Thread: 9/11 was an inside job

No marks whatsoever from the two huge wings that alledgedly hit it as well as the two 5 tonne "engine bombs" that would have smashed huge holes either side (if obviously it was a plane crash) which obviously it wasn't.

Originally Posted by Albert Shagnastier

No marks whatsoever from the two huge wings that alledgedly hit it as well as the two 5 tonne "engine bombs" that would have smashed huge holes either side (if obviously it was a plane crash) which obviously it wasn't.

I think you've been watching too many cartoons.

"The two most pertinent questions and anomalies in regards to the Pentagon and the 'official story' the public has been fed have nothing to do with investigating grand conspiracies or tracking down mis-represented evidence. They have to do with unreasonable suspensions in basic logic. The first is the fact that while almost all the victims of the attack were positively identified through DNA and dental records, we are also told that there is no significant remaining plane debris within the Pentagon because the intensity of the inferno after the crash wholly incinerated the aircraft and its component parts. These are two completely different and irreconcilable narratives.

To be explicitly clear, this is what the public has been told: On one hand, in response to the complaint that there is no verifiable plane debris to positively ID Flight 77, the government claims the fire in the Pentagon was so hot that the virtually indestructible titanium engines were melted, enormous metal wings incinerated, detachable vertical tail fins swallowed whole, seats and luggage consumed, every inch of metal framing obliterated, landing gear gone, a whole enormous Boeing 757 essentially vaporized into molten rubble and dust. And yet that same raging, all-consuming inferno spared enough body parts and DNA of 184 individual human beings made of a carbon based material significantly less rugged than titanium, called skin and bone, somehow survived said firestorm in tact enough for positive identification. How is this possible? And why is no one asking this question and shining light on what should be a most distressing and absurd fabrication?

The second glaring absurdity and illogical detail of the government's narrative is the bizarre ground-level exit hole on the far exterior wall of the Pentagon's inner ring, some 310 feet away from the impact site. At first, this symmetrical hole was comically explained as the 'punch-out' hole, created by the nose of the aircraft as it ploughed through the building and came to rest. However, that impossible story changed when 9/11 researchers calmly pointed out the following photo, showing what a ten-pound goose did to the similar nose cone of a military cargo plane. The exit hole was then credited to dislodged landing gear (or perhaps some other fuselage debris?), even though no landing gear has ever been produced, nor is it evident in any of the initial photos captured outside the exterior hole.

And besides the lack of evidence, serious laws of physics directly counter the possibility of the 'official story's' explanation of the mysterious exit hole. We have been told to believe matter-of-factly that some mass from the airplane survived the initial impact and explosion, maintained its immense forward thrust, threaded its way through a 300-foot maze of stout reinforced concrete pillars, hit an exterior wall made up of 21 inch square steel reinforced concrete covered with 6 inches of limestone façade and 8 inches of brick backed with Kevlar mesh with such massive force that it punched a huge, neat, circular cut-out exit hole. And then, in a miracle as yet unexplained, that same mass with such potent forward thrust decelerated and disintegrated in the span of 30 feet, leaving not a mark on the next wall in its path, nor a physical trace of its existence."

Blah Blah isn't this the same shit you posted fuck knows how many times and which has already been pulled apart as bollocks?

Get out of your basement. Go and visit the real world.

Originally Posted by Albert Shagnastier

Why is there not a scratch on the Pentagon lawn after the crash of a large airliner that supposedly came in on a flat trajectory?

there was.
tv news coverage minutes after the attack clearly showed skid marks on the lawn
caused by the plane as it crashed into the building.
Parts of the plane were also clearly visible outside the building.
The spooks covered up, removed or disguised the evidence very quickly.
This is a stupid thread probably started by USA hating New Zealanders.
I am not posting here again.

Originally Posted by Albert Shagnastier

On one hand, in response to the complaint that there is no verifiable plane debris to positively ID Flight 77, the government claims the fire in the Pentagon was so hot that the virtually indestructible titanium engines were melted, enormous metal wings incinerated, detachable vertical tail fins swallowed whole, seats and luggage consumed, every inch of metal framing obliterated, landing gear gone, a whole enormous Boeing 757 essentially vaporized into molten rubble and dust.

Similar to Shanksville. The plane was obliterated, no sign of a plane, and yet the FBI managed to find 95% of the plane. Them FBI guys must be good.

"The FBI announced... that 95 percent of the plane was recovered... and the pieces of United Airlines Flight 93 that had been recovered were turned over Sunday to the airline…" - CNN (09/24/01)

Why did they return the parts to the airline? It's evidence.

So only in cartoons would a 3300 kg Rolls-Royce RB211-535E4 engine hitting a wall at 400 knots not even leave a mark?

It would be like dropping a marshmallow on a memory foam mattress?

3300kg traveling at 205 m/s would be the same amount of energy as 15 kg of TNT (80 sticks of dynamite).

Detonate that next to any wall and I guarantee it's going to leave a mark.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by Albert Shagnastier

No marks whatsoever from the two huge wings that alledgedly hit it as well as the two 5 tonne "engine bombs" that would have smashed huge holes either side (if obviously it was a plane crash) which obviously it wasn't.

I think you've been watching too many cartoons.

"The 9/11 Commission Report concludes that the military was not contacted regarding Flight 77's unapproved wayward path toward D.C. until 9:34 a.m. Forty minutes after the confirmed hijacking, and fifty minutes after the first plane impact. This directly contradicts not only common sense, logic, and standard operating procedures in full effect on the morning of 9/11, it also inexplicably contradicts specific information given directly to the Commission itself in regards to Flight 77. "Within minutes after the first aircraft hit the World Trade Center (at 8:46 a.m.), the FAA immediately established several phone bridges that included FAA field facilities, Command Center, headquarters, DOD, the Secret Service, and other government agencies. The US Air Force liaison immediately joined the FAA phone bridge and established contact with NORAD on a separate line…The FAA shared real-time information on the phone bridges about unfolding events…including Flight 77. NORAD logs indicate that the FAA made formal notification about AA Flight 77 at 9:24 a.m., but information about the flight was conveyed continuously during the phone bridges before the formal notification." (FAA clarification memo presented by Laura Brown to the 9/11 Commission, entitled 'FAA Communications with NORAD on Sept 11, 2001', presented 21 May, 2003)

So this clarification memo means that the military suspected, along with the FAA, at 8:48 a.m. that AA Flight 77 had been hijacked. And the hijacking was confirmed at 8:56 a.m. when the plane's transponder was turned off. Yet the Commission inexplicably states the military and government leadership receives no official word of Flight 77's approach to D.C. until 9:34 a.m., four minutes before the Pentagon is struck. Why? Were they trying to explain away the initial lack, then bizarre pattern, of military response? Because while military jets were airborne by 9:30 a.m. - 34 unexplained minutes after confirmation of 77's hijacking - they were ordered toward Baltimore, not D.C., to chase down a 'phantom flight 11' the Commission Report invented without the use of any corroborating evidence. Then in the minutes before the crash at the Pentagon, the jets are turned east away from Baltimore, again given inexplicable instructions, this time to fly 60 miles out to sea away from Washington and the obvious bearing of Flight 77.

It is essential to remember the testimony of Norman Mineta reviewed earlier in this paper, showing full government and military awareness of Flight 77 and its suicidal path toward D.C. before the fighters were scrambled and given the above nonsensical orders. By 9:27 a.m. (which is when Mineta walked into the scene), Cheney and others were already watching the progress of Flight 77 zeroing in on Washington from their underground bunker below the White House. "During the time that the airplane (Flight 77) 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!?"

The testimony of Norman Mineta

Mineta's testimony proves that Cheney, and other top military officials in the bunker with him at that time, not only knew about Flight 77's whereabouts and approach, they were giving direct orders as to how to engage and deal with it. And since Cheney has admitted numerous times that orders to shoot down planes were not given until after 10:10 a.m., clearly Cheney's orders referred to in Mineta's testimony were to not shoot down AA77. Meaning the Vice President of the United States, the ranking government official in Washington that morning, ordered that the airplane be allowed to freely enter D.C. airspace, line up the Pentagon, and slam into its West wing. That Cheney did not even evacuate the White House bunker in which he was himself sitting, even though it was surely a potential target, only furthers the suspicion of the VP's full knowledge of AA77's intentions. And while the media refuses to connect the dots, Cheney's deliberate order of non-action in regards to the flight, and his refusal to evacuate the Pentagon, are nothing less than high treason and mass murder. Any reasonable investigator would pull Cheney into an interrogation room, and hammer at him over and over and over to explain his comments, his whereabouts, his meaning, his contradictions, and the highly suspicious nature of his behavior.

