/recation is all the evidence anybody needs to know I hit my mark...precisely and without fail.  Your total loss at trying to debunk them is further evidence that the previous 9 traction-less years of your "movement" is prelude to 99 more coming your way.  



HUGGY said:


> Not even your so called truthers are ONLY interested in 9/11.  Seems odd.  Seems obsessed.  Seems paid for.


I'm guessing your "pilot" claim is out the window since you don't seem to have any idea what someone would get "paid" for; it reflects a lack of sophistication that you're choice of language underscores junior.  



HUGGY said:


> There are many valid questions.  You are not the answer to them.



There are no valid questions about 9/11 that, if answered, would change the fact that 19 middle eastern men hijacked four planes, crahsed them into 3 buildings and acted alone without any assistance from the US Government.  

If you do have some evidence please bring it forward on your next temper tantrum.  If not, shut the fuck up.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 9, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Patriot911 said:
> 
> 
> > You said most was underground.  This was false.
> ...


bump


----------



## saiweril (Dec 9, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> Are you claiming someone came in moments before the collapse and distributed *11 dumpsters worth of debris*


Did they actually give a quote that the recovered debris filled 11 of those giant garbage dumpsters?



> and then buried a bunch of plane parts into a 45' hole and then covered it back up?


45' hole?  WTF???  Covered back up?  WTF???  Bunch of plane parts came out of the ground?  WTF???


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 9, 2010)

Any of you troofer idiots care to explain this away:

Flight 93 Cockpit Transcript - Wikisource

Where's the plane?.......Where's the passengers?......Where's the hijackers?


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 9, 2010)

candycorn said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> > Who pays you to go around and focus on talking down 9/11 questions?
> ...



Interesting theory.  I don't speculate in such matters.  I am still waiting for an honest investigation to answer all of the questions.

It is not my job to investigate 9/11.  That said I do not believe much of the "evidense" that HAS been produced.  Little missing things like the pentagon videos trouble me.  Squeezing a 757 into an 18 foot diameter hole.  You can diss information till the end of time.  You are not only not an authority ... or seemingly intelligent...  You have not said anything that answers my questions.  I don't care if you believe I am a pilot.  I only mention it because much of what happened on 9/11 occured from the vantage point of one.  You not thinking THAT matters just shows YOUR lack of understanding ..not mine.  I am not a truther because I do not know what "the truth" is concerning 9/11.  If that bothers you..THAT is to bad.


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 9, 2010)

Oh NOOOOOOOooooooo....!!!!!!!  A 13.5 pt neg rep from Candycornhole!!!

You are pathetic on SOOOOooooo many levels.


----------



## candycorn (Dec 9, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > HUGGY said:
> ...



You attacked me junior.  I put you in your place.

You attacked the evidence presented.  I put you in your place.

You don't believe the evidence?  Well, thats your problem and, as you mis-spell it "to bad".  LOL.

The 9 tractionless pathetic years of your "movement" is or at least should be evidence enough that there is nothing to the "movement's" questions; elsewise someone with some standing in academia would be asking them.  In short, you got nothing.  And you have been shown your place; again.


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 9, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> There are many unanswered questions.  You can go fuck yourself as well.


  I would tell you to fuck yourself, but your head is so far up your ass that it would be an impossibility even if you COULD find your dick.  There.  Is that better now?  Do you feel all warm and fuzzy after having your manhood mocked in public?  Awwww.  Poor truthtard.  I guess you didn't like people pointing out your questions are bullshit as they have been answered repeatedly.  It takes a special kind of retard to ignore the answers just because they don't say what you want them to say.  Have fun finding your manhood, prick!


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 9, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > HUGGY said:
> ...


Why wouldn't a 12 ft 6 inch diameter fuselage of a 757 be able to sqeeze through an 18 foot hole?


----------



## eots (Dec 9, 2010)

candycorn said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> > Who pays you to go around and focus on talking down 9/11 questions?
> ...



*who is they ?*


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 9, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Patriot911 said:
> 
> 
> > Are you claiming someone came in moments before the collapse and distributed *11 dumpsters worth of debris*
> ...



Ooops!  I made a mistake.  It was only 10 of those dumpsters. 

"It's all aircraft parts, no human remains," Miller said. "We've collected them in 10 recycling bin-sized containers and eventually we'll turn them all over to United."



			
				saiweril said:
			
		

> > and then buried a bunch of plane parts into a 45' hole and then covered it back up?
> 
> 
> 45' hole?  WTF???  Covered back up?  WTF???  Bunch of plane parts came out of the ground?  WTF???



You stupid or something?  You do remember the crater right?  The one they found stuff 45' down?  Is your memory really that bad or are you just too retarded to debate?


----------



## eots (Dec 9, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > Patriot911 said:
> ...



got a picture of ten dumpster loads ???....is it from these dumpster all the DNA was identified ????


----------



## eots (Dec 9, 2010)

eots said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > HUGGY said:
> ...



*who offered to pay you ??*


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 9, 2010)

eots said:


> Patriot911 said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


What about the DNA?........Last I read, and it was awhile ago, 34 of 44 victims had been identified by DNA evidence found at the crash site.........Hence, they were on the plane, the plane crashed right there, DNA confirmed the victims were there.

Seriously, get a fucking life!


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 9, 2010)

eots said:


> Patriot911 said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


learn to read for comprehension


----------



## eots (Dec 9, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Patriot911 said:
> ...



So in a crash so great that massive steel pieces were turned into unidentifiable fragments and there are no identifiable bodies or body parts the manged to ID 34 of 44 victims.... wouldn't cross contamination in that situation make that impossible ...not one piece of aircraft indefinable with a serial number but almost all passengers found....hmmmm..there is precedents for the FBI and fake dna reports several actually


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 9, 2010)

eots said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


Hmmmmmm......You do realize that dna can be extracted from soil samples........You do realize that the miltary has to, on ocassion, identify victims who have been completely pulverized by various munitions by using soil samples around where the victims were known to be?

You do realize that because of modern technology there is a myriad of ways to detect and extract DNA?

And, i'll ask again, because you people never seem to have an answer..........Where are the victims if the plane never crashed in that field....Where's the plane?


----------



## eots (Dec 9, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Wicked Jester said:
> ...



who knows what the lie is ... perhaps it was shoot down.a bomb.. maybe they are lying about the amount of DNA evidence...a real open investigation and examination of all evidence is required to answer these question


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 9, 2010)

eots said:


> Patriot911 said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...



Yeah, typical truthtard denial.  Show them evidence and they deny it until you produce a picture.  Then they deny the picture.    Is it no wonder truthtards have absolutely no credibility?  They deny evidence simply because they don't like what it says.  If a conspiratard site says a complete lie, they believe it without question and will defend it to the death no matter how much evidence is provided to show it is false.

Thanks eots, for demonstrating so aptly just how dishonest and disgusting truthtards are.


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 9, 2010)

eots said:


> who knows what the lie is ... perhaps it was shoot down.a bomb.. maybe they are lying about the amount of DNA evidence...a real open investigation and examination of all evidence is required to answer these question


Truthtards will come up with ANY theory no matter how retarded or implausible as long as it isn't the official story.  The fact they have zero evidence to back up these lameassed theories they pull from the depths of their bowels doesn't seem to phase them at all despite the fact they demand evidence from everyone else.  Of course they promptly poo poo that evidence for no reason other than it doesn't say what they want to hear.  Truthtards are a disease.


----------



## eots (Dec 9, 2010)

*DNA Profiles: Will They Stand Up In Court?

by Courtney Nicholson, BioStorage Product Manager, Thermo Scientific, Epsom, U.K.*

Since the early 1980s when DNA profiling was first introduced, its application in forensic science has become increasingly more discriminating and sensitive. Today, the technology has a major impact on police investigations, not only in respect to present-day crimes, but also those that were committed many years ago. 


Figure 1. Thermo Scientific SmartScan Twist-Lock tubes feature special caps that are moulded from an inert polymer and combine the benefits of this dual seal approach with the convenience of being easily removable and replaceable.
It is clear, however, that the interpretation of DNA profiles may be complicated by many different factors which can potentially make or break the case for a criminal conviction. There are numerous opportunities for errors to occur between the collection of evidence and the writing of a laboratory report&#8212;many of which can potentially result from cross-contamination. As defense lawyers are all too well aware, a DNA profile is only of value in a criminal prosecution if it can be established beyond doubt that it originated directly from material actually recovered from a suspect or crime scene. If there is any doubt that it may have originated from contamination introduced by an investigator or laboratory technician, transport packaging, storage facilities, analytical instrumentation or other unrelated samples, it will quickly be discredited as evidence. 

Laboratory Equipment - DNA Profiles: Will They Stand Up In Court?




*Even more troubling are cases of DNA fraud* -- instances where criminals plant fake DNA samples at a crime scene. In 1992, Canadian physician John Schneeberger planted fake DNA evidence in his own body to avoid suspicion in a rape case. Planting fake DNA obtained from someone else is only part of the problem. Scientists at Nucleix, an Israeli company, recently reported that they could, with access to profiles stored in one of the DNA databases, manufacture a sample of DNA without obtaining any tissue from that person.

P)  Weeks after testifying at a court hearing in a Kentucky murder, FBI scientist Kathleen Lundy told her superiors a secret. She knowingly gave false testimony about her specialty of lead bullet analysis.

"I had to admit that it was worse than being evasive or not correcting the record. It was simply not telling the truth," Lundy wrote her superior in an e-mail likely to be used against her now that she has been charged by Kentucky authorities on a charge of misdemeanor false swearing.

Internal FBI documents obtained by The Associated Press show the FBI lab, which reformed itself after a mid-1990s scandal over bad science, is grappling with new problems that have opened its work on lead bullets and DNA analysis to challenges by defense lawyers.

In addition to Lundy's indictment:
A FBI lab technician has resigned while under investigation for alleged improper testing of more than 100 DNA samples, and the lab is now reviewing samples she placed into the FBI national database of DNA evidence;

The Houston police crime lab has been banned from placing new samples into the FBI's DNA registry because of allegations of shoddy science
FBI Lab Work Under Serious Scrutiny - CBS News


----------



## eots (Dec 9, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Patriot911 said:
> ...



what picture ?


----------



## eots (Dec 9, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > who knows what the lie is ... perhaps it was shoot down.a bomb.. maybe they are lying about the amount of DNA evidence...a real open investigation and examination of all evidence is required to answer these question
> ...



when two former presidents of the U.S air crash investigation board  and several military air crash investigators go on record and call the investigation a cover up I believe it is incumbent upon us to pay attention..this to me seems reasonable and logical


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 9, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > who knows what the lie is ... perhaps it was shoot down.a bomb.. maybe they are lying about the amount of DNA evidence...a real open investigation and examination of all evidence is required to answer these question
> ...


What cracks me up about these clowns, is that they've had 9 years and 3 months. They throw up all these "experts" and their claims, and cannot come up with any answers when challenged on their claims.

As far as 93 goes, all the evidence is right there in that area. It's the area where the plane fell off radar. If it had been a bomb, or it was shot out of the sky, the debris field would have been massive.......These so called "experts" can't come up with any other debris fields for miles around.......There WERE body parts found.....They want pictures!....Why would the government release pictures to the public of mangled, burned, twisted body parts?........Do these loons not understand respect for the victims and their families?

I've thrown up the transcript of the cockpit recording.....These loons up here refuse to acknowledge it or what's on it......Those transcripts make it very clear as to what went on during that flight.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 9, 2010)

eots said:


> Patriot911 said:
> 
> 
> > Ooops!  I made a mistake.  It was only 10 of those dumpsters.
> ...


I'd like to see some pics of these dumpsters with debris too.  But I'll make it easy for you Patriot911, like I tried to make it easy for Wicked Jester with his "tons" of pics of the mushroom cloud.  Just show a pic of at least two of those dumpsters with debris and I'll concede there were 8 more.  Easy peasy.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 9, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > 45' hole?  WTF???  Covered back up?  WTF???  Bunch of plane parts came out of the ground?  WTF???
> ...


The 10-foot deep one made by the burying 155-foot long 757 down to 45'?  Yes, I remember.  



> The one they found stuff 45' down?


As they did with that "similar" crash 1771?


----------



## eots (Dec 9, 2010)

> What cracks me up about these clowns, is that they've had 9 years and 3 months. They throw up all these "experts" and their claims, and cannot come up with any answers when challenged on their claims.
> 
> As far as 93 goes, all the evidence is right there in that area. It's the area where the plane fell off radar. If it had been a bomb, or it was shot out of the sky, the debris field would have been massive.......These so called "experts" can't come up with any other debris fields for miles around.......


*are you claiming former presidents of the U.S air crash investigation board and military crash investigators are not EXPERTS ???
*



> *There WERE body parts found...*..They want pictures!....Why would the government release pictures to the public of mangled, burned, twisted body parts?........Do these loons not understand respect for the victims and their families


?

*THERE WERE NO BODY PARTS FOUND*...and the government did release them where they were actually found ...the  pentagon staff and the wtc buildings

9-11 Research: Human Remains


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 9, 2010)

You loons are just too damn funny.

Living in total denial of the facts must really suck.

Go read the transcripts of the flight......It tells the whole story of what happened to flight 93

And, the funniest thing up here comes from Huggy, someone I actually like, stating that a 12 foot 6 inch diameter 757 fuselage couldn't fit into an 18 foot hole..........Well, IT CAUSED THE 18 FOOT HOLE.....That's what happened when flight 77 rammed full speed into the pentagon!


----------



## eots (Dec 9, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> You loons are just too damn funny.
> 
> Living in total denial of the facts must really suck.
> 
> ...



so once again you wont address your errors or the question put to you...are not air crash investigators experts in air crash investigation ?


