This Is What Happened At The Pentagon On 9/11

[Bern80]

yes release of all classified evidence released to a team of forensic crash investigators
all eyewitness testimony sworn under oath and subject to cross-examination

That doesn't count. That is about as transparent and desperate a response as I have heard from you yet. Allow me translate. I have ZERO evidence to answer this with, but my beliefs require me believe that SOMEONE knows and will tell us the truth if we make them....somehow.

 

[candycorn]

yes release of all classified evidence released to a team of forensic crash investigators
all eyewitness testimony sworn under oath and subject to cross-examination

That doesn't count. That is about as transparent and desperate a response as I have heard from you yet. Allow me translate. I have ZERO evidence to answer this with, but my beliefs require me believe that SOMEONE knows and will tell us the truth if we make them....somehow.

 

[Terral]

Hi Candy:

Your 'bold' key appears stuck. :0)

Okay, since you are acquiescing to the truth for a change, that AA77 or at least a plane hit the Pentagon and it wasn’t some bullshit “bow shockwave” that searches for light poles 150 feet away but not the ones across the street (giggle) . . .

The reason I spend almost no time explaining the SAME THING to you over and over again is because I am convinced that Candy has minimal mental capacity to comprehend anything related to this Topic. Where you get this "150 feet" I have no clue. Click in the pic (here) to realize that all 5 light poles are within the 125' wingspan of your fictitious AA77. Divide 125 by 2 and place the missile down the middle to realize that the missile bow shockwave only need extend about 60 feet to knock down all 5 poles. However, the A-3 took down two of the poles, so that number is reduced to below 50 feet for the size of the bow shockwave from the hypersonic missile flying at just 5 feet off the ground. Many variables are present when dealing with bow shockwaves (wiki), which includes breaks in the wave attaching, disconnecting and reattaching to the nose of the missile. These are fluid dynamics principles (link) and . . . well . . .

You should realize that these 5 light poles were taken down completely by accident. The rogue element inside the DoD that carried out these attacks forgot to make provisions for the large bow shockwave attached to their missile nose when in the planning stages of the operation . . .

GL,

Terral

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Terral,

Would you mind summarize your post in ONE SENTENCE?

I'm afraid to say that I am just too busy to read your post and to click on all of your links.

So a one sentence synopsis would be very helpful.

Based on all of your other posts, I am really intrigued and think that you are onto something.

I, like you, have always been skeptical of reality. In fact, I am pretty sure that I am 6'5" 190 lbs of solid muscle, but when I look in the "mirror", I see a 5'10" 210 lb guy with a hairy back and manbreasts. I am pretty sure the "mirror" is actually a very thin plasma TV that was installed by the government, and on that TV they project the image of the man that I see, rather than reflecting my true image.

So, I'd love to hear your one sentence synopsis.

Thank you for your time.

I'll handle this..I am a pilot and a machinist that has spent about 7 ears making aircraft parts for boeing airplanes. I have seen thousands of blueprints for 757's. I know exactly how they are built and how strong they are.

Here is the one sentence that cannot be refuted.

A 757 will not fit into a 20 foot hole.

The Bush dupes will of course post something to try and save face over this you know.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Hi Candy:

Your 'bold' key appears stuck. :0)

Okay, since you are acquiescing to the truth for a change, that AA77 or at least a plane hit the Pentagon and it wasn’t some bullshit “bow shockwave” that searches for light poles 150 feet away but not the ones across the street (giggle) . . .

The reason I spend almost no time explaining the SAME THING to you over and over again is because I am convinced that Candy has no mental capacity to comprehend anything related to this Topic. Where you get this "150 feet" I have no clue. Click in the pic (here) to realize that all 5 light poles are within the 125' wingspan of your fictitious AA77. Divide 125 by 2 and place the missile down the middle to realize that the missile bow shockwave only need extend about 60 feet to knock down all 5 poles. However, the A-3 took down two of the poles, so that number is reduced to below 50 feet for the size of the bow shockwave from the hypersonic missile flying at just 5 feet off the ground. Many variables are present when dealing with bow shockwaves, which includes breaks in the wave attaching, disconnecting and reattaching to the nose of the missile. These are fluid mechanics principles and . . . well . . .

