PDA

View Full Version : 9/11: The Official Account of the Pentagon Attack is a Fantasy



iceni tribe
15th March 2012, 18:57
9/11: The Official Account of the Pentagon Attack is a Fantasy


Tuesday, March 13th, 2012 | Posted by Jim Fetzer
Dennis Cimino (with Jim Fetzer)


Among the most fascinating aspects of 9/11 research has been the on-going controversy over whether the absence of evidence that a Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon should or should not be publicized within the movement, especially by Jim Hoffman, who has published several articles maintaining that the physical evidence as well as the witness reports supports a Boeing 757 having hit the building. One of the more bizarre aspects of his defense of the “official account” of the Pentagon attack is to cite the Sandia test, in which an F-4 was strapped onto a rail car frame and run at around 500 mph into a nuclear-resistant concrete barrier. The plane blew apart into millions of tiny pieces, implying that that was what ought to have been expected of the Boeing 757 at the Pentagon. The building consists of 12 inches of concrete, 8 inches of brick, and a facade of 4 inches of limestone, which is a very porous stone. Even Major Gen. Albert Stubblebine, USAF (ret.), concluded that no Boeing 757 had hit the Pentagon for the obvious reason that he could discern no imprint of the wings on the building.

Stubblebine, of course, was the NSA’s signals intelligence image analyst, but that has not deterred Jim Hoffman, who has also argued that discussing the Pentagon “might be a trap”, since the Pentagon might release some of the more than 80 videos it possesses that would show “what really happened” as opposed to the five frames it has released, one of which shows the image of a small plane that is about half the size of a Boeing 757. Why anyone should take Hoffman seriously about any of this is beyond me, because, based upon my personal experience, he has gone out of his way to manipulate the 9/11 Truth community, even to the extent of creating an elaborate pretext to excuse Larry Silverstein from having made an obvious concession to the controlled demolition of WTC-7 with his “pull it” remark during an interview with PBS. He has had some effect, it would appear, since even David Ray Griffin, perhaps the leading expert on 9/11 in the world today, has avoided pushing the Pentagon front-and-center, where it properly belongs. As Dennis Cimino explains, the “official account” is a fantasy, where the American public would benefit from knowing that even the Pentagon attack was a fabrication and a fraud.
The Pentagon attack is a fantasy

DENNIS CIMINO

On September 11, 2001, we were told by the U.S. government that at 9:38 a.m. on that day, a Boeing 757 jetliner impacted the building at a speed of approximately 465 knots after executing a 330 degree turn for no apparent reason any sane person can think of, as the building is highly distinguishable from virtually any altitude above 2000 feet for several miles. The official story has the flight path just to the side of the west wing of the White House, which in any person’s estimation is a significantly more important target than is the building that houses the military managers who run the Military Industrial Complex. We were also told that nobody could have foreseen this type of attack, even though just a year earlier, a drill was held, and a nearly identical B-757 American Airlines plane was flown by Chuck Burlingame himself, as the Pentagon ran a preparedness drill to simulate such an attack.

"Pentagon Mass Casualty Exercise", 24-26 October 2000

Unfortunately, many people in America are unaware that the Washington, D.C. area has Raytheon “Basic Point Defense” missile battery armament embedded on several building rooftops there, using Sea Sparrow air defense missiles, much in the same fashion that Moscow has a system that NATO code named ‘Yo Yo’ that maintains radar surveillance and provides protection to the Kremlin and other high value targets from military incursions. In other words, the Pentagon was protected not only by these missile batteries, but also had in place a number of adjacent fighter bases which provided a fairly high level of protection given the fact that the plane inbound to the Pentagon from the east was not supersonic as are the adjacent fighter jets based in the area, and therefore easily could have been intercepted and at the very least, temporarily deflected off course if not shot down, if need be, long before it reached the target on the building, known as ‘The Catchers Mit’ due to recent renovations which added several inches of KEVLAR armor to that face of the building to protect the occupants. For those of you who are not familiar with Kevlar armor and how it works, the only much more vastly superior but significantly more expensive armor is ceramic in nature and is often used jointly with Kevlar to protect personnel from high energy armor piercing rounds fired by tanks and other anti armor weapons such as are mounted on most military attack helicopters, for instance, such as the 30mm cannon and the infamous Obama well used ‘hellfire’ anti tank missile system.

In addition, there is a system, known as “Identification Friend or Foe” aka I.F.F., which uses a special MODE 4A feature that only military aircraft use, whereupon special encryption. Additionally, a mission specific MODEX aka SEDSCAF number for each plane is assigned and if it does not meet the PLAN OF THE DAY for the area, IT STILL IS NOT GOING TO PASS MODE 4A MUSTER. It would be shot down. No “if”s, no “and”s and no “but”s!!!!

