Printable View
Thicker reinforced wall v.s. thinner walls. Which is why it went through more than one of them. The initial impact force is still the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by Serpo
So you get a compromise of what is instantly pulverized v.s. what remains. It all burned for a while as well.
They have plenty of video footage and wont show it.......means they are covering something upQuote:
Originally Posted by joboo
so no bodies.............Quote:
Originally Posted by joboo
Like I'm saying the initial impact force was immense as indicated by the concrete wall video. 500mph.Quote:
Originally Posted by Serpo
You're not going to find anything recognizable in that level of impact.
And then it all burned in fire for hours. You're not going to find anyone in that.
Is it on purpose. Yes it most definitely is. Could it be to make people ramble on with wild assumptions of what it could be while ultimately not knowing?Quote:
Originally Posted by Serpo
It definitely could. It could even make them sound crazy.
Hmm...Just confiscate the video you say, and it will do that? Yup. Cool.
How bout we do that from now on? deal.....ff to sandy hook.
tada...
yes the teeth burnt down to nothingQuote:
Originally Posted by joboo
Impact force against soft lime stone walls and steel dosnt account for a whole on the other side of the pentagon
I dont mind sounding crazy as I dont get too attached to ideas one way or an other ,but I do respect the TRUTH a great deal and the Admiral in this OP found out he was being lied too for 50 years or more.Quote:
Originally Posted by joboo
I dont care about your opinion Joboo but I care about the Admrals opinion and you seem to want to ram your opinion down everyones throat which is an example of a hidden agenda
joboo quit being a homeo-neutral posterboy for your masturbatory self.Quote:
If you see three apples on a table, and form the conclusion there is three apples on a table. Is that biased?
Something tells me no.
There's no need to form conclusions above & beyond previously inflated ones.
Burnt or shattered? They did say there were human remnants they were able to DNA trace. The imact profile is going to carry forward everything in front of it according to the area affected.Quote:
Originally Posted by Serpo
Why would a missile leave a hole like that might be a better question when it's equipped with an explosive warhead designed to blow everything apart in a wide pattern?
Could be a dummy test to determine any number of future "bunker busting" technologies (soon to be required).Quote:
Originally Posted by joboo
Speaking of dummy tests...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Serpo
That's your opinion. I'm speaking to the evidence that was found. One reality is likely, and all the evidence supports it, while the other is far fetched at best.
The video you posted stated the guy had rock solid evidence of a missile as the premise, and turned out to be everything but. Again I am speaking to this particular aspect of the 9II narrative. I have no argument with the rest of it.
So when did all the airplane wreckage get there without any witnesses noticing that yet they all noticed the airplane flying in and impacting?Quote:
Originally Posted by Horn
All these guys running around tossing stuff all over the place, running in and out of a burning building to set up photo ops, and nobody noticed?
I'm not seeing it. It's far more likely they had planes set out to do this, and they used them.
You realize you're talking about the Pentagon?Quote:
Originally Posted by joboo
There are no witnesses.
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHART...witnesses.html
Funny they had air defense turned off that day
Except for a highway being right there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Horn
.....Quote:
Originally Posted by EE_
only to add other hither to forever unknown & vested interests.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/wp-cont.../06/119750.jpg
A bunker buster is used to penetrate first then explode. If it exploded, then you're not going to find a hole like that, and if it didn't explode what caused the explosion, and fire? A dud bunker buster + planted explosives? Ok this is new territory indeed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Horn
Yeah...we'll chuck a dud bunker buster in there, then dispose of it, then set off explosives, and start scattering plane wreckage all over the place.
"Harry break out crane to get those engines unloaded, and get that landing gear in there, careful of the flames....don't mind all the traffic stopped right there on the highway....they won't look......ok frank move the crane into position...we need to get the second engine into that burning mess..."
How much more contrived does it need to be to avoid what the evidence is showing?
http://www.kasjo.net/ats/image004.jpg
Yes, quite.
Source?Quote:
Originally Posted by Norweger
Quote:
Originally Posted by joboo
image properties. http://www.kasjo.net/ats/image004.jpg
go fish.
Harley Guy fuelQuote:
Originally Posted by joboo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5y8PtfKA14
http://www.pgi.org/
No thanks, if it's going to be an intelligent discussion, put up the links to your information. Why would I chase down a random photo on the internet? Silly.Quote:
Originally Posted by osoab
I was asking Norweger btw.
Joboo apparently has no clue what the darkside of the force is capable of.
