shamu said:reporters on scene said there was no evidence of plane crash
Whitewing said:Such videos are often admitted as evidence in court Shamu. And there was a photograph of the plane caught by that camera at the entrance. You know the one. You saw it. But since it doesn't fit into your pre-conceived notion of what happened that day, you ignore it.
shamu said:reporters on scene said there was no evidence of plane crash
There are all sorts of photos of people picking up plane parts, numbnut, but you ignore those too.
Yeah, there's a pattern alright.
You know, I've often wondered how a hundred people can read an article and come to a specific conclusion and then you read the same article and come to a totally different conclusion. I think I've finally figured it out.
hopalong said:Other than your MOUTH flopping where is your REAL proff that it was a missile, and i do not mean some trumped up youtube that some 12 yr old could have made. REAL proof!!n[Not some trumped up garbage your HANDLERS at space ship x3112 has given you as proof!!!!!! :wink: :wink:
shaumei said:hopalong said:Other than your MOUTH flopping where is your REAL proff that it was a missile, and i do not mean some trumped up youtube that some 12 yr old could have made. REAL proof!!n[Not some trumped up garbage your HANDLERS at space ship x3112 has given you as proof!!!!!! :wink: :wink:
it was a easy thing to figure out..
first, the commercial jet could not fly at 500 mph at 10 feet above the ground....
next, the jet could not go thru to the 3rd ring....impossible based on the materials that the plane is made from.....
where were the bags of the passengers, bodies, and video footage?
shaumei said:hopalong said:Other than your MOUTH flopping where is your REAL proff that it was a missile, and i do not mean some trumped up youtube that some 12 yr old could have made. REAL proof!!n[Not some trumped up garbage your HANDLERS at space ship x3112 has given you as proof!!!!!! :wink: :wink:
it was a easy thing to figure out..
first, the commercial jet could not fly at 500 mph at 10 feet above the ground....
next, the jet could not go thru to the 3rd ring....impossible based on the materials that the plane is made from.....
where were the bags of the passengers, bodies, and video footage?
hopalong said:shaumei said:hopalong said:Other than your MOUTH flopping where is your REAL proff that it was a missile, and i do not mean some trumped up youtube that some 12 yr old could have made. REAL proof!!n[Not some trumped up garbage your HANDLERS at space ship x3112 has given you as proof!!!!!! :wink: :wink:
it was a easy thing to figure out..
first, the commercial jet could not fly at 500 mph at 10 feet above the ground....
next, the jet could not go thru to the 3rd ring....impossible based on the materials that the plane is made from.....
where were the bags of the passengers, bodies, and video footage?
Where did the speed of 500 mph come from shamme???
Whitewing said:So let's summarize Shamu's "evidence" here.
1) No video has been released showing a plane hit the building therefore it's gotta be a missle.
2) Shamu says the commercial jet could not fly at 500 mph at 10 feet above the ground....
3) Shamu says the jet could not go thru to the 3rd ring....impossible based on the materials that the plane is made from.....
4) Shamu says the jet could not go thru to the 3rd ring....impossible based on the materials that the plane is made from.....
5) Shamu says where were the bags of the passengers, bodies, and video footage? I notice you've dropped the request for photographs of airplane parts at the Pentagon.
Here's what Whitewing posts as evidence after previously providing photographs of plane parts being handled by assorted persons at the location, after pointing out that Flight 77 and its passengers are no longer with us, after linking to eye witness testimony of those who watched the plan fly into the building, after seeing the evidence of light poles knocked down by the plane on its approach to the Pentagon.....and the list goes on and on and on.
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/index.html#debris
You're a GD loon Shamu and I often wonder how you manage to feed yourself.
shaumei said:Whitewing said:So let's summarize Shamu's "evidence" here.
1) No video has been released showing a plane hit the building therefore it's gotta be a missle.
2) Shamu says the commercial jet could not fly at 500 mph at 10 feet above the ground....
3) Shamu says the jet could not go thru to the 3rd ring....impossible based on the materials that the plane is made from.....
4) Shamu says the jet could not go thru to the 3rd ring....impossible based on the materials that the plane is made from.....
5) Shamu says where were the bags of the passengers, bodies, and video footage? I notice you've dropped the request for photographs of airplane parts at the Pentagon.
Here's what Whitewing posts as evidence after previously providing photographs of plane parts being handled by assorted persons at the location, after pointing out that Flight 77 and its passengers are no longer with us, after linking to eye witness testimony of those who watched the plan fly into the building, after seeing the evidence of light poles knocked down by the plane on its approach to the Pentagon.....and the list goes on and on and on.
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/index.html#debris
You're a GD loon Shamu and I often wonder how you manage to feed yourself.
lets take these one by one:
1) yes, it has to be a missile to do the damage that was caused to the pentagon...there was a stand down order by cheney to allow it to happen as well....norman minetta testified to this during the hearings...they deleted his testimony from the transcripts but it still got out on video...
But he testified that it was a plane! :wink: :wink: :wink:
No mention of a missile in any of his testimony :roll: :roll:
2) it cannot...it can straight down though...but that is not what happened...per the govt story..
3) you obviously do not refute it...
4) same as 3
5) the plane parts are a joke...