An email from a Conspiracy theorist, and I have no idea how

[Panoply_Prefect]

Based on observations of damages and lack of jet fuel I would suggest the explosive charges were pre-planted on the outside of the E wall directed inwards. But there could have been more charges, e.g. at the C wall. A missile is too complicated (how/where from to launch it?). Keep it simple.

Then why did you use a person that claimed a missile hit the Pentagon as evidence of pre-planded explosives (my bolding in all quotes):

Experts suggest what we saw at pentagon was a detonation caused by explosives and not a fire ball of jetfuel. http://www.voltairenet.org/article13...#article139203 .

Note the difference with WTC - no detonation when the plane impacts - just a fire ball. Real detonations are heard when the towers fall - a clear sign of controlled demolition.

Many persons in pentagon assume it was a detonation inside pentagon. The shock/heat wave proceeded through the corridors far away from the impact point. It would not have happened with a plane crashing into the ground floor releasing jet fuel.

From your source:

The examination of this photo alone already suggests a singleengine flying vehicle much smaller in size than an airliner.
(...)

The flying device that struck the Department of Defense has, at first sight, nothing to do with the airliner of the official version.
(...)

So the vehicle that carried the charge that weakened the pillars struck lower than an enormous airliner would have done. And r refer you back to the first photographs studied on which we could see the trail of smoke from a propulsion unit very close to the ground.

This photo, and the effects described in the official version, lead me therefore to think that the detonation that struck the building was that of a high-powered hollow charge used to destroy hardened buildings and carried by an aerial vehicle, a missile.

This looks a bit, to me, like the time you were asked to provide links to "CD Experts that agree that WTC were brought down by CD", whereupon you produced the video with Danny Jowenko, where he very clearly stated the exact opposite.

 

[Belz...]

Based on observations of damages and lack of jet fuel I would suggest the explosive charges were pre-planted on the outside of the E wall directed inwards. But there could have been more charges, e.g. at the C wall. A missile is too complicated (how/where from to launch it?). Keep it simple.

Keep it simple ?

You're saying that people, for some reason, planted an explosive device in the Pentagon, that nobody noticed this, that there is no physical evidence of explosives or detonators, that nobody has spilled the beans, that no expert claims this, and that the plane didn't hit the building but somehow vanished into this air over Washington, D.C....

And then you're asking us to keep it simple ?

 

[Heiwa]

Keep it simple ?

You're saying that people, for some reason, planted an explosive device in the Pentagon, that nobody noticed this, that there is no physical evidence of explosives or detonators, that nobody has spilled the beans, that no expert claims this, and that the plane didn't hit the building but somehow vanished into this air over Washington, D.C....

And then you're asking us to keep it simple ?

Gangsters, we are talking about gangsters, albeit quite clever - not normal people. And this is a friendly discussion forum about scepticism. Either you believe official policy or not. No reason to get upset and obnoxious about that for certain participants. I am not nasty, just curious. And peaceful. So if it were not OBL with planes, how could some other gangsters do it and blame it on OBL? I propose alternative ideas and support others with similar objectives to encourage friendly discussion.

What's really wrong with one or more explosive devices in the outside wall of pentagon to cause the damages observed? The gangsters had already blown up WTC and everybody was confused. What was going on? Aha, another (?) plane had crashed in pentagon. Easy to swallow. And not too difficult to arrange. And lots of people will believe the BS and participate to prove it.

But where is the evidence? Come on! Give me some identified air plane parts! Show me the unfortunate passengers strapped in their seats! Don't give me BS. Keep it simple! Give me some real evidence that AA77 crashed in pentagon. Then I will stop thinking about how it could have been/was done by other gangsters.

So how was it done? The wall had been recently upgraded/reinforced for reasons I cannot fathom. Why reinforce an office building outside wall as a bunker??? Against an attack? In the middle of DC? It is obtuse. I assume the explosive devices were fitted in the pentagon wall at the time of the upgrading! I assume security was slack then. Nobody expected the gangsters to prepare the wall then. The whole 9/11 was very well prepared, pre-planned and executed. And a assume by gangsters. Not OBL in a cave somewhere. The WTCs were similarly prepared.

You do not have to be Einstein to imagine how it was done. Just use your imagination and participate in friendly discussions. Be sceptical.

