its fake and all evidence to the contrary is fake
Old Army has gone to hell.
Planted plane wreckage. Someone trucked in tons of plane wreckage, with parts that matched the 757 that was used for AA77, along with the black boxes and body parts of the passengers. Do you not realize how completely illogical that is ?AggiEE said:The Fife said:AggiEE said:
the evidence at the scene is overwhelmingly lacking and inconsistent with a 757
How much experience do you have with commercial aircraft, or heavies on the military side for that matter? Design, fabrication, assembly, ops, quality, records, MRO, anything at all. I'm wrapping up my second decade in this exact line of work.
Any identifying mark containing at least the first four characters on parts found would make them immediately identifiable to anyone with Boeing commercial experience as being from a 757. If you don't understand what I'm talking about, and you don't know what that character is you should take the chance right now to exit this thread and try to save face. The claim I quoted is pure ignorance.
That would be great if there was any large and significant surviving and identifiable wreckage left consistent with a 757 striking the building. There wasn't. And what pieces were there is easy enough to be planted
he should turn in his degree.Old Army Ghost said:
glad you arent a real ee
you're logic is atrocious
Poster you're quoting has been consistent with this on both 9/11 threads.The Fife said:AggiEE said:
the evidence at the scene is overwhelmingly lacking and inconsistent with a 757
How much experience do you have with commercial aircraft, or heavies on the military side for that matter? Design, fabrication, assembly, ops, quality, records, MRO, anything at all. I'm wrapping up my second decade in this exact line of work.
Any identifying mark containing at least the first four characters on parts found would make them immediately identifiable to anyone with Boeing commercial experience as being from a 757. If you don't understand what I'm talking about, and you don't know what that character is you should take the chance right now to exit this thread and try to save face. The claim I quoted is pure ignorance.
G.K. Chesterton spoke directly about 911 Truthers:agracer said:Poster you're quoting has been consistent with this on both 9/11 threads.The Fife said:AggiEE said:
the evidence at the scene is overwhelmingly lacking and inconsistent with a 757
How much experience do you have with commercial aircraft, or heavies on the military side for that matter? Design, fabrication, assembly, ops, quality, records, MRO, anything at all. I'm wrapping up my second decade in this exact line of work.
Any identifying mark containing at least the first four characters on parts found would make them immediately identifiable to anyone with Boeing commercial experience as being from a 757. If you don't understand what I'm talking about, and you don't know what that character is you should take the chance right now to exit this thread and try to save face. The claim I quoted is pure ignorance.
SInce you obviously didn't read my other reply directly above this one, I'll share it. 9/11 Pentagon Attack Question - Page 2 | TexAgs "Thank you for confirming the plane crash."redcrayon said:Exactly what do you question about the Pentagon and 9/11?AgBandsman said:
Wow, the amount of people on here blindly trusting our government is insane. There's nothing wrong with questioning and it isn't a sign of low IQ.
Which takes more IQ:2%er/New Army said:AgBandsman said:
Wow, the amount of people on here blindly trusting our government is insane. There's nothing wrong with questioning and it isn't a sign of low IQ.
Yes, it is. Lol. Very low IQ
you dont trust the government but trust that they give you the evidence they killed jfk?AgBandsman said:Which takes more IQ:2%er/New Army said:AgBandsman said:
Wow, the amount of people on here blindly trusting our government is insane. There's nothing wrong with questioning and it isn't a sign of low IQ.
Yes, it is. Lol. Very low IQ
1) blindly trusting everything a proven tyrannical government tells you, or...
2) thinking for yourself and questioning the BS they tell you.
P.S. keep in mind, this same government has been shown to have killed JFK this week.
P.P.S. if you read the reply directly above the one you quoted, you'd see where I'm not denying the pentagon plane crash, but low IQ gonna Low IQ. 9/11 Pentagon Attack Question - Page 2 | TexAgs
The government actually did not admit to killing JFK. They withheld information that should have been public in 2017 and was further delayed to this week and still not released this week. FYI, the innocent have nothing to hide.Old Army Ghost said:you dont trust the government but trust that they give you the evidence they killed jfk?AgBandsman said:Which takes more IQ:2%er/New Army said:AgBandsman said:
Wow, the amount of people on here blindly trusting our government is insane. There's nothing wrong with questioning and it isn't a sign of low IQ.
Yes, it is. Lol. Very low IQ
1) blindly trusting everything a proven tyrannical government tells you, or...
2) thinking for yourself and questioning the BS they tell you.
P.S. keep in mind, this same government has been shown to have killed JFK this week.
