9/11 Pentagon Attack Question

27,196 Views | 623 Replies | Last: 1 yr ago by PA24
43rd Street Posse
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:38a, 12/19/22
Random, but I stumbled across one of those 9/11 "truther" threads on Instagram last night talking about how there was no evidence of a plane crashing into the pentagon...no wreckage that you would typically expect to see...engines, chunks of fuselage, smoldering wreckage etc. I am no physicist...is it possible for gigantic planes and everything on board to instantly vaporize upon high speed impact?

And then there is the issue of basically ZERO images or footage of an airplane crash/strike...at one of the most secured and protected buildings in the world. This is the part that gets me...and what fuels so much of the conspiracy stuff imo. You would think that there would be cameras and surveillance out the wazzoo on and surrounding the pentagon...providing open/shut PROOF of plane attack. If you think about it, the death toll was relatively low, compared to the evil Tuskegee experiments, and other past atrocities committed by our depraved government.

My question for those who would be much more in the know than me...Why was the Pentagon basically armed with just a single gas station camera at the parking lot entrance and not high tech cameras and other surveillance tools EVERYWHERE?

I was trying to debate against conspiracy loons online and just didn't feel like I had a lot of ammo, compared to these dudes who have been obsessing over this stuff for over 20 years lol. I can honestly kind of see why certain people will always think it could have been a cruise missile or something to that effect...given how little footage there is and the lack of wreckage you would expect to see. Obviously, something really warped would have had to be done with the plane and all of the people on board, which was my main argument against the theory...but why would this be any different or worse than downright evil/deadly stuff our government has engaged in in the past?
Reply Quote
3
2 edits
Sarge 91
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:40a, 12/19/22
AG
There is video of a plane hitting the building. And there are photos of airplane debris at the crash site.
Reply Quote
81
Jason C.
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:42a, 12/19/22
AG
There is this video

Reply Quote
7
RWWilson
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:42a, 12/19/22
If you engage with 911 Truthers your IQ will immediately begin to drop. They are extremely ignorant by and large.

Half of the population is below average intelligence yet 100% of the Truther population fits that description.
Reply Quote
97
1 edit
FCBlitz
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:45a, 12/19/22
Really…..no plane? Do you realize how busy and crowded the Pentagon is? I can't tell you why they haven't released any footage….but there are so many cameras in the building/hallways/outside/other bldgs exteriors that there are video footages……my guess is you would strategically not want any photo or video shown that a foreign analyst might exploit.


…I would spend zero energy on this topic.
Reply Quote
14
43rd Street Posse
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Jason C. • 11:48a, 12/19/22
Jason C. said:
There is this video

That's a 757? Probably the best flying ever. You know how difficult that would be? Allah was amazing that day.

I wish there was better footage out there. After thinking about how our government agencies have been caught red handed colluding with certain tech companies to rig/influence an election, as well as other more barbaric atrocities, I just don't know what to believe anymore.

I think I'm like 90% certain it was a huge 757 and there must be some reason beyond my understanding that it looks like a tiny missile.
Reply Quote
23
LMCane
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:49a, 12/19/22
so this is just a fake picture of course

I was working at the Commerce Department on 11 September 2001 across the Potomac from the Pentagon and watched it burn.

4 years later I was stationed in the E Ring not too far from the impact zone. went on a date with a very attractive woman whose fiance was killed during the attack. (hence why I had no shot with her)

it was not a hoax.

Reply Quote
35
Duckhook
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:50a, 12/19/22
AG


Here's some light reading for you for the rest of the day.

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3321185#discussion
Reply Quote
8
1 edit
GAC06
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:50a, 12/19/22
AG
Best part: in this giant supposed conspiracy where three actual airliners were downed, why would the perpetrators fake a plane at the pentagon?
Reply Quote
42
AGHouston11
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:51a, 12/19/22
AG
Well that's some clear military grade footage there. Clears it all up without a doubt…….. obvious sarcasm
Reply Quote
8
43rd Street Posse
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to FCBlitz • 11:52a, 12/19/22
FCBlitz said:
Really…..no plane? Do you realize how busy and crowded the Pentagon is? I can't tell you why they haven't released any footage….but there are so many cameras in the building/hallways/outside/other bldgs exteriors that there are video footages……my guess is you would strategically not want any photo or video shown that a foreign analyst might exploit.


