Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You can't figure anything out can you. That was a timed explosion. Why is a generator causing so much fire and smoke? because it was just a shell of a generator filled with fuel to make the fire look bigger.
So lets look at your story. Now you have a group planting light poles, a group driving a cab on a wrecker in rush hour traffic with a crushed in windshield, a cab driver that is in it for some reason, and now some one rigging a time explosion in a government building.
On top of this, you have another crew taking the 757 that you say didn't crash into the Pentagon and doing something with it...gee...what happened to the passengers?
And the phone calls? Oh yeah, another crew.
And this is just the Arlington unit. I like that you think a conspiracy this big could be kept secret for 11 years now. Your cartoonish take on the world is amusing.
You haven't answered any of them yet except to expand your conspiracy in the most implausible way possible. Again, why hit the Generator at all and why necessitate the need to have someone plant a "timed explosive" at the Pentagon.
You guys, the dumb believers, are the ones who mentioned the cab, we just asked how the hell does a lightpole hit a car and only break the windshield. Get you shit straight or your head out your butt. Hey were you the cab driver? Once again please explain the vaporizing 757 trick or the disintergating parts trick. But wait now you say the wreakage inside the building is the757.Tell the truth, You really have no idea what happened at the Pentagon.[/COLOR]
There was wreckage and all of it was consistent with AA Flight 77. Gee, I guess we have to add another crew to come in after the "timed explosion" and command and control of the missile/globalhawk (which was it again?) and plant plane parts--extremely heavy plane parts all around the joint.
So we have crews:
planting light poles
planting plane parts
planting broken cabs
And all of that unnecessarily; change the vector or increase the angle and you don't have to worry about any of that or any of the crews squealing.
Have we forgotten anything?
Oh yes,
steering missiles/drone aircraft
planting timed explosives
making passenger jets disappear (not to mention the messy work of passengers)
There was wreckage and all of it was consistent with AA Flight 77.
And yet there are no reports of radiation poisoning or sickness.......
Love those mini nukes that you guys invented for this scenario.......
So lets look at your story. Now you have a group planting light poles, a group driving a cab on a wrecker in rush hour traffic with a crushed in windshield, a cab driver that is in it for some reason, and now some one rigging a time explosion in a government building.
On top of this, you have another crew taking the 757 that you say didn't crash into the Pentagon and doing something with it...gee...what happened to the passengers?
And the phone calls? Oh yeah, another crew.
And this is just the Arlington unit. I like that you think a conspiracy this big could be kept secret for 11 years now. Your cartoonish take on the world is amusing.
You haven't answered any of them yet except to expand your conspiracy in the most implausible way possible. Again, why hit the Generator at all and why necessitate the need to have someone plant a "timed explosive" at the Pentagon.
There was wreckage and all of it was consistent with AA Flight 77. Gee, I guess we have to add another crew to come in after the "timed explosion" and command and control of the missile/globalhawk (which was it again?) and plant plane parts--extremely heavy plane parts all around the joint.
So we have crews:
planting light poles
planting plane parts
planting broken cabs
And all of that unnecessarily; change the vector or increase the angle and you don't have to worry about any of that or any of the crews squealing.
Have we forgotten anything?
Oh yes,
steering missiles/drone aircraft
planting timed explosives
making passenger jets disappear (not to mention the messy work of passengers)
There was wreckage and all of it was consistent with AA Flight 77.
We all know you don't have the game to debate your idiotic claims of planted bombs, lightpoles, cabs, cab drivers, etc and why the supposed conspirators would add such things to their "inbox" totally unnecessarily.
Please continue on with the graphics though.
All of the wreckage was consistent with AA77. As it was. As it is. As it always will be.
There was wreckage and all of it was consistent with AA Flight 77.
We all know you don't have the game to debate your idiotic claims of planted bombs, lightpoles, cabs, cab drivers, etc and why the supposed conspirators would add such things to their "inbox" totally unnecessarily.
Please continue on with the graphics though.
All of the wreckage was consistent with AA77. As it was. As it is. As it always will be.
