9/11: What really happened on that day?

[Capstone]

No one died at Sandy Hook......ask me how I know. ...

I don't need to ask how you think you "know" that or anything else you've claimed to know on this board. I've seen enough from you over the past 10 months to formulate my own belief in that regard. My guess is that you saw something online which confirmed your bias and then immediately suspended all doubt in favor of that bias. As usual, though, your unwarranted degree of certainty on the matter is most likely just symptomatic of your delusional thought processes.

I have my doubts regarding the Sandy Hook event, but the point of bringing up the stink that was raised over the perceived anomalies in the FBI's crime stats for 2012 was to highlight the danger inherent in jumping to conclusions on the basis of data point entries (or the lack thereof) that may well have an innocent explanation.

...A passenger plane did not hit the Pentagon..ask me how I know. ...

Since it applies equally well, please see the first paragraph of my response to your first claim above.

...Dick Cheney took over command of NORAD in June of 2001....unprecedented and then he allowed an alleged jet to get within the parameters of the Pentagon while giving stand down orders and we have testimony of that.

Norman Mineta testifying before the 9/11 Commission, though it was omitted from their final report. He told Lee Hamilton:

“During the time that the airplane was coming into the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President…the plane is 50 miles out…the plane is 30 miles out…and when it got down to the plane is 10 miles out, the young man also said to the vice president “do the orders still stand?” And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said “Of course the orders still stand, have you heard anything to the contrary!?”

I'm well aware of Cheney's likely complicity and direct involvement in the 9/11 black operation. I believe the "plane" he was tracking on its inbound trajectory was the same one mistaken for a fighter interceptor by air traffic controllers in the D.C. area. It was, in all likelihood, the "commute jet" that struck the Pentagon.

 

[rightwinger]

I believe:

- When the towers and WTC7 were built they were wired with explosives so that someday they could be imploded on government command
- Our leaders secretly planned to kill thousands of Americans on 9-11 and laughed maniacally as they did it
- We waited 30 years for terrorists to fly into the towers. and then remotely exploded the buildings at exactly the point of impact
- People jumped from the towers because they heard the government was going to explode them
- WTC 7 was allowed to burn for hours before it was remotely exploded without concern that the fire could mess up the prewired explosive charges
- A missile flew into the Pentagon and the actual 757 was flown to a remote airfield where our government executed the passengers
- A missile was launched at Shanksville and Flight 93 was diverted elsewhere and all the passengers were killed by our government

I believe

- The WTC was carefully imploded at exactly the point where the planes hit
- The building had been wired to explode for 30 years and they were just waiting for terrorists to attack

 

[candycorn]

First of all, it's not -my- version of events, it's the version that the majority of the witnesses in the best positions to know the flight path the plane took in its final approach to the Pentagon. Secondly, I have never just "assumed" any of the witnesses were lying. If I had, I wouldn't have spent a considerable amount of time discussing various witnesses that he himself brought up with Faun.

Given that you were not present during the interviews; how do you know that CIT is telling you the truth in their highly edited presentations? And without sworn/notarized affidavits from their actors err “witnesses” that can be verified…we can’t accept any of their fanciful yarns.

 

[SAYIT]

The issue is The Twin Towers Anomaly.

How could a 150 ton airliner destroy a 400,000 ton skyscraper in less than 2 hours and make it come down in less than 30 seconds? Regardless of which conspiracy is responsible the physics should be explained.

Then the physicists must explain why they didn't explain in by January of 2003.

psik

You can't be this devoid of 9/11 knowledge 15 years after the attack so I must conclude you don't really care about facts or truth ... just your agenda (whatever that happens to be).

Here's a clue: the airliners did not destroy the Towers. Just as we watched, the fires weakened enough support to cause the weight of multiple floors to collapse and crush the floors below. This is not rocket science but if you can't accept what so many of us observed on 9/11/01, physicists won't be able to help you.

A distinction without a difference. But there have been so many other fires in skyscrapers that were bigger and lasted longer and yet the buildings did not collapse. So your comment is really just bullshit.

But then firefighters got to the 78th floor of the south tower and reported back that the fire could be "knocked down with two lines" and then the building suddenly collapsed in less than 30 seconds.

