• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Ed Pentagon - TruthMakesPeace

cicorp said:
PilotsFor911Truth.org points out that the FDR was always in the hands of a potential suspect of the crime, and appears to have been manipulated.
Click to expand...

Having been building these for the last 20 years, I can't really let this one go by. It is not possible to manipulate the FDR in flight. That kind of defeats the purpose.
 
cicorp said:
Not my claim, USA Today. OK. I'll be happy to look at the factual evidence. Please send the URL. It should be used for a New Investigation or 9/11.
Click to expand...

There's not going to be a new investigation. Your disrespectful little hobby is not going to lead anywhere. You and your kind simply aren't good enough to have the impact you're looking for. No one who could help you would risk the embarrassment of being associated with you. The reason for this isn't a conspiracy, it's because you're wrong.

Here's a hint, the thousands of people who investigated 9/11 did not do so in their parent's basement surfing the internet.
 
Craig4 said:
There's not going to be a new investigation. Your disrespectful little hobby is not going to lead anywhere. You and your kind simply aren't good enough to have the impact you're looking for. No one who could help you would risk the embarrassment of being associated with you. The reason for this isn't a conspiracy, it's because you're wrong.

Here's a hint, the thousands of people who investigated 9/11 did not do so in their parent's basement surfing the internet.
Click to expand...

This is a very good point. I don't doubt that many of the Hollywood personalities who spoke about 9/11 during the Obama years still think Bush did something bad. But there's no way that James Brolin, Michale Moore or David Lynch are going to stand next that to that right-wing rabble that makes up the so-called Truth Movement.

This is something that Truthers should seriously ask themselves about. Do you really think Dick Gage or Luke Rudkowski can make you look respectable enough for this? There are significant Truthers who are Holocaust Deniers, no-planers, live in their parent's basement. the Truth Movement today looks more like a circus freak show than a political protest.
 
Last edited:
cicorp said:
How about photos from these cameras? Even some cameras were removed. Suspicious.
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/lofiversion/index.php?t14873.html
Click to expand...

Well, we know that that dork SPreston can't count. He makes some comment about seven vieo cameras on the roof when it is clear to most people with an IQ of 50 or more that there were only three, and all of them aimed at sally points. What is suspicious to a moron like that is not at all suspicious to a thinking person.

You pick some real dimbulbs as sources for your claptrap.
 
leftysergeant said:
Well, we know that that dork SPreston can't count. He makes some comment about seven video cameras on the roof when it is clear to most people with an IQ of 50 or more that there were only three, and all of them aimed at sally points. What is suspicious to a moron like that is not at all suspicious to a thinking person.

You pick some real dimbulbs as sources for your claptrap.
Click to expand...

I'm starting to feel sorry for Truthers and their related conspiracy friends. Once you have yourself labeled like this, it's really hard to recover. Someone like Luke Rudkowski is never going to be able to get a proper job. It may OK for for clerks at the 7-11 to talk about this with their colleagues, but probably not much more than that. It's just sad. We had a Truther try and disrupt another forum that I sometimes view. After leaving about 500 911 Truth posts, others stopped taking him seriously even when he switched topics to something that everyone should have agreed with. But by then, he was such an embarrassment, no one wanted to be caught on his side. When he asked why this for an answer,

I was trying to be polite, actually, by informing you why you're an object of ridicule and disdain. You seem to have an inflated sense of self-importance, i.e., you believe you're shaking things up and challenging people's beliefs, when you're really just playing the fool.
Click to expand...
 
Unified Pentagon Explosion Theory

Dave Rogers said:
You choose to find the part of the testimony relating to the NOC flight path to be credible, but not the part of the testimony where they describe the plane hitting the Pentagon.
Click to expand...

Over the weekend, I have listened again to PumpItOut/Shure's phone interviews with Pentagon witnesses. Pentagon Fire Department worker Allen Wallace sounds quite credible in his account of almost being hit by plane parts. Plus other interviews supporting a plane hitting the Pentagon.