FAA Managers Destroyed 9/11 Tape
*Recording Contained Accounts of Communications With Hijacked Plan*es

By Sara Kehaulani Goo
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, May 6, 2004; 6:16 PM
FAA Managers Destroyed 9/11 Tape (washingtonpost.com)


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 9, 2010)

eots said:


> > What cracks me up about these clowns, is that they've had 9 years and 3 months. They throw up all these "experts" and their claims, and cannot come up with any answers when challenged on their claims.
> >
> > As far as 93 goes, all the evidence is right there in that area. It's the area where the plane fell off radar. If it had been a bomb, or it was shot out of the sky, the debris field would have been massive.......These so called "experts" can't come up with any other debris fields for miles around.......
> 
> ...


Were those "experts" actually involved directly in the official investigation.....were they there immediately on scene?........Did they do the DNA testing?.....Have they found any other possible debris field in the flight path?........Do they know where the fucking plane is at if it didn't go down in that field?........Can they debunk the DNA evidence........Have they had access to the evidence for independent testing.......Can they deny the cockpit recordings and transcripts?.......Can they deny the cell phone calls?

All it seems you can come up with from your "EXPERTS" is nothing more than opinions!


----------



## eots (Dec 9, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > > What cracks me up about these clowns, is that they've had 9 years and 3 months. They throw up all these "experts" and their claims, and cannot come up with any answers when challenged on their claims.
> ...



yes  it is their expert opinion that the flight data and crash scene are not consistent and that the investigation did not follow proper procedure as president of the U.S investigation board this is exactly what his expertise and mandate would have been and his direct involvement in field work would be delegated to others


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 9, 2010)

eots said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > You loons are just too damn funny.
> ...


Here, fuckin' ignore 'em!

Flight 93 Cockpit Transcript - Wikisource

Transcript of American Airlines Flight 77


----------



## eots (Dec 9, 2010)

are you even aware who did the investigation you put so much faith in ?


----------



## eots (Dec 9, 2010)

o once again you wont address your errors or the question put to you...are not air crash investigators experts in air crash investigation ?


FAA Managers Destroyed 9/11 Tape
Recording Contained Accounts of Communications With Hijacked Planes

By Sara Kehaulani Goo
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, May 6, 2004; 6:16 PM
FAA Managers Destroyed 9/11 Tape (washingtonpost.com)


----------



## saiweril (Dec 9, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> You loons are just too damn funny.


Like those funny loons who said there were tons of photos of the mushroom cloud and when asked to produce just two photos, they could only produce one?



> stating that a 12 foot 6 inch diameter 757 fuselage couldn't fit into an 18 foot hole..........Well, IT CAUSED THE 18 FOOT HOLE.....That's what happened when flight 77 rammed full speed into the pentagon!


How did Flight 93, a 155-foot long plane, bury down to 45', but only leave a 10' crater?


----------



## eots (Dec 9, 2010)

*Col. George Nelson, MBA, U.S. Air Force (ret) &#8211; Former U.S. Air Force aircraft accident investigator and airplane parts authority.  Graduate, U.S. Air Force War College.  34-year Air Force career.*
Licensed commercial pilot.  Licensed airframe and powerplant mechanic.

Essay: "In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft -- and in most cases the precise cause of the accident. ... 

The government alleges that four wide-body airliners crashed on the morning of September 11 2001, resulting in the deaths of more than 3,000 human beings, yet not one piece of hard aircraft evidence has been produced in an attempt to positively identify any of the four aircraft. On the contrary, it seems only that all potential evidence was deliberately kept hidden from public view. &#8230; 

With all the evidence readily available at the Pentagon crash site, any unbiased rational investigator could only conclude that a Boeing 757 did not fly into the Pentagon as alleged. Similarly, with all the evidence available at the Pennsylvania crash site, it was most doubtful that a passenger airliner caused the obvious hole in the ground and certainly not the Boeing 757 as alleged. &#8230; 

As painful and heartbreaking as was the loss of innocent lives and the lingering health problems of thousands more, a most troublesome and nightmarish probability remains that so many Americans appear to be involved in the most heinous conspiracy in our country's history."   Physics911, by Scientific Panel Investigating Nine-Eleven, 9/11/2001





*Lt. Col. Jeff Latas, U.S. Air Force (ret) &#8211; Former combat fighter pilot.  Aerospace engineer.  Currently Captain at a major airline.*  Combat experience includes Desert Storm and four tours of duty in Northern and Southern Watch.  Aircraft flown: McDonnell Douglas F-15E Strike Eagle and General Dynamics F-111 Aardvark fighter/bomber.  *Former President, U.S. Air Force Accident Investigation Board*.  *Also served as Pentagon Weapons Requirement Officer and as a member of the Pentagon's Quadrennial Defens*e Review.  Awarded Distinguish Flying Cross for Heroism, four Air Medals, four Meritorious Service Medals, and nine Aerial Achievement Medals.  20-year Air Force career.
Audio interview with Rob Balsamo 6/25/07:  Regarding the 9/11 Commission's account of the impact of Flight 77 at the Pentagon and discrepancies with the actual Flight Data Recorder information: 

"After I did my own analysis of it, it's obvious that there's discrepancies between the two stories;  between the 9/11 Commission and the flight data recorder information.  And I think that's where we really need to focus a lot of our attention to get the help that we need in order to put pressure on government agencies to actually do a real investigation of 9/11.  And not just from a security standpoint, but from even an aviation standpoint, like any accident investigation would actually help the aviators out by finding reasons for things happening. ... 




*Lt. Cdr. Bernard J. Smith, U.S. Nay (ret) &#8211; Retired carrier Naval Aviator and former aircraft accident investigator.*
Statement in support of Architects and Engineers petition: 

"From my several years experience as an aircraft accident investigator for the U.S.Navy,* I am appalled at the basic principles of investigation being ignored; ie, premature destruction of evidence, reliable eye witness accounts ignored, etc. To allow the official version to be the final word in this planned event, *as is evident from the AE9/11 investigation, would be a major disservice to the victims and the nation."  AE911Truth.org



*Major Jon I. Fox, U.S. Marine Corps &#8211; Former Marine Corps fighter pilot, including interceptor pilot*.  Retired commercial airline pilot, Continental Airlines.  Aircraft flown: Boeing 727, McDonnell Douglas DC-10, LearJet.  35-year commercial aviation career.
Statement to this website 6/3/08: 

*"Recent research proves that explosives were used at the World Trade Cente*r.  Flight paths and maneuvers of the aircraft involved at the Pentagon and *Shanksville do not match NTSB released flight data recordings*.  Shouldn't there be a criminal investigation before more lives and trillions of dollars are wasted?"




L*t. Col. David Gapp, U.S. Air Force (ret) &#8211; Retired Pilot and Qualified Aircraft Accident Investigator.  Served as President, Aircraft Accident Board*. Military aircraft flown: McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom, Cessna T-37 Dragonfly "Tweet", Northrup T-38 Talon.  3,000+ total hours flown.  31 years of U.S. Air Force service.  One year as commercial pilot for Continental Airlines. Commercial aircraft flown: ATR-42.

Member: Pilots for 9/11 Truth  Association Statement: "Pilots for 9/11 Truth is an organization of aviation professionals and pilots throughout the globe that have gathered together for one purpose. We are committed to seeking the truth surrounding the events of the 11th of September 2001. Our main focus concentrates on the four flights, maneuvers performed and the reported pilots. *We do not offer theory or point blame. However, we are focused on determining the truth of that fateful day since the United States Government doesn't seem to be very forthcoming with answers*.




*Capt. Daniel Davis, U.S. Army &#8211; Former U.S. Army Air Defense Officer and NORAD Tac Director.  Decorated with the Bronze Sta*r and the *Soldiers Medal for bravery under fire and the Purple Heart for injuries sustained in Viet Nam.*  Also served in the Army Air Defense Command as Nike Missile Battery Control Officer for the Chicago-Milwaukee Defense Area.  Founder and former CEO of Turbine Technology Services Corp., a turbine (jet engine) services and maintenance company (15 years).  Former Senior Manager at General Electric Turbine (jet) Engine Division (15 years).  Private pilot.


Statement to this website 3/23/07: "As a former General Electric Turbine engineering specialist and manager and then CEO of a turbine engineering company, I can guarantee that none of the high tech, high temperature alloy engines on any of the four planes that crashed on 9/11 would be completely destroyed, burned, shattered or melted in any crash or fire.  Wrecked, yes, but not destroyed.  Where are all of those engines, particularly at the Pentagon?  If jet powered aircraft crashed on 9/11, those engines, plus wings and tail assembly, would be there. 

Additionally, in my experience as an officer in NORAD as a Tactical Director for the Chicago-Milwaukee Air Defense and as a current private pilot, there is no way that an aircraft on instrument flight plans (all commercial flights are IFR) would not be intercepted when they deviate from their flight plan, turn off their transponders, or stop communication with Air Traffic Control.  No way!  With very bad luck, perhaps one could slip by, but no there's no way all four of them could! 

Finally, going over the hill and highway and crashing into the Pentagon right at the wall/ground interface is nearly impossible for even a small slow single engine airplane and no way for a 757. Maybe the best pilot in the world could accomplish that but not these unskilled "terrorists". 

*Attempts to obscure facts by calling them a "Conspiracy Theory" does not change the truth.  It seems, "Something is rotten in the State.*"

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


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 9, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > You loons are just too damn funny.
> ...


Does this look like a 10 foot crater?:

http://jc3131.k12.sd.us/event/crater-flight93.jpg


----------



## saiweril (Dec 9, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> Does this look like a 10 foot crater?:


  Does someone else want to tell the court Jester what he just posted, or should I?


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 9, 2010)

A 2000 lb bomb wouldn't penetrate 45 feet into packed gravel and rocks.


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 9, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > Does this look like a 10 foot crater?:
> ...


its from a movie, but it was a recreation of the event


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 9, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > You loons are just too damn funny.
> ...



That's really a simple question that you can show yourself if you have a BB Gun. Shoot into a sand box is the BB buried? Is the hole it made as deep as the BB went? Flight 93 crashed into a reclaimed mine, the earth there would be rather soft. Much of the plane would have buried itself. 

Now tell me how that analogy is soooo wrong.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 9, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > How did Flight 93, a 155-foot long plane, bury down to 45', but only leave a 10' crater?
> ...


I didn't know Flight 93 was a solid object that crashed at the beach.  

But if 93 did what you said, tons and tons of plane debris should have been dug out of the ground, right?


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 9, 2010)

Why do I bother?


----------



## saiweril (Dec 9, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> Shoot into a sand box is the BB buried? Is the hole it made as deep as the BB went? Flight 93 crashed into a reclaimed mine, the earth there would be rather soft. Much of the plane would have buried itself.


Patriot911, the above description is FAR different than what happened to Flight 1771, right?


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 9, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > Does this look like a 10 foot crater?:
> ...


Sorry about that. clicked on the wrong one.

HERE......Does this look like a 10 foot crater......How long is that fire truck?

http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/evidence/photos/docs/shankshole3.jpg


----------



## saiweril (Dec 9, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> Why do I bother?


You can't answer a simple question?


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 9, 2010)

saiweril said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > Why do I bother?
> ...



I gave up answering questions for idiots. Just use some common sense and you might make something of yourself someday.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 9, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> HERE......Does this look like a 10 foot crater......How long is that fire truck?
> 
> http://911research.wtc7.net/plane/evidence/photos/docs/shankshole3.jpg


I'm talking about the depth.  How does a 155-foot long plane bury 45' down, but only leave a 10-foot deep crater?


----------



## saiweril (Dec 9, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > SFC Ollie said:
> ...


If most of the plane buried, show us your best proof that tons and tons of plane debris was dug out of that 45' deep hole they excavated.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 9, 2010)

See?


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 9, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > Wicked Jester said:
> ...


fixed


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 9, 2010)

Any of you loons care to address those transcripts?......Particularly the 93 transcript......Surely you can just explain it away

Flight 93 Cockpit Transcript - Wikisource


----------



## eots (Dec 9, 2010)

wicked jester said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > wicked jester said:
> ...



why is there not a single piece of debris anywhere ? And where are those big wing marks??...the grass is all still green for fuck sakes


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 9, 2010)

eots said:


> wicked jester said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


did you bother to look at the other picture?

The one with the green grass was posted by mistake.

WAKE UP!


----------



## eots (Dec 9, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > wicked jester said:
> ...



 the one with the green grass ?..wtf ?? posted by mistake. ?..so was the grass or not ? and where is the debris ??


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 9, 2010)

eots said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


Yeah, it was posted by mistake.....I clicked on the wrong picture....It was from a movie.

Now, scroll up to 566 and see the actual picture taken at the site......You can even see debris in the crater.

And there are pictures of debris being dug from the hole.....Just go to the same site your body pictures came from and look 'em up, DAMMIT!


----------



## eots (Dec 9, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Wicked Jester said:
> ...



lol...ya its all a movie...the whole investigation reads like a cheap novel


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 9, 2010)

eots said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


Still don't have the balls to adress the transcripts I see.

LMAO!

You people are fuckin' lunatics!


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 9, 2010)

eots said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


Don't have the balls to adress the actual picture.......Typical!


----------



## eots (Dec 9, 2010)

same question where are the bodies,the scorched earth ,the debris, the engines.. there is virtually nothing around the hole


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 10, 2010)

Here's one of the engines being dug out of the HOLE!
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6b/Flight93Engine.jpg


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 10, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Wicked Jester said:
> ...