I guess fire fighters don't know shit about fires.

It is also curious that in 1940 it only took 4 months for a college professor and his students to build a 50 ft 1/200th scale model of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge in a wind tunnel to study the oscillation. No computers in 1940. But in FIFTEEN YEARS we do not have physical or virtual models of the north tower collapse to explain how it came down so quickly.

Sorry that I am so devoid of knowledge! Let's just say that I am devoid of BELIEF.

PROVE IT!!!

psik

I don't have to prove it. Those charged with determining what was the most likely 9/11 scenario did all the heavy lifting for me (and you). You simply refuse to accept their findings (because they don't confirm your beliefs?) which include the observations and words of the firefighters who were there. Note that sources are attached to the NIST report which was the work of many talented and hard working individuals, independent professional groups, agencies and firms:

South Tower- Collapse of the World Trade Center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

North Tower- Collapse of the World Trade Center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

7WTC- Collapse of the World Trade Center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Capstone]

I wouldn't be so sure about that. I strongly believe that atleast one of the alleged eyewitnesses that day was a plant: Lloyd England. CIT actually made an entire documentary of him, which can be seen here:

Lloyd England's account may well have been coerced, but it almost certainly wasn't fabricated with the intention of fatally contradicting the official storyline.

...It's not that I think they -wanted- to mess up their own case, it's just that I think their coordination in their deception must have been pretty bad. ...

More like downright HORRENDOUS, if you're suggesting that several eyewitnesses were coerced into claiming that they saw a small commuter jet hit the Pentagon!!! What possible purpose would that have served?!

The light pole fabrication, on the other hand, would at least be understandable. In the aftermath of the smaller plane's impact, the still standing poles may have been seen as problematic to the official storyline, at which point mistakes could have been made in the rush to circumvent the perceived problem.

Don Wright says he saw a commuter plane, two-engined, and was 2 miles away from the building. He also apparently elicited strange behavior when questioned about the direction it was going, ...

He was on the 12th floor of a nearby highrise building with a clear view of the Pentagon and the surrounding area. Still, it's entirely possible that he only caught sight of the plane after it had made its corkscrew turn from the north (giving the appearance of a southern approach).

...Steve Patterson claims he saw a small commuter plane, holding 8-12 passengers. A little more on him:
**Steve Patterson, 43, said he was watching television reports of the World Trade Center being hit when he saw a silver commuter jet fly past the window of his 14th-floor apartment in Pentagon City. The plane was about 150 yards away, approaching from the west about 20 feet off the ground, Patterson said. He said the plane, which sounded like the high-pitched squeal of a fighter jet, flew over Arlington cemetary so low that he thought it was going to land on I-395. He said it was flying so fast that he couldn't read any writing on the side. The plane, which appeared to hold about eight to 12 people, headed straight for the Pentagon but was flying as if coming in for a landing on a nonexistent runway, Patterson said. "At first I thought 'Oh my God, there's a plane truly misrouted from National,'" Patterson said. "Then this thing just became part of the Pentagon .‚.‚. I was watching the World Trade Center go and then this. It was like Oh my God, what's next?" He said the plane, which approached the Pentagon below treetop level, seemed to be flying normally for a plane coming in for a landing other than going very fast for being so low. Then, he said, he saw the Pentagon "envelope" the plane and bright orange flames shoot out the back of the building.**

Exactly.

The witnesses from nearby highrise buildings were close enough to see and hear what type of plane it was that struck the building. They were also close enough to SEE the impact.

Steven Gerard was another such witness.



Don Wright, Steve Patterson, and Steven Gerard all had the bird's eye view from a little distance, which explains why they failed to see some of the details (in terms of paint scheme and markings) described by Omar Campos, who was on the ground and much closer to the impact site.

...Perhaps most importantly: he [Omar Campos] said he was near a building next to the Pentagon, and the only buildings near the Pentagon on the west side were on the -north- side, in the general location of the Arlington cemetary. This guy wasn't a south of Citgo flight path witness, he was a north of Citgo flight path witness, and if the plane flew in from north of Citgo, it couldn't have crashed into the building due to a number of reasons.

