Where is Shanksville?![]()
To be fair if I'm not mistaken it's like an hour or so away from Pittsburgh. That's like me including Montgomery in the Birmingham area.
Where is Shanksville?![]()
pickles said:United 93 though, that was a missile for sure.
Even dikk Cheney let that shyt slip in some press conference.
A plane hit it. End of story. If you want to know about the victims, start here.....
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/911victims/pentagon/
So why won't the govt release more than a few frames where you can barely see what actually hits the pentagon if there's nothing to hide?BuddyOmar said:So why won't the govt release more than a few frames where you can barely see what actually hits the pentagon if there's nothing to hide?
they did didn't they, or are you talking about something other than that grainy vid we say.?Good looks on the link
Still confused as to why I've never seen video/pics.
Because that's all there is to the CCTV footage.
Yeah fukking right. God knows how much footage they're withholding from other feeds and that's not even including all of the other tapes they confiscated.BuddyOmar said:Yeah fukking right. God knows how much footage they're withholding from other feeds and that's not even including all of the other tapes they confiscated.
If 'God' knows, ask 'it' for the footage. An argument from silence doesn't prove your assertion is true.
BuddyOmar said:Ok, so take another expression literally. Never said it was absolute truth, I just know bullshyt when I smell it. You're a good soldier (or is it Marine?) so I know your allegiance in this case is unwavering.
Poisoning the WellThis sort of "reasoning" involves trying to discredit what a person might later claim by presenting unfavorable information (be it true or false) about the person. This "argument" has the following form:
This sort of "reasoning" is obviously fallacious. The person making such an attack is hoping that the unfavorable information will bias listeners against the person in question and hence that they will reject any claims he might make. However, merely presenting unfavorable information about a person (even if it is true) hardly counts as evidence against the claims he/she might make.
- Unfavorable information (be it true or false) about person A is presented.
- Therefore any claims person A makes will be false.
No, I spent three days at Ground Zero as a First Responder. I looked for answers and found them. Also,
Call out my fallacy and respond with an appeal to authority, nice one. You and a shyt ton of other people were first responders... and? Too many inconsistencies in the gubment tale for me to believe breh. Knowing the U.S. government, this is just one of them ones.BuddyOmar said:Call out my fallacy and respond with an appeal to authority, nice one.
No, I spent three days at Ground Zero as a First Responder. I looked for answers and found them. Also,