Loose Change????

**dreaddman** · 01-23-13, 10:39 AM

Originally Posted by Hocus Pocus

Then why did they call them amendments if they aren't amendable. If not now, when?

Not saying I disagree with you dg, simply stating the meaning of the word.

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk 2

What? The Ammendments are ammendable. Ammendment 21 undid Ammendment 18. Ammendments are also, by their nature, part of the Constitution once they are signed.

The purpose of ammendments is to a) rewrite language in the Consititution (or, yes, ammendments) or b) add language to the Consitution to do something not currently covered under the Constitution.

The Constituion is the very foundation of our Federal-State and legal system. If something's not right anymore, change the Constitution via ammendment. Re-interpreting it as a "living" document is an end run around the entire government system. It's a blade that cuts both ways. Once you blow it off, whoever is in power can do what they want via their intepreation of the meaning.

**kANG** · 01-23-13, 10:45 AM

2 photos of plane crashes....

Both photos taken minutes after they crashed.

**kANG** · 01-23-13, 10:46 AM

What kind of hole does a Boeing 757 leave when it crashes into Pentagon?

**deathgodusmc** · 01-23-13, 11:00 AM

Originally Posted by kANG

What kind of hole does a Boeing 757 leave when it crashes into Pentagon?

Is there an actual question in there somewhere? The hole is 12.25 ft high and a 757 with its gear up is 12.4 ft high minus the tail. There is testimony from multiple people saying there was plane wreckage through out the building. So you have more then just a government coverup going on seeing as civilians were among those in the pentagon.

**kANG** · 01-23-13, 11:06 AM

Wheres the wreckage

??

Photos

??

**Morningfrost** · 01-23-13, 11:11 AM

Originally Posted by kANG

2 photos of plane crashes....

Both photos taken minutes after they crashed.

Not seeing the point of this comparison....the first one (9/11) was done using 757s that I believe were set up to do international flights. In other words, full of a metric shit-ton of jetfuel. The second picture to me looks to be the crash of maybe a crop duster plane, evidenced by the "fire truck" that's out there, and the fact that the corresponding hole/wreck appears significantly smaller than one would expect from a large passenger plane like a 757. In other words, the pictures are comparing apples to Xav. Both fruits? Sure, but that's where their similarities end.

~Morningfrost

**deathgodusmc** · 01-23-13, 11:15 AM

Originally Posted by kANG

Wheres the wreckage

??

Photos

??

A gbu could punch thru the outer wall of the pentagon but the damage didnt end there. All five rings sustained damage. No single explosive device could accomplish that task. The only thing that could has to be of substantial weight with a shit ton of momentum. Kind of like a large commercial aircraft.

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

That page lists photos taken but we all know they were dismissed by the conspiracy theorist because they dont feed the thought process.

**kANG** · 01-23-13, 11:15 AM

The second photo is the (911)Shanksville crash....first photo is a random plane crash.

**deathgodusmc** · 01-23-13, 11:17 AM

Originally Posted by Morningfrost

Not seeing the point of this comparison....the first one (9/11) was done using 757s that I believe were set up to do international flights. In other words, full of a metric shit-ton of jetfuel. The second picture to me looks to be the crash of maybe a crop duster plane, evidenced by the "fire truck" that's out there, and the fact that the corresponding hole/wreck appears significantly smaller than one would expect from a large passenger plane like a 757. In other words, the pictures are comparing apples to Xav. Both fruits? Sure, but that's where their similarities end.

~Morningfrost

Pretty much and without looking at angle of approach which would change the crater size and the debris field.