He was a grounds maintenance worker. The "building" he described was probably a utility/storage shed where the landscaping tools and lawn mowing equipment were stored.

In any case, he and his translator were interviewed at the scene, which is a very compelling indicator that he was in the proper proximity to see what he claimed he saw.

...There's a lot of reasons why Sandy Hook wasn't what we were told. I actually started a thread about it shortly after it occurred, can be seen here:
The Sandy Hook Killings [W:24]

A piece of friendly advice: you need to stop linking to other discussion boards. It's against the rules here. Site administration doesn't like it when members promote the competition. You can count your lucky stars that apparently nobody has reported you so far. It's okay to link to blogs, YouTube, news sources, and the like, but links to other discussion boards WILL eventually get you banned here. Heads up.

FYI, I don't buy the official Sandy Hook narrative either. I was just making the point that data anomalies aren't really strong enough to be used as foundational for some of the claims made by Jayhan and others.

Yes, I'm aware that there are other problems concerning Flights 11 and 77 in particular, but Jayhan starts with and places too much importance on those BTS data anomalies, IMO.

 

[psikeyhackr]

I don't have to prove it. Those charged with determining what was the most likely 9/11 scenario did all the heavy lifting for me (and you). You simply refuse to accept their findings (because they don't confirm your beliefs?) which include the observations and words of the firefighters who were there. Note that sources are attached to the NIST report which was the work of many talented and hard working individuals, independent professional groups, agencies and firms:

South Tower- Collapse of the World Trade Center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

North Tower- Collapse of the World Trade Center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

7WTC- Collapse of the World Trade Center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I don't expect YOU to prove it, but no one has proven it to date.

Wikipedia just blathers other sources and no one has explained how the north tower could come down in less than 30 seconds and proven that their so called explanation is anything but pseudo-intellectual BS.

NO MODELS, physical or virtual. The NIST never even specifies the total amount of concrete in the TwinTowers though sources before 9/11 say it was 425,000 cubic yards. But how was the mass of steel and concrete distributed in the towers? How could a collapse analysis be done without that data? Where has Steven Jones or Richard Gage asked about it?

psik

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Hey everybody,have you all heard recently that there are doubts Oswald shot JFK by many people recently?

 

[rightwinger]

I believe that George Bush pushed the button that imploded the towers

Bill Clinton helped him

 

[MisterBeale]

As I see it, the question as to "what really happened on 9/11" should be approached in a way that doesn't downplay the importance of a certain series of events that preceded that darkest of days, from the wave of privatization that swept through NYC in the mid-to-late 90's (which resulted in a couple of key WTC security and elevator system contracts) to the major "renovations" and "modernization projects" that took place in the targeted buildings in the weeks and months leading up to the "attacks". In line with the doctrine of 'plausible deniability', there's little doubt in my mind that 9/11 was years in the making and that several critical steps had been taken unwittingly by bought-and-paid-for politicians as well as wittingly by a handful of teams of professional order-followers and operatives well in advance of 9/11/01.

In terms of some of the operational steps on the day of the "attacks", building on the premise that the targeted skyscrapers had indeed been rigged ahead of time under the pretext of a well-documented series of construction projects, I believe that Flights 11 and 175 were switched out in mid-flight for R/C drones and that the 2 legit airliners were then sent to rendezvous with Flight 93 (a passenger jumbo jet that had been secured and equpped in advance for R/C flight), onto which the passengers and any unwitting crew members from the diverted airliners were loaded with the intention of placing their bodies and personal effects in NYC.

I think it's pretty clear that something went wrong with the Flight 93 aspect of the plan. We know from Cheney's own admission on tape that he issued a shoot-down order based on erroneous information regarding Flight 93's direction of travel. It is my multi-tier belief that the order was followed by an interceptor pilot from The Happy Hooligans and that the in-flight passenger revolt was contrived, in part to put a feel good spin on the story but more importantly to justify the handling and classification of the so-called "crash site" in Shankesville, PA. As a result of that bungled aspect of the operation, the controversy surrounding the inexplicable "collapse" of Building 7 was born...(along with the 9/11 truth movement).