If I see you make another reference to someones "balls" today I may be forced to put you in the HOMO CAGE for the weekend...

Just sayin..


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 10, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


Why would I care?.........I'm rarely up here on the weekends anyway!

But hey, everytime I see one of these troofer loons not showing the balls to adress facts, i'll let 'em know they don't have the BALLS!

It's kinda like a hobby!

And hey Hug.....Maybe you can consider coming up with a "Neutered cage".....for all the ones up here who don't have any BALLS!


----------



## eots (Dec 10, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> Here's one of the engines being dug out of the HOLE!
> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6b/Flight93Engine.jpg



thats not a commercial air liner engine it too small an airliner engine would never fit in that bucket and why is it rusty ?


[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8aj0WvkJKA[/ame]


----------



## Obamerican (Dec 10, 2010)

eots said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > Here's one of the engines being dug out of the HOLE!
> ...


It's not rust, it's dirt! And the turbine blades shear off. You're hopeless.


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 10, 2010)

eots said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > Here's one of the engines being dug out of the HOLE!
> ...


Do you not understand that it's the internals of the engine?

Rusted?.......No, it's covered in dirt......Notice how it's the same color as the EARTH surrounding it.


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 10, 2010)

Damn!.......Look at the shape and size of the crash site.....Definitely resembles the shape of a commercial airliner. Look at the vehicles in the upper left hand corner......Line 'em up end to end and you've got the width of a commercial airliner.....And lets not forget the SCORCHED EARTH And BURNED TREES!

http://www.solcomhouse.com/images/11fbishan.jpg


And of course, we have the TRANSCRIPT that you repeatedly ignore:

Flight 93 Cockpit Transcript - Wikisource


----------



## saiweril (Dec 10, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> Don't have the balls to adress the actual picture.......Typical!


When do we get to see that second mushroom cloud photo out of the tons you said existed?


----------



## saiweril (Dec 10, 2010)

eots said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > Here's one of the engines being dug out of the HOLE!
> ...


Hey, it does fit in the bucket.  That's probably how they planted it!!!  Good eye.


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 10, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > Don't have the balls to adress the actual picture.......Typical!
> ...


There are no more photo's of the mushroom cloud.......Just a bunch of photos of the same picture, zoomed in and out.......Christ, you actually think the plane crashed in some heavily populated area with thousands of people standing around with digi's and cell phone cameras?

Still, you can't deny that picture......Can't deny that your fellow troofer loons have made the lady's life who took it a living hell, because it's just further proof that you people are full o' shit!


----------



## saiweril (Dec 10, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> Rusted?.......No, it's covered in dirt......Notice how it's the same color as the EARTH surrounding it.


Here's a hi-res:  http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecution/P200060.jpg

Doesn't look like dirts on it.  It looks aged.  And why was that engine, the heaviest and strongest part of the plane, unearthed only a couple feet below the surface when the diggers supposedly had to dig 15 feet to start finding the rest of the plane?  Eots mentioned it's small enough to fit in the bucket.  I think we know how that engine part got in that hole!


----------



## saiweril (Dec 10, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> There are no more photo's of the mushroom cloud.......Just a bunch of photos of the same picture, zoomed in and out


But you said...



Wicked Jester said:


> *There are tons of pictures of the smoke cloud*....How could that be if it never happened?





> Christ, you actually think the plane crashed in some heavily populated area with thousands of people standing around with digi's and cell phone cameras?


Didn't the lady take it with a digital camera?  That "dropped" her camera after the first shot and couldn't put the battery back it?  Who later said she gave all her profits to the Todd Beamer foundation by the *honor system*?



> Still, you can't deny that picture


Looks like someone closer to this event than any of us does...



> Jeff: Val McClatchey... she has a famous photo.
> Ms. Leverknight: *It was a fake photo, because it didn't have a mushroom cloud*.
> Jeff: It what?
> Ms. Leverknight: There was no mushroom cloud.
> ...


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 10, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > There are no more photo's of the mushroom cloud.......Just a bunch of photos of the same picture, zoomed in and out
> ...



Oh yes, We understand someone else who was "in School" at the time of the crash "Knows" the photo was faked.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 10, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> Oh yes, We understand someone else who was "in School" at the time of the crash "Knows" the photo was faked.


Are you saying Ms. Leverknight is lying?


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 10, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > Wicked Jester said:
> ...


Exactly Sarge, they got NOTHIN'!

And notice how they keep ignoring the transcript.......They ignore it because it tells exactly what happened that day on flight 93.

They're friggin' laughable!


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 10, 2010)

saiweril said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > Oh yes, We understand someone else who was "in School" at the time of the crash "Knows" the photo was faked.
> ...


Obviously!

LMAO!


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 10, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > Rusted?.......No, it's covered in dirt......Notice how it's the same color as the EARTH surrounding it.
> ...


Are you fucking blind?


This is just too damn funny!


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 10, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...



They also claim the phone calls were faked. But they have no alternative scenarios to explain anything other than Bush did it, or it was Israel, Or (Insert evil genius here).


----------



## saiweril (Dec 10, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > SFC Ollie said:
> ...


What does she have to gain by lying?  How do we know that photo isn't fake?

Lot of circumstantial evidence that it is:  she was in financial trouble, she copyrighted it, sold copies for $20, said all profits were forwarded by the honor system, admitted using some of the profits to fight her lawsuit.

How do we know she didn't keep all of her profits?

Just think if Richard Gage used the honor system.


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 10, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


Lets just get to the cruxt of your argument here.......You're saying she was too stupid put the battery back in, but was smart enough to fake the photo within an hour before the FBI arrived?

How do YOU know the photo is faked?

How do YOU know that the profits weren't forwarded?

Yes, somebody who didn't have the money to pay for attorneys would be perfectly right in using profits.

What does she have to gain by lying?......Could it be that she's possibly pissed that she didn't take the photo that day, and wished that she could turn a profit?......Could it be that she was paid off by troofer loons looking to bolster their BS?.......Could it be she never liked her neighbor in the first place?

Like I said, you loons got NOTHIN'!


----------



## eots (Dec 10, 2010)

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0CSMtLec3A[/ame]


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 10, 2010)

eots said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0CSMtLec3A


Once again......EPIC FAIL!

LMAO!

Care to address the trancripts?..........Of course not!


----------



## eots (Dec 10, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0CSMtLec3A
> ...



the transcripts not be trusted without  fiuther investigation



*The Evidence

Destroyed, Missing, and Surviving Evidence of the September 11th Attack*

Evidence about the September 11th attacks can be divided into three categories: destroyed, missing, and surviving. The missing category includes officially secret information, since the existence of secret evidence and what it indicates cannot be verified.

A great deal of the evidence about the crimes of September 11th has either been destroyed or is unaccounted for. Indeed the event was and continues to be used to justify a campaign of secrecy never before seen in the United States, virtually eliminating public accountability of the very agencies who were entrusted to handle the evidence.

A review of the evidence shows a strong pattern of destruction or suppression of evidence, and the blocking of effective investigations, by the authorities. This is evident whether one looks at the flights, the World Trade Center, or the Pentagon.

9-11 Research: The Evidence

*FAA Managers Destroyed 9/11 Tape
Recording Contained Accounts of Communications With Hijacked Plane*s

By Sara Kehaulani Goo
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, May 6, 2004; 6:16 PM
Six air traffic controllers provided accounts of their communications with hijacked planes on Sept. 11, 2001, on a tape recording that was later destroyed by Federal Aviation Administration managers, according to a government investigative report issued today.

It is unclear what information was on the tape because no one ever listened to, transcribed or duplicated it, the report by the Department of Transportation inspector general said.


The report concluded that the FAA generally cooperated with the independent panel investigating the terrorist attacks by providing documents about its activities on Sept. 11, but the actions of two FAA managers "did not, in our view, serve the interests of the FAA, the Department [of Transportation] or the public."

The report was conducted at the request of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) after the panel investigating the Sept. 11 attacks, officially known as the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, complained that the FAA had been less than forthcoming in turning over documents

FAA Managers Destroyed 9/11 Tape (washingtonpost.com)


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 10, 2010)

the destroyed is easily answered by Hanlon's Razon


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 10, 2010)

So let me get this straight..... an FAA manager destroys a tape at the insistance of the UNION that contained the testimonies of the ATC personnel who gave their statements the next day.

So what again was lost?  How is the UNION the big bad gubment?  Do you even READ the bullshit you post?


----------



## eots (Dec 10, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> So let me get this straight..... an FAA manager destroys a tape at the insistance of the UNION that contained the testimonies of the ATC personnel who gave their statements the next day.
> 
> So what again was lost?  How is the UNION the big bad gubment?  Do you even READ the bullshit you post?



yes destruction of 9/11 evidence is no big deal...


----------



## saiweril (Dec 11, 2010)

Patriot911, can you please provide a picture of at least two of those large garbage dumpsters of plane debris?  I can't image there were 10 of those giant dumpsters that are hard to miss there and they only photographed one.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 11, 2010)

I can see 2 dumpsters in this photo in another I counted a possible 4. I, sure they moved them out as they were filled.


----------



## eots (Dec 11, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> I can see 2 dumpsters in this photo in another I counted a possible 4. I, sure they moved them out as they were filled.



lol....


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 11, 2010)

Dumpsters are funny now?


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 11, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> I can see 2 dumpsters in this photo in another I counted a possible 4. I, sure they moved them out as they were filled.



Link the photo so we can blow it up and look at it for ourselves.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 11, 2010)

I never that you'd have to play "Where's Waldo?" with 10 giant garbage dumpsters.

Why is it that a big plane crashed there, almost all of it was recovered, but you skeptics really can't show very good evidence that it was?


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 11, 2010)

eots said:


> Patriot911 said:
> 
> 
> > So let me get this straight..... an FAA manager destroys a tape at the insistance of the UNION that contained the testimonies of the ATC personnel who gave their statements the next day.
> ...



Way to duck the questions, eots.  What evidence was lost?  The oral testimonies of the ATC agents that gave their written testimonies the next day?  I'm not saying the manager was right to destroy the evidence at the insistance of the union for the ATC.  I AM saying nothing was actually lost.  

Unless of course you can produce evidence there was something lost in that evidence that was forgotten in the 12 hours before they gave their written testimonies.... but we all know how you abhor and detest real evidence.


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 11, 2010)

saiweril said:


> I never that you'd have to play "Where's Waldo?" with 10 giant garbage dumpsters.
> 
> Why is it that a big plane crashed there, almost all of it was recovered, but you skeptics really can't show very good evidence that it was?



Maybe because the people doing all the work didn't realize a bunch of immature assholes would question every move they made.  HUNDREDS of people worked in Shanksville from all kinds of agencies and including volunteers.  Not ONE of them has come forward to say no plane was there.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 11, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> a bunch of immature assholes


Pot, meet Kettle.



> HUNDREDS of people worked in Shanksville from all kinds of agencies and including volunteers.  Not ONE of them has come forward to say no plane was there.


Logical fallacy.

Still standing behind your claim that 10 giant garbage dumpsters of plane debris were at the scene?


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 11, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > I never that you'd have to play "Where's Waldo?" with 10 giant garbage dumpsters.
> ...



Ya...no reason to handle a supposed crime scene that also happens to be a supposed airplane crash site as if there would be questions of every conceivable detail.  Maybe you are one of the dumbest fucks to ever grace USMB.

The most simple airplane accident let alone a crash is documented in EVERY detail with all evidense tagged, bagged and in the case of crash re-assembled in a big hanger with every piece seperately and as a whole photographed.  

Ya...no reason to question even the presence of a "dumpster" when every bit of evidence should be documented seperately, photographed...where found...where evidense is placed ..transferred..etc..."chain of evidense"...  etc...  A dumpster at a crash site?...What ever for?

Just how STUPID do you people think we are?

Here goes that pesky "pilot" experience raising it's ugly head again....

So you all would be OK if your local police just showed up with a broom and a dumpster at a murder scene?

Christ you people are either mongoloid stupid or being paid to try to deflect some of the most obvious objections imaginable.


----------



## eots (Dec 11, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Patriot911 said:
> ...



we do not know what was lost as it was destroyed


----------



## candycorn (Dec 11, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> Just how STUPID do you people think we are?
> 
> Here goes that pesky "pilot" experience raising it's ugly head again....



USMB likely doesn't have enough bandwidth for me to list how stupid I think you are.  

Pilot...yeah....whatever.


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 11, 2010)

candycorn said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> > Just how STUPID do you people think we are?
> ...



Oh look...The one with absolutely NO knowledge of how a crime scene and a crash scene is normally proccesed chimes in.  Run your traitor ass pie hole all you want bitch.  A dumpster at a crime scene is by itself totally out of place.  There is no "garbage" at a supposed scene like this.  EVERYTHING is evidense.

At the risk of being repetative...Go Fuck Yourself.

And Fuck the people you obviously work for!


----------



## saiweril (Dec 11, 2010)

Still waiting Parrot911.


----------



## candycorn (Dec 11, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > HUGGY said:
> ...



You're the one bitching small-dick.  The internet-tough guy routine bores us.  You're nothing and you know it so you try to make people as miserable as you apparently are.  

The 9 tractionless years of your twoofer movement shows how impotent your movement is. 

I'm guessing it's a night time problem as well seeing how bitter you are.  

Have fun tonight short-stack.  You're living proof that someone else can take a joke.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 11, 2010)

candycorn said:


> The 9 tractionless years of your twoofer movement shows how impotent your movement is.


Then why are so many of you skeptics wasting your lives on us?


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 11, 2010)

candycorn said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Well at least you didn't try to come up with some lame excuse for a dumpster at a crime scene.  I guess that is progress of sorts.

