Calling all Boxcutter Conspiracy Theorists

[BigAl]

Certainly do. The system was never designed to be used from high altitude from a fast moving aircraft. If you do you get cell cascading.

""never designed to" doesn't mean they don't work at all.

 

[Quad4_72]

Show me the chain of evidence for the pieces of AA77 and the body parts?

Here are the findings of the DNA evidence for the remains of the passengers:
http://www.dcmilitary.com/dcmilitary_archives/stories/112901/12279-1.shtml

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-09-11-sept11-remains_x.htm

And now my prediction is that you will proceed to ignore this evidence and claim that it was planted and faked by the government.

 

[Edx]

roscoe_the_first is the kind of truther where all evidence has to be planted, he already believes he is 100% correct therefore any evidence that comes up must be wrong or faked. It doesnt matter how implausible it all is. Its just the same as how Creationists think.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Where's the barf-o-rolleyes-emoticon when I need it?

 

[The Big Dog]

We are see Russia Today currently a free news channel on the satellite. More Russia today with former MI5 whistleblower Annie Machon. Meanwhile western media wont touch the Charlie Sheen affair even to debunk it. They've been silenced. Look up the phrase D Notice.

Two Russia Today links and a link from 2006.

Hey, Roscoe, did short knives cause the 2006 media "black out" on Charlie Sheen, and the oil spill too?

Remarkable!

 

[funk de fino]

Yes how dare they use real eyewitnesses. Yeh let's use cell phone calls from who knows where.

Sean Boger watched it hit the Pentagon and all your police officers say it did.

 

[funk de fino]

Certainly do. The system was never designed to be used from high altitude from a fast moving aircraft. If you do you get cell cascading.

Luckily for the passengers on some planes they were able to use airphones.

 

[funk de fino]

If the plane took a northern path, as the eyewitnesses all said then the lamposts were staged. Lloyd England (the taxi driver) says they led him there on camera. He didn't know he was being filmed.

Who planted the lamposts, when did they do it and how did all the aircraft parts get spread all over the area in front of the Pentagon?

 

[roscoe_the_first]

Read Firefight: Inside the Battle to Save the Pentagon on 9/11 150 interviews with participants and eye-witnesses by Patrick Creed

So this is your idea of Chain of Evidence is it? Interviews with people with Pentagon security clearance, not testifying under oath.

 

[BigAl]

So this is your idea of Chain of Evidence is it? Interviews with people with Pentagon security clearance, not testifying under oath.

You haven't read the book.

 

[roscoe_the_first]

Who planted the lamposts, when did they do it and how did all the aircraft parts get spread all over the area in front of the Pentagon?

Oh I see how this works. if I cannot say (chiefly because I was not there) who planted the poles then this, in your mind, makes the whole thing void? Is this correct?

No it works like this old chum. 13 eyewitnesses saw the plane approach over the Navy Annex to the North of the former CITCO garage. If that is correct then the plane would miss the poles that had been uprouted.

Who planted them is for an enquiry to decide, Savvy?

 

[The Big Dog]

Oh I see how this works. if I cannot say (chiefly because I was not there) who planted the poles then this, in your mind, makes the whole thing void? Is this correct?

No it works like this old chum. 13 eyewitnesses saw the plane approach over the Navy Annex to the North of the former CITCO garage. If that is correct then the plane would miss the poles that had been uprouted.

Who planted them is for an enquiry to decide, Savvy?

Well, now you know that is not true. I showed you that before you got suspended.

LaGasse said that the plane he saw hit the poles.

Have the Buffet Slayer and Shaky Craig showed you the raw video yet? You know they lied about Paik right?

 

[funk de fino]

Oh I see how this works. if I cannot say (chiefly because I was not there) who planted the poles then this, in your mind, makes the whole thing void? Is this correct?

OK then. How did they do it and when did they do it? That should be easy eh?