…I would spend zero energy on this topic.
Maybe I have seen too many movies, that crash is NOTHING like how I would imagine a plane crashing into a building would be. When planes crash do they always completely incinerate and leave no wreckage behind?
Reply Quote
2
titan
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 43rd Street Posse • 11:53a, 12/19/22
S


Quote:
My question for those who would be much more in the know than me...Why was the Pentagon basically armed with just a single gas station camera at the parking lot entrance and not high tech cameras and other surveillance tools EVERYWHERE?
Before you stray down that rabbit hole, understand that there are many questions it is correct to ask. But the "lack of coverage" is one of the red-herrings, because it is one of those things that imposes assumptions retroactively on conditions in 2001.

First--the nature of the cams had most of them pointing at entrances--where a break-in would happen, or the grounds. Not a broadside view of the portion where the plane hit.

Second, some of them were apparently offline because of the documented construction underway in the reinforcement of the area at the time. The entire Pentagon exterior was being reinforced in stages, advancing around each corner at a time. That was the side that was just finishing a reinforcement. You can see all the temporary construction vehicles and generator truck parked outside at the time. Also various spools.

Cellphone cams of civilians were barely in existence then, not all that common. So you don't have alot of "incidental" footage from drivers on the hwy.

Short to the point--- the lack of imagery is not what -- if anything - that may be question mark -- its what happened to what little there was from some cameras, and also the where, when the plane struck and the particular offices and staff destroyed. The questions should go that way, rather than the lack of footage.

There are physical indications of the plane strike, including clipping a generator truck inbound and chopping off a large tree directly in the path. Again, focus on other questions other than the lack of footage. That even the Pentagon analysis team didn't get full access till after much had been cleaned up, destroyed evidence. If there is anything "there" it would be more those kind of things, not the lack of catching that impact on film.

Two cents.
Reply Quote
20
agracer
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Duckhook • 11:56a, 12/19/22
AG
Duckhook said:


Here's some light reading for you for the rest of the day.

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3321185#discussion
Has AggiEE turned in his degree yet?
Reply Quote
2
BigRobSA
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:00p, 12/19/22
Had a friend that was late to a meeting at the Pentagon. He was stuck on traffic when the plane flew overhead. There are pictures of debris and other videos and eyewitness accounts. Anyone questioning the facts is an abject moron.
Reply Quote
62
Rapier108
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to RWWilson • 12:01p, 12/19/22
RWWilson said:
If you engage with 911 Truthers your IQ will immediately begin to drop. They are extremely ignorant by and large.

Half of the population is below average intelligence yet 100% of the Truther population fits that description.
They're just as bad as the people who still believe in the Russian Collusion Delusion, or that the 2020 and 2022 elections were completely open and aboveboard.
Reply Quote
41
titan
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:05p, 12/19/22
S

Just to explain something found when drawn into that long thread several, several weeks ago.

Some of the debate is not whether a plane hit the Pentagon, but what type and whether a professional pilot was flying it and whether it was aimed to hit where it did. Who knows -- that sounds improbable in the extreme, but it is apparently driven by some of the forensics of the site and how any access, even by those with plenty of clearance of the architectural and damage assessment, didn't get to investigate the site till the end of the month. That necessarily generated questions since in forensic terms it was a `heavily altered and too cleaned up' site by then. Think of it the way a detective does access to a scene.

Reply Quote
1
91AggieLawyer
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 43rd Street Posse • 12:05p, 12/19/22
AG
43rd Street Posse said:
FCBlitz said:
Really…..no plane? Do you realize how busy and crowded the Pentagon is? I can't tell you why they haven't released any footage….but there are so many cameras in the building/hallways/outside/other bldgs exteriors that there are video footages……my guess is you would strategically not want any photo or video shown that a foreign analyst might exploit.


…I would spend zero energy on this topic.
Maybe I have seen too many movies, that crash is NOTHING like how I would imagine a plane crashing into a building would be. When planes crash do they always completely incinerate and leave no wreckage behind?

First of all, other than the WTC crashes, how many planes have you seen crash into buildings? My guess is zero, especially at ground level so your imagination about a plane crashing into a building means nothing. That's not a dig on you -- my imagination (or everyone else's on here) means the same thing. If you don't know what one actually looks like, especially at the x number of frames per second camera rate we're given (whatever it was), how would you know what the Pentagon crash was to look like?

