[Moderated]175 did NOT hit the South tower.

Status
Not open for further replies.
malcolm kirkman said:
Does that include telling us how Homer got listed as a casualty at the Pentagon ?
How could that possibly happen ?
The Department of Defence put together the list of victims at the Pentagon.
They would put together a list of those who were at the Pentagon and a list from American Airlines of the passengers on flight 77.
There would be absolutely no need to call United Airlines and ask them for a list of passengers on flight 175.
So how did a 'passenger' on flight 175 get to be named as a victim at the Pentagon ?
I keep asking these questions.
Furthermore, Homer's name appeared on the Pentagon list on Sept 14th.
Where on earth did his name come from ?
Click to expand...

Homer who? How should I know? Why should I care? Are you claiming that a possible mixup in the passenger lists (assuming that can be shown) is proof that the planes did not exist?

Hans
 
Belz... said:
Actually, lots and lots of animals have this ability. They pretty much have to.
Click to expand...

Yup. I recall the last time I was nipped by a dog I didn't pose any actual threat to him at all.

He sure seemed to think I did though.
 
how come the pentagon jet went through 12 or so such walls
Click to expand...
That one is easy and you really need to do some research.
There is no reason to blast harden any walls other than the outer most wall and indeed that was the only one that had such construction.
The plane went through ONE blast resistant wall and one other outer wall. the section of the Pentagon that it hit does not have the exterior walls of the three outer rings extending all the way down to the ground. IIRC the first three floors are common for all three rings.
 
Belz... said:
Actually, lots and lots of animals have this ability. They pretty much have to.
Click to expand...
Animals do not have the imagination to perceive a threat that is not there, for example a neighbour calling them names in the pub when our man is sat by his fireside etc. or someone at work talking about them when they are off sick.
 
Animals do not have the imagination to perceive a threat that is not there
Click to expand...

Malcolm. Animals do it ALL THE TIME. They hear a sound, can't identify the source, and run away because they think it's a predator. How do you call THAT, if not perceiving a non-existent threat ?
 
malcolm kirkman said:
My message is that 9/11 was an inside job and justice is going to be served in the matter, in spages.
Click to expand...

You see, this is where you have a problem. That might be the message you are trying to get across, but it is not the one you are actually getting across, not least because it is just plain wrong.

The message we are actually getting is that you know nothing whatsoever about 11/9, physics, maths, politics or any other subject that you have talked about, you are willing to lie and have no remorse when caught out, and that you care nothing for the feelings of other people.

See how those messages aren't quite the same? You may want to consider that before posting any further.
 
MRC_Hans said:
The link does not work. And kindly answer my question in your own words. I asked for your opinion, the internet I can peruse any time I will.

Hans
Click to expand...
Planes most certainly existed. Two unmanned bad boys from Offutt hit the twins and a plane overflew the Pentagon. On top of that, we have the cover story, which alledgedly involved four other planes.
 
Belz... said:
Malcolm. Animals do it ALL THE TIME. They hear a sound, can't identify the source, and run away because they think it's a predator. How do you call THAT, if not perceiving a non-existent threat ?
Click to expand...
Kindly read post 2547.
 
Cuddles said:
You see, this is where you have a problem. That might be the message you are trying to get across, but it is not the one you are actually getting across, not least because it is just plain wrong.

The message we are actually getting is that you know nothing whatsoever about 11/9, physics, maths, politics or any other subject that you have talked about, you are willing to lie and have no remorse when caught out, and that you care nothing for the feelings of other people.

See how those messages aren't quite the same? You may want to consider that before posting any further.
Click to expand...
You will have no difficulty in 'proving' any part of it wrong then will you ?
 
Originally Posted by malcolm kirkman
My message is that 9/11 was an inside job and justice is going to be served in the matter, in spages.
Click to expand...

"Spades"

Trouble with your message is that you simply have not shown any proof at all that it was an "inside job". Punishing people without proof of guilt is a hallmark of a dictatorial system. Determining guilt with out a trial is a hallmark of a repressive system of governance.

I shudder to think of life under any system that you might wish for.
 
malcolm kirkman said:
I'm most impressed by the maths. Can we stay with that for a moment.
How many people on the flights, were connected to Raytheon, Global hawk, Boeing and the intelligence community and if you would be so kind, the 10 to the whatever. Thanking you in advance.
Click to expand...


