user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
thats not the pentagon. thats a book burning party dubya threw a few weeks ago in the rose garded of the white house. when you burn thousands of bookd you're bound to have a massive inferno. geesh people, anyone knows that.
oooo could just as well be true, Ken!
by Jyl on Sun Oct 22, 06 7:50pm
[+]
Voted : NO - A Boeing hit the Pentagon, DUH.
"Where's the Boeing???"
Smashed to bits after hitting a heavily fortified structure at high speed. There are some bits that survived the impact but you can't see them in this picture.
"JAMIE MCINTYRE: From my close-up inspection, there's no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the Pentagon."
It didn't crash near the Pentagon - it crashed right into it. Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think McIntyre is an air crash investigator...what he says or thinks is irrelevant.
"Needless to say this report has never been broadcast again"
Oh how suspicious! The news is usually FILLED with reruns of actual reports.
Once again - looking at one photo is pointless - you need to examine ALL the evidence.
Don't forget that all of the victims on flight 77 have been identified using DNA analysis from their remains in the Pentagon wreckage.
How did their charred remains get there if not in the Boeing?
Check out the first three links on my user page for some alternative sources of info.
"Check out the first three links on my user page for some alternative sources of info."
by wideheadofknowledge
- Would they be the three monkeys?
I think we've had enough of you and Nipple's hopeless user page links thanks very much! 
They just don't get it do they folks! 
Describe what proof you see in that photo Wide Head that Nipple Head uses as proof of a Boeing vaporisation -
go on ->
This should be really interesting folks 
You have the floor to yourself here Wide head of knowledge --->
"Describe what proof you see in that photo"
Unlike you I don't make grandiose claims based on one photograph.
I have looked at the evidence from many different sources and they quite clearly support the given explanation: A Boeing hit the Pentagon.
"I think we've had enough of you and Nipple's hopeless user page links thanks very much!"
I'm sure you have had enough of photographic evidence and analysis that doesn't back up your pathetic claims.
Again: If the remains of the victims aboard Flight 77 were found in the Pentagon rubble where do you propose they came from? And what do you propose happened to Flight 77 if it did not hit the Pentagon?
This picture incidently is roughly 60ft wide.
The cable spools in the foreground are actually over 6ft tall.
You can clearly see the 12ft high ground floor has gone, all the way along this picture. Column 18 to at least column 11 - roughly 60ft.
Add that to the damage in the picture in my latest ballot and you have a 100ft hole.
And you can clearly see a flaming hole in the middle stretching up to the first floor - over 20ft high - the smoke obscuring the true height.
Remember what you said Ken? The hole was 14ft wide? A little over twice the size of one of those cable spools. LOL
"The only site, is the actual side of the building that's crashed in. And as I said, the only pieces left that you can see are small enough that you pick up in your hand. There are no large tail sections, wing sections, fuselage, nothing like that anywhere around which would indicate that the entire plane crashed into the side of the Pentagon and then caused the side to collapse."
Thats because when planes explode they create little pieces.
"Now look at the support columns - notice anything strange?"
Those are first floor slabs actually.
"bent OUTWARDS from the building facade instead of inwards!"
You have 3D glasses do you? LOL
"Look at how comparatively clean the lawn is.
Anyone see any identifiable piece of debris there that would even remotely suggest a massive Boeing hit there? "
But funnily enough, when you actually research, you find other pictures showing lts of debris.
"I pointed this anomaly out to him before and thinking on his feet he declared that Oh Em -'It was the engines! They must have exploded after flying through the windows'*"
I never said that. I was using the windows as scale - as the engines were a little bit taller than each window. More nitpicking! Tells people alot Ken.
Jamie MacIntyre...
"A short -- a while ago I walked right up next to the building, firefighters were still trying to put the blaze. The fire, by the way, is still burning in some parts of the Pentagon. And I took a look at the huge gaping hole that's in the side of the Pentagon in an area of the Pentagon that has been recently renovated, part of a multibillion dollar renovation program here at the Pentagon. I could see parts of the airplane that crashed into the building, very small pieces of the plane on the heliport outside the building. The biggest piece I saw was about three feet long, it was silver and had been painted green and red, but I could not see any identifying markings on the plane. I also saw a large piece of shattered glass. It appeared to be a cockpit windshield or other window from the plane."
transcripts . cnn . com / TRANSCRIPTS / 0109 / 11 / bn . 35 . html
Jamie MacIntyre...
"...had a camera with me. I took pictures of some of the wreckage, some of the parts of the fuselage, a part of the cockpit, until they told us we had to move back away from the scene.
I saw thousands of shards of metal, of pieces of the plane all over the driveway. I didn't pick up any of them or touch any of them, but I saw them everywhere. And again, took some pictures of them."
transcripts . cnn . com / TRANSCRIPTS / 0605 / 16 / lol . 04 . html
Jamie MacIntyre...
Referring to the idea that something other than a 757 hit the Pentagon, McIntyre stated,
"Having been there on September 11th, having seen the plane wreckage and photographed it myself personally, I can tell you that’s nonsense"
thepowerhour . com / press_release / press16 . htm
"Nipple Head uses as proof of a Boeing vaporisation"
I never claimed that Ken. Why would I show pictures of debris if I thought it vaporised?