Regarding Flight 77, I believe that a flyover was staged to coincide with the carefully coordinated group assassination that took place aboard the "commuter-type jet" that actually struck the Pentagon. YES, I believe an aircraft really DID hit that building! Can't say who the targets of the group asassination were, but the evidence suggests that the "commuter jet" originated in the D.C. area at a time when evacuations of sensitive facilities were reportedly underway.

Recall Omar Campos's detailed description of the plane: "A 10 to 15 passenger business jet, [...] white up top and blue downstairs, with United States of America markings "...

^^Seriously, Gang, according to an eyewitness who was on the freakin' lawn when it hit, the plane that struck the Pentagon looked very much like the one in that pic.

Now, with the exception of some logic-based speculation, the bulk of the above-mentioned 'beliefs' have their basis in the available evidence; AND, unlike some of my fellow "twoofers", I can actually back up that statement.

To sum things up, I believe that 9/11 was a multinational (though quintessentially Western) false flag operation designed to fulfill the prophecies of the likes of Albert Pike, Oded Yinon, George H.W. Bush, and the PNAC signatories, among others. It really was "a new Pearl Harbor", in every foul-smelling sense of that analogy.

Nice post. Here are more specific connections within the Deep State.

 

[phoenyx]

First of all, it's not -my- version of events, it's the version that the majority of the witnesses in the best positions to know the flight path the plane took in its final approach to the Pentagon. Secondly, I have never just "assumed" any of the witnesses were lying. If I had, I wouldn't have spent a considerable amount of time discussing various witnesses that he himself brought up with Faun.

Given that you were not present during the interviews; how do you know that CIT is telling you the truth in their highly edited presentations? And without sworn/notarized affidavits from their actors err “witnesses” that can be verified…we can’t accept any of their fanciful yarns.

I have now created a thread exclusively made to discuss the Pentaplane flyover theory, which is CIT's theory as to what happened and the theory that Pilots for 9/11 Truth also tends to favour, and responded to your post there:
9/11: The Pentaplane Flyover Theory

 

[rightwinger]

First of all, it's not -my- version of events, it's the version that the majority of the witnesses in the best positions to know the flight path the plane took in its final approach to the Pentagon. Secondly, I have never just "assumed" any of the witnesses were lying. If I had, I wouldn't have spent a considerable amount of time discussing various witnesses that he himself brought up with Faun.

Given that you were not present during the interviews; how do you know that CIT is telling you the truth in their highly edited presentations? And without sworn/notarized affidavits from their actors err “witnesses” that can be verified…we can’t accept any of their fanciful yarns.

I have now created a thread exclusively made to discuss the Pentaplane flyover theory, which is CIT's theory as to what happened and the theory that Pilots for 9/11 Truth also tends to favour, and responded to your post there:
9/11: The Pentaplane Flyover Theory

I like the part of the theory where the actual flight was flown to a remote location and Bush ordered they all be killed

 

[phoenyx]

...I agree that the plane that approached the Pentagon was smaller then a 757, but I think that's about as far as we agree on that point. ...

Corroborated eyewitness testimonies that were gathered and recorded for posterity on the day of the incident cannot be ignored or discounted, particularly when what they "corroborated" flew in the face of the official narrative from the get-go. That's true, because we can reasonably preclude such accounts from the list of likely fabrications.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. I strongly believe that atleast one of the alleged eyewitnesses that day was a plant: Lloyd England. CIT actually made an entire documentary of him, which can be seen here:

Lloyd England's account may well have been coerced, but it almost certainly wasn't fabricated with the intention of fatally contradicting the official storyline.

I have responded to this post of yours in the new thread I have created that specifically deals with the Pentagon Flyover Theory, which can be seen here:
9/11: The Pentaplane Flyover Theory

 

[LA RAM FAN]

I wouldn't be so sure about that. I strongly believe that atleast one of the alleged eyewitnesses that day was a plant: Lloyd England. CIT actually made an entire documentary of him, which can be seen here:

Lloyd England's account may well have been coerced, but it almost certainly wasn't fabricated with the intention of fatally contradicting the official storyline.

...It's not that I think they -wanted- to mess up their own case, it's just that I think their coordination in their deception must have been pretty bad. ...

