High Ranking US Major General Exposes September 11 High

Lets not forget the testimony of the taxi cab driver of the cab pictured below.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvyQ0vVwjqc

The fact that there wasn't any appreciable debris is the case here.

See joboo, that there are no other scars on your light pole surfaces, other than where they are creased.

the crease was made upon other contact, on either end of the poles....as if falling to the ground.

Your case for jetliner striking those poles has failed miserably.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joboo

At least that picture shows the proper impact damage dimensions rather than the deceptive loose change tiny hole version.

Where were those spools beforehand? That needs to be determined. Were they stacked off to the side? There would be one heck of an air disturbance with a plane that size roaring in at 400+mph

Three of them are already in the position to roll easily. Were they all?

The look like they were off the the right and followed the air currents towards the impact hole.

---

Joboo

Get some sleep and read over what you've written here tomorrow. Some things should be clear in the morning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Horn

See joboo, that there are no other scars on your light pole surfaces, other than where they are creased.

the crease was made upon other contact, on either end of the poles....as if falling to the ground.

Your case for jetliner striking those poles has failed miserably.

---

There are no scars eh? I see some pretty significant damage that you simply cannot cause with missile super thrusters.

What's failed even more miserably is your explanation for explosive air disturbance from some super high powered jet propulsion engine flying right above cars on a highway, and no one being killed by it, or cars being damaged by it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Libertarian_Guard

Joboo

Get some sleep and read over what you've written here tomorrow. Some things should be clear in the morning.

---

If you can't establish where those spools were, then you really cant use them as proof of anything.

The premise is they were in the way right? How do you know where they were? If you don't know then it's ultimately not proof of anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joboo

What's failed even more miserably is your explanation

---

I had no explanation, you are putting words in my mouth, as you accuse others doing to you.

This along with many other self masturbatory oversights creates an aire of wingnut craziness emanating from your corner.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Libertytree

The fact that there wasn't any appreciable debris is the case here.

---

There was debris, and airplane parts found. Both outside, and inside the building.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Horn

I had no explanation, you are putting words in my mouth, as you accuse others doing to you.

This along with many other self masturbatory oversights creates an aire of wingnut craziness emanating from your corner.

---

You made the statement that I don't understand missiles, and that some kind of final "big thrust" could have caused it.

You said it yourself.

The evidence does not show this would have been remotely possible without damaging a bunch of cars in the process.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joboo

The evidence does not show this would have been remotely possible without damaging a bunch of cars in the process.

---

What evidence, were there some thrust vectoring calculations that were missed somewhere on thread?

Where's the bunch a cars?

Were you on the bridge with a bunch of cars that day?