No it works like this old chum. 13 eyewitnesses saw the plane approach over the Navy Annex to the North of the former CITCO garage. If that is correct then the plane would miss the poles that had been uprouted.

All those witness say the plane hit the Pentagon. Many others saw it happen. Sean Boger saw it happen. The FDR data proves the south flight path.

Is Sgt Lagasse a liar?

Who planted them is for an enquiry to decide, Savvy?

See above

 

[roscoe_the_first]

You haven't read the book.

No.

But books and novels do not constitute reliable chains of evidence. Enquiries, forensic evidence presented in a court of law and subpoenaed witnessess testifying under oath do.

 

[Quad4_72]

So this is your idea of Chain of Evidence is it? Interviews with people with Pentagon security clearance, not testifying under oath.

Are you choosing to go with the ignore option for the evidence I presented you in post #182

 

[roscoe_the_first]

Well, now you know that is not true. I showed you that before you got suspended.

LaGasse said that the plane he saw hit the poles.

Have the Buffet Slayer and Shaky Craig showed you the raw video yet? You know they lied about Paik right?

Actually Lagasse is featured on the new Loosechange: An American Coup.

He is shown the light poles and says that the ones next to Lloyd England's taxi were not the ones that he referred to.

So Paik was inside the building? And your point is? Actually when you look at what Paik is saying he's merely pointing out the path the plane took which he was perfectly able to ascertain whilst he was in the building.

Sorry old chum but the count is now up to 13 eyewitnesses and counting ALL of them describe a path north of the CITCO garage.

 

[BigAl]

Oh I see how this works. if I cannot say (chiefly because I was not there) who planted the poles then this, in your mind, makes the whole thing void? Is this correct?

No it works like this old chum. 13 eyewitnesses saw the plane approach over the Navy Annex to the North of the former CITCO garage. If that is correct then the plane would miss the poles that had been uprouted.

Who planted them is for an enquiry to decide, Savvy?

And hundreds of people saw the plane aim at and hit the Pentagon.

The way we decide who to believe is to compare each statement to the physical evidence.

In this case, We have DNA for all passengers. We have 100+ tons of airplane parts and surviving luggage scraps and personal effects and jewelry and dental records.

We have black box data, cockpit speech via the flight voice recorder, Cockpit-to-ATC radio conversations, passenger Air-phone calls,
passenger cell phone calls, phone company data identifying the location where the plane was when the calls were made, radar track data that identifies the entire path the plane took, and operationsrecords at Dulles airport.

We have boarding manifests. We have credit card records and parked cars that show that the people on the manifest paid for their tickets and went to the airport, checked in and never returned.

Ans there's more.

 

[The Big Dog]

Actually Lagasse is featured on the new Loosechange: An American Coup.

He is shown the light poles and says that the ones next to Lloyd England's taxi were not the ones that he referred to.

So Paik was inside the building? And your point is?

New, I'm not sure you are using that word correctly. Loose Change, Part 7, Operation Bugaloo dropped like a stone about a year ago, and no one's mentioned it since.

My point is, the Buffet Slayer and Shaky Craig falsely edited their video to show that he was outside. So they lied, and they won't release the raw video.

(actually Paik did not say it went North, Morin did not say it went North, the ANC witnesses could not see CITGO, etc..)

 

[funk de fino]

Actually Lagasse is featured on the new Loosechange: An American Coup.

He says the plane hit the Pentagon.

He is shown the light poles and says that the ones next to Lloyd England's taxi were not the ones that he referred to.

There wase more than 1 pole damaged

So Paik was inside the building? And your point is?

The point is that he is not where Ranke led everyone to believe he was. He pointed to a south path. His flight path drawing would have been impossible for him to see.

 

[Sam.I.Am]

Google moussaoui trial transcript or moussaoui trial evidence. If there is a problem with the chain of custody it would've been brought up there by the defense (hint, it wasn't because there was no problems involving the chain of custody).