I am re-evaluating witness statements in light of a new Unified Pentagon Explosion Theory (UPET). It is an eclectic theory, integrating the best of several others, which postulates PPE-NOC-SLP-PIP:

PPE - Pre Planted Explosives - putting bombs in key areas of the Pentagon, ready to explode upon command, done during the renovation.

NOC - North of Citgo - the plane passed over the Navy Annex then headed to the Pentagon, as the Pentagon Police Officers and others stated.

SLP - Staged Light Poles - popping them out of the ground via remote explosives, staging Lloyd England's taxi window crash. CIT proposes this.

PIP - Plane Impacted Pentagon at about a 90 degree angle, and penetrated just the E Ring. Pentagon Fireman Allen Wallace and other credible witnesses saw the plane hit.

The rest of the damage at the Official 45 degree angle (approximately) to the C Ring was caused by PPEs, supporting April Gallop's story.

So far, this theory accounts for many more witness statements than other theories. It rules out a Fly Over, however. There is no reason that NOC requires a FOP (Fly Over Pentagon).

A plane could go NOC, then slam right in to the Pentagon at a 90 degree angle, through the E Ring causing about 1/3 of the damage. Then the explosives took care of the diagonal damage through to the C Ring, the other 2/3 damage, making it look like all the damage was done at a 45 degree angle.

The PPEs made sure the accounting data was destroyed and provided a margin for error, in case the Plane did not hit the planned spot.

It is consistent with the pattern of the WTCs in NYC:
1. Plane hits building
2. Delay to allow evacuation
3. Pre Planted Explosives complete the collapse
4. Spin the Press so the Plane gets 100% of the blame.
 
Last edited:
<facepalm>

when do you intend to do the due diligence for your slanders of the SEC, FBI and others? When will you figure out the Put orders, the missing 2.3 trillion or any of your other half dozen blatant slanderous claims?

Try to figure those out first, then come up with more crapola.
 
You missed the pre-programmed anti-aircraft missile battery rising up from under the Pentagon lawn to blow the tail off the airliner just as it hit the building, in order that the impact damage wouldn't show anything to indicate that the tail of the airliner had hit it. The purpose of this was as a pre-prepared Gotcha! whereby conspiracy theorists would notice the absence of a tail impact, claim that the object that struck the Pentagon wasn't an airliner, and could subsequently be discredited when overwhelmingly convincing evidence was found that it really was an airliner.

Now, the quiz question for the assembled masses: did I just make up that piece of paranoid delusional nonsense, or was it in fact proposed by a leading figure in the truth movement as a serious account of an aspect of the Pentagon impact?

Dave
 
oh... and you forgot the preplanned explosives which were used to shoot aircraft debris out on the lawn of the pentagon....
 
cicorp said:
I am re-evaluating witness statements in light of a new Unified Pentagon Explosion Theory (UPET).
Click to expand...

You're using the word "theory" incorrectly here. A theory provides a framework to explain facts. As you lack facts there is no framework to build to explain them.
 
cicorp said:
Over the weekend, I have listened again to PumpItOut/Shure's phone interviews with Pentagon witnesses. Pentagon Fire Department worker Allen Wallace sounds quite credible in his account of almost being hit by plane parts. Plus other interviews supporting a plane hitting the Pentagon.
Click to expand...

You mean people who were right.

I am re-evaluating witness statements in light of a new Unified Pentagon Explosion Theory (UPET). It is an eclectic theory, integrating the best of several others, which postulates PPE-NOC-SLP-PIP:
Click to expand...

lol
PPE - Pre Planted Explosives - putting bombs in key areas of the Pentagon, ready to explode upon command, done during the renovation.
Click to expand...

So the people tasked with fixing that area of the Pentagon saw to it that it was destroyed? Must be paid by the hour I guess.

NOC - North of Citgo - the plane passed over the Navy Annex then headed to the Pentagon, as the Pentagon Police Officers and others stated.
Click to expand...

so?

SLP - Staged Light Poles - popping them out of the ground via remote explosives, staging Lloyd England's taxi window crash. CIT proposes this.
Click to expand...

