Rich Man's Trick

[Childlike Empress]

Did it or did it not penetrate 3 of the 5 rings of the building?

"It" didn't. You can see the collapse of the outer facade in my playlist. If an airliner would have been able to penetrate that deeply, rocket scientists wouldn't be needed. Ask Mackey. Oops, he left like all of your "experts".

 

[The Big Dog]

"It" didn't. You can see the collapse of the outer facade in my playlist. If an airliner would have been able to penetrate that deeply, rocket scientists wouldn't be needed. Ask Mackey. Oops, he left like all of your "experts".

Wow! You actually got something correct! It did not penetrate three rings because there were not "rings" at the level that the plane struck the building!

It was all contiguous space.

Now if you could understand the concept of M * A you might catch up to what prop powered (not rocket powered) fliers in the Japanese air force knew by 1944.

 

[NoahFence]

"It" didn't. You can see the collapse of the outer facade in my playlist. If an airliner would have been able to penetrate that deeply, rocket scientists wouldn't be needed. Ask Mackey. Oops, he left like all of your "experts".

lol
"Your" playlist.

What if I looked at the playlist of the rational? What would I find then?

OOPS

I already have. It shows parts of the aircraft including human beings strewn throughout the first, second and third rings of the building. This was all entered into evidence. Recorded for posterity, history, and for any rational person wanting to look.

I can almost understand your intentional ignorance of the political aspects of 9/11. But you don't get to reject physical reality. Just because you ignore something, doesn't mean it didn't happen.

 

[beachnut]

"It" didn't. You can see the collapse of the outer facade in my playlist. If an airliner would have been able to penetrate that deeply, rocket scientists wouldn't be needed. Ask Mackey. Oops, he left like all of your "experts".

What? The plane had the energy of 1,200 pound bomb, and worse, the energy was in a shape, not some haphazard explosion, but like bullet. The energy of impact matches the damage done by a 757; it is called physics, math and engineering, and not an opinion based on BS.

You have an opinion, you are wrong. Show the math to prove your fantasy point; you will not.

The videos you posted are proof 77 hit the Pentagon. The videos you posted show thousands of Flight 77 parts. Radar shows it was 77, tracked by multiple Radars from takeoff to impact. The FDR found in the Pentagon shows it was 77 by data, and gee, by the fact it is 77's FDR. The DNA spread on the impact course in the Pentagon; guess you ignore reality to have your opinion; a lie about 911 based on ignorance of engineering, flight, DNA, Radar, FDR, math, physics, and logic. Mocking the murder of Flight 77 passengers with the a fantasy based on nothing.

Like the OP video, your claims are false.

The Pentagon lawn features thousands of Flight 77 parts due to a high speed impact. To deny is ignorance - having to deny Radar, FDR, DNA, and logic.

 

[Childlike Empress]

The Pentagon lawn features thousands of Flight 77 parts due to a high speed impact. To deny is ignorance - having to deny Radar, FDR, DNA, and logic.

"Bla bla no I only served my country". Everybody can watch the videos and see, beachnut. Your obsessing is completely irrelevant, and you know it. ktnxbye

 

[GlennB]

Get that? It's in small pieces but the pieces are still there, they're all over the ******** place. The Pentagon lawn doesn't feature remains of a large passenger jet. It just doesn't, and no spin can top videos showing the immediate aftermath with the screaming absence of evidence.

The Pentagon lawn also had metallic confetti strewn everywhere, with larger pieces outside and inside. But it was hollow, as opposed to a mountain, so there are slight differences, though not very much really.

So, what on earth are you talking about?

 

[beachnut]

"Bla bla no I only served my country". Everybody can watch the videos and see, beachnut. Your obsessing is completely irrelevant, and you know it. ktnxbye

Making fun of my military service, how cool is that. Good job presenting your evidence to support your fantasy. What does my flying for the USAF have to do with your 13 years of fantasy on Flight 77. During my service, I was board present for aircraft mishaps; we ordered Radar data for the flight; why can't you comprehend Radar data? We interviewed witnesses, but unlike CIT we understood witnesses weaknesses and problems, and were able to use witnesses to confirm things, not make up fantasy like you do.

lol, this is it, no math, just talk - Using the Fetzer method of proof - BS.

You can't figure out 911 given evidence, play the "served my country" card as some weak personal attack, and fail to make a valid point. ..., thank you, I did serve, and it was an honor I did not deserve. Reality is more important to me, you prefer fantasy to match your political biases. Ironically, you show thousands of Flight 77 aircraft parts in the videos posted.

What does this mean? Are you saying a 757 is such a good weapon it needs to be used?

able to penetrate that deeply, rocket scientists wouldn't be needed

LOL, we are suppose to use airliners as weapons....
What should we do? Math...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Direct_Attack_Munition
JDAM costs 25,000 dollars, can have the explosive energy of 500 to 2,000 pounds of TNT - flight 77 has about 1200 pounds of TNT energy, kinetic energy at impact, not to mention the jet fuel causing major damage as it burns and starts fire in seconds all over the impact area.

25,000 dollars for a JDAM - 65,000,000 dollars for a Boeing 757.

Wow, you are right, Germany should rush out and buy Billions of dollars worth of Boeing 757s to use as weapons, JDAMs are too cheap to be as effective as a KE weapon 757.

Wow, that is logic gone stupid...
What are you talking about, the damage down with 65,000,000 dollars can be done by rocket scientist with a 25,000 dollar bomb?

What was your point? It makes zero sense, and when coupled to your video list, it becomes bigger problem for your fantasy.