But I agree! The gangsters are still around and do not like sceptical people like me. They think they can scare me and all others. They apparently scared many to adhere to policy and produce 'evidence' supporting them. But not me.

 

[Panoply_Prefect]

Give me some real evidence that AA77 crashed in pentagon.

Give me some real evidence it was actually the Pentagon that was attacked, and not some photoshopped model. Fake! It was obviously a hoax perpertrated by the american government to get the world's attention. Sheeple! I've seen pictures of the Pentagon and its obviously unharmed. No evidence!

 

[funk de fino]

Hiewa - Respond to post #620

You propose alternative ideas with no evidence and ignore questions as well as ignore facts and you are not being friendly you are being very nasty and ignorant

What would you take as evidence that a part at the Pentagon was from a 757?

 

[Zorglub]

What's really wrong with one or more explosive devices in the outside wall of pentagon to cause the damages observed? The gangsters had already blown up WTC and everybody was confused. What was going on? Aha, another (?) plane had crashed in pentagon. Easy to swallow. And not too difficult to arrange. And lots of people will believe the BS and participate to prove it.

Instead of crashing another plane it´s way easier to plant unprovable explosives inside the walls? Oh wait. I forgot. There were no planes in WTC either.

But where is the evidence? Come on! Give me some identified air plane parts! Show me the unfortunate passengers strapped in their seats! Don't give me BS. Keep it simple! Give me some real evidence that AA77 crashed in pentagon. Then I will stop thinking about how it could have been/was done by other gangsters.

And if there were official evidence that linked every single piece of debris to AA77 you would believe this? You would accept the evidence and lay down your arms (a bb-gun). You would NOT say that the evidence cleary is faked by the man?
My conviction is that there is no evidence you would belive in. Why you even try to withhold a facade of yourself as the truth seeking world-citizen, just asking questions, is beyond my understanding.

So how was it done? The wall had been recently upgraded/reinforced for reasons I cannot fathom. Why reinforce an office building outside wall as a bunker??? Against an attack? In the middle of DC? It is obtuse. I assume the explosive devices were fitted in the pentagon wall at the time of the upgrading! I assume security was slack then. Nobody expected the gangsters to prepare the wall then. The whole 9/11 was very well prepared, pre-planned and executed. And a assume by gangsters. Not OBL in a cave somewhere. The WTCs were similarly prepared.

No there is a lot you cannot fathom, agreed.
So instead of "assuming". Can you for once bring up som evidence. Bring us one single expert that provides us with a schematics of how the bombs were rigged. There must be one (1) demolition expert that will support this theory, right?

You do not have to be Einstein to imagine how it was done.

No, all youneed is a lack of logic and understanding.

Just use your imagination and participate in friendly discussions. Be sceptical.

See, that is your problem. Your imagination has won over your grip of the real world. I say STOP using your imagination. It´s bad for your brains.

But I agree! The gangsters are still around and do not like sceptical people like me. They think they can scare me and all others.

Now see what your imagination just did to you. Relax, they do not want to scare you. They are not afraid of you. If "they" even have noticed you they´re quite happy that you bring ridicule to the truthers movement. This is not imagination. It´s paranoia.

They apparently scared many to adhere to policy and produce 'evidence' supporting them. But not me.

Now, just because you cannot find support from the expertise doesn´t mean that they have met "the man". Actually, chances are that they simply do not agree with your theories.

 

[Heiwa]

Gents,

we are friendly discussing alternatives how 9/11 was carried out. Don't ask me for evidence of the pentagon wall. This is FBI's jobb. Did they ever look for any evidence that explosives were not put in the wall? They seem scared. They just produce BS evidence for the official policy scenario. But ... and it is clear ... they cannot produce one piece of AA77 at pentagon. Or seats with passengers. It is much easier to plant the latter lie in the media and then pass it on as truth. But only fools believe that. And no autopsies. Sorry gents, my opinion is that you are deceived. A contributing factor is scare. But that is OT. Please - provide some real evidence that AA77 crashed in pentagon. No more eye witnesses, no more newspaper clippings - produce hard facts.

 

[Belz...]

Gangsters, we are talking about gangsters, albeit quite clever - not normal people.

Gangsters still have human failings, Heiwa. Please answer my question, now.

Either you believe official policy or not.

"With me or against me" mentality.