Maybe you are smarter little disinformation distributor than I thought.  Or would you care to explain the presense of a dumpster at a crime scene?


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 11, 2010)

saiweril said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > The 9 tractionless years of your twoofer movement shows how impotent your movement is.
> ...


because your pathetic stupidity is very funny
you should be on TBS


----------



## candycorn (Dec 11, 2010)

saiweril said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > The 9 tractionless years of your twoofer movement shows how impotent your movement is.
> ...



I spend about 11 posts per day.  The only difference is I'm quite effective.  Elsewise people like Huzzy or whatever her name is wouldn't sound (and be) so totally overmatched in every conceivable way.  

Please feel free to do your daily routine:

Wake up in the house you're living at rent free.
Go down to the basement.
Break open the scalpel drawer
Sharpen scalpels for splitting hairs
Post your crap on here.
Get your ass handed to you.
Go back upstairs.
Say goodnight to those who you live with rent-free
Dream that what you did today will actually matter (in your dreams is the only place it does).


----------



## candycorn (Dec 11, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > HUGGY said:
> ...



As soon as you explain what took down the light poles short-stack.


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 11, 2010)

Lets just boil it all down, troofer loons.

First, thousands of people at so many levels and angency's would have had to have been involved in this supposed "conspiracy" long before the attack.....Are you loons going to say with a straight face that not ONE of those thousands would have stood up and said "Oh hell no!"?......Do you actually think that not ONE would have come to their senses after signing on and went straight to the media with the conspiracy, and made it aware that there was a plan to allow thousands of their fellow americans to die in some sort of evil conspiracy?....And after more than 9 fucking years not ONE of those thousands of people would be able to keep their mouths shut about it, particularly when big fucking bucks could be made by outing such a conspiracy........And, how long did it take to out Watergate?.......There weren't nearly as many people involved in that fiasco, compared to the thousands who would have had to have been involved in a conspiracy the size of 9/11.....Are you going to say that not one person in the media wouldn't have their deep throat by now?......Particularly the left wing media who were looking for ANYTHING to nail Bush and his administration on.

Your claims all nothing but pure BS.......Sensible people fully know what happened that day. A bunch of crazy fucks hijacked 4 planes and rammed them full speed into 3 buildings and an empty field.

Get a life people.....And understand that fools like you are making several people rich by duping you into believing all the garbage.


----------



## eots (Dec 11, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> Lets just boil it all down, troofer loons.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## candycorn (Dec 11, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> Lets just boil it all down, troofer loons.
> 
> First, thousands of people at so many levels and angency's would have had to have been involved in this supposed "conspiracy" long before the attack.....Are you loons going to say with a straight face that not ONE of those thousands would have stood up and said "Oh hell no!"?......Do you actually think that not ONE would have come to their senses after signing on and went straight to the media with the conspiracy, and made it aware that there was a plan to allow thousands of their fellow americans to die in some sort of evil conspiracy?....And after more than 9 fucking years not ONE of those thousands of people would be able to keep their mouths shut about it, particularly when big fucking bucks could be made by outing such a conspiracy........And, how long did it take to out Watergate?.......There weren't nearly as many people involved in that fiasco, compared to the thousands who would have had to have been involved in a conspiracy the size of 9/11.....Are you going to say that not one person in the media wouldn't have their deep throat by now?......Particularly the left wing media who were looking for ANYTHING to nail Bush and his administration on.
> 
> ...



This is what they do, time and again.  Short-stack can't argue about anything so she has now gone with, "Why is there a dumpster there".  What the fuck ever.  Its like wondering if the running lights were on when AA77 hit the Pentagon.  As if it matters.

Absolutely zero evidence points anywhere except to the 9/11 Commission Report on the major points on the events of the day.  There will never be any evidence to the contrary so there will always be these attempts at obfuscation.  It hasn't worked for 9 tractionless years and it never will work.  All of the "fuck you's" in the world won't make it any more effective than it has been.  It just makes them look like the unscrupulous bastards they are.


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 11, 2010)

candycorn said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Don't go pleasuring yourself fantasizing about my dick ya stinking skank.  I wouln't fuck ya with Divey's johnson.  

Fortunately for me I don't have to explain everything about 9/11.  But I'm pretty sure that the video tapes they never showed documenting everything around the pentagon that day would show exactly what broke your precious light poles and put that little hole in the building.

I don't claim to know what happened.  I just keep getting these rediculous pieces of the puzzel thrown up in my face and ask extremely basic questions about them.  Take the "dumpster" situation...Everyone is so concerned about how many dumpsters...What was in them...Blah...  blah...  blah... Not one of you imbeciles even question why a dumpter is at a crime scene of this magnatude at all.  What prey tell at a crime scene/crash site is garbage?  It is things like this that scream fraud at this "official" investigation.  A lying piece of shit like yourself isn't interested in answering any questions that remain unsolved.  You are here only to try to cover up.  That's fine.  If I was working for your side I would probably be doing the same thing.  

As for the time that has passed...I haven't followed the 9/11 blogs at all and only from time to time look in on the progress of these threads here on USMB.  Whether it is 9 days or 9 years...a dumpster has no place at a crime scene.  I just discovered this little fauxpax(sp) this week.  Stupid me I don't let something this obvious go un noticed.


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 11, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > HUGGY said:
> ...


Why is evidence thrown into TRASH BAGS at crime scenes?........Why were TRASH bags after TRASH bags hauled out of Dahmers apartment. And Gacy's home?........Why is it that just about everytime we see a crime scene on the news, you see the detectives and evidence tech's loading TRASH bags into CSI vans?

It would make sense to bring in TRASH bins to load up evidence, to be taken for sorting by experts who may have wanted a cleaner environment to do said sorting, then in a dirty empty field.

Once again, no conspiracy there, buddy!


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 11, 2010)

eots said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > Lets just boil it all down, troofer loons.
> ...


----------



## saiweril (Dec 11, 2010)

Wicked Jester, do you believe there were 10 giant garbage dumpsters fill with plane debris at the scene?

candycorn, do you believe there were 10 giant garbage dumpsters fill with plane debris at the scene?

DiveCon, do you believe there were 10 giant garbage dumpsters fill with plane debris at the scene?


----------



## saiweril (Dec 11, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> Where is Bin Laden?......Most likely cowering in a cave with his precious dialysis machine


I didn't know caves have electrical outlets.



> waiting for special op's or a missile to blow his sorry ass away!


What's taking you guys so long?  He has a $50 million bounty on his head for God's sake.  Shall we call in the Girl Scouts to help you guys find him?


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 11, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Wicked Jester, do you believe there were 10 giant garbage dumpsters fill with plane debris at the scene?
> 
> candycorn, do you believe there were 10 giant garbage dumpsters fill with plane debris at the scene?
> 
> DiveCon, do you believe there were 10 giant garbage dumpsters fill with plane debris at the scene?


Yep!


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 11, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Wicked Jester, do you believe there were 10 giant garbage dumpsters fill with plane debris at the scene?
> 
> candycorn, do you believe there were 10 giant garbage dumpsters fill with plane debris at the scene?
> 
> DiveCon, do you believe there were 10 giant garbage dumpsters fill with plane debris at the scene?


depends
how full they filled them, and did they sort them by zone/part
i havent seen anything that tells me they didnt


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 11, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



You have never seen me put the word conspiracy on this MB.  OK...Handling evidense of this importance in dumpsters even in trash bags is rediculous to the extreme but if I could see a blow up of these dumpsters showng tied off tagged garbage bags it would at least lend SOME(but not conclusive) credibility to THAT theory.  A proffessional investigation would not use dumpsters because they are not clean. Try to remember that almost everything would be subject to dna testing before proven not neccesary which would certainly not be determined out in the field.  Also the evidense would have a lot of sharp metal shards intertwined with the debris so garbage bags would hardly be suitable containment packaging.  

I would hope that an investigation involving the best federal people would use best practices.  

The bags one sees coming out of places like Dahlmers contain clothing and other "soft" items.  All evidense that needs priocessing for dna is put in clear heavy bagging..sealed and documented before it is put in sturdy boxes.

I'm not going to go on and on about the dumpsters but one HAS to admit that thier usage under these circumstances is strange.

I repeat.  There is no "garbage" at a crime scene...especially one where everything is subject to a dna test.


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 11, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > Where is Bin Laden?......Most likely cowering in a cave with his precious dialysis machine
> ...


Yes, there are caves there with generators......People have been living in those caves for centuries.......They have modernzed a few with modern conveniences.


And, have you ever been to that region?........Know anything about it?.......Know about the people who inhabit it?..........Know about the tribal aspect?.

I have......I do........I do.........I do!

Now, if you think you can take you and your fellow girl scouts and take care of business, by all means, GO FOR IT!........But when you end up on videotape with your head about to be sawed off, don't expect any back up.........That's your lil' problem.......Shoulda kept your lil' ass at home.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 11, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > I can see 2 dumpsters in this photo in another I counted a possible 4. I, sure they moved them out as they were filled.
> ...



You don't know how to copy or link to a photo?

http://cryptome.quintessenz.org/mirror/shank-092201b.jpg


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 11, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> > SFC Ollie said:
> ...



Don't be a smart ass Ollie.  I clicked on the photo and it gave me no link.

I don't have the time to process it tonight but I will later.  Thanks for the link.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 11, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon, do you believe there were 10 giant garbage dumpsters fill with plane debris at the scene?
> ...


I'll make it easier on you, were there at any time 10 giant garbage dumpsters at the scene, empty or not?


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 11, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


no idea
would it matter if they were ALL there at one time, or that they had several that had been hauled off and dumped at a secure site for analysis?

what if they only had 1 dumpster that was filled 10 times?


----------



## saiweril (Dec 11, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> no idea
> would it matter if they were ALL there at one time, or that they had several that had been hauled off and dumped at a secure site for analysis?
> 
> what if they only had 1 dumpster that was filled 10 times?


Patriot said there were 10 giant dumpsters there.  Were there?  I don't see any evidence of it.  He insists though.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 11, 2010)

Forgot about Ollie.

SFC Ollie, do you believe there were 10 giant dumpsters at the scene?


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 11, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > no idea
> ...



That's why you're so stupid. What does it matter how many dumpsters were used to collect the debris? They had to carry it out of there somehow.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 11, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> That's why you're so stupid. What does it matter how many dumpsters were used to collect the debris? They had to carry it out of there somehow.


So do you believe there were 10 giant dumpsters at the scene as Patriot911 claimed?


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 11, 2010)

saiweril said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > That's why you're so stupid. What does it matter how many dumpsters were used to collect the debris? They had to carry it out of there somehow.
> ...



I believe it is extremely possible that 10 dumpster loads (10 to 20 yard dumpsters are not giant by the way) could have been taken out of the crash area and debris fields. Of course we really have no way of knowing this do we.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 11, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> I believe it is extremely possible that 10 dumpster loads (10 to 20 yard dumpsters are not giant by the way) could have been taken out of the crash area and debris fields. Of course we really have no way of knowing this do we.


Then you guys shouldn't make that claim, should you?


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 11, 2010)

saiweril said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > I believe it is extremely possible that 10 dumpster loads (10 to 20 yard dumpsters are not giant by the way) could have been taken out of the crash area and debris fields. Of course we really have no way of knowing this do we.
> ...


no one made the claim you are pushing
if i remember correctly it was only said that they took 10 dumpster loads
and not that there were 10 dumpsters on site


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 11, 2010)

saiweril said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > I believe it is extremely possible that 10 dumpster loads (10 to 20 yard dumpsters are not giant by the way) could have been taken out of the crash area and debris fields. Of course we really have no way of knowing this do we.
> ...



Yeah, lord knows the coroner in charge MUST have been lying to us.    More proof truthtards willfully ignore any and all evidence they don't like.

But hey.  This has a simple solution.  They said the wreckage was returned to United.  Why don't you write to United and ask them if they got their plane back?  I am pretty sure they're familiar enough with aircraft to know if what they got back was their 757 or not.  

We all know you will do no such thing though.  Why would you piss on your own parade of ignorance?


----------



## saiweril (Dec 11, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > SFC Ollie said:
> ...


Parrot911, I'll give you one chance to retract your 10 dumpsters claim, or else.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 11, 2010)

LOL @ or else......


----------



## saiweril (Dec 11, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> LOL @ or else......


Keep laughing buddy.  You'll get yours too.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 11, 2010)




----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 11, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Patriot911 said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...



WOOOO!  I'm quaking in my boots from some fucktard with an overblown ego who thinks he can somehow threaten people over the Internet and actually have them take him seriously.    You're a fucking joke saiweril.  I won't retract a claim made by the coroner in charge at Shanksville; a civilian who is held in the highest regard and has impeccable integrity and credibility.  I am going to believe him any day of the week as opposed to a piece of shit like you who thinks threatening someone over the internet is a viable alternative!    Go slap your mama for raising such a dipshit!

Did you try to contact United yet?


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Dec 11, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > Patriot911 said:
> ...



If you don't retract it, he will cry. A lot.


----------



## Obamerican (Dec 11, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Patriot911 said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


And then what???? Tell your mommy????


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Dec 11, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Patriot911 said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...



Are you threatening him?


----------



## Obamerican (Dec 12, 2010)

eots said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > I can see 2 dumpsters in this photo in another I counted a possible 4. I, sure they moved them out as they were filled.
> ...


Shut the fuck up, bitch. Your mommy says take the trash out.


----------



## Obamerican (Dec 12, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > I can see 2 dumpsters in this photo in another I counted a possible 4. I, sure they moved them out as they were filled.
> ...