More like downright HORRENDOUS, if you're suggesting that several eyewitnesses were coerced into claiming that they saw a small commuter jet hit the Pentagon!!! What possible purpose would that have served?!

The light pole fabrication, on the other hand, would at least be understandable. In the aftermath of the smaller plane's impact, the still standing poles may have been seen as problematic to the official storyline, at which point mistakes could have been made in the rush to circumvent the perceived problem.

Don Wright says he saw a commuter plane, two-engined, and was 2 miles away from the building. He also apparently elicited strange behavior when questioned about the direction it was going, ...

He was on the 12th floor of a nearby highrise building with a clear view of the Pentagon and the surrounding area. Still, it's entirely possible that he only caught sight of the plane after it had made its corkscrew turn from the north (giving the appearance of a southern approach).

...Steve Patterson claims he saw a small commuter plane, holding 8-12 passengers. A little more on him:
**Steve Patterson, 43, said he was watching television reports of the World Trade Center being hit when he saw a silver commuter jet fly past the window of his 14th-floor apartment in Pentagon City. The plane was about 150 yards away, approaching from the west about 20 feet off the ground, Patterson said. He said the plane, which sounded like the high-pitched squeal of a fighter jet, flew over Arlington cemetary so low that he thought it was going to land on I-395. He said it was flying so fast that he couldn't read any writing on the side. The plane, which appeared to hold about eight to 12 people, headed straight for the Pentagon but was flying as if coming in for a landing on a nonexistent runway, Patterson said. "At first I thought 'Oh my God, there's a plane truly misrouted from National,'" Patterson said. "Then this thing just became part of the Pentagon .‚.‚. I was watching the World Trade Center go and then this. It was like Oh my God, what's next?" He said the plane, which approached the Pentagon below treetop level, seemed to be flying normally for a plane coming in for a landing other than going very fast for being so low. Then, he said, he saw the Pentagon "envelope" the plane and bright orange flames shoot out the back of the building.**

Exactly.

The witnesses from nearby highrise buildings were close enough to see and hear what type of plane it was that struck the building. They were also close enough to SEE the impact.

Steven Gerard was another such witness.



Don Wright, Steve Patterson, and Steven Gerard all had the bird's eye view from a little distance, which explains why they failed to see some of the details (in terms of paint scheme and markings) described by Omar Campos, who was on the ground and much closer to the impact site.

...Perhaps most importantly: he [Omar Campos] said he was near a building next to the Pentagon, and the only buildings near the Pentagon on the west side were on the -north- side, in the general location of the Arlington cemetary. This guy wasn't a south of Citgo flight path witness, he was a north of Citgo flight path witness, and if the plane flew in from north of Citgo, it couldn't have crashed into the building due to a number of reasons.

He was a grounds maintenance worker. The "building" he described was probably a utility/storage shed where the landscaping tools and lawn mowing equipment were stored.

In any case, he and his translator were interviewed at the scene, which is a very compelling indicator that he was in the proper proximity to see what he claimed he saw.

...There's a lot of reasons why Sandy Hook wasn't what we were told. I actually started a thread about it shortly after it occurred, can be seen here:
The Sandy Hook Killings [W:24]

A piece of friendly advice: you need to stop linking to other discussion boards. It's against the rules here. Site administration doesn't like it when members promote the competition. You can count your lucky stars that apparently nobody has reported you so far. It's okay to link to blogs, YouTube, news sources, and the like, but links to other discussion boards WILL eventually get you banned here. Heads up.

FYI, I don't buy the official Sandy Hook narrative either. I was just making the point that data anomalies aren't really strong enough to be used as foundational for some of the claims made by Jayhan and others.

Yes, I'm aware that there are other problems concerning Flights 11 and 77 in particular, but Jayhan starts with and places too much importance on those BTS data anomalies, IMO.

so cap since you and others here are so much worried about something from the PAST long done and over with that happened so long ago, instead of being concerned about the future and whats going on NOW,answer me this question.what are you going to do ABOUT IT?

what do you hope to achieve by going back and forth on this old issue. posting facts about how 9/11 was an inside job carried out by the mossad and CIA when it has never gotten anybody anywhere?

you guys should be worried about SOLUTIONS to do something about it since something from the past is such a a major big deal to you.