GL,

Terral

I see that your catching on that agent Candy Corn has the worst memory of anybody alive.That when you explain it to him,he never remmebers the answer and just asks the same damn question over and over and over again as your finding out.The guy has obviously never seen an engine of a Boeing 757 before.If he HAD,he would realise what an idiot he looks like when he says that the site wreckage is consistant with that of a
757. You look at the engine at the crash site THEY say is a 757 and that of a REAL engine of a 757 and theres no comparison.The engine at the crash site is MUCH smaller than a 757.I love it.lol.

 

[HUGGY]

Terral,

Would you mind summarize your post in ONE SENTENCE?

I'm afraid to say that I am just too busy to read your post and to click on all of your links.

So a one sentence synopsis would be very helpful.

Based on all of your other posts, I am really intrigued and think that you are onto something.

I, like you, have always been skeptical of reality. In fact, I am pretty sure that I am 6'5" 190 lbs of solid muscle, but when I look in the "mirror", I see a 5'10" 210 lb guy with a hairy back and manbreasts. I am pretty sure the "mirror" is actually a very thin plasma TV that was installed by the government, and on that TV they project the image of the man that I see, rather than reflecting my true image.

So, I'd love to hear your one sentence synopsis.

Thank you for your time.

I'll handle this..I am a pilot and a machinist that has spent about 7 ears making aircraft parts for boeing airplanes. I have seen thousands of blueprints for 757's. I know exactly how they are built and how strong they are.

Here is the one sentence that cannot be refuted.

A 757 will not fit into a 20 foot hole.

who is claiming a 757 fit into a 20' hole?

Did you see the hole in the side of the pentagon and the type of material the exterior wall was made of? How big would you estimate the size of the hole? Now here is my problem with the "hole". The jet engines are made of titanium primarily which is alot tougher than steel. The engines are about twelve feet accross and spaced more than 75 feet apart. Upon impact the 10,000 rpm compression blades would explode into spinning wrecking balls taking out at least 50-100 feet on each side of the point of impact.

You can go on and on about any number of aspects of 9/11 but you will never talk me out of what I know DIDN"T hit the pentagon. Unlike many of you my opinion is based on pure well informed fact.

 

[Toro]

I'll handle this..I am a pilot and a machinist that has spent about 7 ears making aircraft parts for boeing airplanes. I have seen thousands of blueprints for 757's. I know exactly how they are built and how strong they are.

Here is the one sentence that cannot be refuted.

A 757 will not fit into a 20 foot hole.

Scientists at Purdue created a model demonstrating how the plane crashed into the Pentagon.

[youtube]bMqgFaNvoP8[/youtube]

Notice what he says at 1:15 of the video, when he says that twoofers irrationally and hysterically accused them of being agents of the government and being a part of the conspiracy.

Remind you of anyone here?

 

[Terral]

Hi Huggy:

You make far too much sense for the typical USMB member living in 911Truth DENIAL . . .

Did you see the hole in the side of the pentagon and the type of material the exterior wall was made of? How big would you estimate the size of the hole?

The E-Ring Entry Hole was exactly 18-feet 3-inches on the second floor (pic). We know that number is correct, because the columns are on 10-feet centers and measure 21-inches each (pic). The exterior wall was reinforced concrete CMU's (block) with a covering of limestone. The rear C-Ring Hole was about 9-0 by 12-feet (pic = oval).

Now here is my problem with the "hole". The jet engines are made of titanium primarily which is alot tougher than steel. The engines are about twelve feet accross and spaced more than 75 feet apart. Upon impact the 10,000 rpm compression blades would explode into spinning wrecking balls taking out at least 50-100 feet on each side of the point of impact.