First, let me apologize to any math-challenged readers; looking back, I could have done a better job of explaining all the steps in the calculation. Second, I'd rather not do any more computations based on your assumptions; they're going to be long and tedious to no good purpose. So I'll merely grant for the sake of argument that, using your assumptions, the chances of this having happened at random would have been astronomical--far beyond a reasonable doubt, and smoking-gun proof of a conspiracy. However, I'll deal with your assumptions in a later post.
 
malcolm kirkman said:
You are mistaken about subjective cause.
People gets suspicions every day about all kinds of things. The human animal is unique at being able to take offence (a potential threat) where none exists, especially when he or she has had too much to drink. Suspicion therefore is no more than a part of everyday life. Next comes subjective cause, where an individual amasses enough suspicions to believe there is substance in the matter. After that comes objective cause, where he now needs to persuade someone else and so on.
Click to expand...


I'm not convinced by your suspicion-leads-to-subjective-cause-which-leads-to-objective-cause argument; however, I'll leave this issue for someone who has a deeper knowledge than I of epistemology.
 
malcolm kirkman said:
I have already responded to the maths part of this post and I would like to keep that bit separate. With regard to the rest of your post, isn't what you're really saying,
"We know you're speaking the truth Malcolm and we know you won't be dissuaded, but so what? 9/11 truth is going nowhere".
Isn't that what you are really saying ?
Click to expand...


:faint: No, Malcolm, that is not what I am saying. It's what you desperately want to believe, I know, but it's not what I'm saying. Let me re-pose my question that you've ignored about the astronomical improbability, under your assumptions, of five key Global Hawk workers' having been aboard the hijacked planes. Almost anyone with a mathematics degree could calculate this--why haven't any mathematicians around the world spoken out about this? Is it because they're all being intimidated by the Men in Black, or is it because your assumptions are hopelessly flawed, and the fact of there have been one DCMA and four Raytheon employees on the flight isn't such an improbable coincidence after all?

On a related question, when I go and ask my two physics professors whether an ordinary airliner could have penetrated the walls of the World Trade Center towers, and they say "yes," will it be because they're incompetent? Or because they've been bought off? We are a regional campus of Purdue University--maybe we're all in on the conspiracy. Or could it be because it's true, and you simply don't understand the physics that explains why it's true?

Please respond to both questions.
 
malcolm kirkman said:
Planes most certainly existed. Two unmanned bad boys from Offutt hit the twins and a plane overflew the Pentagon. On top of that, we have the cover story, which alledgedly involved four other planes.
Click to expand...

Sorry Malcolm, but you are WRONG. A plane hit the pentagon, & I have talked with a person who was there, who saw the carnage first hand & held the parts in his hands. I have heard Col. Bidlack's description of that hellish event & will stand by him 100%. Are you calling Col. Bidlack a Liar?
 
malcolm kirkman said:
A response with regard to Mr Jack is no answer to my question with regard to Mr Homer.
How could a person who was ostensibly murdered on United flight 175 in New York, be listed as a victim at the Pentagon, when the plane that alledgedly hit the Pentagon was an American Airlines flight ?
Click to expand...


As I said, the Department of Defense would have asked all of its offices to list those personnel missing after the attack, and this request would have gone through several levels of bureacracy. Have you ever played "post office," Malcolm, the game where a number of people sit in a circle and take turns whispering a message to each other around the circle? Often, the original message becomes so garbled as to be barely recognizable. Add to this the chaotic and stressful aftermath of the attacks, and such mix-ups become perfectly understandable. The DCMA had around 10,000 employees. The most likely explanation is that someone fairly high up heard that Homer was missing, and, not knowing Homer or his duties, simply assumed that he had been at the Pentagon. Therefore, when the request to list those missing came down, Homer was added to the list. How is this even remotely suspicious??
 
malcolm kirkman said:
Planes most certainly existed. Two unmanned bad boys from Offutt hit the twins and a plane overflew the Pentagon. On top of that, we have the cover story, which alledgedly involved four other planes.
Click to expand...
And your proof the such "unmanned bad boys" exist is where? Please provide the make, model, serial number, tail number, FAA docs, etc. as proof. And you have the Offutt control tower or ATC log book entries that show such aircraft took off from there?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom