You hit the nail on the head. Every standard forensic airline crash investigation requires an inventory of the parts recovered. Furthermore, each part is tagged with a serial number that is logged and matched to the actual airplane that crashed. This standard procedure was never conducted with any of the 4 9/11 airplanes in question, not even with any of the allegedly recovered flight recorders. Photos of alleged parts are not proof that those parts actually belong to the planes in question. To answer your question, there exists no verification whatsoever and the reason is that no forensic airplane crash investigation was ever conducted in the first place. - - - Updated - - - We posted concurrently lol.
"Well done. The missile story borders on the lunatic." and exactly WHY does the missile theory border on lunatic?
You didn't think about it, huh? It's a stupid story invented by a hoaxer 1). Why fly a missile into the Pentagon? It's moronic. 2). There is no physical evidence to support the missile story. 3). There is no eyewitness testimony to support the missile story. 4). The missile story began as a hoax and the dull witted ran with it. Here is an excellent site that has collated the actual evidence and the authentic information on the subject: http://therightbloggerbastard.blogspot.com.au/ Enjoy and learn.
because any reasonable person knows flying debris steers its way around columns because it likes columns and hates walls. Yeh thats it!
No that's the result of a detailed forensic airplane crash investigation. You can find the detailed report right here in this forum, it consists of two words, IT'S OBVIOUS. What, you don't believe it?
What I find amusing about your post, is that you just debunked yourself and you probably can't figure out why. A golden moment. - - - Updated - - - So, your another that missed the fact that the planes struck the towers? Good to know. This is just getting funnier by the day.
Ok come come now. Everyone knows tons of metal vaporized and became fluid then followed the drainage channels and then got lonely and resolidified on the side of all those poles blocking its path just so a conspiracy theorist could laugh their asses off at how over the top absurd loony offficial story peddlers had to get to push the lies! Pretty close huh?
No, that missed the point by 10 parsecs. You debunked yourself, so I suggest you try this for a change, THINK! Oh, and to your infantile claims of molten metal in that pic some time ago, we both know that came from the cutters on the clean up operation. You can't slip a dud past me, guy.
Bottom line with the building collapse fiasco, HOW is it that 3 skyscrapers were completely destroyed by what can only be described as un-focused and disorganized forces?
Hey! Did you see the fire in Ontario recently? Look familiar? Firehouse article on the hazards of working in steel buildings: http://www.firehouse.com/article/10503674/steel-bar-joist-trusses-and-steel-c-beams-part-2
I read about it maybe 10 years ago. I don't keep copies or links to every article I've ever read, sorry. Understanding your views, I doubt very much you would believe it even if I could find it after all these years. Your mind is made up, and it will not be changed. If a person still believes that nonsensical story 15 years after the fact, it means only that he is morbidly incurious.
Correct, his comment is dismissed as stale and irrelevant. His comment is an attempt to call facts learned more than 10 years ago to be false. Besides the smell of cordite reported by several, nothing at the Pentagon supports the claim of an airliner striking there, and EVERYTHING about the pentagon shows a coverup and false flag operation meant to derail the ongoing congressional and ONI audits regarding missing funds and Operation Hammer implications.
you mean like how YOU guys disregard the professional views of all architects and engineers who don't confirm your pre-conceived and conspiratorial notions of truth?
Sorry, you misunderstand. Your response to Ronstar was the handwave. Excuse me for causing confusion. - - - Updated - - - No, his response to you was a 'hand wave dismissal'. Sorry for causing confusion.
It would be career-suicide for an arquitect or engineer to support the theory that the government did it. A lot of architects and engineers who say that are sophists who lie for money. It's pretty obvious that a lot of them don't even believe their own arguments. 9/11 Incontrovertible Proof NIST lied - John Gross Lead Engineer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0r0rWm6p0s Hey Blues63... Look at the bottom of post #1. http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=456924&p=1066192834#post1066192834 I'm still waiting. Your ducking this issue doesn't help your credibility.
There is actual evidence. Have you watched these videos? 9/11: Explosive Evidence -- Experts Speak Out (Full) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stOQ5Vl9d0k Start watching this one at the 2:40:21 time mark. If you don't want to watch the whole part about the towers, at least watch the summary which begins at the 4:27:48 time mark. September 11 -- The New Pearl Harbor (FULL) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DOnAn_PX6M