But, of course, Cheney believes himself untouchable. And so far, because of our collective inaction, he is"

Originally Posted by Albert Shagnastier

Mineta's testimony proves that Cheney, and other top military officials in the bunker with him at that time, not only knew about Flight 77's whereabouts and approach, they were giving direct orders as to how to engage and deal with it. And since Cheney has admitted numerous times that orders to shoot down planes were not given until after 10:10 a.m., clearly Cheney's orders referred to in Mineta's testimony were to not shoot down AA77. Meaning the Vice President of the United States, the ranking government official in Washington that morning, ordered that the airplane be allowed to freely enter D.C. airspace, line up the Pentagon, and slam into its West wing. That Cheney did not even evacuate the White House bunker in which he was himself sitting, even though it was surely a potential target, only furthers the suspicion of the VP's full knowledge of AA77's intentions. And while the media refuses to connect the dots, Cheney's deliberate order of non-action in regards to the flight, and his refusal to evacuate the Pentagon, are nothing less than high treason and mass murder. Any reasonable investigator would pull Cheney into an interrogation room, and hammer at him over and over and over to explain his comments, his whereabouts, his meaning, his contradictions, and the highly suspicious nature of his behavior.

But, of course, Cheney believes himself untouchable. And so far, because of our collective inaction, he is"

Hang on a minute. Was it a plane that they deliberately let go or a missile?

It seems to me you can't make your mind up which fairy story you want to cling to.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Was it a plane that deliberately let go of a missile?

You tell me 'arry

Originally Posted by Albert Shagnastier

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Was it a plane that deliberately let go of a missile?

You tell me 'arry

Now you're trying to edit my quotes?

Stupid boy.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Blah Blah isn't this the same shit you posted fuck knows how many times and which has already been pulled apart as bollocks?

Get out of your basement. Go and visit the real world.

You're talking cr*p again harrybare-arse.

Other than character assassination you've posted exactly ZERO factual statements or references on the topic.

Halliburton will be proud of your efforts, you might even get a medal, if ya had a chest to hang it on, ....

Originally Posted by ChookRaffle Jones

Originally Posted by Albert Shagnastier

Why is there not a scratch on the Pentagon lawn after the crash of a large airliner that supposedly came in on a flat trajectory?

there was.
tv news coverage minutes after the attack clearly showed skid marks on the lawn
caused by the plane as it crashed into the building.
Parts of the plane were also clearly visible outside the building.
The spooks covered up, removed or disguised the evidence very quickly.

Re, the skid marks,......bullshit.

If there were skid marks shown, post the news reference to it.

Also, post the pics of parts of the plane, other than those of the nice clean unburnt debris that was deliberately scattered around the lawn.

The spooks did in fact remove, cover up and disguise anything found on the Pentagon lawn that day, photos of that activity have already been posted on this thread.

Originally Posted by Latindancer

^^^ See what I mean ? "Mentally challenged" is putting it mildly.

You're referring to this pic, it seems.

No sign of any airliner parts in front of the Pentagon there.

Albert.....where is the bullet (or Improvised Incendiary Device) from this hole ? And why didn't it make a larger hole ??

Originally Posted by ENT

The spooks did in fact remove, cover up and disguise anything found on the Pentagon lawn that day, photos of that activity have already been posted on this thread.

Were you expecting them to just leave everything laying around? It's quite customary to clean up the lawn after a plane has crashed into a large building close by. Fcuk me this thread has gone way beyond ridiculous......

It's just two people here who are mentally challenged : ENT and Albert. But you get that on a public forum....plus trolling by those two.

Originally Posted by koman

Originally Posted by ENT

The spooks did in fact remove, cover up and disguise anything found on the Pentagon lawn that day, photos of that activity have already been posted on this thread.

Were you expecting them to just leave everything laying around? It's quite customary to clean up the lawn after a plane has crashed into a large building close by. Fcuk me this thread has gone way beyond ridiculous......

G'day grunt!

Once a grunt, always a grunt, eh, koman?

Obviously you haven;t a clue about crime or crash investigation, so your ignorance may be excusable.

You don't have much of a clue about REALITY, ENT. And there are quite a few people on this forum who would also say this.

Originally Posted by Latindancer

It's just two people here who are mentally challenged : ENT and Albert. But you get that on a public forum....plus trolling by those two.

Trolling again Ld?
Latindancer; "Albert.....where is the bullet (or Improvised Incendiary Device) from this hole ? And why didn't it make a larger hole ??"



A hole made by an armour piercing shell.
Nothing to do with the topic, just your hare-brain at work.

Originally Posted by Latindancer

You don't have much of a clue about REALITY, ENT. And there are quite a few people on this forum who would also say this.

On the contrary, schizo,...

Even though you've been a member here since 2006, you still _regularly_ fail to quote people correctly. What does that tell us ?