 

[BazBear]

"Bla bla no I only served my country". Everybody can watch the videos and see, beachnut. Your obsessing is completely irrelevant, and you know it. ktnxbye

Yes, we certainly can watch the videos. We can also look at other videos, photographs, and eyewitness testimony. The totality of the evidence proves that AA 77 was flown into the Pentagon, and it also proves that this no-planer nonsense is giant stinking pile of male bovine excrement. CTists should stick to theories that at least match the physical, ground truth, reality.

 

[Childlike Empress]

The Pentagon lawn also had metallic confetti strewn everywhere, with larger pieces outside and inside. But it was hollow, as opposed to a mountain, so there are slight differences, though not very much really.

So, what on earth are you talking about?

[qimg]http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg274/sap-guy/pentagondebris2.jpg[/qimg]

[qimg]http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg274/sap-guy/pentagondebris3.jpg[/qimg]

What you've shown there is what I referred to with something like "fitting into a container the size of the one that causes a lot of that smoke". You can see that container to the right of the frame in your second picture, if you watch the first [and/or second] video in my playlist.

 

[NoahFence]

What you've shown there is what I referred to with something like "fitting into a container the size of the one that causes a lot of that smoke". You can see that container to the right of the frame in your second picture, if you watch the first video in my playlist.

So there was a comparatively small amount of debris on the lawn. On this we'll agree.

Where we disagree is that you flat-out refuse to look INSIDE the Pentagon, you know, where the : plane crashed.

 

[beachnut]

Fantasy inspired by youtube. Ignore evidence, and make up lies based on youtube videos which show evidence of Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon.

makes sense after watching the OP video


911 truth claims, ewige unwissenheit

 

[NoahFence]

It's what the pre$$itutes want.

 

[The Big Dog]

What you've shown there is what I referred to with something like "fitting into a container the size of the one that causes a lot of that smoke". You can see that container to the right of the frame in your second picture, if you watch the first [and/or second] video in my playlist.

wait, that container is where your heroes the CIT boys claimed the frozen bodies of the deceased passengers were kept.

Oh man, the no planer crowd....

 

[JSanderO]

RMT is interesting to see how some conspiracists think. Some of their theory is based on facts... other aspects of it is pure hooey and fantasy. Yet it all seems logical and cohesive which is probably why people might accept it.

 

[Childlike Empress]

RMT is interesting to see how some conspiracists think. Some of their theory is based on facts... other aspects of it is pure hooey and fantasy. Yet it all seems logical and cohesive which is probably why people might accept it.

While your wordy nonsense in the OP won't convince anyone as it is so far detached from the actual evidence.

 

[JSanderO]

While your wordy nonsense in the OP won't convince anyone as it is so far detached from the actual evidence.

I am not on this site or forum to convince anyone of anything. I am here to learn and to share what my understanding of 9/11 was /is.

I posted the link to RMT because I thought some of the over arching ideas presented had currency yet others did not... but there was a coherence to the arguments... It amounts to a GIGO I suppose but still I like some of the themes in the presentation.

His JFK stuff seems so complex... it's sort of hard to accept. But I have no way of knowing what is fact and what is fiction. His reference to 9/11 material is all stuff from truth sites and incorrect.

 

[DGM]

What say you?

Long day. Do you have a "Readers Digest" version?

 

[beachnut]

Long day. Do you have a "Readers Digest" version?

Save your brain...

At two hours and fifty seven minutes... 2:57:38 "along came Dylan Avery, with his amazing film"

An eight word summary for this trash.

It takes seconds, but no more than 4 minutes to see and hear enough BS you can skip to 2:57:38; shoot your computer, put it out of it's suffering and pain.

 

[jaydeehess]

It hasn't been penetrated significantly and the videos you refuse to understand are witness of that fact. Given the evidence it almost behaved like a mountain - just without reflecting the mass of a large passenger plane -, contrary to the comic-like understanding of physics you are willing to believe.

Oh I believe my education in physics is quite good enough to understand that your fantasy is ,, well , fantasy.

 

[ozeco41]

One reason I stopped forcing the 9/11 issue in discussions is that understanding that the event was exploited - which many well-meaning people do these days - is almost as good as understanding that the official story is bogus. Because it was a minor crime compared to what is committed daily against the people at the receiving end of the "New American Century" politics...

My position unchanged for years. I think that there are many aspects of the socio political situation that have not been adequately addressed.

AND one big factor - possibly the biggest - is that the truth movement had been its own worst enemy.

Pursuing silly claims for CD. The AE911 strategy the most obvious and a dead set recipe for a political loss. "This looks like CD THEREFORE we demand a New Investigation". Anyone trying a political influence move would be well advised to NEVER feed the politicians with an easy way out. Especially when the issue will not be popular.

There never has been the slightest case for CD claims and most politicians being pressured for a new investigation are bound to look at the supporting argument, seek reasonable advice, identify the nonsense of CD and drop the issue.

Then you resort to false generalisations which are a common procedural fault in truther claims. You say "is almost as good as understanding that the official story is bogus." and you put that nonsense on par with "understanding that the event was exploited". Give us a break. At the least drop the false global claim to make it appear that you are partially rational "[some/many/a lot/a few] of the findings of the official story are wrong."

The instant you resort to global or exclusive claims (most/many/lots of ) intelligent readers will switch off.

And you do yourself further disservice by quoting me THEN making this false GLOBAL assertion with the inference that it includes me:

That doesn't change the fact that you "debunkers" strive on simply denying the evidence and building your believe in the "official theory" around that,....

I have not relied on official stories or official reasoning since my second week on the Internet - late Nov. 2007. Many do - I don't and it is a deliberate long term choice.

No comment needed on the remaining two issues:

....as Jay Howard just again tried to inform you of[/URL], and I still think that the absence of evidence for a large passenger plane crash at the Pentagon is among the best evidence of absence of such an event central to the "official story".