Take your faggot sunglasses off, bitch.


----------



## Obamerican (Dec 12, 2010)

saiweril said:


> I never *that* you'd have to play "Where's Waldo?" with 10 giant garbage dumpsters.
> 
> Why is it that a big plane crashed there, almost all of it was recovered, but you skeptics really can't show very good evidence that it was?


"thought", you fucking moron.


----------



## eots (Dec 12, 2010)

Obamerican said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > I never *that* you'd have to play "Where's Waldo?" with 10 giant garbage dumpsters.
> ...



the moron would be anyone that thinks that picture shows a dumpsters full of aircraft parts


----------



## eots (Dec 12, 2010)

Obamerican said:


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



OA is slipping into the world of his little imaginings to avoid the reality there is no evidence of any positively identifiable air craft parts from shaksville


----------



## candycorn (Dec 12, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > HUGGY said:
> ...



The only thing that could knock down the light poles--some over 100' apart is an airplane. A genuine pilot would know that, short-stack.  

You're just afraid to admit the self-obvious fact because it shows me putting you in your place; yet again.  

Keep harping on dumpsters though...I'm sure that will result in a revolution for your "movement" short-stack.


----------



## candycorn (Dec 12, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> > SFC Ollie said:
> ...



C'mon Oliver,

We all know that Airline Pilots like Hussy don't work with such high-tech equipment like a computer mouse.  Too many buttons for her to keep track of.  LOL


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 12, 2010)

Obamerican said:


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



I don't have a truck to move those dumpsters....


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 12, 2010)

Obamerican said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> > SFC Ollie said:
> ...



Those "faggot" sunglasses are on for YOUR protection.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 12, 2010)

Obamerican said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > I never *that* you'd have to play "Where's Waldo?" with 10 giant garbage dumpsters.
> ...


Actually, "I never [thought] that..."

But reminds me to ask you...

Obamerican, do you believe there were 10 giant dumpsters at the scene?


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 12, 2010)

Explain all the following away, troofers!

[ame]www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkivdEGph9A[/ame]


----------



## saiweril (Dec 12, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> Explain all the following away, troofers!
> 
> www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkivdEGph9A


Who ever said there was no wreckage was found?

How does a 155-foot long plane bury itself and only leave a 10-foot deep crater?

Have you ever seen a plane crash leave wing and tail indentations in the ground before?  

@1:12, why is that the ONLY piece photographed with United Airlines coloring?  If 95% of the plane was recovered, shouldn't there be a ton of pieces photographed with UA coloring still on it?

@1:38, how did that red bandana survive unscathed, yet all 44 passengers were shredded so badly that only 8% of their total mass remained and most reportedly had to be identified by DNA cause their remains were so shredded?

@1:43, how come most of the debris in that dumpster looks rusted and why isn't there a single piece in there that has United Airlines coloring?

@1:45, if so much of the plane was recovered (95% claimed), why is there so lack of evidence to prove that?  Was all that debris collected in those phantom 10 dumpsters?!  

@2:02, how come she says plane came down at almost a 90 degree angle when officials said it crashed at only 40 degrees?

@3:34, smoke plume looks like an ordnance blast.  One site measured it near the pond, not over the crater and the width of approx 700 YARDS!!!  Phone call from local resident claims it's fake.  Hokey story that she dropped camera after first shoot and couldn't put the battery back in supports it was faked claim.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 12, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> I don't have a truck to move those dumpsters....


What dumpsters?


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 12, 2010)

saiweril said:


> How does a 155-foot long plane bury itself and only leave a 10-foot deep crater?


  What a moron.  The crater was 10' deep before they started digging.  The plane was buried up to 45' below the surface.  Just another example of truthtard incompetence, dishonesty and overall ignorance.  Way to go saiweril!  You've managed to make truthtards look dumber than they already are!  No small accomplishment!


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 12, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > Explain all the following away, troofers!
> ...


Facts just suck for you, don't they?

Where did the id's and personal items come from?......The fuselage parts?........The recorders?........

Notice the lil' red flags around the debris field?...Those identify body parts.

What about the ariel footage from the news helicopter showing a shitload of Debris in the crater.

How about you quit trying to make the 10 foot wide claim?........It was 20 feet wide, 15 feet deep, not including wing an tail indents............Are you saying the cop was lying?....Prove it!

Can you prove there weren't ten dumpsters.

Where's the plane?......The passengers?........The crew?......The terrorists?

Where's the missile parts if it were shot down?

LMAO!


----------



## eots (Dec 12, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > How does a 155-foot long plane bury itself and only leave a 10-foot deep crater?
> ...



any pictures of the 45 ft hole they dug and what came out of it ?


----------



## eots (Dec 12, 2010)

> How does a 155-foot long plane bury itself and only leave a 10-foot deep crater



232ft...


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 12, 2010)

Here's another one for ya' loons to explain away.

[ame]www.youtube.com/watch?v=ae63iivRHt8&feature=related[/ame]


What about the flight transmissions?.......Did Bush and Cheney hire Rich Little to impersonate all those voices?

All those light poles knocked down at the Pentagon sure are a curious thing......Can any of you provide proof that a missile that wide exists in our arsenal?


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 12, 2010)

eots said:


> > How does a 155-foot long plane bury itself and only leave a 10-foot deep crater
> 
> 
> 
> 232ft...


Say what?.......Do your abject lies ever cease?

It's 155 ft 3 inches long.

Look it up!


----------



## saiweril (Dec 12, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> What a moron.  The crater was 10' deep before they started digging.


Um, I know it was.  



> The plane was buried up to 45' below the surface.


Yes, that's what was reported, so how does a 155-foot long plane bury down to 45 feet, but only leave a 10-foot deep crater as evidence of it burying?



> Just another example of truthtard incompetence, dishonesty and overall ignorance.  Way to go saiweril!  You've managed to make truthtards look dumber than they already are!  No small accomplishment!


Keep putting your foot further and further in your mouth and if you don't retract your 10 giant garbage dumpsters claim, your foot's going to be so far down your mouth that it's going to come out of your ass.


----------



## eots (Dec 12, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > > How does a 155-foot long plane bury itself and only leave a 10-foot deep crater
> ...



Does your stupidity and and lack of any factual data ever cease ??? 

*Dimensions of the Boeing 747 *

The 747  has a seating capacity of 467 (3 class). Its length is 250 ft 8 in (equal to 76.4 m). The 747s  wingspan is 224 ft 7 in (68.5 m). The cabin

Boeing 747-400 | Airliners.net


----------



## saiweril (Dec 12, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > Wicked Jester said:
> ...


How about you address each of my questions since I addressed that video like you asked?


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 12, 2010)

eots said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


dipshit, it wasnt a 747 that crashed
it was a 757


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 12, 2010)

Boeing 757-200 | Airliners.net

155 ft.


----------



## eots (Dec 12, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> Boeing 757-200 | Airliners.net
> 
> 155 ft.



I see...


----------



## saiweril (Dec 12, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> Evidence used in a court of law.


Did the defense scrutinize it to prove it all was authentic, or did they assume nothing was fishy about em and let them all be admissible?



> http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/93debris1.jpg


Eots pointed out it was planted by the bucket, that's why it looks like it was unearthed only a few feet below the ground as opposed to to the rest of the plane supposedly burying down to 45'.



>


Hmm, paint scheme missing.  Let's see if your light bulb goes off on that one. 



>


Who set it on that metal debris to level it for the shot?  Let's see if your light bulb goes off on that one too. 



>


That photo isn't even taken at the scene.  That could be a phone from numerous old plane crashes! 



>


Can you find me one more photo of a piece at the scene that shows United Airlines coloring?  Betcha can't. 



> How much proof can you handle?


I've seen all the proof of a staged event that I need to see.  Thanks.


----------



## eots (Dec 12, 2010)

saiweril said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > Evidence used in a court of law.
> ...



funny every crash site has one piece of metal small enough to carry with united colors on it


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 12, 2010)

saiweril said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > Evidence used in a court of law.
> ...



Yep an asshole like you could imagine the truckloads of stuff they drove in there and scattered around before setting off an explosion without anyone seeing them. You are of course a full blown card carrying nutcase.


----------



## eots (Dec 12, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > SFC Ollie said:
> ...



what truck loads? GOT A PIC !


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 12, 2010)

eots said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...



Um, no, that would be in dumbfucks imagination. Do try to keep up.


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 12, 2010)

These troofer idiots are beyond laughable..........their abject denial of facts is hilarious!

Christ, Eots didn't even know what kind of fuckin' plane it was.

I wish I would have  thought of taking these fools money by filling their lil' pinheaded minds with complete BS and paranoid propoganda.


----------



## eots (Dec 12, 2010)

wicked jester said:


> these troofer idiots are beyond laughable..........their abject denial of facts is hilarious!
> 
> Christ, eots didn't even know what kind of fuckin' plane it was.
> 
> I wish i would have  thought of taking these fools money by filling their lil' pinheaded minds with complete bs and paranoid propoganda.



my one mistake to your 100...ya that settles the issue ...lol


----------



## eots (Dec 12, 2010)

sfc ollie said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > sfc ollie said:
> ...



so someone told you about all this debris...i see


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 12, 2010)

eots said:


> sfc ollie said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



No you don't see at all. You are totally lost on this sub-thread, let it drop or go back and read all the posts.


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 12, 2010)

eots said:


> sfc ollie said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


dipshit, you troofer morons claim the debris was trucked in and placed there
do try harder to keep up
it makes ridiculing you so much more fun


----------



## eots (Dec 12, 2010)

divecon said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > sfc ollie said:
> ...



no they are  claiming the amount of debris shown in the feild or in pictures is nothing close to 95% of a *757*.. And would in fact all fit into the back of a good sized pick up truck and this fact should be openly investigated and the explanation found...all else is theory


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 12, 2010)

eots said:


> divecon said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


and they would be WRONG
on a massive scale


----------



## candycorn (Dec 12, 2010)

saiweril said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > Evidence used in a court of law.
> ...


Well, here's your chance to bring forth evidence and free Mousaui(sp?).  What are you waiting for?    

If they didn't authenticate the evidence, there is basis for appeal or mis-trial.  No such motion has been made.  

So it all points toward defense counsel doing due diligence.  Of course you're just going to make up more shit because thats all you can do sonny boy.  Sucks to be you doesn't it... 



saiweril said:


> Hmm, paint scheme missing.  Let's see if your light bulb goes off on that one.


What a loser!  

http://www.popularmechanics.com/cm/popularmechanics/images/UW/911-flight77-debris.jpg

Theres not going to be paint on the inner fuselage because there is insulation between the inner and outer skin which is painted.  It is the yellow material that is present in the wreckage.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 12, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> Yep an asshole like you could imagine the truckloads of stuff they drove in there and scattered around before setting off an explosion without anyone seeing them. You are of course a full blown card carrying nutcase.


What truckloads?  And who said they scattered _everything_ around before whatever they had explode there explode there?  Don't worry, I think you're a nutcase too.  You believe the official story when you don't even _know_ the entire official story!


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 12, 2010)

I know that the official investigations have all the main points correct. I am not overly concerned with the little stupid stuff. Of course some people have little else to do.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 12, 2010)

candycorn said:


> Of course you're just going to make up more shit because thats all you can do sonny boy.  Sucks to be you doesn't it...


What have I made up?  And the only people it sucks to be are you guys who believe there were 10 giant dumpsters filled with debris at the scene.



saiweril said:


> What a loser!
> 
> http://www.popularmechanics.com/cm/popularmechanics/images/UW/911-flight77-debris.jpg
> 
> Theres not going to be paint on the inner fuselage because there is insulation between the inner and outer skin which is painted.  It is the yellow material that is present in the wreckage.


What does a debris piece at the Pentagon have to do with this?


----------



## saiweril (Dec 12, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> I know that the official investigations have all the main points correct.


Such as?



> I am not overly concerned with the little stupid stuff.


Such as?



> Of course some people have little else to do.


Such as coming here to this stupid forum and respond to "loser" truthers everyday?


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 12, 2010)

saiweril said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > I know that the official investigations have all the main points correct.
> ...



Actually, I love the conspiracy threads, they are better than most comedies on TV.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 12, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> Actually, I love the conspiracy threads, they are better than most comedies on TV.


I notice you sidestep questions a lot.  Why is that?


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 12, 2010)

saiweril said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > Actually, I love the conspiracy threads, they are better than most comedies on TV.
> ...



I don't waste time answering stupid questions.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 12, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > SFC Ollie said:
> ...


Asking you what you think are the main points and non-main points of a plane crash is stupid?  How will we ever know if the official story adds if you just cherry pick what you want to accept or not?


----------



## candycorn (Dec 13, 2010)

I got this one, Oliver!



saiweril said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > I know that the official investigations have all the main points correct.
> ...


All of them.




> I am not overly concerned with the little stupid stuff.


Such as?
[/quote]
You and every thing you say.



> Of course some people have little else to do.


Such as coming here to this stupid forum and respond to "loser" truthers everyday?[/QUOTE]

When warranted we respond, when not, we sit around and laugh at you with no response.  
That happens quite often little person.