Second, the plane was going at roughly its top speed. The person at the controls pushed it to its max. Even if you've seen other crashes on landing or ones where planes came down, it is doubtful that they were in any way like this one. Most, no make that virtually all, other crashes involve pilots trying to KEEP their planes from crashing.

Finally, as shown, there was a great deal of wreckage.







Reply Quote
20
Duckhook
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to agracer • 12:08p, 12/19/22
AG
agracer said:
Duckhook said:


Here's some light reading for you for the rest of the day.

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3321185#discussion
Has AggiEE turned in his degree yet?

I don't know, but I'll bet his Bat-signal has activated!
Reply Quote
3
titan
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BigRobSA • 12:08p, 12/19/22
S
BigRobSA said:
Had a friend that was late to a meeting at the Pentagon. He was stuck on traffic when the plane flew overhead. There are pictures of debris and other videos and eyewitness accounts. Anyone questioning the facts is an abject moron.
What should also be added is that while you inevitably have some suggest some of that debris was "planted", to the keen eye, the bits are visible in-situ in the real-time footage when it is 9/11 still on some of the more distant TV footage that just captured on VHS. So its there from the start.

Did your friend happen to mention anything unusual about the plane, whether one engine was trailing smoke/streamer?
Reply Quote
43rd Street Posse
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 91AggieLawyer • 12:11p, 12/19/22
VegasAg86
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:15p, 12/19/22
AG
What did they do with the people on the plane?

Should I tell my aunt (former, she divorced my dad's brother when I was 10 or so) that her cousin Barbara Olson didn't really die in the crash? Did they "disappear" or execute the wife of the Solicitor General? Did they not really identify and bury her remains?



Reply Quote
26
Noblemen06
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to titan • 12:17p, 12/19/22
AG
titan said:


Quote:
My question for those who would be much more in the know than me...Why was the Pentagon basically armed with just a single gas station camera at the parking lot entrance and not high tech cameras and other surveillance tools EVERYWHERE?
Before you stray down that rabbit hole, understand that there are many questions it is correct to ask. But the "lack of coverage" is one of the red-herrings, because it is one of those things that imposes assumptions retroactively on conditions in 2001.

First--the nature of the cams had most of them pointing at entrances--where a break-in would happen, or the grounds. Not a broadside view of the portion where the plane hit.

Second, some of them were apparently offline because of the documented construction underway in the reinforcement of the area at the time. The entire Pentagon exterior was being reinforced in stages, advancing around each corner at a time. That was the side that was just finishing a reinforcement. You can see all the temporary construction vehicles and generator truck parked outside at the time. Also various spools.

Cellphone cams of civilians were barely in existence then, not all that common. So you don't have alot of "incidental" footage from drivers on the hwy.

Short to the point--- the lack of imagery is not what -- if anything - that may be question mark -- its what happened to what little there was from some cameras, and also the where, when the plane struck and the particular offices and staff destroyed. The questions should go that way, rather than the lack of footage.

There are physical indications of the plane strike, including clipping a generator truck inbound and chopping off a large tree directly in the path. Again, focus on other questions other than the lack of footage. That even the Pentagon analysis team didn't get full access till after much had been cleaned up, destroyed evidence. If there is anything "there" it would be more those kind of things, not the lack of catching that impact on film.

Two cents.
Second blue star for this - how soon we forget what life was like in 2001 vs today.

I work in the Pentagon now...can't walk 10 feet without spotting a camera today. Talking to the old timers in the office who were here back then, it is clear the Pentagon was a completely different place before the 9/11 attacks. Anyone off the street could come up from the Metro to get a donut and coffee on their way into the city before then! The ongoing remodeling of the Pentagon when the attack happened was part of why it was cleaned up and repaired so quickly. Crews worked 24/7 with a passion to show American resolve in the wake of the attack. Probably the most recent "finest hour" we've had as a country.
Reply Quote
16
1 edit
Charles Hickson Knows
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to RWWilson • 12:19p, 12/19/22
RWWilson said:
If you engage with 911 Truthers your IQ will immediately begin to drop. They are extremely ignorant by and large.

