This Is What Happened At The Pentagon On 9/11

[SFC Ollie]

having trouble not being an idiot ignoring you have been proved wrong thousands of times here that it was an inside job after my last post and the others the last couple pages? what part do you not get that your lovers candyfag,divecunt and now rat in the hat for being exposed as a liar recently by me,are on ignore? you been hanging around candyfag too much lately,cause like him,your developing the diseace HE has.alzheimers. because those three trolls are the only ones that might have asked me a question and are you so stupid you dont realise i have had candyfag and divecunt on ignore since day one when they got here?

also,if you asked me any i would not know,you put ME on ignore remember? so why would i address someone who has me on ignore? unlike divecunt and candyfag,my life isnt so pathetic that i seek attention by talking to myself which is what they do when they address me.probably what your fellow agent rat in the hat does NOW as well. AGAIN divecunt and candyfag have been on ignore since DAY ONE when they got here,and i already stated at LEAST 3 times rat in the hat wen on it last tuesday. I only took you off ignore for a second here since you CLAIM you have me on ignore to see what bullshit you were saying now. see since you have me on ignore,i dont address you anymore,i dont seek attention like divecunt and candyfag do and talk to myself addressing someone who has me on ignore which im not with you since you CLAIM it.you DONT have me on ignore because you STILL read my posts when someone quotes me.hahahahahahahahahahahaahhahahaha. great way to have someone on ignore,I love it.hahahahahahahahaah

what i think is so hysterical is you CLAIM you have me on ignore yet you always read them when someone else reposts them. greay way of keping me on ignore troll. time to put you on ignore, dont answer trolls questions who are only sent here to lie and ignore when they have been proven wrong.duh,you cant seem to figure that out.back on ignore again. your not worth addressing anymore anyways because you make Gomer Pyle look like an intelligent man.hahahahahahahahahahahaa

I guess you missed the thread where I ran a poll of who I should remove from my ignore list. Deal with it. Now if you have anything real to add please do. And don't tell me about anyone else on here, I am me they are them, you are you. And you are wrong. Got that? Good!

i dont address trolls who cant make up their mind to keep me on ignore or not and lie when proven wrong and kiss the asses of lovers candyfag and divecunt.Plus you just lost your credibility with your pathetic logic of THEIR OPINIONS ARE WRONG AS YOU ARE. As always,you have the pathetic logic that those credible people are wrong and corrupt the corrupt government agencys and the CIA corntrolled media that congress discovered has plants in meainstream media in the 70;s,its true,YOU deal with it,its all in the history archives,that THEY are right,you love getting your pathetic ass hansded to you on a platter,.i have proved you arong a thousdand times,i dont answer questions of lovers divecunt and candyfag,have fun trolling.bye.back to ignore again troll.

See there you go talking about other posters, Address me not them.

Now, show me one post I have ever made where I lied. And let us use the correct meaning of the word. A lie is not a statement that you disagree with.

And my statement that their opinions is wrong is as credible as anyones opinion might be.

Fact is that if you place me on ignore it is only because you cannot honestly answer the questions that I might put to you. But that's OK because you will simply claim that you kicked my ass and tell another fable.

And just for the record, you have never proved me wrong. On any subject on any board, in any universe. Other than maybe in your own little head, but that one only counts to you.

 

[Jos]

Notice when the subject of 9/11 comes up, the israeli firsters always jump in to support the "official" line, ask yourself, why is that?

I don't know about you but I support the truth and the USA.

SOo... does that mean your a truth-er, or the opposite?

 

[SFC Ollie]

Notice when the subject of 9/11 comes up, the israeli firsters always jump in to support the "official" line, ask yourself, why is that?

I don't know about you but I support the truth and the USA.

SOo... does that mean your a truth-er, or the opposite?

I do not believe that the US Government planed, executed, or had prior knowledge of the attacks on 9/11/01. Other than UBL wanted to attack us, somehow, some way, some time.

I believe that the official reports and investigations have got the main points correct.

 

[eots]

I don't know about you but I support the truth and the USA.

SOo... does that mean your a truth-er, or the opposite?

I do not believe that the US Government planed, executed, or had prior knowledge of the attacks on 9/11/01. Other than UBL wanted to attack us, somehow, some way, some time.

I believe that the official reports and investigations have got the main points correct.

dupe

 

[SFC Ollie]

SOo... does that mean your a truth-er, or the opposite?

I do not believe that the US Government planed, executed, or had prior knowledge of the attacks on 9/11/01. Other than UBL wanted to attack us, somehow, some way, some time.

I believe that the official reports and investigations have got the main points correct.

dupe

Got any facts that say otherwise? Didn't think so.

 

[Jos]

Got any facts that say otherwise? Didn't think so.

Would you agree America does not have the means of sending up planes to investigate possible hijacked flights? or would you go with a stand down
Do The Orders Still Stand?

 

[DiveCon]

Got any facts that say otherwise? Didn't think so.

Would you agree America does not have the means of sending up planes to investigate possible hijacked flights? or would you go with a stand down
Do The Orders Still Stand?

just another nutter site

 

[danielnimrod]

Okay here's your answers.
1. Why was nobody fired or court martialed?
For what exactly?? The psycho babble after that question hardly made sense really.

