Overunity.com Archives is Temporarily on Read Mode Only!



Free Energy will change the World - Free Energy will stop Climate Change - Free Energy will give us hope
and we will not surrender until free energy will be enabled all over the world, to power planes, cars, ships and trains.
Free energy will help the poor to become independent of needing expensive fuels.
So all in all Free energy will bring far more peace to the world than any other invention has already brought to the world.
Those beautiful words were written by Stefan Hartmann/Owner/Admin at overunity.com
Unfortunately now, Stefan Hartmann is very ill and He needs our help
Stefan wanted that I have all these massive data to get it back online
even being as ill as Stefan is, he transferred all databases and folders
that without his help, this Forum Archives would have never been published here
so, please, as the Webmaster and Creator of these Archives, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above.
You can visit us or register at my main site at:
Overunity Machines Forum



Confessions of khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Oklahoma City, PanAm 800 and American 587

Started by synchro1, May 21, 2015, 10:18:50 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 6 Guests are viewing this topic.

MarkE

Quote from: synchro1 on May 27, 2015, 03:05:59 AM
@MarkE,

Whether Bill Clinton made that remark or not;
Stop right there.  If you are going to chastise someone for something that they said or did, then get yourself on solid ground, or discredit yourself by making unsubstantiable claims.
Quote
The bottom line on the 9/11 attacks is that the ground level hole punched through the Pentagon wall that day, the one the government falsely maintains was made by a commercial aircraft, was physically unachievable. I can assure everyone, as a highly trained military pilot, that it's completely impossible to fly any kind airplane that close to the ground at cruise speed due to "Ground Effect" cushioning. The aircraft would need to be traveling at landing speed to get that close to the ground. That explosion was either caused by a missile or a bomb planted inside the building. The Government supplied us with a "Surveillance Video", with the airplane missing!
Your opinion is opposed by other "highly trained military pilots".  I've watched the videos I could find and it sure looks like an aircraft zipped by in a few frames.
Quote

Former President Clinton was barred from practicing law before the Supreme Court because he was found guilty of committing an act of perjury while under oath.
He lost his law license in Arkansas, which banned him from practicing any law.  He was eligible to reapply in 2006.  I never checked to see if he did.  I would just prefer that the Clintons quietly leave the stage as I find them both infuriating examples of lawyers at their worst.
QuoteHe maintains that terrorists piloted an aircraft into the Pentagon on 9/11, 2001. This story line, that Bill Clinton is trying to help hoodwink the public with, is an outrageous falsehood and just one in a long line of cover up stories designed to foist a costly policy of "Global Domination", "Domestic Surveillance", and "Militarization" of the Municipal Police on the American people with.
The evidence that I have reviewed makes the physical description of an airliner crashing into the Pentagon plausible.  Clinton has told a lot of whoppers, but that story has yet to be disproven.  If you want to be really, really angry at Clinton for something he indisputably did:  He signed repeal of Glass Steagall into law.  To the best of my knowledge he hasn't lifted a finger to try and undo that wretched act.  He's spent too much time taking soft bribes in the form of highly inflated speaking fees.  Like I said he and his wife represent the worst behavior of lawyers.

synchro1

Quote from: MarkE on May 27, 2015, 07:21:15 AM
Stop right there.  If you are going to chastise someone for something that they said or did, then get yourself on solid ground, or discredit yourself by making unsubstantiable claims.Your opinion is opposed by other "highly trained military pilots".  I've watched the videos I could find and it sure looks like an aircraft zipped by in a few frames.He lost his law license in Arkansas, which banned him from practicing any law.  He was eligible to reapply in 2006.  I never checked to see if he did.  I would just prefer that the Clintons quietly leave the stage as I find them both infuriating examples of lawyers at their worst.The evidence that I have reviewed makes the physical description of an airliner crashing into the Pentagon plausible.  Clinton has told a lot of whoppers, but that story has yet to be disproven.  If you want to be really, really angry at Clinton for something he indisputably did:  He signed repeal of Glass Steagall into law.  To the best of my knowledge he hasn't lifted a finger to try and undo that wretched act.  He's spent too much time taking soft bribes in the form of highly inflated speaking fees.  Like I said he and his wife represent the worst behavior of lawyers.

@MarkE,

So, Sir Issac Newton gets a failing grade because the entire aircraft was completely swallowed up by a structure many times the planes strength, and no plane wreckage hurled backwards onto the lawn nor found inside the Pentagon? No "Landing Gear" no "Tourister Luggage"? At 60 frames per second at least half the Aircraft should appear in the Surveillance Video at the reported air speed. The aircraft was too large for a slick "Zip By" Bub!

I can't find a recording of Clinton making that remark, but I remember it, so I'm unwilling to come forward with any kind of retraction.

synchro1

Here's an excellent video on the 9/11 attack on the Pentagon entitled "Behind the Smoke Curtain" by Barbara Honegger:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fvJ8nFa5Qk

MarkE

Quote from: synchro1 on May 27, 2015, 09:20:25 AM
@MarkE,

So, Sir Issac Newton gets a failing grade because the entire aircraft was completely swallowed up by a structure many times the planes strength, and no plane wreckage hurled backwards onto the lawn nor found inside the Pentagon? No "Landing Gear" no "Tourister Luggage"? At 60 frames per second at least half the Aircraft should appear in the Surveillance Video at the reported air speed. The aircraft was too large for a slick "Zip By" Bub!
Sir Isaac would disagree with you.  He knew that if you could throw a big enough spitball fast enough you could topple any structure.  Recoil occurs in elastic collisions.  Something that goes fast enough to overcome the plastic limits of what it impacts doesn't recoil.  The surviellance camera caught the plane going by.  For every 100mph something goes, it travels 135 feet per second.  Surveillance cameras run frame rates anywhere from 1fps to 30fps.  That is done to save storage requirements.  Basically, you rely on a bunch of unproven or worse disproven assumptions to arrive at a conclusion that is at odds with the available evidence.
Quote

I can't find a recording of Clinton making that remark, but I remember it, so I'm unwilling to come forward with any kind of retraction.
It is to your disadvantage to do so.  Personal credibility suffers when one cannot back up a claim, especially an extraordinary claim with evidence. 

synchro1

@MarkE,

Please watch the video "Behind the Smoke Curtain" I posted a link to above by Barbara Honegger. I bet you didn't know there were two explosion events at the Pentagon on 9/11, five minutes apart. The first behind the Helicopter Pad caused by what witnesses described as a small commuter jet painted to look like an airliner. I would very much like you to comment on the facts outlined in Barbara's video. Barbara did an excellent job. Please view it, and I'll look forward to your comments. 

By the way, the "Clinton Foundation" just got hit with a massive racketeering (RICO) complaint out of Florida.