----------



## eots (Dec 13, 2010)

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGxKU2B0ZjY&feature=related[/ame]


----------



## eots (Dec 13, 2010)

*Lt. Col. Robert Bowman, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret) &#8211; Director of Advanced Space Programs Development under Presidents Ford and Carter.  U.S. Air Force fighter pilot with over 100 combat missions. (PhD in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering, Cal Tech).   Former Head of the Department of Aeronautical Engineering and Assistant Dean at the U.S. Air Force Institute of Technology.  22-year Air Force career.  Also taught Mathematics and English at the University of Southern California, the University of Maryland, and Phillips University.*


[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlGm9ZorT4Q&feature=related[/ame]


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 13, 2010)

should have known it would be a waste of 5 anhd a half minutes of my time to watcxh any video Id-Eots would post

that guy is fucking delusional and should be in protective custody


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 13, 2010)

eots said:


> *Lt. Col. Robert Bowman, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret)  Director of Advanced Space Programs Development under Presidents Ford and Carter.  U.S. Air Force fighter pilot with over 100 combat missions. (PhD in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering, Cal Tech).   Former Head of the Department of Aeronautical Engineering and Assistant Dean at the U.S. Air Force Institute of Technology.  22-year Air Force career.  Also taught Mathematics and English at the University of Southern California, the University of Maryland, and Phillips University.*
> 
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlGm9ZorT4Q&feature=related



This asshole produced no evidence to back up his claims.  Thus he is only giving his retarded and wrong opinion.  You can have all the credentials in the world and still spew bullshit.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 13, 2010)

Patriot911, are you going to retract your claim that 10 giant garbage dumpsters of debris were at the scene?  This is your final chance.


----------



## Wicked Jester (Dec 13, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Patriot911, are you going to retract your claim that 10 giant garbage dumpsters of debris were at the scene?  This is your final chance.


Are you going to retract YOUR claims that there WEREN'T 10 garbage dumpsters of debris at the scene?

Where's your proof that they weren't there?


----------



## saiweril (Dec 13, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > Patriot911, are you going to retract your claim that 10 giant garbage dumpsters of debris were at the scene?  This is your final chance.
> ...


I'm giving Patriot911 a chance to retract first, being the nice guy that I am and that he is the originator of that claim.


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 13, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...



I am not the originator of that claim.  Wally Miller, the coroner for Shanksville made the claim.  To date I haven't seen one of you truthtards debunk the claim.  You whining that you can't see ten dumpsters doesn't cut it.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 13, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > Wicked Jester said:
> ...


That's what you think.  Don't say I didn't warn you...


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 13, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Patriot911, are you going to retract your claim that 10 giant garbage dumpsters of debris were at the scene?  This is your final chance.



Or what?

 Damn your stupid.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5ZkdHImCuQ[/ame]


----------



## PhysicsExist (Dec 13, 2010)

Disturbing behavior.  Patriot911 posts misinformation as rebuttals, and uses opinionated commentary to try and prove points.  You can find his screenname throughout the Web, he is what he is, a patsy.


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 13, 2010)

PhysicsExist said:


> Disturbing behavior.  Patriot911 posts misinformation as rebuttals, and uses opinionated commentary to try and prove points.  You can find his screenname throughout the Web, he is what he is, a patsy.



Hehehehe I love that truthtards feel they need to follow me around and bad mouth me.  Strange thing is all they can do is make claims, not back them up.    What a bunch of fucking losers!  If it is such misinformation, why can't you address said misinformation?  Oh yeah, that's right.  You truthtard losers don't have any actual evidence to back up your bullshit claims, but I do.  Sucks to be you!


----------



## PhysicsExist (Dec 13, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> PhysicsExist said:
> 
> 
> > Disturbing behavior.  Patriot911 posts misinformation as rebuttals, and uses opinionated commentary to try and prove points.  You can find his screenname throughout the Web, he is what he is, a patsy.
> ...



In your own words once again:



			
				Patriot911 said:
			
		

> *The very fact you can't respond to what I write should be a HUGE clue of who is right and who is lying.*



Side note: You stated earlier 
Patriot911: "You and your "ilk" are out to lie your asses off to push your agendas of hate by lying about the deaths of three thousand Americans. That, to me and many others, is VERY wrong."

If lying about the deaths of 3 thousand americans gets under you skin, then what about your stance on the Gulf of Tonkin?  58,000 soldiers were killed in the Vietnam war, which was initiated by the Gulf of Tonkin, which has been declassified as a False Flag operation by our Government.  If 9/11 makes you angry, how come the Gulf of Tonkin and the death of 58,000 of your fellow soldiers doesnt irk you even more?  Just wondering your opinion, since that's all you use.


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 13, 2010)

PhysicsExist said:


> Patriot911 said:
> 
> 
> > PhysicsExist said:
> ...



Ah.  More strawmen because you can't debate the topic at hand!  I love it!

Wrong again, ya stupid fuck!  The FIRST attack in the Gulf of Tonkin happened and North Vietnam acknowledged that fact.  The SECOND attack in the Gulf of Tonkin was a case of nerves that never was an attack.  The fact there was serious doubt about the second attack was never expressed to Congress before the Tonkin Resolution was passed.

North Vietnam admits to Tonkin attack

BTW, your analogy is still flawed.  We don't have people using the deaths of 58,000 Americans as the basis of a lie in order to push an agenda.  That is what you douches do.  

Even your strawmen suck ass!


----------



## saiweril (Dec 13, 2010)

Now that Patriot911 and the rest of the skeptics got majorly bitch-slapped about their false belief that there were 10 large garbage dumpsters worth of plane debris at the scene, can they give any non-false evidence of that alleged 95% of Flight 93 collected was actually true?  That's a LOT of debris to be removed from the scene with hardly any evidence proving it.

And they wonder why some of us think no plane crashed and the field was staged.


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 13, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Now that Patriot911 and the rest of the skeptics got majorly bitch-slapped about their false belief that there were 10 large garbage dumpsters worth of plane debris at the scene, can they give any non-false evidence of that alleged 95% of Flight 93 collected was actually true?  That's a LOT of debris to be removed from the scene with hardly any evidence proving it.
> 
> And they wonder why some of us think no plane crashed and the field was staged.



So what is your evidence the FBI lied about the 95% recovered?  Have you written to United yet and asked them?  I didn't think so.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 13, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Now that Patriot911 and the rest of the skeptics got majorly bitch-slapped about their false belief that there were 10 large garbage dumpsters worth of plane debris at the scene, can they give any non-false evidence of that alleged 95% of Flight 93 collected was actually true?  That's a LOT of debris to be removed from the scene with hardly any evidence proving it.
> 
> And they wonder why some of us think no plane crashed and the field was staged.



http://www.usmessageboard.com/3083985-post43.html


----------



## saiweril (Dec 14, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> The FBI announced Monday that its investigation of the site where a hijacked jet slammed into a field here is complete and that 95 percent of the plane was recovered.
> 
> The federal investigation into the September 11 terrorist attacks continues.
> 
> ...


So your best evidence 95% of a 757 was recovered in that field is a CNN news article?  

Guess that _is_ more convincing than 10 small red plastic recycling bins of plane debris!


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 14, 2010)

saiweril said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > The FBI announced Monday that its investigation of the site where a hijacked jet slammed into a field here is complete and that 95 percent of the plane was recovered.
> ...


so you claim the FBI lied and CNN is in on it


----------



## saiweril (Dec 14, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> so you claim the FBI lied


Yes, unless you can show some good proof that 95% was really recovered there.  Shouldn't be too hard if that amount was really recovered.  Christ, it's practically a whole 757.  How hard can it be to prove?!  



> and CNN is in on it


No dimwit.  They just report what the FBI spokespeople tell them.


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 14, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > so you claim the FBI lied
> ...


sorry dipshit, i dont have access to that, and neither would anyone else on this forum
and you are saying they lied, you need some proof , dont you?
what proof do you have
we've all seen the photos of the proof they DID get it
you want to deny the facts and replace it with your paranoid delusions


----------



## saiweril (Dec 14, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> we've all seen the photos of the proof they DID get it


Photos proving 95% was recovered?  Where?!?


----------



## candycorn (Dec 14, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > we've all seen the photos of the proof they DID get it
> ...



[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EEyk-iohLw"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EEyk-iohLw[/ame]

On second thought, you're pretty hilarious.  Keep up the good work.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 14, 2010)

Sorry for the smack-down candycorn.  I'll try to go easier on you guys from now on.  I know it's not easy supporting an official story that's full of holes.


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 14, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Sorry for the smack-down candycorn.  I'll try to go easier on you guys from now on.  I know it's not easy supporting an official story that's full of holes.


yet you have no story at all


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 15, 2010)

If this imbecile wasn't so funny I'd put him on ignore.....


----------



## PhysicsExist (Dec 15, 2010)

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkqgs68A6a8&feature=player_embedded[/ame]


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 15, 2010)

PhysicsExist said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkqgs68A6a8&feature=player_embedded


thanks, retard, its nice knowing i can occupy space in your cranial cavity free of charge, and in such a short span of time


----------



## PhysicsExist (Dec 15, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> PhysicsExist said:
> 
> 
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkqgs68A6a8&feature=player_embedded
> ...



[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkqgs68A6a8&feature=player_embedded[/ame]


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 15, 2010)

PhysicsExist said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > PhysicsExist said:
> ...


dipshit, you understand that id-eots just retitled that video he found on youtube, right?
or are you pathetically THAT stupid to think that is actually me in that video?


----------



## PhysicsExist (Dec 15, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> PhysicsExist said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...



1) Building 7 came down in a sudden collapse, across the full length of the building, for full freefall acceleration for 105 feet, or 8 floors. 

2) The freefall for 2.25 seconds is impossible because in a natural collapse a building would need its columns to buckle/fail

3) When columns buckle/fail, there is a MINIMUM resistance, its asymptotic (it never gives a zero) thus meaning this is IMPOSSIBLE for freefall to occur.


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 15, 2010)

PhysicsExist said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > PhysicsExist said:
> ...


WRONG

again


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Dec 15, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> PhysicsExist said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...



Why do you say again? Was he ever right?


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 15, 2010)

Rat in the Hat said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > PhysicsExist said:
> ...


again, as in still
saying "wrong again" in no way implies he has ever been right
i hope that clears it up


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Dec 15, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> Rat in the Hat said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...



My mistake.

You're saying again as meaning repetitively. I thought you meant again as meaning an entirely new episode of idiocy.

Sorry to have misunderstood you.


----------



## PhysicsExist (Dec 15, 2010)

PhysicsExist said:


> 1) Building 7 came down in a sudden collapse, across the full length of the building, for full freefall acceleration for 105 feet, or 8 floors.
> 
> 2) The freefall for 2.25 seconds is impossible because in a natural collapse a building would need its columns to buckle/fail
> 
> 3) When columns buckle/fail, there is a MINIMUM resistance, its asymptotic (it never gives a zero) thus meaning this is IMPOSSIBLE for freefall to occur.



Anyone?


----------



## candycorn (Dec 15, 2010)

PhysicsExist said:


> PhysicsExist said:
> 
> 
> > 1) Building 7 came down in a sudden collapse, across the full length of the building, for full freefall acceleration for 105 feet, or 8 floors.
> ...



Nobody cares, CD. You've been exposed (now on this forum as well) as a fraud.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Dec 15, 2010)

PhysicsExist said:


> PhysicsExist said:
> 
> 
> > 1) Building 7 came down in a sudden collapse, across the full length of the building, for full freefall acceleration for 105 feet, or 8 floors.
> ...



Anyone what? Are you asking if anyone will come to your defense and agree with you?

It didn't work in the concrete core thread, why would you think it would work here, Chris?


----------



## eots (Dec 15, 2010)

Rat in the Hat said:


> PhysicsExist said:
> 
> 
> > PhysicsExist said:
> ...



Chris ? concrete core ? wtf are you on boy ?


----------



## eots (Dec 15, 2010)

candycorn said:


> PhysicsExist said:
> 
> 
> > PhysicsExist said:
> ...



You have been exposed as someone who is paid to post so shut the Fuck up


----------



## PhysicsExist (Dec 15, 2010)

eots said:


> Rat in the Hat said:
> 
> 
> > PhysicsExist said:
> ...



they are so fucking delusional I cannot even fathom it.  They assume I'm Chris, and then ignore the facts and issues presented.  Its embarrassing, this forum cannot have this many naive people, its so humbling to acknowledge that people will fight against the truth this way.  How do you disregard the physics of earth?  How can you avoid the points of freefall? How can you not realize that it is i-m-p-o-s-s-i-b-l-e?

1) Building 7 came down in a sudden collapse, across the full length of the building, for full freefall acceleration for 105 feet, or 8 floors. 

2) The freefall for 2.25 seconds is impossible because in a natural collapse a building would need its columns to buckle/fail

3) When columns buckle/fail, there is a MINIMUM resistance, its asymptotic (it never gives a zero) thus meaning this is IMPOSSIBLE for freefall to occur.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kP0Hs-v-uJ0[/ame]


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Dec 15, 2010)

Christophera and PhysicsExist have their own cartoon show. 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEAYcR8w_tE&feature=related[/ame]

It fits in with their cartoonish theories.

It must be a Santa Barbara thing.


----------



## eots (Dec 15, 2010)

Rat in the Hat said:


> Christophera and PhysicsExist have their own cartoon show.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEAYcR8w_tE&feature=related
> 
> ...



stop projecting your homo erotic fantasies on the rest of is loser


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 15, 2010)

PhysicsExist said:


> PhysicsExist said:
> 
> 
> > 1) Building 7 came down in a sudden collapse, across the full length of the building, for full freefall acceleration for 105 feet, or 8 floors.
> ...



Take a deep breath there sparky!  Oh and your sig is too big..tidy it up and remove the stupid quotes...  The people you are aguing with are not on this thread to learn anything.  They received thier marching orders 9 years ago.  The good news is that eventually everything on the internet will able to be traced back to a specific account and computer which everyone will have access to.  Don't be too shocked when many of those that proffesionaly poo poo 9/11 questions are discovered to be non existant accounts in goverment buildings.