Half of the population is below average intelligence yet 100% of the Truther population fits that description.
On The Psychology Of The Conspiracy Denier OffGuardian (off-guardian.org)
Reply Quote
B-1 83
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:21p, 12/19/22
AG
This thread sends up the "Nut Signal" faster than a drag queen story hour story brings out the alphabet people…..
Reply Quote
6
Jeeper79
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:26p, 12/19/22
AG
OP sounds like a backdoor conspiracy theorist trying to bring people over by posing "questions" and guiding them come to their own conclusions while probing for soft spots in others' beliefs. All the while dropping what doesn't work and picking up another angle.
Reply Quote
25
titan
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to VegasAg86 • 12:27p, 12/19/22
S
VegasAg86 said:
What did they do with the people on the plane?

Should I tell my aunt (former, she divorced my dad's brother when I was 10 or so) that her cousin Barbara Olson didn't really die in the crash? Did they "disappear" or execute the wife of the Solicitor General? Did they not really identify and bury her remains?
Caveat: Some of the theories are challenging who the pilot is, not that the plane hit. Others are even wanting to say it was another aircraft remotely flown.

Obviously if there was such a plot they wouldn't think twice about eliminating the people of the diverted plane.

But this is just to explain the reasoning.
Reply Quote
VegasAg86
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to titan • 12:34p, 12/19/22
AG
titan said:
VegasAg86 said:
What did they do with the people on the plane?

Should I tell my aunt (former, she divorced my dad's brother when I was 10 or so) that her cousin Barbara Olson didn't really die in the crash? Did they "disappear" or execute the wife of the Solicitor General? Did they not really identify and bury her remains?
Caveat: Some of the theories are challenging who the pilot is, not that the plane hit. Others are even wanting to say it was another aircraft remotely flown.

Obviously if there was such a plot they wouldn't think twice about eliminating the people of the diverted plane.

But this is just to explain the reasoning.
No doubt, but the OP here is there was no plane.
Reply Quote
2
Kenneth_2003
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:34p, 12/19/22
AG
One thing that people REALLY forget as time goes on.

in 2001...
A lot of these truthers are (among other things) lost in recency bias.

Cell phones... State of the art was still a Nokia 5110 or there abouts, and they did NOT have a camera
Data Storage... 3.5 inch diskettes were the norm, with a storage capacity of 1.44MB USB drives, if on the market were high end with maybe 1GB of storage. Most data was still transferred by diskette or burned CD (not DVD). Computers were even still using mice and keyboards with PS2 connectors (the old Purple and Green ones)
Televisions... 720p? Maybe 1080 was out? Screens were still predominantly CRT.

My high end computer (just under 2 years old) was a Pentium 3, and the 300GB hard drive was still considered to be massive by the day.

So jsut the first question, the parking lot camera that captured the plane... Sorta...
It was a remote camera (internet was still 100% WIRED) designed to record license plates at a gate. It's frame rate, and ultimately the data/video it generated, was set to record slow moving even static license plates. It was not spec'd to capture a plane approaching the speed of sound.
Reply Quote
13
LMCane
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:36p, 12/19/22
so the Attorney General WHOSE WIFE IS DEAD is just making all this up?

and WHY exactly?

Remembering 9/11: Barbara Olson fought for life until her final minutes, now Ted Olson does too
Published September 11, 2021
September 11
FOX News



Barbara Olson, wife of former U.S. Solicitor General Theodore Olson, was one of the 64 people who died in the crash of American Airlines Flight 77 into the Pentagon. Olson made two calls to inform her husband that the airplane, flying from Washington

Barbara Olson, a conservative commentator and lawyer, wasn't panicked when hijackers took over her flight on Sept. 11, 2001, from Washington Dulles airport to Los Angeles, where she was heading for an appearance on Bill Maher's TV show.

She managed to call her solicitor general husband, Ted Olson, twice from the back of the plane where the terrorists, armed with knives and box cutters, herded the passengers. She reported the hijacking aboard American Airlines Flight 77 and asked what she could convey to the captain.



According to the 9/11 Commission report, only Olson and flight attendant Renee May were able to make phone calls to loved ones from the plane before it was crashed into the Pentagon. Twenty years later, Barbara's husband still marvels at her bravery and calm in the final moments of her life.
Reply Quote
4
43rd Street Posse
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to VegasAg86 • 12:38p, 12/19/22
VegasAg86 said:
What did they do with the people on the plane?