There are many problems with the Official Cover Story:

1. The windows above and to the left (north) of the E-Ring Hole are not broken (pic).

2. At 530 miles per hour (911CR), the 100-ton Jetliner would have exited the C-ring wall (220 feet away) in just .39 seconds and that never happened (only hole = wall on left).

3. The location of cable spools (pic) and parked vehicles (pic) in front of the E-ring hole forbid any 1st-floor impact of any 100-Ton Jetliner that did not break any windows on the third floor.

4. There is simply not sufficient damage (pic) to warrant an "AA77 Crashed Here" hypothesis . . .

You can go on and on about any number of aspects of 9/11 but you will never talk me out of what I know DIDN"T hit the pentagon. Unlike many of you my opinion is based on pure well informed fact.

We agree. This case is Reason #8 that the USA will be destroyed (my Topic) . . . because Americans 'are' really this STUPID cuckoo . . .

GL,

Terral

 

[HUGGY]

I'll handle this..I am a pilot and a machinist that has spent about 7 ears making aircraft parts for boeing airplanes. I have seen thousands of blueprints for 757's. I know exactly how they are built and how strong they are.

Here is the one sentence that cannot be refuted.

A 757 will not fit into a 20 foot hole.

Scientists at Purdue created a model demonstrating how the plane crashed into the Pentagon.

[youtube]bMqgFaNvoP8[/youtube]

Notice what he says at 1:15 of the video, when he says that twoofers irrationally and hysterically accused them of being agents of the government and being a part of the conspiracy.

Remind you of anyone here?

The deuschebag in the video doesn't even mention the engines which to anyone familiar with a 757 is the most destructive part of the plane in terms of mass, extremely high speed moving parts and impact and destruction caused by a collision.

If he doesn't know what forces would be unleashed by the motors he is either lying about being a scientist or lying about who writes his paychecks.

 

[Toro]

I'll handle this..I am a pilot and a machinist that has spent about 7 ears making aircraft parts for boeing airplanes. I have seen thousands of blueprints for 757's. I know exactly how they are built and how strong they are.

Here is the one sentence that cannot be refuted.

A 757 will not fit into a 20 foot hole.

Scientists at Purdue created a model demonstrating how the plane crashed into the Pentagon.

[youtube]bMqgFaNvoP8[/youtube]

Notice what he says at 1:15 of the video, when he says that twoofers irrationally and hysterically accused them of being agents of the government and being a part of the conspiracy.

Remind you of anyone here?

The deuschebag in the video doesn't even mention the engines which to anyone familiar with a 757 is the most destructive part of the plane in terms of mass, extremely high speed moving parts and impact and destruction caused by a collision.

If he doesn't know what forces would be unleashed by the motors he is either lying about being a scientist or lying about who writes his paychecks.

Here is the simulation.

Pentagon Crash, Digital Render from Purdue University • videosift.com

 

[LA RAM FAN]

I'll handle this..I am a pilot and a machinist that has spent about 7 ears making aircraft parts for boeing airplanes. I have seen thousands of blueprints for 757's. I know exactly how they are built and how strong they are.

Here is the one sentence that cannot be refuted.

A 757 will not fit into a 20 foot hole.

Scientists at Purdue created a model demonstrating how the plane crashed into the Pentagon.

[youtube]bMqgFaNvoP8[/youtube]

Notice what he says at 1:15 of the video, when he says that twoofers irrationally and hysterically accused them of being agents of the government and being a part of the conspiracy.

Remind you of anyone here?

The deuschebag in the video doesn't even mention the engines which to anyone familiar with a 757 is the most destructive part of the plane in terms of mass, extremely high speed moving parts and impact and destruction caused by a collision.

If he doesn't know what forces would be unleashed by the motors he is either lying about being a scientist or lying about who writes his paychecks.

Sorry to break your heart again Toro but as always,you get OWNED in a 9/11 debate again.your blind faith in the governments version is hysterical. This guy is an obvious liar as Huggy pointed out to you.