2. Why was nobody prosecuted for their crimes of removing and destroying evidence at the pentagon and trade centers?
First of all who was it that did this in the first place? I've only heard of a couple of people that tried to sell evidence on e-bay and they WERE prosecuted.
I myself didn't have time to look for evidence because I was too busy saving lives and fighting for my own.
Removing evidence from the Trade Centers? Really? Who the hell do you think removed that evidence bud? If in fact you could find evidence of this removal, I'd so like to see it.

3. Why have there only been 5 flimsy pics of a fireball been released of the airliner hitting the pentagon,when there should be at least several dozens of them showing the airliner coming in?

Okay, this one is EASY!!
Picture if you will, a Pentagon without a bunch of cameras protruding from it's roofs and hanging off of light poles, etc. etc.
The area that was hit was NOT a well trafficked area to begin with. There were no main entrances and no motor vehicle entrances leading up to the Pentagon. This particular side of the Pentagon was just a "WALL WITH WINDOWS" and one little entrance/exit to a small helipad. The camera that took those pictures was a "TIME SENSITIVE" camera. Said camera wasn't even located AT the Pentagon but was located to the West of the Pentagon. Said camera was at a delivery post about 100 yards away from said Pentagon. This was an area that delivery vans and trucks used to bring their goods to a back dock for deliveries to and from the Mall located inside the Pentagon. Like I said, this camera was "Time Sensitive" which means it was NOT a video camera. Why didn't the Pentagon have cameras all over the place? Who the hell knows but I CAN tell you that there were NO cameras taking shots of that area. Those five flimsy pictures came from the "Time Sensitive" camera that you say is a "Video Camera".
Next time ask someone who was there and someone who knew the inside of the Pentagon inside and out. ASK ME!! My job was also "LOCATION TRAINING NCO"
I had to know the Pentagon and I DID. I know that camera and what kind it was. Now that I've refuted that lets go on to the next question.

4. What happened to the bodies?
I was saving this one for last because it still haunts me to this day. Okay what do you mean what happened to the bodies? Do you mean, were there in fact bodies? YES. There most certainly were bodies. I have first hand knowledge of that fact. I would LOVE to share that knowledge with you but will not due to PTSD. Sharing this with you would mean I would have MANY nights without sleep again and when sleep did come I would be afraid of what was on the other side waiting for me.

5. What happened to the shoot down order? Well, I don't know if one existed and would only be speculating at this point in time. I can only guess and that isn't like me to do so there it is...............................

 

[SFC Ollie]

Got any facts that say otherwise? Didn't think so.

Would you agree America does not have the means of sending up planes to investigate possible hijacked flights? or would you go with a stand down
Do The Orders Still Stand?

Which orders? And what was 10 miles out? When you have the facts let us know.

There were no stand down orders that day. Just saying.

 

[eots]

Okay here's your answers.
1. Why was nobody fired or court martialed?
For what exactly?? The psycho babble after that question hardly made sense really.

2. Why was nobody prosecuted for their crimes of removing and destroying evidence at the pentagon and trade centers?
First of all who was it that did this in the first place? I've only heard of a couple of people that tried to sell evidence on e-bay and they WERE prosecuted.
I myself didn't have time to look for evidence because I was too busy saving lives and fighting for my own.
Removing evidence from the Trade Centers? Really? Who the hell do you think removed that evidence bud? If in fact you could find evidence of this removal, I'd so like to see it.

3. Why have there only been 5 flimsy pics of a fireball been released of the airliner hitting the pentagon,when there should be at least several dozens of them showing the airliner coming in?

Okay, this one is EASY!!
Picture if you will, a Pentagon without a bunch of cameras protruding from it's roofs and hanging off of light poles, etc. etc.
The area that was hit was NOT a well trafficked area to begin with. There were no main entrances and no motor vehicle entrances leading up to the Pentagon. This particular side of the Pentagon was just a "WALL WITH WINDOWS" and one little entrance/exit to a small helipad. The camera that took those pictures was a "TIME SENSITIVE" camera. Said camera wasn't even located AT the Pentagon but was located to the West of the Pentagon. Said camera was at a delivery post about 100 yards away from said Pentagon. This was an area that delivery vans and trucks used to bring their goods to a back dock for deliveries to and from the Mall located inside the Pentagon. Like I said, this camera was "Time Sensitive" which means it was NOT a video camera. Why didn't the Pentagon have cameras all over the place? Who the hell knows but I CAN tell you that there were NO cameras taking shots of that area. Those five flimsy pictures came from the "Time Sensitive" camera that you say is a "Video Camera".
Next time ask someone who was there and someone who knew the inside of the Pentagon inside and out. ASK ME!! My job was also "LOCATION TRAINING NCO"
I had to know the Pentagon and I DID. I know that camera and what kind it was. Now that I've refuted that lets go on to the next question.

4. What happened to the bodies?
I was saving this one for last because it still haunts me to this day. Okay what do you mean what happened to the bodies? Do you mean, were there in fact bodies? YES. There most certainly were bodies. I have first hand knowledge of that fact. I would LOVE to share that knowledge with you but will not due to PTSD. Sharing this with you would mean I would have MANY nights without sleep again and when sleep did come I would be afraid of what was on the other side waiting for me.