What do you think happens to planes when they hit a reinforced concrete building and explode?
Come on Ken. I tell you what, look at the Jamie MacIntyre quotes I just provided, seeing as though you see him as a very reliable source on this issue lets see what he has to say...
"I saw thousands of shards of metal, of pieces of the plane all over the driveway. I didn't pick up any of them or touch any of them, but I saw them everywhere. And again, took some pictures of them."
"I could see parts of the airplane that crashed into the building, very small pieces of the plane on the heliport outside the building."
See, even a reporter realises what happens to plane when they explode.
Why did I know this was a Ken ballot? 
Whether you agree with his premise or not, Ken keeps things lively around here. That's great, IMO. Yay, Ken!
by mojo on Mon Oct 23, 06 9:07am
[+]
    
Remember Ken, If your going to use a reporter as a source, make sure he doesn't contradict you.
"I saw thousands of shards of metal, of pieces of the plane all over the driveway. I didn't pick up any of them or touch any of them, but I saw them everywhere. And again, took some pictures of them."
"I could see parts of the airplane that crashed into the building, very small pieces of the plane on the heliport outside the building."
See, even a reporter realises what happens to plane when they explode.
Yeah, exactly, here's another reminder of what the esteemed journalist broadcast to the nation after arriving at the scene on the morning of 9/11 folks;
JAMIE MCINTYRE: From my close-up inspection, there's no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the Pentagon.
The only site, is the actual side of the building that's crashed in. And as I said, the only pieces left that you can see are small enough that you pick up in your hand. There are no large tail sections, wing sections, fuselage, nothing like that anywhere around which would indicate that the entire plane crashed into the side of the Pentagon and then caused the side to collapse.
Even though if you look at the pictures of the Pentagon you see that the floors have all collapsed, that didn't happen immediately. It wasn't until almost about 45 minutes later that the structure was weakened enough that all of the floors collapsed.
- Needless to say this report has never been broadcast again, but thanks to the net you can view it here;
thewebfairy. com/911/ pentagon/
Gilah Goldsmith, personnel attorney at the Pentagon -
"I knew it was a crash site before we got there, and I didn’t know what it was going to look like. I couldn’t imagine because the building is like rock solid. I expected to see the airplane, so I guess my initial impression was, “Where’s the plane? How come there’s not a plane?” I would have thought the building would have stopped it and somehow we would have seen something like part of, or half of the plane, or the lower part, or the back of the plane. So it was just a real surprise that the plane wasn’t there."
"We saw a huge black cloud of smoke," she said, saying it smelled like cordite, or gun smoke
(cordite - A smokeless explosive powder consisting of nitrocellulose, nitroglycerin, and petrolatum that has been dissolved in acetone, dried, and extruded in cords.)
~Gilah Goldsmith, personnel attorney at the Pentagon -
(mis-appropriated the quote above this one - it was actually -Eileen Murphy, Head Nurse of the Minor Surgery Clinic at the DiLorenzo TRICARE Health Clinic.
** karma **
Voted : NO - A Boeing hit the Pentagon, DUH.
Ken, when are you going to realise that personal incredulity is not evidence?
The fact that someone expected to see large parts of a plane doesn't mean that the lack of large parts clearly visible on the lawn indicates that a plane did not really crash there!
Show us the evidence and give us your viable alternative theory - until then your claims are nothing but fatuous, hollow nonsense based on nothing substantial whatsoever.
Referring to the idea that something other than a 757 hit the Pentagon, McIntyre stated,
"Having been there on September 11th, having seen the plane wreckage and photographed it myself personally, I can tell you that’s nonsense"
thepowerhour . com / press_release / press16 . htm
Ken, you seem to be having trouble understanding what your journalist is saying.
"there's no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere NEAR the Pentagon"
Translates as: there is no evidence the plane crashed first, in the surrounding area, outside of the pentagon. It didn't crash into the lawn, or road, or anything else first. There is no evidence of it sliding, or rolling along the ground first.
"The only site, is the actual side of the building that's crashed in"
Translates as: The plane crashed directly into the building.
So, to summarise: The plane didn't crash NEAR the Pentagon, it crash IN the Pentagon.
But anyway, you still don't have any solid evidence, do you?
Ken said..."We saw a huge black cloud of smoke," she said, saying it smelled like cordite, or gun smoke"
Cordite is smokeless, although classed as explosive it is only used as propellant for guns and rockets - launching them, not powering them, and certainly not as part of a bomb.
Secondly, these people weren't even military personnel.
Showing you lack of proper research again Ken.
Just out of interest thin skinned metal that covers the airframe etc has survived and the engines...massive structures and a large part in steel and alloy havent???? im just interested. I believe it isnt a cover up but..im just interested. Its just a lad i know has 45 years in the field of wreckage examination and recovery and he was shocked that all that LIGHT FRAME wrackage as they call it is there but no sign of any engines or anything substantial. I'd like to know others opinions.
|
|
