Register :: Log in :: Profile :: Mail   


pentagon NOT hit by plane
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    LVC Home // Conspiracies and Theories
Author Message
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 2825

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 2:46 am    Post subject: Re: pentagon NOT hit by plane. Reply with quote
SteelCityConservative wrote:

OK, but, I am going to keep using the word because I think most people understand the point I am making with it


You intend to intentionally use an inaccurate and emotionally charged word to get your point across?
Back to top
Xerxes
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 15 Mar 2007
Posts: 1534
Location: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 4:18 am    Post subject: Re: pentagon NOT hit by plane. Reply with quote
Quote:
And why does there have to be a conspiracy behind the 9/11 Attacks? Because Bush won the election and you need some way to feel better that your side lost?

There is NO actual evidence that 9/11 didn't happen the way that everyone saw it, friends of mine in New Jersey and New York watched those towers fall after being hit with PLANES. My Mother was in DC on 9/11 and watched the PLANE fly into the Pentagon.

Get over the whole conspiracy thing, and find something more constructive to focus your ire on.


Nice try....not buyin it. Commercial aircraft do not have military transponders. It would have been blown out of the sky by any number of SAM batteries that ring the Pentagon. You anti-conspiracy debunk thingy doesn't hold water. This transcends politics.
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 2825

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 4:29 am    Post subject: Re: pentagon NOT hit by plane. Reply with quote
Xerxes wrote:
Nice try....not buyin it. Commercial aircraft do not have military transponders.


What's this talk of military transponders?

Quote:

It would have been blown out of the sky by any number of SAM batteries that ring the Pentagon.


When in doubt, the default decision is to NOT shoot down commercial aircraft.

They don't have those things on automatic; they don't just blow anything out of the sky. Accidental flight into restricted airspace happens too often for that.
Back to top
rynln53
Newbie


Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 43

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 4:46 am    Post subject: islamofacist Reply with quote
the whole goal of radical islam is to establish a world wide caliphate. this is concurrent with the definition of facist, the definition says that facism is often marked by nationalism, but it does not say that facism has to be nationalist in origin.
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 2825

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 4:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Fascism does, in fact, have to be nationalistic in origin. That's what separates it from other sorts of fanaticism.
Back to top
Xerxes
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 15 Mar 2007
Posts: 1534
Location: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 6:23 am    Post subject: Re: pentagon NOT hit by plane. Reply with quote
[quote="exton"]
Xerxes wrote:
Nice try....not buyin it. Commercial aircraft do not have military transponders.


Quote:
What's this talk of military transponders?


Transponder: A beacon that signifies it as being commercial or military. Anything other than military is to be treated as a hostile. I don't see there being a whole lot of accidental flights over the Pentagon. Why would they have missile batteries, anyway, and not use them. Isn't it the first directive of the federal gov't to protect and defend the borders of the US?

Ask yourself this: If you were pres. on 9/11 and you knew for certain that we were attacked by a foreign source, what would be the first thing that you would do? I personally would seal the borders up tighter than a frogs ass. There was no border beefing-up because there was no external threat. And I don't think that I would let the whole Bin Laden family just fly out of the country unimpeded, without answering a few questions.

That is not just some conspiracy theory crap. That is a matter of public record in regard to the Bin Ladens' exodus from the country. One of those things the Warren Commi, I mean the 9/11 Commission failed to address.
Back to top
Lester
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 3813

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 7:22 am    Post subject: Re: islamofacist Reply with quote
rynln53 wrote:
the whole goal of radical islam is to establish a world wide caliphate. this is concurrent with the definition of facist, the definition says that facism is often marked by nationalism, but it does not say that facism has to be nationalist in origin.


Welcome.
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 2825

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 3:25 pm    Post subject: Re: pentagon NOT hit by plane. Reply with quote
Xerxes wrote:
A beacon that signifies it as being commercial or military. Anything other than military is to be treated as a hostile. I don't see there being a whole lot of accidental flights over the Pentagon.


You'd be surprised how often some idiot flies into restricted airspace by accident.

They don't automatically shoot things that are not american military.

Quote:

Why would they have missile batteries, anyway, and not use them.


...against civilian aircraft? For the obvious reason: you don't want to shoot down something that you aren't certain is a threat.

Those aren't there for shooting down 747's or whatever. They're there for shooting down enemy aircraft of the real kind. Combat aircraft. You know, like, in the event of a real war.

Quote:

Ask yourself this: If you were pres. on 9/11 and you knew for certain that we were attacked by a foreign source, what would be the first thing that you would do?