Like Terral said Huggy,your making way to much sense for Toro here to comprehend.you got to remember guys,this is the blind loyal Bush dupe who worships popular mechanics as the total truth and refuses to look at posts that proof PM is a propaganda piece.Not only that,he cant get past the point I brought up that the pic of the engine at the site doesnt even come close to matching in size how big a REAL Boeing 757 engine is just like CandyCorn.LOl. as usual,the 9/11 apologists use COMPUTER ANIMATION as their evidence which is NO EVIDENCE .

They do that with the kennedy assassination constantly all the time as well when promoting that other tale that Oswald killed kennedy.Even Toro has said he doesnt believe the official version of that and believes there was a conspiray there.yet he SOMEHOW accepts the computer animation of this guy.I love it. Like Toromthis guy doesnt account for the fact that the engine seen at the pentagon is several times smaller than what a REAL engine of a 757 looks like.

 

[HUGGY]

Scientists at Purdue created a model demonstrating how the plane crashed into the Pentagon.

[youtube]bMqgFaNvoP8[/youtube]

Notice what he says at 1:15 of the video, when he says that twoofers irrationally and hysterically accused them of being agents of the government and being a part of the conspiracy.

Remind you of anyone here?

The deuschebag in the video doesn't even mention the engines which to anyone familiar with a 757 is the most destructive part of the plane in terms of mass, extremely high speed moving parts and impact and destruction caused by a collision.

If he doesn't know what forces would be unleashed by the motors he is either lying about being a scientist or lying about who writes his paychecks.

Sorry to break your heart again Toro but as always,you get OWNED in a 9/11 debate again.your blind faith in the governments version is hysterical. This guy is an obvious liar as Huggy pointed out to you.

Like Terral said Huggy,your making way to much sense for Toro here to comprehend.you got to remember guys,this is the blind loyal Bush dupe who worships popular mechanics as the total truth and refuses to look at posts that proof PM is a propaganda piece.Not only that,he cant get past the point I brought up that the pic of the engine at the site doesnt even come close to matching in size how big a REAL Boeing 757 engine is just like CandyCorn.LOl. as usual,the 9/11 apologists use COMPUTER ANIMATION as their evidence which is NO EVIDENCE .

They do that with the kennedy assassination constantly all the time as well when promoting that other tale that Oswald killed kennedy.Even Toro has said he doesnt believe the official version of that and believes there was a conspiray there.yet he SOMEHOW accepts the computer animation of this guy.I love it. Like Toromthis guy doesnt account for the fact that the engine seen at the pentagon is several times smaller than what a REAL engine of a 757 looks like.

Even more important a factor always overlooked is what a jet engine does. The fans are made out of one huge piece of titanium. They are spinning twice as fast as your cars engine at maximum. The enertial energy they release when breaking up would be an awesome thing to witness. Parts of the fanblades would litterally be thrown for more than a mile. You do the math..no you are too stupid..I'll do the math. a 12 foot diameter is about 50 ft circumfrance. divide 10,000 by 60..roughly 167 times 50 something like 8000...what all that gibberish means is that the outside edge of a fan assembly is travelling at around a mile and a half a second while it is still on the plane. When it breaks up it is still going a mile and a half a second. HELLO???? A rifle like an AR15 spits out bullets at roughly 2700 feet per second or just slightly more than a third of the velocity of said jet engine parts.
An AR15 sends slugs out a bit more than a mile. To suggest that the jet engines would do no harm to the building as the video shows is beyond perposterous. They were not pictured in the clip nor explained earlier in the other clip.

 

[eots]

SO HUGGY...what exactly are your credentials and how do they stack up against preposterous individuals....just wondering...thanks..
eots


Lt. Col. Karen U. Kwiatkowski, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Former Political-Military Affairs Officer in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Also served on the staff of the Director of the National Security Agency. 20-year Air Force career. Member adjunct faculty, Political Science Department, James Madison University. Instructor, University of Maryland University College and American Public University System. Author of African Crisis Response Initiative: Past Present and Future (2000) and Expeditionary Air Operations in Africa: Challenges and Solutions (2001).
Contributor to 9/11 and American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out 8/23/06: Account of Lt. Col.