I was asked that question a long time ago and since it is a very good question and I had no answers,i moved on realising i really should be concerned with what our government is plotting against us NOW since as i have said a million times on 9/11 threads that 9/11 is the least of our problems we need to be concerned about from the government right now.

the major issue people SHOULD be concerned and focused on right NOW,IS Trump getting elected since that is the only chance we have of america being free from this facist dictatership it is now or cleaning up the corruption in washington where the REAL criminals behind this whole thing are roaming.

Its sad people rather be concerned about this old event from way back in the past rather that what is going on NOW especially since out future is at stake here at being a free country again and breaking from for this facist dicatership run by all these criminals in washington who govern us.If HELLERY gets elected,it is GUARANTEED that will continue. Trump may be our last chance to be a free country again,that is whats at stake here right now.

I dont know,seems like that is a hell of a lot more important to me.

 

[SAYIT]

...what do you hope to achieve by going back and forth on this old issue. posting facts about how 9/11 was an inside job carried out by the mossad and CIA when it has never gotten anybody anywhere?

Maybe, just maybe, none of the 9/11 CTs - including your CIA/Mossad theory - has "gotten anybody anywhere" because normal, rational peeps find them to be the ridiculous rantings of desperate, hate-filled fools.

...Its sad people rather be concerned about this old event from way back in the past rather that what is going on NOW... I dont know,seems like that is a hell of a lot more important to me.

Aren't you the lame idiot who spends countless hours on the JFK assassination (which, BTW, happened decades before 9/11), going so far as to promote your JFK CTs on these 9/11 boards? Does it ever occur to you that no rational poster cares about what is important to a flaming idiot? Do you ever wonder why your short bus was extra short?

 

[LA RAM FAN]

someone farted in here.^

 

[LA RAM FAN]

I wouldn't be so sure about that. I strongly believe that atleast one of the alleged eyewitnesses that day was a plant: Lloyd England. CIT actually made an entire documentary of him, which can be seen here:

Lloyd England's account may well have been coerced, but it almost certainly wasn't fabricated with the intention of fatally contradicting the official storyline.

...It's not that I think they -wanted- to mess up their own case, it's just that I think their coordination in their deception must have been pretty bad. ...

More like downright HORRENDOUS, if you're suggesting that several eyewitnesses were coerced into claiming that they saw a small commuter jet hit the Pentagon!!! What possible purpose would that have served?!

The light pole fabrication, on the other hand, would at least be understandable. In the aftermath of the smaller plane's impact, the still standing poles may have been seen as problematic to the official storyline, at which point mistakes could have been made in the rush to circumvent the perceived problem.

Don Wright says he saw a commuter plane, two-engined, and was 2 miles away from the building. He also apparently elicited strange behavior when questioned about the direction it was going, ...

He was on the 12th floor of a nearby highrise building with a clear view of the Pentagon and the surrounding area. Still, it's entirely possible that he only caught sight of the plane after it had made its corkscrew turn from the north (giving the appearance of a southern approach).

...Steve Patterson claims he saw a small commuter plane, holding 8-12 passengers. A little more on him:
**Steve Patterson, 43, said he was watching television reports of the World Trade Center being hit when he saw a silver commuter jet fly past the window of his 14th-floor apartment in Pentagon City. The plane was about 150 yards away, approaching from the west about 20 feet off the ground, Patterson said. He said the plane, which sounded like the high-pitched squeal of a fighter jet, flew over Arlington cemetary so low that he thought it was going to land on I-395. He said it was flying so fast that he couldn't read any writing on the side. The plane, which appeared to hold about eight to 12 people, headed straight for the Pentagon but was flying as if coming in for a landing on a nonexistent runway, Patterson said. "At first I thought 'Oh my God, there's a plane truly misrouted from National,'" Patterson said. "Then this thing just became part of the Pentagon .‚.‚. I was watching the World Trade Center go and then this. It was like Oh my God, what's next?" He said the plane, which approached the Pentagon below treetop level, seemed to be flying normally for a plane coming in for a landing other than going very fast for being so low. Then, he said, he saw the Pentagon "envelope" the plane and bright orange flames shoot out the back of the building.**

Exactly.