All what wreakage? You don't have enough wreakage to say that a Cessna crashed there, let alone a 757. Just show me 245,000 pounds of 757 wreakage or explain how a plane vaporizes. It should be so simple to produce the wreakage, IF a 757 did hit the Pentagon. Show me the bodies of these poor souls you say where on this aircraft. Show me the seats they sat in. Show me the luggage they checked in with. Show me two sets of landing gears. Show me all the tires and rims.
Plane vaporizes as you and your video suggest
Bullshit........... cancer yes, Radiation and emp that would have gone along with a Nuke....Sorry didn't happen.......
So lets look at your story. Now you have a group planting light poles, a group driving a cab on a wrecker in rush hour traffic with a crushed in windshield, a cab driver that is in it for some reason, and now some one rigging a time explosion in a government building.
On top of this, you have another crew taking the 757 that you say didn't crash into the Pentagon and doing something with it...gee...what happened to the passengers?
And the phone calls? Oh yeah, another crew.
And this is just the Arlington unit. I like that you think a conspiracy this big could be kept secret for 11 years now. Your cartoonish take on the world is amusing.
You haven't answered any of them yet except to expand your conspiracy in the most implausible way possible. Again, why hit the Generator at all and why necessitate the need to have someone plant a "timed explosive" at the Pentagon.
There was wreckage and all of it was consistent with AA Flight 77. Gee, I guess we have to add another crew to come in after the "timed explosion" and command and control of the missile/globalhawk (which was it again?) and plant plane parts--extremely heavy plane parts all around the joint.
So we have crews:
planting light poles
planting plane parts
planting broken cabs
And all of that unnecessarily; change the vector or increase the angle and you don't have to worry about any of that or any of the crews squealing.
Have we forgotten anything?
Oh yes,
steering missiles/drone aircraft
planting timed explosives
making passenger jets disappear (not to mention the messy work of passengers)
There was wreckage and all of it was consistent with AA Flight 77.
We all know you don't have the game to debate your idiotic claims of planted bombs, lightpoles, cabs, cab drivers, etc and why the supposed conspirators would add such things to their "inbox" totally unnecessarily.
Please continue on with the graphics though.
All of the wreckage was consistent with AA77. As it was. As it is. As it always will be.
Bullshit........... cancer yes, Radiation and emp that would have gone along with a Nuke....Sorry didn't happen.......
You should be demoted to private for your ignorance. Radiation and emp that would have gone along with a Nuke....Sorry DID happen! Maybe if you didn't believe Bush's lies, then maybe you could see the truth, but that's doubtful.
Monday, April 4th, 2011 | Posted by Veterans Today
9/11 NUKE DEMOLITION PROOF: Firefighters Radiation Cancers Off the Scale
RADIATION CANCERS KILL 345 SO FAR
9/11 FIREFIGHTERS ARE GETTING CANCER AT A FASTER RATE THAN OTHERS, CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER REVEALS
By Daily Mail Reporter
Firefighters who recovered bodies at Ground Zero are developing cancer at a faster rate than those who worked before the atrocity, medical officials have revealed.
A seven-year study by the New York Fire Department has claimed that there are unusual rises in the number of cancer cases among firefighters who worked in the aftermath of 9/11.
Some types of cancer among 9/11 firefighters are even bizarrely off the charts, according to sources who have seen the as-yet-undisclosed federal-funded study.
Dr. David Prezant, the Fire Departments chief medical officer, has reportedly said that cancer cases across all ranks of the FDNY who worked at Ground Zero are up significantly.
It is thought that the report due to be officially disclosed in time for the 10th anniversary of the terror attacks in September cites unusual rises in leukemia, non-Hodgkins lymphoma and multiple myeloma.
The report also states increases in esophageal, prostate and thyroid cancers.
Although officials have yet to confirm the increase, sources who attended a recent steering-committee meeting said Dr. Prezants report will document the cancer increase.
One source told the New York Post: The only conclusion that could have been reached was that there was an increase in the cancer rate for firefighters after 9/11.
Minutes of the meeting quote Prezant as saying that we have completed our seven-year cancer study and that he planned to present it to the fire unions.