P.P.S. if you read the reply directly above the one you quoted, you'd see where I'm not denying the pentagon plane crash, but low IQ gonna Low IQ. 9/11 Pentagon Attack Question - Page 2 | TexAgs
you are no free thinker they are controlling your thinking and you are thinking exactly what those three letter agencies want you to think
think about it. you believe cia killed jfk because the government gave you the evidence that they did. they gave you the evidence that west was working for them and you believed it. you believes the government
AggiEE said:
clearly airports don't have very good security cameras so we can't manage to trace a significant portion of the hijackers
And then covid happened.Noblemen06 said:
Anyone who thinks the US government is capable of such a widespread, thousand layers-deep coverup has more faith in the government than I ever will.
New World Ag said:Planted plane wreckage. Someone trucked in tons of plane wreckage, with parts that matched the 757 that was used for AA77, along with the black boxes and body parts of the passengers. Do you not realize how completely illogical that is ?AggiEE said:The Fife said:AggiEE said:
the evidence at the scene is overwhelmingly lacking and inconsistent with a 757
How much experience do you have with commercial aircraft, or heavies on the military side for that matter? Design, fabrication, assembly, ops, quality, records, MRO, anything at all. I'm wrapping up my second decade in this exact line of work.
Any identifying mark containing at least the first four characters on parts found would make them immediately identifiable to anyone with Boeing commercial experience as being from a 757. If you don't understand what I'm talking about, and you don't know what that character is you should take the chance right now to exit this thread and try to save face. The claim I quoted is pure ignorance.
That would be great if there was any large and significant surviving and identifiable wreckage left consistent with a 757 striking the building. There wasn't. And what pieces were there is easy enough to be planted
Who am I kidding, of course you don't.
AgBandsman said:
Just this week, we've seen evidence that the CIA killed JFK and still we have sheep on here saying only low IQ individuals question the government. Completely idiotic.
I would bet that 95% of these insane 9/11 Truther conspiracy theorists are alsoRWWilson said:
I am still waiting for the first conspiracy theorist to come up with a detailed, complete summary of the alleged plot -- not the bits and pieces, but the whole story, put together -- that would not make any fifth grader anywhere burst out in convulsive laughter. I'm pleased to see that most of low IQ conspiracy theorists don't have an AgTag. It gives me hope Aggies are still of above-average intelligence.
You just said it yourself, you have absolutely no idea how aerospace supply chain, manufacturing, ops, and maintenance work. Last go around the merry go round for me, I'll explain it like I was talking to my 1st grader.AggiEE said:The Fife said:AggiEE said:
the evidence at the scene is overwhelmingly lacking and inconsistent with a 757
How much experience do you have with commercial aircraft, or heavies on the military side for that matter? Design, fabrication, assembly, ops, quality, records, MRO, anything at all. I'm wrapping up my second decade in this exact line of work.
Any identifying mark containing at least the first four characters on parts found would make them immediately identifiable to anyone with Boeing commercial experience as being from a 757. If you don't understand what I'm talking about, and you don't know what that character is you should take the chance right now to exit this thread and try to save face. The claim I quoted is pure ignorance.
That would be great if there was any large and significant surviving and identifiable wreckage left consistent with a 757 striking the building. There wasn't. And what pieces were there is easy enough to be planted
how many lies can be in TWO SENTENCES?!!CanyonAg77 said:AgBandsman said:
Just this week, we've seen evidence that the CIA killed JFK and still we have sheep on here saying only low IQ individuals question the government. Completely idiotic.
Bullcrap
No such evidence was released
Oh yeah I'm pretty much done with this one. The idea that assemblies from any 757 could be hidden and intermixed within the Pentagon after the fact is something that makes sense only to someone who has never stood next to any of this stuff. Or handled any of them, MLG and NLG assemblies are crane lift levels of heavy.agracer said:Poster you're quoting has been consistent with this on both 9/11 threads.The Fife said:AggiEE said:
the evidence at the scene is overwhelmingly lacking and inconsistent with a 757
How much experience do you have with commercial aircraft, or heavies on the military side for that matter? Design, fabrication, assembly, ops, quality, records, MRO, anything at all. I'm wrapping up my second decade in this exact line of work.
Any identifying mark containing at least the first four characters on parts found would make them immediately identifiable to anyone with Boeing commercial experience as being from a 757. If you don't understand what I'm talking about, and you don't know what that character is you should take the chance right now to exit this thread and try to save face. The claim I quoted is pure ignorance.
