This Is What Happened At The Pentagon On 9/11

[eots]

the dumbasses start out by saying that we should be suspicious because there were no cameras at the pentagon broadcasting live whem the plane came in

You can't start off with something so moronic and expect to be taken seriously or have anyone hear you out

none of your bullshit changes the facts the eyewitnesses give credible and genuine accounts and the testimony is unwavering...the conflicting testimony comes essentially from USA today employees appear disingenuous and has changed over the years to accommodate the official story...does it

 

[JBeukema]

the dumbasses start out by saying that we should be suspicious because there were no cameras at the pentagon broadcasting live whem the plane came in

You can't start off with something so moronic and expect to be taken seriously or have anyone hear you out

none of your bullshit changes the facts the eyewitnesses give credible and genuine accounts and the testimony is unwavering...

true- they all saw an airliner

damn... too bad that doesn't fit your fantasy

the conflicting testimony comes essentially from USA today employees

and? If they all agreed, then we'd be supicious

that would mean they were lying

A first-year law student can tell you why'

Unreliable Eyewitness Testimony : The Frontal Cortex

The Problem With Eyewitness Testimony

FindLaw's Writ - Dorf: How Reliable Is Eyewitness Testimony?

Rape Victim Convicted Man

Navy Study: Eyewitnesses Unreliable

Yale Law School | Eyewitness Testimony Doesn't Make It True--A Commentary by Steven B. Duke

Visual Expert Human Factors: Eyewitness Memory Is Unreliable

 

[eots]

well somebody is clearly lying ..either it is the 14 wittnessess that include police officers pilots and pentagon employees that have given identical independent accounts and who's story's have not changed or the USA today employees whose story's have changed on key elements of their unsworn testimony... ....

 

[JBeukema]

Unreliable Eyewitness Testimony : The Frontal Cortex

The Problem With Eyewitness Testimony

FindLaw's Writ - Dorf: How Reliable Is Eyewitness Testimony?

Rape Victim Convicted Man

Navy Study: Eyewitnesses Unreliable

Yale Law School | Eyewitness Testimony Doesn't Make It True--A Commentary by Steven B. Duke

Visual Expert Human Factors: Eyewitness Memory Is Unreliable


Usually people never change their stories if they memorized it cause it's a lie, although some have excellent memories. In a traumatic incident, you expect to see varying accounts and for the details to change over time s people incorporate new information into their 'memories'

 

[eots]

police testomony


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNVmVBgGrFk]YouTube - Eyewitnesses of Flight 77 Debunk Government's Story 3/5[/ame]

 

[eots]

USA today wittnessess


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMHqti3ylUw]YouTube - The Pentagon witnesses[/ame]

 

[JBeukema]

police testomony


YouTube - Eyewitnesses of Flight 77 Debunk Government's Story 3/5

Unreliable Eyewitness Testimony : The Frontal Cortex

The Problem With Eyewitness Testimony

FindLaw's Writ - Dorf: How Reliable Is Eyewitness Testimony?

Rape Victim Convicted Man

Navy Study: Eyewitnesses Unreliable

Yale Law School | Eyewitness Testimony Doesn't Make It True--A Commentary by Steven B. Duke

Visual Expert Human Factors: Eyewitness Memory Is Unreliable

Argument from authority - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


damn those are some leading questions


that'd never fly in court

 

[JBeukema]

wait... so eots is posting eyewitness testimony saying the plane hit the building?

but that refutes terral's claims that there was no plane!

this is twice now you've debunked him

are you coming around?

 

[DiveCon]

the dumbasses start out by saying that we should be suspicious because there were no cameras at the pentagon broadcasting live whem the plane came in

You can't start off with something so moronic and expect to be taken seriously or have anyone hear you out

of course if they HAD HD cameras there at the time it would have been proof it was an inside job

 

[eots]

wait... so eots is posting eyewitness testimony saying the plane hit the building?

but that refutes terral's claims that there was no plane!

this is twice now you've debunked him

are you coming around?

none of the wittnessess saw the plane hit the building they saw the appearing and the approach they saw is opposite that of the government flight path...the eyewitness flight path would of not taken the plane on a heading that would of been near the downed lamp post and would of passed over the pentagon...which supports the claim..no plane hit the building..and also supporting eyewittness testomony at the impact point that a commercial jet was flying just over the roof as they ran outside...

 

[JBeukema]

none of the wittnessess saw the plane hit the building

so your cop saw the plane go down...


and then it disappeared into thin air?

.which supports the claim..no plane hit the building..a

it just vanished?

nd also supporting eyewittness testomony at the impact point that a commercial jet was flying just over the roof as they ran outside...

yet noone saw this plane fly away and it wasn't on radar?

 

[eots]

no....so the police officer ..his partner and 12 other independent wittnessess put the plane on a completly diffrent flight path than the questionable flight data released...