The witnesses from nearby highrise buildings were close enough to see and hear what type of plane it was that struck the building. They were also close enough to SEE the impact.

Steven Gerard was another such witness.



Don Wright, Steve Patterson, and Steven Gerard all had the bird's eye view from a little distance, which explains why they failed to see some of the details (in terms of paint scheme and markings) described by Omar Campos, who was on the ground and much closer to the impact site.

...Perhaps most importantly: he [Omar Campos] said he was near a building next to the Pentagon, and the only buildings near the Pentagon on the west side were on the -north- side, in the general location of the Arlington cemetary. This guy wasn't a south of Citgo flight path witness, he was a north of Citgo flight path witness, and if the plane flew in from north of Citgo, it couldn't have crashed into the building due to a number of reasons.

He was a grounds maintenance worker. The "building" he described was probably a utility/storage shed where the landscaping tools and lawn mowing equipment were stored.

In any case, he and his translator were interviewed at the scene, which is a very compelling indicator that he was in the proper proximity to see what he claimed he saw.

...There's a lot of reasons why Sandy Hook wasn't what we were told. I actually started a thread about it shortly after it occurred, can be seen here:
The Sandy Hook Killings [W:24]

A piece of friendly advice: you need to stop linking to other discussion boards. It's against the rules here. Site administration doesn't like it when members promote the competition. You can count your lucky stars that apparently nobody has reported you so far. It's okay to link to blogs, YouTube, news sources, and the like, but links to other discussion boards WILL eventually get you banned here. Heads up.

FYI, I don't buy the official Sandy Hook narrative either. I was just making the point that data anomalies aren't really strong enough to be used as foundational for some of the claims made by Jayhan and others.

Yes, I'm aware that there are other problems concerning Flights 11 and 77 in particular, but Jayhan starts with and places too much importance on those BTS data anomalies, IMO.

so cap since you and others here are so much worried about something from the PAST long done and over with that happened so long ago, instead of being concerned about the future and whats going on NOW,answer me this question.what are you going to do ABOUT IT?

what do you hope to achieve by going back and forth on this old issue. posting facts about how 9/11 was an inside job carried out by the mossad and CIA when it has never gotten anybody anywhere?

you guys should be worried about SOLUTIONS to do something about it since something from the past is such a a major big deal to you.

I was asked that question a long time ago and since it is a very good question and I had no answers,i moved on realising i really should be concerned with what our government is plotting against us NOW since as i have said a million times on 9/11 threads that 9/11 is the least of our problems we need to be concerned about from the government right now.

the major issue people SHOULD be concerned and focused on right NOW,IS Trump getting elected since that is the only chance we have of america being free from this facist dictatership it is now or cleaning up the corruption in washington where the REAL criminals behind this whole thing are roaming.

Its sad people rather be concerned about this old event from way back in the past rather that what is going on NOW especially since out future is at stake here at being a free country again and breaking from for this facist dicatership run by all these criminals in washington who govern us.If HELLERY gets elected,it is GUARANTEED that will continue. Trump may be our last chance to be a free country again,that is whats at stake here right now.

I dont know,seems like that is a hell of a lot more important to me.

I'm WAITING. A reply to post# 73 that is.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Hey everybody,have you all heard recently that there are doubts Oswald shot JFK by many people recently?

Im glad at least ONE person here agreed that was pretty funny.

I just wish it wasnt my arch enemy,USMB's resident paid shill who clicked on the funny.

 

[Capstone]

Someone farted in here.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Someone farted in here.

so in translation you know you cant counter any of those good points knowing I am right so you wont address them so same as this OP here,you ALSO are content to waste your time on these shills like agent sayit. okay I see.

 

[Capstone]

so in translation you know you cant counter any of those good points knowing I am right so you wont address them so same as this OP here,you ALSO are content to waste your time on these shills like agent sayit. okay I see.

Well, if anyone would know how to translate that retarded phrase, I suppose it'd be the guy who's used it tens of thousands of times!