No reason to get upset and obnoxious about that for certain participants. I am not nasty, just curious. And peaceful.

Good, then you'll have no problem answering my question.

So if it were not OBL with planes, how could some other gangsters do it and blame it on OBL?

Begging the question.

What's really wrong with one or more explosive devices in the outside wall of pentagon to cause the damages observed?

It's an unnecessary entity that's not supported by evidence. That's what's wrong with it.

The gangsters had already blown up WTC and everybody was confused.

Begging the question.

What was going on? Aha, another (?) plane had crashed in pentagon. Easy to swallow. And not too difficult to arrange.

Indeed, just crash a REAL plane into it.

But where is the evidence? Come on! Give me some identified air plane parts!

Your incredulity does not negate the documented evidence, Heiwa.

The wall had been recently upgraded/reinforced for reasons I cannot fathom.

Why can't you fathom them ?

I assume the explosive devices were fitted in the pentagon wall at the time of the upgrading!

Yes, indeed. That's the right word: assume.

And a assume by gangsters. Not OBL in a cave somewhere. The WTCs were similarly prepared.

That's all fine until you ask for evidence.

You do not have to be Einstein to imagine how it was done.

Of course. Einstein wouldn't believe that crap.

Just use your imagination and participate in friendly discussions. Be sceptical.

Skepticism and denial are two different things.

They think they can scare me and all others. They apparently scared many to adhere to policy and produce 'evidence' supporting them. But not me.

Behind your anonymity, that's easy to say, especially since those gangsters don't exist. That's mighty big of you.

 

[funk de fino]

Gents,

we are friendly discussing alternatives how 9/11 was carried out. Don't ask me for evidence of the pentagon wall. This is FBI's jobb. Did they ever look for any evidence that explosives were not put in the wall? They seem scared. They just produce BS evidence for the official policy scenario. But ... and it is clear ... they cannot produce one piece of AA77 at pentagon. Or seats with passengers. It is much easier to plant the latter lie in the media and then pass it on as truth. But only fools believe that. And no autopsies. Sorry gents, my opinion is that you are deceived. A contributing factor is scare. But that is OT. Please - provide some real evidence that AA77 crashed in pentagon. No more eye witnesses, no more newspaper clippings - produce hard facts.

dont run away and ignore questions from people?

answer previous posts

then tell me what damaged the lamposts at the pentagon?

and how the explosives mounted on the outside of the wall could blast into the pentagon and not away?

if you ignore these questions and my previous ones you are a coward and i will waste no further time on you

 

[Zorglub]

Gents,

we are friendly discussing alternatives how 9/11 was carried out. Don't ask me for evidence of the pentagon wall.

I "assume" this means you have come to terms with the real world and will no longer prevail in your attempts to prove AA77 never hit the Pentagon? If you continue to support the NPL-theory I will continue to ask for evidence supporting your claims.

This is FBI's jobb.

No. They are perfectly fine with the evidence supporting AA77 actually hit the Pentagon. No need to bring forth evidence for every weird idea man can possible think of. As has been claimed before they also haven´t proved that the pentagon WAS hit.

T Did they ever look for any evidence that explosives were not put in the wall?

No. They didn´t look for Jimmy Hoffa or a soujuz capsule either. Your point is?

They seem scared.

No. They ignore you and your companions. Big difference.

They just produce BS evidence for the official policy scenario.

No. They provide evidencew. You do not.

But ... and it is clear ... they cannot produce one piece of AA77 at pentagon. Or seats with passengers.

Neither have they provided any evidence that proves that the pentagon actually was hit.

It is much easier to plant the latter lie in the media and then pass it on as truth. But only fools believe that.

I´ll say you have the situation in the wrong order.

And no autopsies. Sorry gents, my opinion is that you are deceived.

My opinion is forbidden to express in this forum.

A contributing factor is scare.

Learn to see the difference between paranoia and scare.

But that is OT.

No. That is the core point in your attempts to keep a bursting bubble of lies from not bursting.

. No more eye witnesses, no more newspaper clippings - produce hard facts.

Why don´t you start?

 

[Alt+F4]

Gangsters, we are talking about gangsters, albeit quite clever - not normal people.

Mafia gangsters or gangsta rappers?

 

[Alt+F4]

And no autopsies.

