In article <swgEc.40318$OT6.17381109@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>,
BaronVonMunchausen <munchausen@baron.net> wrote:

I'd like to remind you that this posting of links containing witnesses
had to do with A 757 HITTING THE PENTAGON. The coincidence theorists
believe this to be the case, yet when it's time to back their theory
they fail.

Well when you conspirowackos are asked to provide proof you claim a
757 should remain intact when hitting a reinforced concrete,

granite
faced structure which had recently been rebuilt to withstand bomb
attacks. Such inane questions as "Where are the wings?" get asked,
and "Where'd the engines go?" and more *****.

A plane is a relatively fragile thing. It's made of light structures
that are engineered with weight in mind. The more weight you have
to drag around the worse off a plane is. Witness the F-111 vs. the
F-14...nearly the same plane in many respects, except the thrust
to weight ratio on an F-111 is 1:2 and an F-14 is 1:1. Witness which
one is still in service in the US military.

A fragile plane travelling in excess of 400 kts slamming into a
building that is designed to withstand bomb attacks isn't going to run
away out of fear. It's going to take the hit, and fare a hell of a lot
better than the plane.

But, you conspirowackos insist the plane should have slammed into the
building and just stopped, and allowed the passengers to step off in
peace or some other *****.

You have no evidence. None.

Meanwhile, you refuse to answer basic questions regarding your
conspiracy theory. Such questions as:
o Where'd the "real" Flight 77 go? Why did no one report it
landing anywhere?

o Who killed all the Flight 77 passengers?

o Who destroyed the 757-200 that was Flight 77 and how did they
hide its remains so successfully?

o How did they plant gobs of evidence of Flight 77 (such as
serial numbers of plane parts, and literally tons of wreckage
from a 757-200) in the Pentagon without anyone noticing?

o What actually hit the Pentagon? At least one of you claims it
was an F-15. Why has the USAF not reported this plane missing?

o Why did not a single witness report anything other than a large
plane hitting the Pentagon?

These questions go on, and on, and on, and on. Yet, you refuse
to answer a single one of them. Instead, you keep squawking ridiculous
***** like "<brawk!>Where'd the second engine go?<brawk!>Polly
wanna cracker!<brawk!>" as if this is some "proof" of conspiracy.
Plane crashes are chaotic events with chaotic results.

If you want to show some grounds for a conspiracy, then start
answering some damn questions about it. Periodically tossing out
"where'd the second engine go?" does not a conspiracy make. You've got
nothing, and are unwilling to back anything up with some proof.

Thankfully, the rest of the world will go on without you. You can
keep thinking it was done by the Romulans for all the rest of the
world cares. Your insistence on tossing out this crap just proves
how utterly stupid you are. Do some basic research, and come up
with some proof that backs up your claim and you might have a
shred of credibility. But you won't. Instead, you'll insist we're
all a bunch of sheeple, or paid gubmint shills, or God knows what
else and never provide an ounce of proof...as if this is all going
to make you look better, more right, more intelligent.

It doesn't. You're a fool because of your actions; you refuse
to do anything but spew ridiculous, easily refutable *****
over and over and over again.

-Geoff
Sector 12
Disinformation Directorate
Ministry of Information
Kansas Field Office