Karen Kwiatkowski, Pentagon employee and eyewitness to the events at the Pentagon on 9/11. "I believe the Commission failed to deeply examine the topic at hand, failed to apply scientific rigor to its assessment of events leading up to and including 9/11, failed to produce a believable and unbiased summary of what happened, failed to fully examine why it happened, and even failed to include a set of unanswered questions for future research. ...

It is as a scientist that I have the most trouble with the official government conspiracy theory, mainly because it does not satisfy the rules of probability or physics. The collapses of the World Trade Center buildings clearly violate the laws of probability and physics. ...
There was a dearth of visible debris on the relatively unmarked [Pentagon] lawn, where I stood only minutes after the impact. Beyond this strange absence of airliner debris, there was no sign of the kind of damage to the Pentagon structure one would expect from the impact of a large airliner. This visible evidence or lack thereof may also have been apparent to the secretary of defense [Donald Rumsfeld], who in an unfortunate slip of the tongue referred to the aircraft that slammed into the Pentagon as a "missile".



Major Douglas Rokke, PhD, U.S. Army (ret) – Former Director U.S. Army Depleted Uranium Project. 30-year Army career.

Article 8/19/05: Regarding the impact at the Pentagon on 9/11/2001 "When you look at the whole thing, especially the crash site void of airplane parts, the size of the hole left in the building and the fact the projectile's impact penetrated numerous concrete walls, it looks like the work of a missile. And when you look at the damage, it was obviously a missile." Jeff Rense Program

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.


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. …

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. …

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

 

[eots]

SO HUGGY...what exactly are your credentials and how do they stack up against preposterous individuals....just wondering...thanks..
eots


Lt. Col. Karen U. Kwiatkowski, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Former Political-Military Affairs Officer in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Also served on the staff of the Director of the National Security Agency. 20-year Air Force career. Member adjunct faculty, Political Science Department, James Madison University. Instructor, University of Maryland University College and American Public University System. Author of African Crisis Response Initiative: Past Present and Future (2000) and Expeditionary Air Operations in Africa: Challenges and Solutions (2001).
Contributor to 9/11 and American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out 8/23/06: Account of Lt. Col.

Karen Kwiatkowski, Pentagon employee and eyewitness to the events at the Pentagon on 9/11. "I believe the Commission failed to deeply examine the topic at hand, failed to apply scientific rigor to its assessment of events leading up to and including 9/11, failed to produce a believable and unbiased summary of what happened, failed to fully examine why it happened, and even failed to include a set of unanswered questions for future research. ...

It is as a scientist that I have the most trouble with the official government conspiracy theory, mainly because it does not satisfy the rules of probability or physics. The collapses of the World Trade Center buildings clearly violate the laws of probability and physics. ...
There was a dearth of visible debris on the relatively unmarked [Pentagon] lawn, where I stood only minutes after the impact. Beyond this strange absence of airliner debris, there was no sign of the kind of damage to the Pentagon structure one would expect from the impact of a large airliner. This visible evidence or lack thereof may also have been apparent to the secretary of defense [Donald Rumsfeld], who in an unfortunate slip of the tongue referred to the aircraft that slammed into the Pentagon as a "missile".



Major Douglas Rokke, PhD, U.S. Army (ret) – Former Director U.S. Army Depleted Uranium Project. 30-year Army career.

Article 8/19/05: Regarding the impact at the Pentagon on 9/11/2001 "When you look at the whole thing, especially the crash site void of airplane parts, the size of the hole left in the building and the fact the projectile's impact penetrated numerous concrete walls, it looks like the work of a missile. And when you look at the damage, it was obviously a missile." Jeff Rense Program

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.


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. …

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. …

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

 

[candycorn]

Hi Candy:

Your 'bold' key appears stuck. :0)

Okay, since you are acquiescing to the truth for a change, that AA77 or at least a plane hit the Pentagon and it wasn’t some bullshit “bow shockwave” that searches for light poles 150 feet away but not the ones across the street (giggle) . . .

