Well this plane crash/shooting down knacks the 9/11 nutters

Status
Not open for further replies.


'the juwes are not the men that will be blamed for nothing' apparently was found scrawled in the wreckage of a cockpit of one of the planes but the CIA washed it off
 
where have i said otherwise ?

Oooh so you're a different type of nutter. Now its getting interesting..... so what do you think hit it? I presume you think it was Flight 77 but it was being flown by someone other than the name terrorist?

Actually you must have changed your opinion in the last few days cos you were all over PMs mad crack about how if it was a plane it would have been picked up by the cameras.

enjoy your day

One year after the attacks, MSNBC's Ashleigh Banfield mused, "It's ironic says Pentagon Renovation Manager Lee Evey that the hijacked airliner smashed into the very area of the Pentagon that had just undergone a renovation to strengthen the building against a terrorist attack. The death toll could have been much worse. Evey said the hijacked aircraft hit a portion of the building that had been renovated and reinforced with blast resistant windows, a special reinforced steel construction, and even fire-resistant Kevlar cloth."?(September 9, 2002 Monday TRANSCRIPT: # 090901cb.467) Ms. Manfield chooses the expression 'ironic' to describe these bizarre facts. That's perhaps one word. Absurd and criminally suspicious could easily be two others.

It had to hit one of five sides, it happened to hit the side reconstructed.
 
There is nothing, I repeat nothing that suggests there is a rabbit away with the 9/11 attacks. The same with the moon landings.

Any apparent "evidence" of foul play from anyone other than the offending terrorists is easily debunked and explained using a little thing called "reason".

So, get off your computers, go outside in the fresh air and if possible find yourself a shag.
 
Oooh so you're a different type of nutter. Now its getting interesting..... so what do you think hit it? I presume you think it was Flight 77 but it was being flown by someone other than the name terrorist?

Actually you must have changed your opinion in the last few days cos you were all over PMs mad crack about how if it was a plane it would have been picked up by the cameras.



It had to hit one of five sides, it happened to hit the side reconstructed.
ok
 
So, get off your computers, go outside in the fresh air and if possible find yourself a shag.

PM would probably stop in the middle of shagging some lass up the arse to ponder if he really was doing so (the hole is too small for it to be a cock going in it).
 
then why are even discussing this ? you've nowt to add , youre just up your own arse

:lol:

You didnt even respond to my comment about how the hijacker could take on the pilot. The reasoning from the nutters is easily debunked every time, so there isnt really much to add is there?
 
the instructor of the pilot of the plane that hit the pentagon said that the pilot/ hijacker couldn't fly for toffee

It isn't true that he couldn't fly for toffee. For a start he got a private pilot's licence and then after further training the FAA issued him with a commercial pilot certificate in April 1999, when he gained a "satisfactory" rating from the examiner.

apparently if the passenger jet hit the pentagon it would have had to have pulled off a manoeuvre that ant experienced pilot would struggle with iirc

It would be like putting someone who'd only had a couple of driving lessons in a car in a car park and asking them to smash it into a lorry at the far end. Put them in a far more powerful car than they were used to and they might fishtail it about a bit, hit a kerb and almost roll it over before finally pointing it in a straight line and hitting the target. You could say that an experienced driver would struggle to pull off exactly that maneouvre. The crazy approach to the Pentagon was exactly the result of his shitty ability to fly a 757, not a demonstration of any skill.
 
It would be like putting someone who'd only had a couple of driving lessons in a car in a car park and asking them to smash it into a lorry at the far end. Put them in a far more powerful car than they were used to and they might fishtail it about a bit, hit a kerb and almost roll it over before finally pointing it in a straight line and hitting the target. You could say that an experienced driver would struggle to pull off exactly that maneouvre. The crazy approach to the Pentagon was exactly the result of his shitty ability to fly a 757, not a demonstration of any skill.

think you've just described @Dave Herbal
 
wey, your recent history is a bit jaded mind :)
Getting caught speeding once in 24 years and being hit whilst stationary? Aye canny jaded that. Remember when I challenged everyone to tell us their average number of miles between (moving ;)) accidents and there were virtually no takers, if any? I rest my case.
 
Getting caught speeding once in 24 years and being hit whilst stationary? Aye canny jaded that. Remember when I challenged everyone to tell us their average number of miles between (moving ;)) accidents and there were virtually no takers, if any? I rest my case.

I've had one since I started driving. was hit by bales of hay coming off a lorry on the a68. let's say I average 10k a year....started driving in dec 1997 so that's for the sake of argument 150,000 miles. plus I had a motorbike for 4 years.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top