Uhm, no one knew what the source of the attack was. All everyone knew was that planes flew into buildings. Terrorism was the obvious suspect, but other than that, the reasons weren't immediately clear.

Moreover, this wasn't a "foreign" source of attack. All of the flights originated from within the united states. There weren't armies crossing the border.

Quote:

I personally would seal the borders up tighter than a frogs ass. There was no border beefing-up because there was no external threat.


...there's a huge difference between a terrorist threat and a military threat.

Quote:

And I don't think that I would let the whole Bin Laden family just fly out of the country unimpeded, without answering a few questions.


That shows corruption on the part of the bush family, not conspiracy.

Most of the bin laden family does not, in fact, consist of terrorists. They are, however, involved in saudi buisness interests, in which george bush senior is also involved.
Back to top
Xerxes
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 15 Mar 2007
Posts: 1534
Location: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 1:23 am    Post subject: Re: pentagon NOT hit by plane. Reply with quote
Quote:
Those aren't there for shooting down 747's or whatever. They're there for shooting down enemy aircraft of the real kind. Combat aircraft. You know, like, in the event of a real war.

[quote]

Actually, there were such provisions to shoot down ANY aircraft over it, even drills of just such an attack had been simulated and prepared for as far back as the Carter administration

Quote:
Uhm, no one knew what the source of the attack was. All everyone knew was that planes flew into buildings. Terrorism was the obvious suspect, but other than that, the reasons weren't immediately clear.


We knew within at least a week, and that is a moot point because if your country is attacked, then you take the necessary measures to secure your borders.
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 2825

PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 1:45 am    Post subject: Re: pentagon NOT hit by plane. Reply with quote
Xerxes wrote:

Actually, there were such provisions to shoot down ANY aircraft over it, even drills of just such an attack had been simulated and prepared for as far back as the Carter administration


I have no doubt that there are written provisions for it.

In actual practice, things don't work that way. They really don't shoot down everything that flies into that airspace. In fact, i can't remember them ever shooting anytihng that flew into that airspace.

Quote:
We knew within at least a week, and that is a moot point because if your country is attacked, then you take the necessary measures to secure your borders.


There is a difference between a military attack and a terrorist attack.

When islamic terrorists fly aircraft into a building, you don't start looking for armies trying to cross your borders. That's not sensible.

Moreover, all flights were, in fact, grounded, and united states airspace was vigorously patrolled after the attacks.

You have to give an appropriate response to an attack; you don't just go swinging wildly.
Back to top
topdog414
Newbie


Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 48

PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 3:56 am    Post subject: Re: pentagon NOT hit by plane. Reply with quote
exton wrote:

There is a difference between a military attack and a terrorist attack.

When islamic terrorists fly aircraft into a building, you don't start looking for armies trying to cross your borders. That's not sensible.

Moreover, all flights were, in fact, grounded, and united states airspace was vigorously patrolled after the attacks.

You have to give an appropriate response to an attack; you don't just go swinging wildly.


your exactly right we shouldn't/didn't look for enemy armies crossing the border, but we should/did/do look for terrorist crossing the border with bombs and weapons. This has happened several times in washington (the capturing of car loads of bombs with terrorist drives bound for seattle.
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 2825

PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 4:14 am    Post subject: Re: pentagon NOT hit by plane. Reply with quote
topdog414 wrote:

your exactly right we shouldn't/didn't look for enemy armies crossing the border, but we should/did/do look for terrorist crossing the border with bombs and weapons.


I don't disagree, but it's also worth noting that, if a terrorist really wants to cross the canadian border with a bomb, there's nothing we can do to stop them.

Quote:

This has happened several times in washington (the capturing of car loads of bombs with terrorist drives bound for seattle.


I've not heard of this. Do you have news articles about it?
Back to top
topdog414
Newbie


Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 48

PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 4:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
sorry
this was pre 9/11 so I'll look for the article but the two biggest ones were in 1999, and one actually supposedly involved and airplane. (I am still in search of the article)
Back to top
topdog414
Newbie


Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 48

PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 4:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
and i made a mistake it was car load not loads (one car)
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 2825

PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 4:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
topdog414 wrote:
sorry
this was pre 9/11 so I'll look for the article but the two biggest ones were in 1999, and one actually supposedly involved and airplane. (I am still in search of the article)


Oh okay, no, that makes sense. I probably wouldn't remember anything that happened in 1999. I didn't read the news much back then.
Back to top
Post new topic   Reply to topic    LVC Home // Conspiracies and Theories All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Page 2 of 8

 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Add to My Yahoo!

Politics Blogs - Blog Top Sites