Along with its many minions who believe the only good towelhead, is a dead towelhead.
He is our innocent and lighted one, to be protected & sheltered from the storm.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2PVv8ZUin4
Don't put words in my mouth. Lack of knowledge = instant personal attack for some users here. Sorry, but that is some low level scenario going on right there. I am well aware of current events.Quote:
Originally Posted by Horn
I'm still waiting to hear something intelligent from you countering post #99.
At least be man enough to admit when you have nothing, or could be incorrect with your assumption. I do, but nobody has posed a single question yet that merits it.
Yet it's still 100% a missile, and I'm the crazy one.
A bit much.
Unspent FuelQuote:
Originally Posted by joboo
http://science.howstuffworks.com/cruise-missile2.htm
A one word answer. That's quite the hypothesis.Quote:
Originally Posted by Horn
Do you realize when truthers are labelled as irrational crazy people, this is exactly the type of scenario they are referring to?
I edited it, and put a link for the hieroglyphics part of your examination.Quote:
Originally Posted by joboo
K.I.S.S.
I just don't see a missile leaving a neat hole like that when it explodes. Bricks are going to fly in every direction. Whatever made that hole was inert at the time of impact.Quote:
Originally Posted by Horn
When is the thing exploding, and how is it getting to that point without exploding?
CIT has been dedicated to providing independent verifiable evidence demonstrating the true flight path of the Pentagon attack jet which ultimately proves it could not have hit the building as reported.
But is the government story flight path as shown in the official data, reports, and required by the physical damage even physically possible?
Pilots for 9/11 Truth released an article earlier this year demonstrating how the final leg of the official flight path is in fact mathematically impossible for a 757 or any transport aircraft for that matter.
Unfortunately the article was released with an error that was quickly noted by other members as well as detractors who came out with their own interpretations of this scenario and the problem presented.
As any honest scientist/professional would do, Pilots for 9/11 Truth quickly admitted the error and promised an update with corrected math.
Since the issue had become convoluted with so many people offering up alternative scenarios.....P4T determined it would be best to put out a video presentation not only with the corrected math, but also with complete animations with scale topography for accurate demonstrations along with completely addressing all of the alternative or "debunking" scenarios in detail and showing exactly WHY they are wrong.
They have done this and as it turns out, the entire premise of the initial article holds true and the "debunkers" have been shown to be disingenuous at best or blatantly deceiving at worst.
http://the911forum.freeforums.org/g-force-calcs-prove-pentagon-attack-flight-path-impossible-t59.html
Its a gas ballon (malatov) with a full metal jacket bullet up front.Quote:
Originally Posted by joboo
One of the "eyewitnesses" said she saw it "speed up towards the end of its path".
A pentagon witness stated that "it came straight down"
Scale of birds are most of the time unknowable to the human eye, as the only reference is sky.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YknxpMZKAZk&NR=1&feature=endscreen
Ok, so how does the plane wreckage fit in all over the place?Quote:
Originally Posted by Horn
When did they have time to move all that in there unnoticed after the missile hit?
I'm wondering why the fuselage created a perfectly round hole, while the engine and wings (which have all the fuel in them) don't even make a scratch on the wall.
WHY you guys eat into the TROLL?
http://www.airforce-technology.com/u...g-metals-7.jpgAttachment 4404Quote:
An AGM-129 Advanced Cruise Missile in flight. A morphing wing could help future systems to fly faster to targets and then adapt to loiter before engaging to evaluate the effectiveness of earlier strikes.
http://www.airforce-technology.com/f...re91197-7.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ypc4ieJO0pg&NR=1&feature=fvwp
Real Eyes Realize Real _______
And what took down the five light poles?
If they scattered that wreckage in there by hand, this is the best movie set I've ever seen. It would take days to create the level of realism required for a set like that.
i.e towards the end of the video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVDdjLQkUV8
http://www.ushmm.org/lcmedia/photo/w...e/75/75102.jpg
On February 27, 1933, the German parliament (Reichstag) building burned down due to arson. The government falsely portrayed the fire as part of a Communist effort to overthrow the state.
Using emergency constitutional powers, Adolf Hitler’s cabinet had issued a Decree for the Protection of the German People on February 4, 1933. This decree placed constraints on the press and authorized the police to ban political meetings and marches, effectively hindering electoral campaigning. A temporary measure, it was followed by a more dramatic and permanent suspension of civil rights following the February 27 burning of the parliament building.
http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article....uleId=10007657