5. What happened to the shoot down order? Well, I don't know if one existed and would only be speculating at this point in time. I can only guess and that isn't like me to do so there it is...............................

you are a fraud

 

[chikenwing]

Takes all kinds to make up this here world

 

[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". ...

I saw nothing of significance at the point of impact - no airplane metal or cargo debris was blowing on the lawn in front of the damaged building as smoke billowed from within the Pentagon. ... all of us staring at the Pentagon that morning were indeed looking for such debris, but what we expected to see was not evident.

The same is true with regard to the kind of damage we expected. ... But I did not see this kind of damage. Rather, the facade had a rather small hole, no larger than 20 feet in diameter. Although this facade later collapsed, it remained standing for 30 or 40 minutes, with the roof line remaining relatively straight.

The scene, in short, was not what I would have expected from a strike by a large jetliner. It was, however, exactly what one would expect if a missile had struck the Pentagon. ...

More information is certainly needed regarding the events of 9/11 and the events leading up to that terrible day."


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

 

[SFC Ollie]

She is either blind or lying.

I see debris all over the place.

 

[DiveCon]

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". ...

I saw nothing of significance at the point of impact - no airplane metal or cargo debris was blowing on the lawn in front of the damaged building as smoke billowed from within the Pentagon. ... all of us staring at the Pentagon that morning were indeed looking for such debris, but what we expected to see was not evident.

The same is true with regard to the kind of damage we expected. ... But I did not see this kind of damage. Rather, the facade had a rather small hole, no larger than 20 feet in diameter. Although this facade later collapsed, it remained standing for 30 or 40 minutes, with the roof line remaining relatively straight.

The scene, in short, was not what I would have expected from a strike by a large jetliner. It was, however, exactly what one would expect if a missile had struck the Pentagon. ...

More information is certainly needed regarding the events of 9/11 and the events leading up to that terrible day."


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

tell ya what, invite her here to discuss this

 

[eots]

She is either blind or lying.

I see debris all over the place.

Or maybe she is just not stupid enough to think unidentified little scraps and the same 5ft piece of fuselage that showed up at shanksville equal a commercial airliners and bodies

 

[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". ...

I saw nothing of significance at the point of impact - no airplane metal or cargo debris was blowing on the lawn in front of the damaged building as smoke billowed from within the pentagon. ... All of us staring at the pentagon that morning were indeed looking for such debris, but what we expected to see was not evident.

The same is true with regard to the kind of damage we expected. ... But i did not see this kind of damage. Rather, the facade had a rather small hole, no larger than 20 feet in diameter. Although this facade later collapsed, it remained standing for 30 or 40 minutes, with the roof line remaining relatively straight.

The scene, in short, was not what i would have expected from a strike by a large jetliner. It was, however, exactly what one would expect if a missile had struck the pentagon. ...

More information is certainly needed regarding the events of 9/11 and the events leading up to that terrible day."


patriots question 9/11 - responsible criticism of the 9/11 commission report

tell ya what, invite her here to discuss this

why so you can call her a toofer moron ?

 

[SFC Ollie]

She is either blind or lying.



I see debris all over the place.

Or maybe she is just not stupid enough to think unidentified little scraps and the same 5ft piece of fuselage that showed up at shanksville a commercial airliners and bodies

That's got to be the most stupid post you've made yet. Please provide some sort of entertaining proof that the same piece was photographed hundreds of miles apart during the same hour or so..... Or even the same week for that matter.

 

[DiveCon]

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". ...

I saw nothing of significance at the point of impact - no airplane metal or cargo debris was blowing on the lawn in front of the damaged building as smoke billowed from within the pentagon. ... All of us staring at the pentagon that morning were indeed looking for such debris, but what we expected to see was not evident.

The same is true with regard to the kind of damage we expected. ... But i did not see this kind of damage. Rather, the facade had a rather small hole, no larger than 20 feet in diameter. Although this facade later collapsed, it remained standing for 30 or 40 minutes, with the roof line remaining relatively straight.

The scene, in short, was not what i would have expected from a strike by a large jetliner. It was, however, exactly what one would expect if a missile had struck the pentagon. ...

More information is certainly needed regarding the events of 9/11 and the events leading up to that terrible day."


patriots question 9/11 - responsible criticism of the 9/11 commission report

tell ya what, invite her here to discuss this

why so you can call her a toofer moron ?

troofer moron
you moron

 

[eots]

She is either blind or lying.



I see debris all over the place.

Or maybe she is just not stupid enough to think unidentified little scraps and the same 5ft piece of fuselage that showed up at shanksville a commercial airliners and bodies

That's got to be the most stupid post you've made yet. Please provide some sort of entertaining proof that the same piece was photographed hundreds of miles apart during the same hour or so..... Or even the same week for that matter.

compare them they are remarkably similar...some what like....the passports...lol

 

[idb]

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).

<snip>

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. ...
<snip>


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

A scientist?!!
Her PHD is in Politics!!!