#7 I have saved for last because it is the least talked about event of that day.  I would be willing to bet that 90 percent of the population doesn't even know the circumstance of building 7 and the ones that have heard of it assume that the towers fell on it or some other crap they picked up that was spread around to confuse any questions.

#7 defies any logic whatsoever.  The disinformation people have not come up with ANY reasonable scenerio.  They have just ignored it because there is no airplane or muslim to blame it on.  It didn't happen at a supposed secure property like the pentagon where there was no public access.  It didn't happen way out in the woods where it could be cordoned off and the scene could be anything someone wanted it to be.

Yes number 7....  Not tall enough to blame fire..It is not difficult to fight a fire in a ten story building.  It makes an interesting problem for those that must include it in the overall cover up.  This is the one where rationality completely goes south and they go straight to wacko conspiracy theoriests.  They do not question that a ten story building just falls down.  That is because there is NO rational excuse for it.  

If this had happened anywhere else but a couple of blocks from the towers it would be one of the most talked about mysteries of all time.  No...It is one of the least talked about mysteries of all time.  Odd.


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 15, 2010)

Oh ya...where are the #7 victims?  These people do like to hide behind the victims?  There should be plenty of survivors from #7.  It doesn't take very long to evacuate a building that size.  There should be hundreds of witnesses.


----------



## PhysicsExist (Dec 15, 2010)

PhysicsExist said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Rat in the Hat said:
> ...


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 15, 2010)

This is consistent with early reports of "a couple of floors burning"[10]. By the time the order was given to evacuate the area, Chief of Department Daniel Nigro says that there was *"very heavy fire on many floors"*[11]. By half-an-hour before the collapse, the building is described as *"fully involved in flames":
*
    Just when you thought it was over, youre walking by this building and youre *hearing this building creak and fully involved in flames *... Sure enough, about half an hour later it came down. (Lieutenant James McGlynn


Then we received an order from Fellini, we're going to make a move on 7. That was the first time really my stomach tightened up because *the building didn't look good.* ... Then this other officer I'm standing next to said, *that building doesn't look straight*. So I'm standing there. I'm looking at the building.* It didn't look right,* but, well, we'll go in, we'll see. So we gathered up rollups and most of us had masks at that time. We headed toward 7. And just around we were about a hundred yards away and Butch Brandies [sic: this should probably be "Brandeis"] came running up. He said forget it, nobody's going into 7, *there's creaking, there are noises coming out of there*, so we just stopped. (Fire Captain Chris Boyle


The major concern at that time at that particular location was number Seven, building number seven, which had taken a big hit from the north tower. When it fell, it ripped steel out from between the third and sixth floors across the façade on Vesey Street. We were concerned that the fires on several floors and the missing steel would result in the building collapsing. (Fire Chief Frank Fellini


We were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. *You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors.* It came down about 5 o'clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o'clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse. (Deputy Chief Peter Hayden 

WTC7 - SkepticWiki


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 15, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> PhysicsExist said:
> 
> 
> > PhysicsExist said:
> ...


uh, huggy, WTC7 was a 47 story building
one that had been evacuated HOURS before it collapsed


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 15, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> > PhysicsExist said:
> ...



I just watched a couple of videos of #7 for the first time.  There is no smoke coming out of any visible sides of the building.  You don't find THAT odd if there was enough fire and heat to "fully engulf" the building?  I have never seen a fully engulfed building that didn't belch smoke and fire from every window.  Here we have a fully engulfed building ..theoretically so "fully engulfed" that all of the steel support collums fail at the same exact momet?

You people are beyond laughable.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 15, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > HUGGY said:
> ...



Did you notice first that it was firefighters at the scene that said the building was "fully engulfed"? And did you by any chance see any photos of the south side of the building? My guess is that you did not because the smoke and fire obscured the entire south of the building. so much that they couldn't even tell exactly how badly damaged the building was.


----------



## eots (Dec 15, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > HUGGY said:
> ...



and apparently the entire inside structure fell almost silently within wtc7 before the facade collapsed...I mean wouldn't that of made almost as much dust and noise as the facade falling ?


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 15, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > HUGGY said:
> ...


then you havent seen the ones of the other sides


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 15, 2010)

eots said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...



If all of the interior floors collapsed......The preassure differential would have blown every window out of the building.  That never happened.


----------



## PhysicsExist (Dec 15, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...



A video is a video DiveCon, physics are physics.  Deal with the truth, stop fearing it.

How are you allowed to own a keyboard?  You are an imbecile.  Can someone be banned for being mentally handicapped?  Pardon me, but I'm serious.  DiveCon, you have a chemical imbalance in the very basics of brain function, which has been relevant for awhile but I feel as if it HAS to be mentioned now.  I am astounded that you are even tolerated on these boards amongst your peers, let alone I can't imagine the type of parenting you received, because there's something very deeply wrong with you as a human being.


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 15, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...



I don't need to.  Enough heat to melt steel is way more than needed to melt out the windows.  ALL of the windows.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 15, 2010)

Wow, P E really is a nutcase. Not one intelligent comment about the expert eyewitnesses who were on the scene who stated that the building was going to collapse.  I guess they're statements just don't fit in with the controlled demo.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 15, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > HUGGY said:
> ...



You do understand that only the truthers claim that steel was melted?


----------



## PhysicsExist (Dec 15, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...



Why do you claim such fallacies? You should have more respect for YOURSELF, because it is very ignorant and naive to claim false facts, as fact.  Here is your melted steel.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCdRA09pztM[/ame]





















[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lihj-Kz9wjY&feature=related[/ame]

Is all of this evidence fake?  Can you rebuttal these facts?  

*Are you man enough to redact your claim that only 'Truthers' claim there was molten steel?*


----------



## eots (Dec 15, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> Wow, P E really is a nutcase. Not one intelligent comment about the expert eyewitnesses who were on the scene who stated that the building was going to collapse.  I guess they're statements just don't fit in with the controlled demo.



yes I commented..this statement is in total contradiction to multiple actual eyewitnesses and with the findings of NIST


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 15, 2010)

I believe a firefighter when he tells me about a fire, When he actually tests the so called molten "Steel" let me know. My bet is they saw aluminum or some other compound.

And you do understand that thermite only burns for a few moments? It cannot cause molten rivers of steel days later.


----------



## PhysicsExist (Dec 15, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> I believe a firefighter when he tells me about a fire, When he actually tests the so called molten "Steel" let me know. My bet is they saw aluminum or some other compound.
> 
> And you do understand that thermite only burns for a few moments? It cannot cause molten rivers of steel days later.



Are you man enough to redact your claim that only 'Truthers' claim there was molten steel?


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 15, 2010)

PhysicsExist said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > I believe a firefighter when he tells me about a fire, When he actually tests the so called molten "Steel" let me know. My bet is they saw aluminum or some other compound.
> ...



In these forums, only truthers claim there was molten steel. Let's talk about the meteorite, the one that was molten steel yet had rebar sticking out of it..... OK, if you want to believe that....

 Now when are you going to tell me that the firefighters who saw a physical bulge in Bldg 7 were wrong?


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 15, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > HUGGY said:
> ...


Yet for some reason truthtards think high explosives blowing all the columns would leave every window intact and not make a sound! :roll:


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 15, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > HUGGY said:
> ...


steel doesn't need to melt to lose over 50% of its structural integrity


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 15, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> PhysicsExist said:
> 
> 
> > SFC Ollie said:
> ...


if you can find a larger image of that, you will also see PAPER in the mix
funny how that paper survived that "molten" steel


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 15, 2010)

eots said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > Wow, P E really is a nutcase. Not one intelligent comment about the expert eyewitnesses who were on the scene who stated that the building was going to collapse.  I guess they're statements just don't fit in with the controlled demo.
> ...



did not see any such comment.


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 15, 2010)

PhysicsExist said:


>


That was more than likely the molten aluminum alloys from the airliner.



			
				PhysicsExist said:
			
		

>


Molten steel does not hold its shape, nor can it be picked up with a claw. 



			
				PhysicsExist said:
			
		

>


If that is supposedly molten steel, why is the paper debris all over the place not bursting into flame?  Steel is 2500F+ , FAR above the flash point of paper.



			
				PhysicsExist said:
			
		

>


If this lump is suppose to be made from molten steel, why isn't the rebar melted?  It also wouldn't be stratified.  This looks like debris that was under tremendous pressure and fused together.



			
				PhysicsExist said:
			
		

> Is all of this evidence fake?  Can you rebuttal these facts?


Yes and yes.


----------



## eots (Dec 15, 2010)

sfc ollie said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > sfc ollie said:
> ...



well you have seen it now


----------



## PhysicsExist (Dec 15, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> PhysicsExist said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...



Aluminum is Silver, not gold.

Molten Steel does hold it shape, don't you always use the Blacksmiths steel techniques as a rebuttal?

Why aren't the paper debris not bursting into flame, how is that scientific?  How about how did a 2 100 story steel buildings collapse from office fires?

Stop playing games, open your eyes.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnIesvQfvd4[/ame]


----------



## candycorn (Dec 15, 2010)

PhysicsExist said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > HUGGY said:
> ...



Gee Creativedreams, nobody gave a shit the first time you posted the shit; what makes you think they do now?


----------



## PhysicsExist (Dec 15, 2010)

candycorn said:


> PhysicsExist said:
> 
> 
> > SFC Ollie said:
> ...



How does a steel building freefall into its own footprint?  For 2.25 seconds, or 8 floors, the building was in freefall, for this to occur, each floor column and support had to of been removed prior/during the collapse, this is only possible with explosives, considering the facts of reality and physics.  Fires cannot melt steel, let alone deform 8 floors synchronistically and have them fail simultaneously. Especially without showing facade damage during the 5 hours it burnt. We have first hand witnesses, such as Barry Jennings, talking of explosions, yet NIST never tests for explosives.  Wouldnt you want to know exactly what happened to the 3 highrises to ever collapse in history?  Why would all of the WTC7 debris be destroyed and shipped off before investigative procedures?


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 15, 2010)

candycorn said:


> PhysicsExist said:
> 
> 
> > SFC Ollie said:
> ...


i dont think this is "repetitiousDelusions"
but all troofers tend to think no one else has ever posted their shit before they got here


----------



## candycorn (Dec 15, 2010)

PhysicsExist said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > PhysicsExist said:
> ...



Too bad you can't wire an occupied building for demolition without anybody noticing.  Otherwise you may have a touch of reality to your idiotic fantasy CD.

You've been at this for 3 years.  You haven't convinced anybody of anything other than the fact that you're a deranged, lonely, piece of shit that nobody loves or even tolerates.  You create phony friends to "back you up"....how fucking sad are you?  

Anyway, can't plant the explosives so theres no way it could happen.


----------



## candycorn (Dec 15, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > PhysicsExist said:
> ...



Oh yes it is.  Although, Rimjob has used 2 of the same videos PE has used.  Problem is that rimjob is on public assistance and won't be posting this late....unless someone got him a computer for Christmas.  Too many correctly spelled words though.  

Trust me, it's CD.  He does this all the time when the Vikings are out of the playoffs.


----------



## PhysicsExist (Dec 15, 2010)

candycorn said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b74naeawdCs[/ame]


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 15, 2010)

candycorn said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...


what do the vikings have to do with this


----------



## candycorn (Dec 15, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...



He is from Minnesota, bets football, plays video poker, lives off of disability.


----------



## PhysicsExist (Dec 15, 2010)

Stop acting like a child candycorn.  You and along with the other users who act like children are a complete disgrace.  You disregard any fact posted, and instead resort to false accusations and name calling.  Grow up, and take off the blinders.  The truth is not scary, so stop fearing it.


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 15, 2010)

PhysicsExist said:


> Stop acting like a child candycorn.  You and along with the other users who act like children are a complete disgrace.  You disregard any fact posted, and instead resort to false accusations and name calling.  Grow up, and take off the blinders.  The truth is not scary, so stop fearing it.


he doesnt fear the truth, thats why he isnt a troofer moron, like you


----------



## candycorn (Dec 15, 2010)

PhysicsExist said:


> Stop acting like a child candycorn.  You and along with the other users who act like children are a complete disgrace.  You disregard any fact posted, and instead resort to false accusations and name calling.  Grow up, and take off the blinders.  The truth is not scary, so stop fearing it.



Gee, I haven't seen writing like that since I last saw cave walls.    Keep digging the hole loser, just makes the ending so much sweeter when you admit you're a sock and I prove, yet again, that you're nothing but a liar.


----------



## PhysicsExist (Dec 15, 2010)

candycorn said:


> PhysicsExist said:
> 
> 
> > Stop acting like a child candycorn.  You and along with the other users who act like children are a complete disgrace.  You disregard any fact posted, and instead resort to false accusations and name calling.  Grow up, and take off the blinders.  The truth is not scary, so stop fearing it.
> ...



How does a building freefall for 2.25 seconds through the path of 8 floors which are made of structural steel?  It is impossible due to fire, so what is the alternative explanation?

Are you just gonna continue acting like a child?  Are names and opinions all you got as a response to these facts?  You are scared.


----------



## candycorn (Dec 15, 2010)

PhysicsExist said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > PhysicsExist said:
> ...



You're a fucking moron.  Okay...again Lucy, take your evidence to court and get some indictments.  What are you afraid of?  Oh wait, you ain't got shit.  Which is perfect because you're not worth a shit either.

C'mon bitch, what you afraid of?  Well, lets hear it.  

You'll probably learn quite a bit when the judge informs you that a good part of the building was washed away by the collapse of the twin towers and weakened by the diesel fuel fires.  
Then he'll probably ask you to stop wasting your time which leads us to a question....