In full view of a bunch of commuters who decided it would be best to keep mum....
PIP - Plane Impacted Pentagon at about a 90 degree angle, and penetrated just the E Ring. Pentagon Fireman Allen Wallace and other credible witnesses saw the plane hit.
Click to expand...

Exactly right, except for the fact that it's wrong.
The rest of the damage at the Official 45 degree angle (approximately) to the C Ring was caused by PPEs, supporting April Gallop's story.
Click to expand...
See above.
So far, this theory accounts for many more witness statements than other theories. It rules out a Fly Over, however. There is no reason that NOC requires a FOP (Fly Over Pentagon).
Click to expand...

Just because you use acronyms, doesn't make you right.
A plane could go NOC, then slam right in to the Pentagon at a 90 degree angle, through the E Ring causing about 1/3 of the damage. Then the explosives took care of the diagonal damage through to the C Ring, the other 2/3 damage, making it look like all the damage was done at a 45 degree angle.
Click to expand...

OR...

A plane traveling at about 500mph slammed into the side of the Pentagon, as seen by hundreds of witnesses, including the pilot of a C130 who described to Air Traffic Control what he was seeing because he was specifically asked to follow the aircraft in question. That's my theory.
The PPEs made sure the accounting data was destroyed and provided a margin for error, in case the Plane did not hit the planned spot.
Click to expand...

So they used this massively elaborate and murderous plot to do whatever it seems you think theyTM wanted to do, but were afraid their pilots couldn't carry out the easiest of all the needed tasks?

It is consistent with the pattern of the WTCs in NYC:
1. Plane hits building
2. Delay to allow evacuation
3. Pre Planted Explosives complete the collapse
4. Spin the Press so the Plane gets 100% of the blame.
Click to expand...

Pre-Planted explosives capable of surviving the impact of a 767 full of fuel causing at least the biggest fireball I've ever seen....

Uh..no.
 
TruthersLie said:
oh... and you forgot the preplanned explosives which were used to shoot aircraft debris out on the lawn of the pentagon....
Click to expand...

scattergun_2000.jpg
 
SLP - Staged Light Poles - popping them out of the ground via remote explosives, staging Lloyd England's taxi window crash. CIT proposes this.

Nice, but this grand unified theory misses the big story.

SA - Staged Airliner - popping a duplicate 757 out of the ground via remote explosives planted by the paving contractors, staging the impact, as the real airliner did a 12-G pull up and flew over the Pentagon.
 
NoahFence said:
OR...

A plane traveling at about 500mph slammed into the side of the Pentagon, as seen by hundreds of witnesses, including the pilot of a C130 who described to Air Traffic Control what he was seeing because he was specifically asked to follow the aircraft in question. That's my theory.
Click to expand...

Not to mention that Morin says that the plane DID NOT pass over the annex at any point that would make it possible for the a/c to then pass to the north of the Citgo which kinda negates the NOC. Morin actually saw the a/c for a lot longer time than either Brooks or Lagasse and who says he watched this aircraft go below his line of sight past some trees that are SOC. Any SOC negates a 90 degree hit.

Then there is the fact that a 90 degree impact would travel farther through the structure than a 45 degree hit yet cicorp seem sto believe that this resulted in only 1/3 of the damage. Other university level investigations beg to differ.


So they used this massively elaborate and murderous plot to do whatever it seems you think theyTM wanted to do, but were afraid their pilots couldn't carry out the easiest of all the needed tasks?
.
Click to expand...

Yes, of course a massively elaborate and completely unneccessary Rube-Goldber-like plot is always preferable to a simpler yet equally effective(politically) one.

:rolleyes:

Wonder if cicorp will get around to finding a reputable source for the 85 video claim?
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Wouldn't it have been easier to buy a shredder?
Click to expand...

A shredder!!!??? Do you know the paperwork required to obtain a chit for a shedder from "Staples"?

OTOH when one wants to have contractors plant explosives in military installations all one need do is obtain a C-143B form and where it says "Pizza oven" stroke through and write in "pre-planted explosives".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom