Science > Physics > Why so "***** sure" about the Pentagon? (Turn away, Ladies.)
| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Dick Eastman" |
| Date: |
16 Apr 2004 05:31:47 AM |
| Object: |
Why so "***** sure" about the Pentagon? (Turn away, Ladies.) |
Why so "***** sure" about the Pentagon?
I'm glad you asked, John.
(Turn away, Ladies.)
by ***** Eastman
1. Pentagon security camera shows
a. Too short a plane
b. Smoke trail of a missile being fired
c. White-hot flash explosion consistent with a missile warhead
2. Photos show wrong crash imprint in the wall
3. Photos show and wrong flash-powder burn darkening the wall
4. Downed lampposts and witnesses each identified a different
approach path to the Pentagon, the Boeing's and the killer jet's
5. Wrong kind of debris
6. Single piece of right kind of debris shown to have been
found on the opposite side of the approach path from
the side of the plane where that particular piece had
to have come from.
7. Witnesses also
a. heard a missile
b. heard a sonic boom prior to blast
c. smelled burning chordite after the blast
d. saw a radar blip behaving like a jet-fighter blip
8. No photos of wreckage from inside consistent with the crash
9. Evidence of only one engine and one seat , a pilots seat.
10. A distraction plane, ur engine plane making dives over D.C.
both photographed, videotaped and shown on BBC, and
reported (erroneously) by many wintesses as the actual plane
"diving at an irrecoverable angle)
11. The attack was made almost horizontally into the first-floor
level -- consistent with a countour-hugging jet-fighter attack
12. Normal rescuers were prevented from entering the building
while only certain people, including Rumsfeld himself, conducted
(screened) victims from the building
13. Rumsfeld had recently been given exclusive power to
OK air interceptions -- and yet he was in his office the whole
time the twin towers were hit, and when the Pentagon was
hit he went to oversee "rescue" instead of going to the situation
room where his interception authority could be given -- he
arrived at the situation room at about the time the Pennsylvania
plane (backup for the Pentagon) was finally shot down.
14. The various drills and practices for an air attack on the Pentagon
including some kind of simulation on 9-11-01 itself, coupled with
denials that such an attack had been considered possible.
15. Impossible stories by, for example, John Judge (regarding
his amazing stewardess friend who claims to have seen the
Boeing inside the hole, recognized the plane as the one she
always flew, recongized her stewardess friend as a victim by
a photo of her severed arm with the matching "friendship
bracelett" they both wore; that she was passing out
doughnuts and coffee to the rescue workers with the salvation
army when the salvation army was nowhere in evidence at the
scene -- John Judge who is a professional JFK conspiracy
theory debunker and discloses that this same stewardess
friend is also a JFK theory investigator, the same
John Judge who launched the phony "People's Investigation
of 9-11 with a press conference by stating that the Pentagon
attack is not something responsible investigators should bother
investigating etc. since we "know" the Boeing hit the Pentagon
and don't want to be a laughing stock etc. -- the People's investigation
that never once reviewed any of the evidence packages I posted
to them -- the same John Judge who to this day refuses to
debate ***** Eastman on any internet forum and whom all --
dare I use the term -- "responsible" 9-11 investigators think is
a John Judge who is working for the coverup, for obstruction
of justice, and because he does it so badly is himself become
one of the proofs of the frameup along with the known-only-to
himself flight attendant who works one of the flights that
most definitely had to have been regularly monitored by
US intelligence operatives, probably flight attendents, and
this one just happened not to take Flight 77 that day by
happenstance etc. -- so how about it, Mr. Judge?
16. The deaths of only the CIA's indepdendent intelligence
revivals , the Offices of Naval Intelligence personel, and auditors
of defense spending contracts etc. alone moved
into the "newly renovated" section that was hit -- on the side
where most of the witnesses would be the Arlington Cemetery
dead or people involved with driving their cars. Naval Intelligence
would have independently investigated 9-11 had they lived --
the investigator that no official has yet conducted -- Wolfowitz
sure bin Laden had done it and ready with the solution of invading
Afganistan on the very first day -- even as they were allegedly taken
by complete suprise only a few hours before that determination.
See the many photos and witness testimony and further analysis
by respected scientific minds establishing all of the above here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TRUTHBAZOOKA/message/5
and
http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/911/Eastman/m18h05.html
***** Eastman
Yakima, Washington
Every man is responsible to every other man.
.
|
|
| User: "tim gueguen" |
|
| Title: Re: Why so "***** sure" about the Pentagon? (Turn away, Ladies.) |
16 Apr 2004 04:57:20 PM |
|
|
"***** Eastman" <de1949@nwinfo.net> wrote in message
news:c5ocob$jnf$1@nnrp.atgi.net...
Why so "***** sure" about the Pentagon?
We already knew you were a dumbass. There's no need to tell us again.
tim gueguen 101867
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Black" |
|
| Title: Re: Why so "***** sure" about the Pentagon? (Turn away, Ladies.) |
17 Apr 2004 12:31:42 AM |
|
|
"***** Eastman" <de1949@nwinfo.net> wrote in message news:<c5ocob$jnf$1@nnrp.atgi.net>...
[snip]
2/10
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Olivers" |
|
| Title: Re: Why so "***** sure" about the Pentagon? (Turn away, Ladies.) |
16 Apr 2004 11:52:32 AM |
|
|
***** Eastman muttered....
(snippagio serenissimo)
.....and just when it seemed that the Lithium in the water was working or
the Conspirowhackos had retreated beyond the tree line back into their
forest lairs....
WalMart has just announced that heavy duty aluminum foil in the "economy"
sized package has been reduced to 1/2 price for a two week pewriod because
so many of the foil-helmeted crowd have been tarnished, blemished or
dinged by blows from loon mallets and clue sticks.
Now's the time for your annual rewrap!
TMO
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Robert J. Kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: Why so "***** sure" about the Pentagon? (Turn away, Ladies.) |
16 Apr 2004 12:08:15 PM |
|
|
***** Eastman wrote:
Why so "***** sure" about the Pentagon?
I'm glad you asked, John.
(Turn away, Ladies.)
by ***** Eastman
1. Pentagon security camera shows
a. Too short a plane
b. Smoke trail of a missile being fired
c. White-hot flash explosion consistent with a missile warhead
Dozens of eye-witnesses say otherwise. The Wogs did crash a plane into
the Pentagon.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