If your time is worth nothing because you are worth nothing...can it really be a waste of time?  I mean, you're not costing yourself anything because you are contributing nothing except body heat...

Just a thought.


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 16, 2010)

candycorn said:


> PhysicsExist said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Here is another thought.  I don't believe you are a chick.  So what's up with pretending you are a twat?  That's way past gay sparky.


----------



## candycorn (Dec 16, 2010)

HUGGY said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > PhysicsExist said:
> ...



Whatever.  Next you'll tell me that Liability isn't John Belushi in disguise and Divecon is only an animated figure?


----------



## saiweril (Dec 16, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> If this imbecile wasn't so funny...


Like this funny imbecile?



SFC Ollie said:


> I believe it is extremely possible that 10 dumpster loads (10 to 20 yard dumpsters are not giant by the way) could have been taken out of the crash area and debris fields.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 16, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Some board members think most of a 155 foot jet buried deep in the ground...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


skeptics, still believe the above?!


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 16, 2010)

saiweril said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > If this imbecile wasn't so funny...
> ...



You don't believe that is possible? Then you are blind.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 16, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > SFC Ollie said:
> ...


Um, did you miss the PWNING thread where I proved it didn't happen?


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 16, 2010)

saiweril said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...



Nope, I saw that. And all that proves is that the quote was taken wrong. It has nothing to do with the total amount of wreckage that was removed from the area.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 30, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> Nope, I saw that. And all that proves is that the quote was taken wrong. It has nothing to do with the total amount of wreckage that was removed from the area.


Yes it does, because you skeptics where using it as evidence for where the alleged recovered 95% of the 757 was collected and how it was hauled out of the area.

Now you guys have no reasonable explanation as to where all that alleged recovered 95% of the 757 was collected and how it would have been hauled out of the area, thus proving the 95% claim was another lie made up by the FBI.


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 30, 2010)

saiweril said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > Nope, I saw that. And all that proves is that the quote was taken wrong. It has nothing to do with the total amount of wreckage that was removed from the area.
> ...


wrong, that is not proof of the lie
you are delusional


----------



## saiweril (Dec 30, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> wrong, that is not proof of the lie
> you are delusional


So all that 95% of debris was magically recovered and magically hauled out of the area with no one seeing it?  And you call me delusional!  

It's been 9+ years skeptics.  When you guys going to prove that 95% recovered claim?


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 30, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > wrong, that is not proof of the lie
> ...


more lies
no one has said anything about magic but YOU, moron


----------



## saiweril (Dec 30, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


You are the one who is truly delusional if you continue to believe the FBI's 95% claim with little evidence in its favor.  

The evidence that claim is a lie far outweighs the evidence that it is true.


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 30, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


they found enough to make that claim factual
tough shit if you dont believe it
you are blinded by your faith in alex jones
grow some functioning brain cells and look again


----------



## saiweril (Dec 30, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


As opposed to you being blinded by your faith in the FBI?! 

I looked again, still don't see the evidence 95% of a 757 was recovered there.  Maybe 20% at best.  Evidence definitely points that the FBI lied about that claim.

It's hilarious that you skeptics are having an extremely hard time proving that claim that should be extremely easy to prove if that much was really recovered.


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 30, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


no its not hard
you just dont accept facts and prefer your fucking moronic delusions


----------



## saiweril (Dec 30, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


Denial and insults aren't evidence!


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 30, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


all you have are your denial of the facts and insults are all you fucking morons deserve


----------



## saiweril (Dec 30, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


Thanks for admitting you're not concerned with evidence, only adhom attacks.


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 30, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


you have yet to post a FACT
typical for moronic fucking troofers


----------



## saiweril (Dec 30, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


We'll add "liar" to your list!  

Also, feel free at any time to post any "facts" that 95% of the plane was recovered.


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 30, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


already been posted, you rejected it
you remain a pathetic fucking moronic troofer


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 30, 2010)

btw, dipshit, your paranoid delusions do not equal FACTS


----------



## HUGGY (Dec 30, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...



Let me speculate a wild guess.  Your singular opposition today with the ADD, Obsessive/Compulsive disorder is the primary reason you have a negative reputation.  He has no intention of conducting a reasonable debate because his opinion is the only one in his mind that HAS any merit.  Or.. he is a paid shill for those that have benefited from 9/11.  If I were you I would look at the neg reps and read the rules.  There are rules against excessive neg repping.  It serves no purpose to the board for anyone to get away with that.  If any one or two members is abusing this feature do the rest of the board a service and report them.  Gunny, the administrator, is especially intolerant of pussies that believe they can intimidate opposing opinion with the chicken shit methods some here seem to fall back on when they cannot convince by logic.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 30, 2010)

STONYCREEK, Pa. -- The FBI said yesterday that it has finished its work at the crash scene of United Flight 93 after recovering about 95 percent of the downed airliner and concluding that explosives were not responsible for bringing it down.

At the same time, the Somerset County coroner said that he has ended his own search for remains of the 44 people aboard the airliner.

"It's been very thorough," Coroner Wallace Miller said of the recovery effort.
FBI ends site work, says no bomb used

SHANKSVILLE, Pennsylvania (CNN) -- The FBI announced Monday that its investigation of the site where a hijacked jet slammed into a field here is complete and that 95 percent of the plane was recovered. 
CNN.com - FBI finished with Pennsylvania crash site probe - September 24, 2001

Of course all good truthers know that the FBI lied and the networks all swear to it....


----------



## eots (Dec 30, 2010)

divconman prefers the popular mechanics theories over the NIST report which he rejects


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 30, 2010)

eots said:


> divconman prefers the popular mechanics theories over the NIST report which he rejects


wrong again, moron
i dont reject it all, just some aspects of it
you are the one that rejects it all but expects everyone else to defend it all


----------



## saiweril (Dec 31, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> STONYCREEK, Pa. -- The FBI said yesterday that it has finished its work at the crash scene of United Flight 93 after recovering about 95 percent of the downed airliner
> 
> SHANKSVILLE, Pennsylvania (CNN) -- The FBI announced Monday that its investigation of the site where a hijacked jet slammed into a field here is complete and that 95 percent of the plane was recovered.


So they excavated down to 45 feet, a photographer was at the scene the entire time, and you're best evidence of the 95% claim are media reports?! 



> Of course all good truthers know that the FBI lied


I haven't seen much evidence that the FBI didn't lie about this, so...



> and the networks all swear to it....


The networks were just reporting what the FBI told them, so no reason to believe they were in on it.


----------



## Patriot911 (Dec 31, 2010)

So call United and ask them.  The parts were returned to them. 

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess you're not going to call them since you know the answer you would receive.    Don't you think SOMEONE at United would have questioned the 95% claim and said something?


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 31, 2010)

On Hallowed Ground - theage.com.au


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 31, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> So call United and ask them.  The parts were returned to them.
> 
> I'm going to go out on a limb and guess you're not going to call them since you know the answer you would receive.    Don't you think SOMEONE at United would have questioned the 95% claim and said something?



Damn it, don't you know United was in on it too. 

Doesn't matter what evidence you present these nut cases, it's a lie if it doesn't fit what they want to be true. 

And they will also call this fact a lie....


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 31, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> Patriot911 said:
> 
> 
> > So call United and ask them.  The parts were returned to them.
> ...


American Airlines must have been also
they both had 2 planes involved


----------



## saiweril (Dec 31, 2010)

Patriot911 said:


> So call United and ask them.  The parts were returned to them.


Who said they were?  Did you personally see all that debris being transfered back to them? 



> I'm going to go out on a limb and guess you're not going to call them since you know the answer you would receive.


I just called them.  They said they had no idea where it was being stored. 



> Don't you think SOMEONE at United would have questioned the 95% claim and said something?


How would they even know to question it?


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 31, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Patriot911 said:
> 
> 
> > So call United and ask them.  The parts were returned to them.
> ...


dipshit, the same stories that said they got 95% of it recovered also said it was being sent to UA


----------



## saiweril (Dec 31, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> On Hallowed Ground - theage.com.au





> Flight 93's estimated speed at the point of impact was 975kmh. In its final moments, it spun 180 degrees, hitting the ground upside down and at a 45-degree angle.
> 
> To the casual eye, it looked like solid, consolidated ground but in reality the reclaimed expanse was loose and uncompacted. *When flight 93 hit the ground, the cockpit and first-class cabin broke off*, scattered into millions of fragments that spread and flew like shrapnel into and through the trees 20 metres away.
> 
> ...


OMG, you guys actually _believe_ that story?!


----------



## saiweril (Dec 31, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> Doesn't matter what evidence you present these nut cases, it's a lie if it doesn't fit what they want to be true.


Funny how the photographer at the scene photographed mostly dirt coming out of the ground and only one of the thousands of plane pieces that were supposedly buried in the ground!


----------



## saiweril (Dec 31, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> dipshit, the same stories that said they got 95% of it recovered also said it was being sent to UA


Yes, and who was that again?


----------



## Obamerican (Dec 31, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


I'll ask the same question that others have asked. The toofers all say that they have ALL of this evidence that the official story is an out and out lie. Then file a lawsuit against the government and present the "evidence" in a court of law. What's so hard about that?


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 31, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > dipshit, the same stories that said they got 95% of it recovered also said it was being sent to UA
> ...


you have had multiple sources posted
i'm not going to redo it for you again


----------



## saiweril (Dec 31, 2010)

Obamerican said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


Another skeptic who couldn't prove a claim that should be extremely easy to prove!


----------



## Obamerican (Dec 31, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


You really are simple minded. I asked a simple question and, once again, you don't answer it. Proving once again why we think you idiots are just that, idiots.


----------



## saiweril (Dec 31, 2010)

Obamerican said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > Obamerican said:
> ...


That it's easy to file a lawsuit?  You're a COMPLETE idiot if you think that.

There, now I answered your question.  Why don't you now show me that 95% recovered debris that's mysteriously absent from the crime scene.


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 31, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


maybe you can get Orly Taitz to fill it for you pro bono
LOL


----------



## Obamerican (Dec 31, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


You saying it's not easy to file a lawsuit against the government doesn't make it so. People do it all the time.

Please link to the post I made that said 95% of the UA flight in Pennsylvania was recovered.

I see you as an average example of the people I've seen yelling their shit at Ground Zero in NY.


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 31, 2010)

Obamerican said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > Obamerican said:
> ...


hes too fucking stupid to understand that they wouldnt need to photograph EVERY piece recovered
most people with common sense(that leaves out just about EVERY troofer) would know a plane crashed there by the photos that have already been shown


----------



## saiweril (Dec 31, 2010)

Obamerican said:


> Please link to the post I made that said 95% of the UA flight in Pennsylvania was recovered.


So you don't believe the 95% claim?


----------



## Obamerican (Dec 31, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > Please link to the post I made that said 95% of the UA flight in Pennsylvania was recovered.
> ...


I have never said one way or the other. I don't believe in %'s. They might have only recovered 93%.


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 31, 2010)

Obamerican said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > Obamerican said:
> ...


even if they only recovered 2%, it would still be enough proof that it crashed there


----------



## saiweril (Dec 31, 2010)

Obamerican said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > Obamerican said:
> ...


Do you believe 90<% of the 757 was recovered?


----------



## saiweril (Dec 31, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> even if they only recovered 2%, it would still be enough proof that it crashed there


Well that would be more believable because it only looks like about 2% of a 757 was left on that field.


----------



## jillian (Dec 31, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...



its not too difficult to file the type of suit you're talking about. every court should have a pro bono office.

have fun. just figure out how to answer a 12(b)(6) motion


----------



## saiweril (Dec 31, 2010)

jillian said:


> its not too difficult to file the type of suit you're talking about. every court should have a pro bono office.
> 
> have fun. just figure out how to answer a 12(b)(6) motion


Prove the 95% claim then I won't have to waste the courts time.  Betcha can't.


----------



## Obamerican (Dec 31, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > even if they only recovered 2%, it would still be enough proof that it crashed there
> ...


If you believe that then where is the plane that left the airport?


----------



## saiweril (Dec 31, 2010)

Obamerican said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


You got all bent out of shape cause I didn't answer your question, now you skipped mine.  You're not a hypocrite, are you?


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 31, 2010)

saiweril said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > its not too difficult to file the type of suit you're talking about. every court should have a pro bono office.
> ...


as it has already been shown, no one can prove it to the delusional that refuse to accept the evidence


----------



## saiweril (Dec 31, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > jillian said:
> ...


What evidence, the media reports of what the FBI _told_ them?!


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 31, 2010)

saiweril said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


do you have any proof that they are incorrect?


----------



## Obamerican (Dec 31, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


Bent out of shape? Are you thin skinned? What didn't I answer?

And what keeps you from filing in court?


----------



## SFC Ollie (Dec 31, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> saiweril said:
> 
> 
> > jillian said:
> ...



They also tend to forget that since they make a claim that the FBI lied,  it is up to them to prove they lied. 
We do not have to prove that the statement is true.

Please do try telling the judge that the Officer lied, without having any proof. Let us know where that gets you.


----------



## Obamerican (Dec 31, 2010)

saiweril said:


> Obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > saiweril said:
> ...


Where is the plane that left the airport?


----------



## R.C. Christian (Dec 31, 2010)

You truthers should ask the famer whose land of course got stolen, about all the wire and debris he found up to and until his property was stolen for that gay memorial.


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 31, 2010)

R.C. Christian said:


> You truthers should ask the famer whose land of course got stolen, about all the wire and debris he found up to and until his property was stolen for that gay memorial.


shhhh, he's in on it too


----------