Do you ever get tired of being wrong? All but one of the victims at the Pentagon was positively identified.

 

[Panoply_Prefect]

Gents,

we are friendly discussing alternatives how 9/11 was carried out. Don't ask me for evidence of the pentagon wall.

Yeah, god forbid you'd have to support anything you pull out of your truther-hat...

Did they ever look for any evidence that explosives were not put in the wall?

Did they ever look for evidence that liquid cheese wasn't the force that made those walls explode? And again, did they ever take any documented samples from the building itself?

They seem scared.

How do you recon? Because they don't invite every internet-googler out there to participate in their investigations?

You do realise that you are just jumping from ice floe to ice floe to avoid drowning?

 

[Heiwa]

Gents,

the good news are that the air line and ar plane building companies are now suing FBI in order to find out what really happened 9/11.
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/08072007fbi.pdf

Hopefully FBI will now produce a verified piece of AA77 found at pentagon, etc. that convinces the air line company and the plane builder. Until then we do not know if AA77 actually crashed into pentagon.

 

[Panoply_Prefect]

Gents,

the good news are that the air line and ar plane building companies are now suing FBI in order to find out what really happened 9/11.
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/08072007fbi.pdf

Hopefully FBI will now produce a verified piece of AA77 found at pentagon, etc. that convinces the air line company and the plane builder. Until then we do not know if AA77 actually crashed into pentagon.

Of course they won't. The lawsuit has nothing to do about whether a plane hit the Pentagon or not, it has to do with how it was allowed to do so. The reason is that individuals are suing, among others, the aviation companies:

The claimants seek to impose billion of dollars in liability against the Aviation Parties for their alleged failure to detect and halt the terrorists who attacked the United States on September 11.

As shown before, you still don't actually read the links you post. You are just in such a hurry to move on to the next ice floe.

 

[beachnut]

Gents,

the good news are that the air line and ar plane building companies are now suing FBI in order to find out what really happened 9/11.
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/08072007fbi.pdf

Hopefully FBI will now produce a verified piece of AA77 found at pentagon, etc. that convinces the air line company and the plane builder. Until then we do not know if AA77 actually crashed into pentagon.

People are suing the airlines, the airlines want to blame the FBI. So?

Flight 77 did hit the Pentagon. By posting this you have proved all planes on 9/11 were hijacked as we all know. You just debunked yourself. You need to take this post back, unless you want to verify by this very post that flight 77 hit the Pentagon, flight 11 and 175 into the towers, and flight 93 into PA.

Funny, how you just made all your junk void.

 

[Zorglub]

Of course they won't. The lawsuit has nothing to do about whether a plane hit the Pentagon or not, it has to do with how it was allowed to do so. The reason is that individuals are suing, among others, the aviation companies:
You are just moving on to the next ice floe.

Heiwas hope is of course that this lawsuit will prove his NPL-theory. To see this happen one of the participants must raise the question wether AA7 really hit the Pentagon or not.
That this question isn´t mentioned in the lawsuit is, for Heiwa at least, not important. The whole lawsuit, as stated by previous posts, is based on the official version with AQ as the organisation behind 9/11.
I "assume" that the words "lawsuit, "9/11" and "FBI "set off the alarm.

 

[Heiwa]

Flight 77 did hit the Pentagon.

This is your opinion (A) and also US policy. My opinion (B) is that the damages were caused by explosive device(s) in the pentagon E-wall.

It is a pity FBI didn't investigate (B). Shouldn't have been too difficult.

 

[Belz...]

Gents,

the good news are that the air line and ar plane building companies are now suing FBI in order to find out what really happened 9/11.
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/08072007fbi.pdf

Hopefully FBI will now produce a verified piece of AA77 found at pentagon, etc. that convinces the air line company and the plane builder. Until then we do not know if AA77 actually crashed into pentagon.

Do you admit to being wrong about the autopsies ?

 

[Zorglub]

This is your opinion (A) and also US policy. My opinion (B) is that the damages were caused by explosive device(s) in the pentagon E-wall.

And also the opinion of the lawsuit you are so excited about. So if by chance this lawsuit proves that AA77 hit the Pentagon. You will do what?

It is a pity FBI didn't investigate (B). Shouldn't have been too difficult.

No especially since there are real doubts that Pentagon actually was damaged at all.