9/11 Pentagon Attack

Defiant · **Wed Sep 08, 2004 4:13 am**

Youve got to be kidding me. How can you dispute the evidence at hand? WHERE IS THE PLANE? WHERE IS THE 5300 GALLONS OF FUEL? WHERE ARE THE WINGS? WHERE IS THE WRECKAGE? WHY WONT THEY RELEASE THE FILMS?

There is too much here to just be tossed aside. The FBI has covered something up really bad. Im not even gonna start to speculate about anything.

Kyre · Commodore Joined: 15 Mar 2002 Posts: 1263

That's some very convincing evidence right there.

Puck · The Texan Joined: 05 Jan 2004 Posts: 5596

I think that if it was something else that the media would have gotten on to this somehow. Plus, let's consider the source for a moment here.

Kyre · Commodore Joined: 15 Mar 2002 Posts: 1263

I wouldn't have cared if it was Jenna freakin' Jameson's *beep* site. The source doesn't matter. The film clearly brings up a very good point that I think people should be more aware of.

Theresa · **Wed Sep 08, 2004 8:34 am**

Yeah, and I saw JFK taking a stroll down the street last Tuesday. Looked remarkable for a dead guy. I think he was with Elvis.
The attacks all happened within hours of each other. Do you realize how much is involved to fire one missile? And how many people would have to be aware of it?
It'd have to have come from a fighter jet, since the ground based missiles are HUGE. So we have the pilot, the RIO, the plane crew, the people in the tower (ATC), the people who gave the order, the President, and anyone on the ground who could have seen the plane fly overhead. Not to mention all of this would have to have been carried out very quickly.
While you can get a fighter pilot to respond quickly to a threat to his/her nation, you aren't going to find one on the first try who is willing to kill other American's for political reasons. Reasons that are going to put his life, and his unit's lives in danger. We all agree war is dangerous, right?
And did we have any reports of jets coming back missing ordinance? If so, I haven't heard anything about it. They would have to have the pilot crash the plane, or simply disappear.
And while there are a few ground based missiles small enough, and it could have been launched from a mobile unit, you still have the same situation. Unless of course they were parked in Rock Creek Park so that the missile only had a short distance to go, and naturally no one in D.C. is going to look up, with fighter jets all over the place.
And no plane flying in that area saw anything resembling a missile... No radar tracked it.
The missile theory is so full of holes it should sink immediately. But naturally we have people who will do anything to Bush to smear him.

Oh, and can someone tell me where they hid the bodies of all of those aboard that aircraft that doesn't exist, but the people are still missing? Did the government happen to have someone aboard who would hijack the plane in the off chance that members of al Quaeda were going to hijack other planes that day? If so, they must have landed the plane, because another plane going down on 9/11 would definitely had been noticed. Seems odd that no one reported a rogue 747 (or size of), airborne after the ground stop had been called. The pilot would have had to bring the plane incredibly high in a short amount of time to make sure no one heard it coming, though it would still have been visible, as that Tuesday was an incredibly beautiful day, (forecast wise). And someone would have had to hear the whine of the engines until it reached an altitude where it's only visible.
But hey, yeah, that video is compelling evidence. "I heard someone said, and they heard someone else say, and we can't find the wreckage, etc..." Duh.

Kyre · Commodore Joined: 15 Mar 2002 Posts: 1263

What about the security camera that shows the moments before and after the impact? What about...hell all the facts. How on Earth could it have been a 747?

Forget about Bush for a moment. Don't you find it the least bit intriguing that evidence is telling us, hey, it probably wasn't a 747, but the nail-in-the-coffin video footage we want is classified.

Doesn't that invoke any type of response?

Theresa · **Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:23 am**

Go buy or rent the HBO special, "In Memoriam New York City 9-11-01"
Watch the aerial view over the Pentagon. Tell me what you see.

And as for my response? It pisses me off that anyone would trivialize what happened on 9/11 to suit their own agenda. You all here call Bush, (and no, he can't be left out of it...) such a stupid man, yet are trying to credit him with what would have to be one of the greatest cover-ups of all time.

Defiant · **Wed Sep 08, 2004 3:04 pm**

OMG! T, I cant believe you would simply discredit all the evidence. Its just not possible.

And I dont care what you try to speculate as what happened. This *beep* is so scary and all, that I dont even want to speculate about what could possibly explain this. Every time I think of it, I keep thinking maybe 9/11 was planned. Maybe the military did it to have an excuse to go after terrorists. It doesnt matter, anything I can think of just makes me sick.

Arellia · **Wed Sep 08, 2004 4:30 pm**

9/11 planned? 3,000 people, dead. Planned? That's so far out there in conspiracy thinking! Can you imagine how many people would have to be involved in making up 9/11 or something like it? How many mouthes you'd have to clamp shut? I have a REALLY hard time thinking that the government could be considered that cruel. The U.S. governement doesn't just go around blowing up buildings. And hey, if they did, wouldn't another 9/11-type attack have been convincing? Probably given us even more of a case for war? It would be a prudent move if you were a conspirator, and this obviously hasn't happened. You consider the planes that were used in Russia, too. And the attacks in Spain. That would be one HECK of a conspiracy ring to piece together.

The source is what is so impossible for me to trust. A joke site? Um...no.

Founder · **Wed Sep 08, 2004 4:47 pm**

I doubt it. C'mon Defiant. They do all that planning to go to war in Afghanistan and perfect it to go after Osama. Just to move to Iraq and go after Saddam with the "flimsy' evidence, as you Democrats say, of WMD. If they were so clever with the 9/11 why didn't they do something equally clever with Iraq. How come no one else is commenting about this other than Ebaumsworld, a known joke site! Why isn't Kerry, Bill Mahr, Moore all saying something about it? Are they in the conspiricy too even though they hate Bush? C'mon man....

Republican_Man · **Wed Sep 08, 2004 4:59 pm**

Republican_Man · **Wed Sep 08, 2004 5:13 pm**

Also:

Come on! This is the nature of the enemy!
1. Attacks on WTC & Pentagon with planes!
2. STABBING INNOCENT 18-month old babies with knives because they ran out of ammo
3. Taking innocent little girls into other rooms and raping them!
4. Massacering over 300 INNOCENT KIDS!
5. Bombing a train station
And MORE!
This is the nature of the enemy! This is them!
It's a WORLD WAR, okay?

So, then the Massacer last and this week was all a conspiracy too!
And so was the Madrid bombing, huh, Defiant?! So was the hostage situation at the 143 days of Carter's term and the 1st day of Reagan's term! Come on!

Theresa · **Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:32 pm**

Link, the Hero of Time · **Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:39 pm**

Really, untill all the tapes that were snatched and never released by the FBI are released, Speculation will continue.

Defiant · **Wed Sep 08, 2004 11:44 pm**

OMFG. You guys dont listen. NOT A SINGLE ONE OF YOU.

I said I dont want to speculate. I said I dont want to even go there with what may be a possible explanation. I only showed something that popped into my head as something absolutely horrible that could explain things. I DONT THINK THAT. GEEZ.

But you guys are all entirely dumb. Thats not meant as an insult. You all are seeing this as some attack on Bush. Thats not what it is at all. Pull your heads out of your asses, and realize. This is full of extremely good points, NO MATTER WHAT THE SOURCE. You cant simply say theyre not valid, because they are something that cant be simply pushed aside.

Link, the Hero of Time · **Thu Sep 09, 2004 10:08 am**

Defiant · **Thu Sep 09, 2004 1:05 pm**

I completely understand that man. But really, everyone is trying to just say that all of this isnt possible, but it is.

LightningBoy · **Thu Sep 09, 2004 2:50 pm**

This debate is RIDICULOUS...

First off, want to know why there's no plane visible there? Well look at this.

That's the flight 93 crash. I don't see any plane visible there. And THAT plane didn't even hit a building

Anyone who's taken high-school physics should understand the force of a plane impacting a solid building is so tremendous that finiding substantial wreckage is nearly impossible.

Then they show the camer footage, and show it next to a picture of a 747, and guess what? THEY LOOK THE SAME.

Then they say "The plane would have to have been flying 2 feet off the ground, and they give no factual substantiation to that.

Then they quote the flight instructor saying "they were unfit to pilot an aircraft". While that quote was taken out of context, it's also not hard to understand that flying a plane IS NOT difficult until you take off or land, the terrorists did neither/

Then they say "And what are these small parts from?" Obvious answer, THE PLANE!

Then they quote witnesses who say there was some sorts of discrepencies in it, but they never quote the much larger number of witnesses who told it EXACTLY HOW IT HAPPENED.

Let's also remember that the FBI collects and classifies almost all information regarding huge events they deal with. At least until they are done working with them, which can sometimes be MANY years.

And the fuel. Light a match next to fuel and see where it goes. IT BURNED AWAY.

And IF, hypothetically that plane DID'NT hit that building, then where is it? Where are the people on board?

Why'd they find the blackbox?

I can't believe ANYONE would swallow this tripe. This animation is so full of it, the untrue facts they present appeal to the gullible.

One more last question. If there is SO MUCH viable evidence that the plane never hit the Pentagon, then how come the only media which has told this is a FLASH ANIMATION!?!? For chirst sake, WHO GETS THEIR INFORMATION FROM A FLASH ANIMATION!?!? AT THAT --- One which doesn't source all of it's quotes, and made up at least half of the facts presented.

I could make a flash animation saying that James Earl Jones built Tom Daschle in a lab somewhere from some paste and Paper Mach�t, and I can make up testimonials, find or make photoshopped pictures, and make just as factuall as that animation was.

LightningBoy · **Thu Sep 09, 2004 3:07 pm**

Kyre · Commodore Joined: 15 Mar 2002 Posts: 1263

Your evidence is "They say...". Now, whatever did happen, be it a missile, a fat clown in dungarees or an actual 747 travelling at 530 mph, why dismiss people who agree with a flash animation that doesn't source all of it's quotes when, that's right you guessed it, you don't even do it yourself. Or are we all too dumb to merit any effort on your part?

I look forward to replies commenting on my own laziness. I wouldn't really disagree with them.

Republican_Man · **Thu Sep 09, 2004 4:27 pm**

LightningBoy · **Thu Sep 09, 2004 8:29 pm**

Republican_Man · **Thu Sep 09, 2004 8:46 pm**

I'm not even going to quote that, but that's thorough, great, and well, just down right THE TRUTH!

Theresa · **Thu Sep 09, 2004 10:13 pm**

RM, I got the DVD at Walmart, don't know where you could find it now.

They have these shows on the NGC, about plane crashes. One plane hit the ocean at an incredibly high rate of speed. Absolutely no wreckage was recovered, including any traces of fuel. Physics dictate this, but hey, physics contradict our little conspiracy "theory", so lets just set them aside for now...

What that link showed is not possible. Whether you want to "take your head out of your ass" and think for yourself or not. If it had all been a "master plan", then yes. But not anything that could have been implemented in that time frame. Unless we are also discarding logic for this theory?