A doctor from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health is said to have asked Dr. Prezant: In the past, you mentioned about the rates before being somewhat similar what led to the change that you noted the increase?
Prezant said researchers have compiled medical records for three years and had access to state cancer registries, though New Yorks is three years behind.
Dr. Prezant reportedly told the group: Those things keep adding cases
The report would be the first to document a cancer-rate increase among rescue and recovery workers.
The city recently settled lawsuits by 10,000 WTC workers, more than 600 of whom have developed cancer.
But officials have so far insisted there is no scientific proof that Ground Zero smoke and dust caused cancer.
An FDNY spokesman gave a statement for Dr. Prezant, saying: The study is ongoing, and no conclusions have been reached on whether cancer rates have increased for firefighters.
But fire union bosses in New York have expressed their concern about the findings.
Al Hagan, head of the fire-officers union, told the New York Post: Im led to believe that the numbers for those cancers across all ranks in the Fire Department of people who worked at Ground Zero is up significantly, and were all very concerned about it, as are our families.
Steve Cassidy, president of the firefighters union, said Ground Zeros toxic stew has proven lethal.
He said: Its a fact that New York City firefighters are dying of cancer in record numbers.
We have buried 10 firefighters in just the last 15 weeks, seven with cancer. On Sept. 10, 2001, they were young, healthy firefighters.
In 2007, doctors at Mt. Sinai Medical Center, which monitors World Trade Center rescue workers, noted blood cancers like multiple myeloma, which normally strikes in the 60s or 70s, were being found in relatively young officers.
The New York state Health Department has confirmed that 345 Ground Zero workers have died of various cancers as of June 2010.
There was wreckage and all of it was consistent with AA Flight 77.
We all know you don't have the game to debate your idiotic claims of planted bombs, lightpoles, cabs, cab drivers, etc and why the supposed conspirators would add such things to their "inbox" totally unnecessarily.
Please continue on with the graphics though.
All of the wreckage was consistent with AA77. As it was. As it is. As it always will be.
YOU ARE A LIAR!
There is nothing consistent with in the wreckage that indicates that it was AA77. What a load of crap.
Let's see if your small mind can answer these questions:
Why, after all these years, haven't we seen any clear photos of the "plane" that struck the Pentagon?
Why are there NO HOLES in the Pentagon where the plane's enormous engines would have impacted?
Why are there NO DAMAGE to the outer wall from the wings?
Where is the tail section, vertical stabilizer and fuselage?
Why is the Pentagon lawn all torn up, a significant sign of an airplane crash?
A Boeing 757 is 60 tons and IF a Boeing 757 struck the Pentagon, it would leave 60 tons of scrap, NOT A FEW PIECES.
There is NO PROOF AT ALL that a Boeing 757 struck the Pentagon on 9/11. YOU ARE WRONG, HAVE BEEN WRONG, AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE WRONG! Deal with it.
We all know you don't have the game to debate your idiotic claims of planted bombs, lightpoles, cabs, cab drivers, etc and why the supposed conspirators would add such things to their "inbox" totally unnecessarily.
Please continue on with the graphics though.
All of the wreckage was consistent with AA77. As it was. As it is. As it always will be.
YOU ARE A LIAR!
There is nothing consistent with in the wreckage that indicates that it was AA77. What a load of crap.
Let's see if your small mind can answer these questions:
Why, after all these years, haven't we seen any clear photos of the "plane" that struck the Pentagon?
Why are there NO HOLES in the Pentagon where the plane's enormous engines would have impacted?
Why are there NO DAMAGE to the outer wall from the wings?
Where is the tail section, vertical stabilizer and fuselage?
Why is the Pentagon lawn all torn up, a significant sign of an airplane crash?
A Boeing 757 is 60 tons and IF a Boeing 757 struck the Pentagon, it would leave 60 tons of scrap, NOT A FEW PIECES.
There is NO PROOF AT ALL that a Boeing 757 struck the Pentagon on 9/11. YOU ARE WRONG, HAVE BEEN WRONG, AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE WRONG! Deal with it.