The reason I spend almost no time explaining the SAME THING to you over and over again is because I am convinced that Candy has minimal mental capacity to comprehend anything related to this Topic. Where you get this "150 feet" I have no clue. Click in the pic (here) to realize that all 5 light poles are within the 125' wingspan of your fictitious AA77. Divide 125 by 2 and place the missile down the middle to realize that the missile bow shockwave only need extend about 60 feet to knock down all 5 poles. However, the A-3 took down two of the poles, so that number is reduced to below 50 feet for the size of the bow shockwave from the hypersonic missile flying at just 5 feet off the ground. Many variables are present when dealing with bow shockwaves (wiki), which includes breaks in the wave attaching, disconnecting and reattaching to the nose of the missile. These are fluid dynamics principles (link) and . . . well . . .

You should realize that these 5 light poles were taken down completely by accident. The rogue element inside the DoD that carried out these attacks forgot to make provisions for the large bow shockwave attached to their missile nose when in the planning stages of the operation . . .

GL,

Terral

Ahh, this fallacy of a shockwave was strong enough to uproot lightpoles that it flew near...and sheer off the ends of them. Your line of bullshit gets longer every day.



As for my mental capacity, yep you got me in terms of vivid imagination and the ability to convince oneself that they are correct. Seldom has somebody so obviously fucked in the head acted with such confidence as you loser.

Can't wait to see what nonsense you come up with next. SO do you still think those two large brown things being lifted with a 40 ton crane were wings? That was classic.

 

[candycorn]

I see that your catching on that agent Candy Corn has the worst memory of anybody alive.That when you explain it to him,he never remmebers the answer and just asks the same damn question over and over and over again as your finding out.The guy has obviously never seen an engine of a Boeing 757 before.If he HAD,he would realise what an idiot he looks like when he says that the site wreckage is consistant with that of a
757. You look at the engine at the crash site THEY say is a 757 and that of a REAL engine of a 757 and theres no comparison.The engine at the crash site is MUCH smaller than a 757.I love it.lol.

Just one question requiring a "yes" or "no"; do you believe a bow shockwave brought down the light poles outside of the Pentagon?

A secondary question is why you can't simply write a "yes" or "no".

 

[eots]

Just one question requiring a "yes" or "no"; do you believe a bow shockwave brought down the light poles outside of the Pentagon?

A secondary question is why you can't simply write a "yes" or "no"

here's some questions for you ..why are the surveillance tapes from the pentagon still classified ???...if they show a plane why not release them ??

with conflicting testimony of eyewitness why are their statements not taken under oath and investigated ???

 

[DiveCon]

Just one question requiring a "yes" or "no"; do you believe a bow shockwave brought down the light poles outside of the Pentagon?

A secondary question is why you can't simply write a "yes" or "no"

here's some questions for you ..why are the surveillance tapes from the pentagon still classified ???...if they show a plane why not release them ??

with conflicting testimony of eyewitness why are their statements not taken under oath and investigated ???

his question has nothing to do with the tapes
why not just answer the question?

 

[eots]

Just one question requiring a "yes" or "no"; do you believe a bow shockwave brought down the light poles outside of the Pentagon?

A secondary question is why you can't simply write a "yes" or "no"

here's some questions for you ..why are the surveillance tapes from the pentagon still classified ???...if they show a plane why not release them ??

with conflicting testimony of eyewitness why are their statements not taken under oath and investigated ???

his question has nothing to do with the tapes
why not just answer the question?

my answer is it is all theoretical until investigated...what is your answer to my question

 

[dilloduck]

here's some questions for you ..why are the surveillance tapes from the pentagon still classified ???...if they show a plane why not release them ??

with conflicting testimony of eyewitness why are their statements not taken under oath and investigated ???

his question has nothing to do with the tapes
why not just answer the question?

my answer is it is all theoretical until investigated...what is your answer to my question

If you think an investigation would lead to an action you are sorely mistaken. Do you seriously want to listen to hours upon hours of rehashing the same old shit ?