9/11 Conspiracy Thread

#303
#303
ajvol01 said:
F=m*a
Click to expand...

In case you want to do some free fall calculations:

T = sq root(2h / a)

Where t = time, h = height, a = acceleration

And assuming an environment with no drag, a = 9.8 m/s-squared or 32.2 ft/s-squared
 
#304
#304
My response to those who mock me for believing a cover up (debate is fine) is this:

"If a plane hit the pentagon, show me the plane. Show me steele turbines, show me a report of the plane that supposedly hit it, when it left, where it came from, when it was suspected or reportedly taken over. Last but certainly not least, show me a video tape of a large aircraft smashing the side of a government building. You won't convince me the only surveillance close enough was one camera that looked ground level."

Where was the grass tore up from the plane skidding into the building? (Maybe it didn't hit the ground first)

So it flew through the upper portion and into the middle of the building? (Well no, the picture doesn't have the damage all the way through).

So, some terrorist flew this plane at an angle and enormous rate of speed into a government building that could only show one angle of surveillance, which didn't include any semblance of a massive plane, and these people manage to not hit the grass on the way in?

Right, wrong, or indifferent that's usually my beef. I don't squander too much over the NY details, because if it was anything other than a true planned terrorist attack, the truth about the Pentagon would prove or disprove it all.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#306
#306
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#307
#307
Mr_Henley said:
My response to those who mock me for believing a cover up (debate is fine) is this:

"If a plane hit the pentagon, show me the plane. Show me steele turbines, show me a report of the plane that supposedly hit it, when it left, where it came from, when it was suspected or reportedly taken over. Last but certainly not least, show me a video tape of a large aircraft smashing the side of a government building. You won't convince me the only surveillance close enough was one camera that looked ground level."

Where was the grass tore up from the plane skidding into the building? (Maybe it didn't hit the ground first)

So it flew through the upper portion and into the middle of the building? (Well no, the picture doesn't have the damage all the way through).

So, some terrorist flew this plane at an angle and enormous rate of speed into a government building that could only show one angle of surveillance, which didn't include any semblance of a massive plane, and these people manage to not hit the grass on the way in?

Right, wrong, or indifferent that's usually my beef. I don't squander too much over the NY details, because if it was anything other than a true planned terrorist attack, the truth about the Pentagon would prove or disprove it all.
Click to expand...

I posted on here earlier about an eye witness who saw the airplane hitting the Pentagon.

the plane left Dulles in the suburbs of Virginia. It's also pretty well documented that several people communicated via cell phone with their loved ones during the hijacking.
 
#308
#308
Follow the money! Look into what floors were hit and what was located there. Somebody already made mention of what was hit in the pentagon. I will try to post links in a min
 
#311
#311
Velo Vol said:
So when will the "truth" about 9/11 emerge? 15 years after the fact? 50? 100? People in the know sure are good about keeping secrets.
Click to expand...
The minute a second person knows the "secret" it is no longer a secret.

Take TWA 800 for example. It was a fuel pump that caused that. Not a missile from a submarine or cruiser. Had it been a missile it would have been all over USAToday the very next day because people cannot keep secrets. (Had a submarine sunk with loss of all hands, I would buy it, but guess what... didn't happen. But you still have theorists that call it a military friendly fire event. Pacer, you wanna weigh in on this event too?:popcorn:
 
#316
#316
Mr_Henley said:
My response to those who mock me for believing a cover up (debate is fine) is this:

"If a plane hit the pentagon, show me the plane. Show me steele turbines, show me a report of the plane that supposedly hit it, when it left, where it came from, when it was suspected or reportedly taken over. Last but certainly not least, show me a video tape of a large aircraft smashing the side of a government building. You won't convince me the only surveillance close enough was one camera that looked ground level."

Where was the grass tore up from the plane skidding into the building? (Maybe it didn't hit the ground first)

So it flew through the upper portion and into the middle of the building? (Well no, the picture doesn't have the damage all the way through).

So, some terrorist flew this plane at an angle and enormous rate of speed into a government building that could only show one angle of surveillance, which didn't include any semblance of a massive plane, and these people manage to not hit the grass on the way in?

Right, wrong, or indifferent that's usually my beef. I don't squander too much over the NY details, because if it was anything other than a true planned terrorist attack, the truth about the Pentagon would prove or disprove it all.
Click to expand...


See DC Vol's post, he is a solid poster. If he says he has a friend that watched the plane fly into the Pentagon, you can take it to the bank.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top