 

[candycorn]

your question is not relevant to the fact that all eyewitness report a flight path that was no where near the lamp post and others at the point of impact reported seeing the commercial airliner pass over the pentagon at extremely low altitude immediately after the impact or the fact these very credible reports were never investigated or resolved

No, Terral says it was a bow shockwave.
I'm just curious if you agree with him.
Not that hard. A simple "yes" or "no" will suffice.

it is a theory...but one that is unproven..however what appears certain is the flightpath according numerous very credible witnesses in sworn statements give an account of flight path no where near the lamp post and their independent accounts are identical and unwavering all these years later the few USA today witnesses that confirm the official flight path appear disingenuous in their story's and changed very critical aspects of their statements years later

You couldn't have called him a dumbass on your own when he first posted the bullshit?

 

[candycorn]

No cogent thoughts

EOTS thinks you're theory is unproven. For once I'll agree with his basic premise that you're so fucked in the head, you pee out of your tear ducts.

 

[candycorn]

no....so the police officer ..his partner and 12 other independent wittnessess put the plane on a completly diffrent flight path than the questionable flight data released...

Humans can be mistaken.
Poles are physical evidence.

Advantage poles.



If 38 people tell you the sky was pink on 9/11 and you have about 10,000 pictures of the sky being blue, I'm assuming you'd believe the 38 people...or try to come up with some way all 10,000 pictures were faked?

Thats where your "movement" is at hoss...trying to convince people what they see with their own eyes is not what happened.

 

[eots]

your inane metaphors are of no significance...and your humans can be mistaken applies to your theory of the poles...the fact is the most credible of all the wittiness accounts are those that conflict with the government released data..and just like almost every aspect of 9/11 needs a independent investigation with subpoena power..writing off such compelling testimony on your... people make mistakes but poles don't lie theory is not good enough for me

 

[eots]

No cogent thoughts

EOTS thinks you're theory is unproven. For once I'll agree with his basic premise that you're so fucked in the head, you pee out of your tear ducts.

post like this highlight your disingenuous nature ..I don't feel the need to place slanderous words into your mouth..because I have a rational argument.. unlike yourself...my basic premise is.. terrals theory's unlike the bush /cheney story are rational and plausible but outside of all full independent investigation remain a theory however convincing ...but what is known with certainty is there is a cover up of the ..logistics ..intelligence and forensics s of 9/11

 

[DiveCon]

No cogent thoughts

EOTS thinks you're theory is unproven. For once I'll agree with his basic premise that you're so fucked in the head, you pee out of your tear ducts.

post like this highlight your disingenuous nature ..I don't feel the need to place slanderous words into your mouth..because I have a rational argument.. unlike yourself...my basic premise is.. terrals theory's unlike the bush /cheney story are rational and plausible but outside of all full independent investigation remain a theory however convincing ...but what is known with certainty is there is a cover up of the ..logistics ..intelligence and forensics s of 9/11

except you have NO rational argument
people saw the plane, some may be mistaken about how it got to the pentagon, howeven they do have SOME video(the released ones) that show an approximate path, and the light poles confirm it

 

[candycorn]

No cogent thoughts

EOTS thinks you're theory is unproven. For once I'll agree with his basic premise that you're so fucked in the head, you pee out of your tear ducts.

post like this highlight your disingenuous nature ..I don't feel the need to place slanderous words into your mouth..because I have a rational argument.. unlike yourself...my basic premise is.. terrals theory's unlike the bush /cheney story are rational and plausible but outside of all full independent investigation remain a theory however convincing ...but what is known with certainty is there is a cover up of the ..logistics ..intelligence and forensics s of 9/11

Can you read? I stated what you stated....that his theory is unproven. There are no degress of unproven....it either is not proven or it is...right? So if my theories that AA77 took down the Pentagon are fucked in the head because I wasn't there to film it and I can't interview the deceased...so is his. Or do you have different standards for "unproven" based on some non-scientific preferences you have? Hmmmm...a real head scratcher.

As for rational arguments...you simply don't have any. You apparently believe that a batallion of people planted evidence all around the Pentagon while it was burning...actually walking into the fire and dropping off evidence. Thats about the most irrational thing I've ever heard.

Okay...list your arguments and we'll see where rational belief rests.

Did Atta commendeer AA11 and ram it into the North Tower. I think he did.
Did UAL 175 hit the South Tower. I think it did.
Did Hani Hanjour pilot AA77 into the South tower. I think he did.

Let see what your argument is exactly.

 

[candycorn]

EOTS thinks you're theory is unproven. For once I'll agree with his basic premise that you're so fucked in the head, you pee out of your tear ducts.

post like this highlight your disingenuous nature ..I don't feel the need to place slanderous words into your mouth..because I have a rational argument.. unlike yourself...my basic premise is.. terrals theory's unlike the bush /cheney story are rational and plausible but outside of all full independent investigation remain a theory however convincing ...but what is known with certainty is there is a cover up of the ..logistics ..intelligence and forensics s of 9/11

except you have NO rational argument
people saw the plane, some may be mistaken about how it got to the pentagon, howeven they do have SOME video(the released ones) that show an approximate path, and the light poles confirm it

I think my post was pretty much poetry...so fucked in the head, you pee out of your tear ducts. I'm really sleepy but that struck me as really funny just now.

G'night.