Should I tell my aunt (former, she divorced my dad's brother when I was 10 or so) that her cousin Barbara Olson didn't really die in the crash? Did they "disappear" or execute the wife of the Solicitor General? Did they not really identify and bury her remains?
Our government has done worse than kill 130 or so people. They are certainly evil enough to pull something like that off...just not competent enough, as it would require too many people to not only coordinate, but keep hush...assuming they were even able to execute the plan in the first place.

Actually, I do believe the CIA could probably pull it off...I just don't believe they did. I believe it was Muslims who viewed us as the great Satan.
Reply Quote
4
Duckhook
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Rapier108 • 12:38p, 12/19/22
AG
Rapier108 said:
RWWilson said:
If you engage with 911 Truthers your IQ will immediately begin to drop. They are extremely ignorant by and large.

Half of the population is below average intelligence yet 100% of the Truther population fits that description.
They're just as bad as the people who still believe in the Russian Collusion Delusion, or that the 2020 and 2022 elections were completely open and aboveboard.

Didn't take long to get to the whataboutism.
Reply Quote
8
titan
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Kenneth_2003 • 12:44p, 12/19/22
S
Kenneth_2003 said:
One thing that people REALLY forget as time goes on.

in 2001...
A lot of these truthers are (among other things) lost in recency bias.

Cell phones... State of the art was still a Nokia 5110 or there abouts, and they did NOT have a camera
Data Storage... 3.5 inch diskettes were the norm, with a storage capacity of 1.44MB USB drives, if on the market were high end with maybe 1GB of storage. Most data was still transferred by diskette or burned CD (not DVD). Computers were even still using mice and keyboards with PS2 connectors (the old Purple and Green ones)
Televisions... 720p? Maybe 1080 was out? Screens were still predominantly CRT.

My high end computer (just under 2 years old) was a Pentium 3, and the 300GB hard drive was still considered to be massive by the day.

So jsut the first question, the parking lot camera that captured the plane... Sorta...
It was a remote camera (internet was still 100% WIRED) designed to record license plates at a gate. It's frame rate, and ultimately the data/video it generated, was set to record slow moving even static license plates. It was not spec'd to capture a plane approaching the speed of sound.
THIS.

Like Nobleman06 also pointed out.

What WAS common by then was very good portable cameras with video capability the kind you take on trips. That's why we get decent to very good 'incidental footage" once something happened back then, but they almost never have it "already on" and certainly not trained out a car window much then as an event happens.

I wasn't even sure if cell phones had a camera yet then. What you are seeing is digital cam footage.

For reference my first digital camera was Feb 2002 and I wasn't anywhere in the front of the pack or spending a huge amount. It was about $ 140 I think. So others undoubtedly had them sooner. When I don't know.

Put yourself a car that day, imagine you are driving by. Even if you happen to be wanting to video the Pentagon, you are not pointing your camera to the opposite side of the car till the plane is roaring over only to impact mere hundreds of yards away the building wall. Its easy to see why few (or NONE) car cameras caught it, or even those standing at a gas station. You would have to have your 2001 era camera out, on, and point it just the right fast enough.

We do have great footage of people doing just that after it hit, even walking/running steadily toward it--they are the ones who caught the Pentagon roof and hole as it looked just after impact, and before the roof collapse further alters the scene.
Reply Quote
5
1 edit
Change Detection
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:53p, 12/19/22
AG
I completely shocked that some internet jockey claims that it was all a hoax. What fools..... So many people died, so many lives interrupted, and so much grief.

The government is corrupt as we see now, and the last 6 yrs have demonstrated corrupt individuals think they are above the law and all morality. But faking a plane crash into a reinforced section of the Pentagon is beyond comprehension and not even remotely possible. So many people would have to remain silent. Even the most threatened individual would say something that would break this wide open. Total nonsense.
Reply Quote
8
Ellis Wyatt
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 43rd Street Posse • 12:55p, 12/19/22
Quote:
I think I'm like 90% certain it was a huge 757 and there must be some reason beyond my understanding that it looks like a tiny missile.
I have friends who saw the plane descend and fly into the Pentagon, live and in-person.
Reply Quote
8
1 edit
AGHouston11
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:14p, 12/19/22
AG
Unrelated but it seems we had much better cell phone technology then than we do now. It's pretty impressive the calls that were being made.
Reply Quote
3
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.