AggiEE said:The Fife said:AggiEE said:
the evidence at the scene is overwhelmingly lacking and inconsistent with a 757
How much experience do you have with commercial aircraft, or heavies on the military side for that matter? Design, fabrication, assembly, ops, quality, records, MRO, anything at all. I'm wrapping up my second decade in this exact line of work.
Any identifying mark containing at least the first four characters on parts found would make them immediately identifiable to anyone with Boeing commercial experience as being from a 757. If you don't understand what I'm talking about, and you don't know what that character is you should take the chance right now to exit this thread and try to save face. The claim I quoted is pure ignorance.
That would be great if there was any large and significant surviving and identifiable wreckage left consistent with a 757 striking the building. There wasn't. And what pieces were there is easy enough to be planted
Maybe questioning covid, but that seems to have died off some lately,Stat Monitor Repairman said:
What gets people madder than questioning 9-11?
I knew about as much as that guy when I started and was a lot younger than the rest of my group, but I sat down and listened to the retired SNCOs instead of arguing with them. They still had to have been at least a little frustrated.wbt5845 said:
30+ years in aerospace and every word of this explanation is true. Things like gear and engine cores are even serialized.
Dumbasses who won't give it up, when experts in their respective fields prove different portions of your "theories" inaccurate.Stat Monitor Repairman said:
What gets people madder than questioning 9-11?
Our government has conducted some pretty crazy and elaborate (and evil) conspiracies. There is ZERO debating that. I challenge anyone to convince me otherwise.AgBandsman said:SInce you obviously didn't read my other reply directly above this one, I'll share it. 9/11 Pentagon Attack Question - Page 2 | TexAgs "Thank you for confirming the plane crash."redcrayon said:Exactly what do you question about the Pentagon and 9/11?AgBandsman said:
Wow, the amount of people on here blindly trusting our government is insane. There's nothing wrong with questioning and it isn't a sign of low IQ.
Just this week, we've seen evidence that the CIA killed JFK and still we have sheep on here saying only low IQ individuals question the government. Completely idiotic.
You get the government you deserve.
i thinj you got mkultraedAgBandsman said:The government actually did not admit to killing JFK. They withheld information that should have been public in 2017 and was further delayed to this week and still not released this week. FYI, the innocent have nothing to hide.Old Army Ghost said:you dont trust the government but trust that they give you the evidence they killed jfk?AgBandsman said:Which takes more IQ:2%er/New Army said:AgBandsman said:
Wow, the amount of people on here blindly trusting our government is insane. There's nothing wrong with questioning and it isn't a sign of low IQ.
Yes, it is. Lol. Very low IQ
1) blindly trusting everything a proven tyrannical government tells you, or...
2) thinking for yourself and questioning the BS they tell you.
P.S. keep in mind, this same government has been shown to have killed JFK this week.
P.P.S. if you read the reply directly above the one you quoted, you'd see where I'm not denying the pentagon plane crash, but low IQ gonna Low IQ. 9/11 Pentagon Attack Question - Page 2 | TexAgs
you are no free thinker they are controlling your thinking and you are thinking exactly what those three letter agencies want you to think
think about it. you believe cia killed jfk because the government gave you the evidence that they did. they gave you the evidence that west was working for them and you believed it. you believes the government
S.3006 - 102nd Congress (1991-1992): President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992 | Congress.gov | Library of Congress "Requires that each assassination record be publicly disclosed in full, and be available in the Collection no later than the date that is 25 years after the date of enactment of this Act" 10/26/92
YellowPot_97 said:AggiEE said:The Fife said:AggiEE said:
the evidence at the scene is overwhelmingly lacking and inconsistent with a 757
How much experience do you have with commercial aircraft, or heavies on the military side for that matter? Design, fabrication, assembly, ops, quality, records, MRO, anything at all. I'm wrapping up my second decade in this exact line of work.
Any identifying mark containing at least the first four characters on parts found would make them immediately identifiable to anyone with Boeing commercial experience as being from a 757. If you don't understand what I'm talking about, and you don't know what that character is you should take the chance right now to exit this thread and try to save face. The claim I quoted is pure ignorance.
That would be great if there was any large and significant surviving and identifiable wreckage left consistent with a 757 striking the building. There wasn't. And what pieces were there is easy enough to be planted
Typical truther idiocy. Look at what you said. "There's no large identifiable wreckage. What was there was planted." Two totally contradicting statements in back to back sentences. So which is it, is the no wreckage or is the wreckage planted?? It can't be both.
You sound like a ****ing moron.