|
exclusive58
illegal alien

Registered: 04/16/04
Posts: 2,146
Last seen: 5 years, 10 months
|
Re: 9/11 Skeptics Beware: the Pentagon Boobytrap [Re: Viveka]
#5689735 - 05/30/06 05:24 AM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Viveka said: They would have had to assume that you would simply ignore all of the overwhelming physical and eyewitness evidence that verifies it was AA flight 77, in favor of one lousy series of frames
The no-757 theory wasn't simply based on the frames, there were also lots of points based on physical evidence that made a case against a plane having crashed there. Please consider all the facts before judging. There's indeed enough contradictions in the official story to make anyone dizzy, that is, if one is even willing to investigate for oneself.
Quote:
And what's with calling the pentagon conspiracy theory a "booby trap" for conspiracy theorists? If a hunter accidentally steps in a bear trap he set, would you call that a booby trap?
Read the first post, the difference is that the hunter didn't set the trap himself.
--------------------
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero


Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 2 months, 20 days
|
Re: 9/11 Skeptics Beware: the Pentagon Boobytrap [Re: exclusive58]
#5689827 - 05/30/06 06:55 AM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
> There's indeed enough contradictions in the official story to make anyone dizzy,
And yet there are people that actually saw a plane fly into the building. The brother of my best friend was in one of the rooms that got hit. He lived, but other people in his office did not. He said it was a plane that he saw, not a missile.
-------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
|
exclusive58
illegal alien

Registered: 04/16/04
Posts: 2,146
Last seen: 5 years, 10 months
|
Re: 9/11 Skeptics Beware: the Pentagon Boobytrap [Re: Seuss]
#5689845 - 05/30/06 07:16 AM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I'm not disagreeing with you. I suggest you read the first post...
|
Viveka
refutation bias


Registered: 10/21/02
Posts: 4,061
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
|
Re: 9/11 Skeptics Beware: the Pentagon Boobytrap [Re: exclusive58]
#5690754 - 05/30/06 01:36 PM (17 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
The no-757 theory wasn't simply based on the frames, there were also lots of points based on physical evidence that made a case against a plane having crashed there.
No, there were lots of points based on the incorrect interpretation of the physical evidence, or the complete lack of even attemping to correctly interpret it at all.
Quote:
Please consider all the facts before judging.
Oh, believe me, I did. I even thought that the pentagon official story was probably a lie at some point. I watched all the videos, looked at all the analysis from both sides, then came to an almost certain conclusion (since no one can say for sure, right) that if the U.S. government perpetrated any villainy in 9/11, it was not in the carryinh out of the attacks, it was in helping to create the conditions that lead to them. The government didn't shoot a missile at the Pentagon, AA flight 77 was flown into it, but that doesn't mean the government is innocent. No one is innocent.
My most recent 9/11 research effort consisted of reading through 60+ transcriptions of interviews with firefighters and chiefs who were at the WTC site. I've compiled a list of eyewitness 'evidence', anchored in quotes, categorized as positive or negative in support of conspiracy theory. The ratio of pos to neg is about 1/50. Keep in mind this is eyewitness accounts, one of the least reliable forms of evidence. I compiled these quotes without attachment to one conclusion or the other, grounded in the realization that there's no way I can know for sure right now. I'm waiting for the appropriate occasion to bust em out. I certainly won't feel compelled to counter weak speculation or regurtitation from 911truth.org with serious hours of unbiased research I have put in. I challenge any conspiracy theorist to read through at least 12 hours worth of firefighter testimony (not even 1/2 of the time I put in) before they post anything else on the Shroomery about the subject.
Quote:
Read the first post, the difference is that the hunter didn't set the trap himself.
Yes he did. The Pentagon releasing a poor quality video does not equate to the Pentagon setting an elaborate trap for anybody. That trap is only set in the mind of the person who doesn't think critically about every piece of information avaliable.
|
Aldous
enthusiast


Registered: 10/19/99
Posts: 977
Loc: inside my skull
Last seen: 2 months, 1 day
|
Re: 9/11 Skeptics Beware: the Pentagon Boobytrap [Re: exclusive58]
#5690912 - 05/30/06 02:20 PM (17 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Hey exclusive58, I've been thinking along the same lines. The logical conclusion as to the next step, which you didn't include in this thread (or else I read over it), would be that the Pentagon waits for a while and then publishes crystal-clear footage of the plane entering the building. Let's just wait and see then...
|
Viveka
refutation bias


Registered: 10/21/02
Posts: 4,061
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
|
Re: 9/11 Skeptics Beware: the Pentagon Boobytrap [Re: Aldous]
#5691184 - 05/30/06 04:02 PM (17 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
|
exclusive58
illegal alien

Registered: 04/16/04
Posts: 2,146
Last seen: 5 years, 10 months
|
Re: 9/11 Skeptics Beware: the Pentagon Boobytrap [Re: Viveka]
#5693827 - 05/31/06 04:44 AM (17 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Viveka said: I challenge any conspiracy theorist to read through at least 12 hours worth of firefighter testimony (not even 1/2 of the time I put in) before they post anything else on the Shroomery about the subject.
links?
Quote:
The Pentagon releasing a poor quality video does not equate to the Pentagon setting an elaborate trap for anybody.
Unless you accept the possibility that the videos were maybe forged into making it seem that the aircraft was more a jet than it was a boeing. Did you check the links I gave concerning this video editing? I'm careful to always keep an unbiased approach as well, and I'm in no position to say that the videos were forged, but still, check it out.
for your unbiased investigative work. And I think you're right that no one will ever be able to say for sure what really happened. But if something did happen, I think its important that the info gets out.
--------------------
|
exclusive58
illegal alien

Registered: 04/16/04
Posts: 2,146
Last seen: 5 years, 10 months
|
Re: 9/11 Skeptics Beware: the Pentagon Boobytrap [Re: Aldous]
#5693833 - 05/31/06 04:52 AM (17 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Aldous said: Hey exclusive58, I've been thinking along the same lines. The logical conclusion as to the next step, which you didn't include in this thread (or else I read over it), would be that the Pentagon waits for a while and then publishes crystal-clear footage of the plane entering the building. Let's just wait and see then...
Ya, that's what I thought as well. If the truth movement keeps getting bigger, its important that the "no-757 theory" doesn't grow along with it, because in that case the Pentagon will release the other videos and will be able to finish off the movement by discrediting it, and making the skeptics look like lunatics. That, in a few words, is what the booby trap is.
|
Phred
Fred's son


Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 18 days
|
Re: 9/11 Skeptics Beware: the Pentagon Boobytrap [Re: exclusive58]
#5694474 - 05/31/06 11:05 AM (17 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Unless I'm misunderstanding the thrust of your argument here, you are now saying that it WAS Flight 77 which hit the Pentagon?
Phred
--------------------
|
Viveka
refutation bias


Registered: 10/21/02
Posts: 4,061
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
|
Re: 9/11 Skeptics Beware: the Pentagon Boobytrap [Re: exclusive58]
#5694996 - 05/31/06 01:47 PM (17 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
links?
You can start here: http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/met_WTC_histories_01.html
Quote:
Unless you accept the possibility that the videos were maybe forged into making it seem that the aircraft was more a jet than it was a boeing.
If the vides were going to be forged according to your theory, don't you think they would have been forged to actually be deceiving? The simple fact is that they are virtually uninterpretable, although they can be shown to possibly have consistency with the form of a 757, as you see there in the gif.
|
|