Высылайте карету, без неё к вам ну никак не пропустят :)))

Искать аргументы против ваших аргументов не пробовали ? Настолько уверены в дэмонизме правительства, что заслушать другую сторону не приходит в головку ?

Про "слишком маленькую дыру в Пентагоне" полно сайтов, навскидку :

http://www.oilempire.us/pentagon-hole.html

.. the ground-level entry area (where the walls were missing and support columns were missing or severely damaged and severed) was about 90 feet wide. Only the second floor area of the hole was small. Both In Plane Site and the Pentagon Strike web movie disingenuously use selective photos in which the 90-foot ground level hole is hidden behind smoke & water being sprayed by a firetruck, and it isn't even mentioned. But note that not all Pentagon no-757 advocates hide the real proportions of the hole in this way, which makes this misprepresentation even more egregious.

there IS wreckage, not on the lawn (another example of deceptive, selective choice of photographs) but all over the South parking lot and part of the Heliport (easily visible in the photos taken by Steve Riskus), which were in fact closer to the impact point than the area of lawn that is shown (severe telephoto foreshortening illusion makes the lawn area look close to the building). Sure, one might attempt to debate whether the existing debris field is consistent with an airliner impact, but not acknowledging its existence at all (or the existence of the ground-level 90 foot entry hole) as is the case with In Plane Site and Pentagon Strike, only serves to make 911 skeptics look like conniving liars.

----------

Это не говоря уже о том, что я лично знаю человека, видевшего этот самый пентагоновский самолет.

В топку. Есть, есть в поклонниках конспираси теорий и изобретателях вечных двигателей что-то сродственное. Бумажки от обоих надо вешать в сортире на гвоздик - это будет им лучшее применение.

Если бы вы читали написанное, а не то, что вам хочется прочесть, то анализ вашего анализа нашелся бы прямо во втором комменте:

--------------

this piece is entirely subjective and loose. what you're saying is it is insane that he may have pulled over, stood on his car, climbed for a better view, made a wrong turn, took a couple of bad photos and didn't panic at an appropriate level.

that's not to say that his photos amount to anything either. there's no point in spending your precious 4 am minutes attacking benign photos of smoke.

I expected dammaging pictures and some good countering.

booooring.
--------------

Как я уже написал - полный буллшит.

Если человек впадает в маразм, ему прошлые чины не помогут.

Это испытанный приём. Все говорят что белое это чёрное и неокрепшие души соглашаются...

Рыбак, тебе место на дурке.

Верь в свою теорию сам, тихонечко в туалете что-б санитары не застукали, а пропаганду здесь не разводи. Никому не интересны эти вскинутые руки забытых активистов которые ты постишь.
Они-то хоть тупо делают бабло на своих "изысках", а ты ведёшься. Был-бы "тихим" ничего, но как буйного тебя необходимо "привязывать".

После пары страниц пикировок Алекс прикроет эту ветку, чего вы видимо и добиваетесь.

Ведёте себя как малолетняя шпана в супермаркете.

А почему их должно быть видно ?
У него есть хоть одна фотография сверху ?

Какой-то д..еб на основании любительских фотографий с дороги, на которых кроме дыма ничего нетдоказывает участие правительства в заговоре - это закрывает для меня вопрос и о вменяемости д..еба, и о ментальном здоровье к ниму примкнувших шепиловых. То ли авокадо пагубно действуют на мозги, то ли спарринговаться вам надо меньше.

Может, перестанете наперсточками шуршать, жулик ?

Louis Freeh настаивал на комиссии отнюдь не потому, что верит в участие правительства. А потому, что комиссия прикрыла жопы тех, что про..л террористов.

-----------
Former FBI Director Louis J. Freeh slammed the 9/11 Commission Thursday saying it ignored – or "summarily rejected" – the most critical piece of intelligence that could have prevented the horrific attacks of September 11, 2001.
...
Though Freeh never blames any Clinton administration officials by name, responsibility for the intelligence failure would squarely fall on the Clinton administration as Able Danger's information was uncovered before George Bush became president.

Congressman Weldon, who has led Congressional efforts to shed light on the Able Danger claims, alleges that Jamie Gorelick, one of the Sept. 11 Commissioners, prevented the full committee from learning of Able Danger's crucial information. Gorelick has served as deputy attorney general during the Clinton administration.

"There's a cover up here," Weldon said. "It's clear and unequivocal." Freeh argues the Able Danger information requires a new inquiry. He also praised the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), for examining some of these matters.
-------------

Поздравляю вас, гражданин, соврамши.

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/11/17/122900.shtml

Freeh maintains that the Able Danger intelligence, if confirmed, is "undoubtedly the most relevant fact of the entire post-9/11 inquiry . . . Yet the 9/11 Commission inexplicably concluded that it "was not historically significant."

Two members of the House, Curt Weldon (R-Pa.) and Dan Burton (R-Ind.), have reported that shortly after the 9/11 attacks they provided then-Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley with a "chart" displaying pre-attack information about al-Qaida that had been collected by Able Danger.

But a spokesperson for the White House said that "a search of National Security Council files had failed to produce such a chart."

The final 9/11 Commission report, released on July 22, 2004, concluded that "American intelligence agencies were unaware of Mr. Atta until the day of the attacks."

Writes Freeh: "This now looks to be embarrassingly wrong."

In fact, Freeh discloses that 10 days before the report was released, commission staffers met with a Navy officer who said that Able Danger had identified Atta as an al-Qaida member and told the Commission the unit "had identified Mohammed Atta to be a member of an al Qaeda cell located in Brooklyn."

But the commission determined that "the officer's account was not sufficiently reliable to warrant revision of the report or further investigation.

Said Freeh: "This dismissive and apparently unsupported conclusion would have us believe that a key piece of evidence was summarily rejected in less than 10 days without serious investigation . . . "No wonder the 9/11 families were outraged by these revelations and called for a ‘new' commission to investigate."

Though Freeh never blames any Clinton administration officials by name, responsibility for the intelligence failure would squarely fall on the Clinton administration as Able Danger's information was uncovered before George Bush became president.

Congressman Weldon, who has led Congressional efforts to shed light on the Able Danger claims, alleges that Jamie Gorelick, one of the Sept. 11 Commissioners, prevented the full committee from learning of Able Danger's crucial information. Gorelick has served as deputy attorney general during the Clinton administration.

"There's a cover up here," Weldon said. "It's clear and unequivocal." Freeh argues the Able Danger information requires a new inquiry. He also praised the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), for examining some of these matters.

Specter said at one hearing: "If Mr. Atta and other 9/11 terrorists were identified before the attacks, it would be a very serious breach not to have that information passed along ... We ought to get to the bottom of it."

Freeh writes in the Journal: "Indeed we should. "The Joint Intelligence Committees should reconvene and, in addition to Able Danger team members, we should have the 9/11 commissioners appear as witnesses so the families can hear their explanation why this doesn't matter."

Вам хочется обломков ? Бедняжка ! "Мы самы не местные, нас на гугле забанили! "

http://www.rense.com/general32/phot.htm