Over a Hundred eyewitnesses and a black box are lying.........
Nobody was photgraphing the building with a high speed camera at the time when the plane hit most likely:There was wreckage and all of it was consistent with AA Flight 77.
We all know you don't have the game to debate your idiotic claims of planted bombs, lightpoles, cabs, cab drivers, etc and why the supposed conspirators would add such things to their "inbox" totally unnecessarily.
Please continue on with the graphics though.
All of the wreckage was consistent with AA77. As it was. As it is. As it always will be.
YOU ARE A LIAR!
There is nothing consistent with in the wreckage that indicates that it was AA77. What a load of crap.
Let's see if your small mind can answer these questions:
Why, after all these years, haven't we seen any clear photos of the "plane" that struck the Pentagon?
It's possible that the plane's port engine was knocked off when it hit this generator:Why are there NO HOLES in the Pentagon where the plane's enormous engines would have impacted?
There is:Why are there NO DAMAGE to the outer wall from the wings?
They were destroyed in the fireball the world saw.Where is the tail section, vertical stabilizer and fuselage?
Are you saying it should have been torn up by something that didn't hit it?Why is the Pentagon lawn all torn up, a significant sign of an airplane crash?
There was significant wreckage found, engines, landing gear, bodies, pieces of fuselage, etc... Your denial is silly.A Boeing 757 is 60 tons and IF a Boeing 757 struck the Pentagon, it would leave 60 tons of scrap, NOT A FEW PIECES.
There is NO PROOF AT ALL that a Boeing 757 struck the Pentagon on 9/11. YOU ARE WRONG, HAVE BEEN WRONG, AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE WRONG! Deal with it.
We all know you don't have the game to debate your idiotic claims of planted bombs, lightpoles, cabs, cab drivers, etc and why the supposed conspirators would add such things to their "inbox" totally unnecessarily.
Please continue on with the graphics though.
All of the wreckage was consistent with AA77. As it was. As it is. As it always will be.
YOU ARE A LIAR!
There is nothing consistent with in the wreckage that indicates that it was AA77. What a load of crap.
Let's see if your small mind can answer these questions:
Why, after all these years, haven't we seen any clear photos of the "plane" that struck the Pentagon?
Why are there NO HOLES in the Pentagon where the plane's enormous engines would have impacted?
Why are there NO DAMAGE to the outer wall from the wings?
Where is the tail section, vertical stabilizer and fuselage?
Why is the Pentagon lawn all torn up, a significant sign of an airplane crash?
A Boeing 757 is 60 tons and IF a Boeing 757 struck the Pentagon, it would leave 60 tons of scrap, NOT A FEW PIECES.
There is NO PROOF AT ALL that a Boeing 757 struck the Pentagon on 9/11. YOU ARE WRONG, HAVE BEEN WRONG, AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE WRONG! Deal with it.
Over a Hundred eyewitnesses and a black box are lying.........
YOU ARE A LIAR!
There is nothing consistent with in the wreckage that indicates that it was AA77. What a load of crap.
Let's see if your small mind can answer these questions:
Why, after all these years, haven't we seen any clear photos of the "plane" that struck the Pentagon?
Why are there NO HOLES in the Pentagon where the plane's enormous engines would have impacted?
Why are there NO DAMAGE to the outer wall from the wings?
Where is the tail section, vertical stabilizer and fuselage?
Why is the Pentagon lawn all torn up, a significant sign of an airplane crash?
A Boeing 757 is 60 tons and IF a Boeing 757 struck the Pentagon, it would leave 60 tons of scrap, NOT A FEW PIECES.
There is NO PROOF AT ALL that a Boeing 757 struck the Pentagon on 9/11. YOU ARE WRONG, HAVE BEEN WRONG, AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE WRONG! Deal with it.
Over a Hundred eyewitnesses and a black box are lying.........
YOU MEAN THESE PEOPLE ??
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Na5Vwc2Dr0k]Pentagon Eyewitness NO PLANE HIT PENTAGON.avi - YouTube[/ame]
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. ...