The proper MODEX / SEDSCAF NUMBER is what enables an aircraft them to penetrate prohibited or military restricted airspace such as that which surrounds both the White House and the Pentagon, as well as a number of military installations around the globe. This feature is necessary to prevent the possible mis-identification of a civilian aircraft by military air defense personnel who man radar scopes in the Washington, D.C. area, 24/7, watching for unauthorized aircraft who do not have the proper MODE 4A response capability or code in use with their on board transponders. Only military aircraft have this Mode 4A capability, or what is often referred to as ‘crypto Beacon Video’ military ATC specialists.

The "hit point" on the ground floor

In any case, the reason I mention this is that there are several echelons of protection which allegedly all summarily ‘failed’ us on Sept. 11th., 2001, and allowed an unidentified plane hurtling towards Washington, D.C.’s protected airspace, long after the First targets in New York had already been seriously damaged. To be honest, it is simply not possible for virtually every one of these systems to have been overcome by 19 guys wielding no more than box cutters. It took a lot of sabotage or unplugging on the ground to do that.

In any case, there was plenty of warning that an ‘unknown’ and presumed ‘hostile’ target was inbound to the Washington, D.C. area from the area around West Virginia to the east, and more than sufficient time existed to scramble fighters and or light off the Basic Point Missile Defense or BPDMS radar systems (AKA as N.S.S.M.S.) and missile defenses that are installed in rooftops there in the Washington, D.C. area since the mid 1980’s. Basic Point Defense uses a CW target illuminator radar to allow the semi-actively guided Sea Sparrow missile to radar home on reflected energy coming back from the target aircraft after the radar has locked onto the target. Though these are short range, they are so effective many high value targets in the Navy use this system, with it’s infamous MK-112 Fire Control radar system. It’s known that NATO’s Sea Sparrow was in place in the mid 1980’s in Washington, D.C. as point defense against air attack. It’s not unreasonable to assume that an updated version of N.S.S.M.S. / Mk 112/MK-115 would be there in September, 2001., by any stretch of the imagination. In all likelihood, it would be a version of the PAC-3 ‘Patriot’ Missile system, another Raytheon toy. One more point would like to make is that the White House, which this aircraft would breeze right past, had agents on the roof with shoulder fired STINGER MISSILES, and on this particular day, you can rest assured that with the unknown target hurtling toward Washington, D.C., those agents were on that roof with those STINGER MISSILES out of their cases and on their shoulders as they scanned the clear morning sky for the coming intruder plane. Why did they not fire at it?

So, on September 11, 2001, what took place was a plane that was not a scheduled air carrier flight, per the Bureau of Transportation Statistics or BTS database, departed Boston’s Logan Field from a departure gate that does not match the coordinates transmitted by the ACARS system, as well as stored in the provided by the N.T.S.B., flight data recorder records, on that non-scheduled American Airlines flight, aka ‘FLT 77’ per the government’s submission, and this plane left Boston’s Logan Airport with a hijacker on board who was capable of flying a very sophisticated and complex airplane that the average pilot in the F.A.A. pilot registry could probably not really fly with such precision. This plane took off, climbed to it’s cruise altitude, and then over W. Virginia, was hijacked in 3 minutes time, and then executed a ‘standard rate’ turn which no hijacker would have performed with such precision, and immediately turned inbound to the perfect heading that would take it directly to the Pentagon, even though for hijackers to do this, would have meant they would have had to know exactly where the aircraft was immediately — and I do mean, IMMEDIATELY — and then have the requisite knowledge of how to re-program the complicated FMS computers in the aircraft to display target area data to them, because as you might have guessed, they did not bring their own GPS system with them on the planes that would have given them immediate positional information as well as a much more immediate way of turning the plane onto a magnetic heading that would take it to Washington, D.C. from that nice precise standard rate turnaround in the skies over West Virginia. Impressed? I sure am, as would be many B-757 line captains who fly this airplane every day, especially with the level of complexity the FMS or Flight Management System on that airplane has, that has on at least one occasion, led to the crash and destruction of a similarly equipped American Airlines B-757 in the mountains just outside of Cali, Colombia just a few years before this.

What was more alarming that day is that during the ‘3’ minute hijacking interval, neither the cockpit door opened (reported via the Digital Flight Data Acquisition Unit or DFDAU as it is known as) and the autopilot did not disengage. Now imagine yourself being Captain Chuck Burlingame and his copilot, sitting in their seats, when these hijackers slid under the door crack on the floor and re-constituted themselves as full fledged box-cutter wielding terrorists, who then proceeded to cut the heads off these two airmen who’s job is to protect their aircraft and it’s passengers at all costs. Neither of these guys were 98 pound weaklings, yet in three minutes they had been incapacitated and were out of their seats without touching either the yokes or the rudders, which would have immediately DISENGAGED the aircraft’s autopilot system which was flying the machine at that time. The plane did not yaw, roll, pitch or otherwise change any flight parameter but remained perfectly on course, and for some reason, two minutes later the hijackers finally decided to turn OFF the transponder to make it a bit harder for ATC to be positively sure this plane was the same one they were watching before the hijacking took place. Now, one more thing you need to know is that for either of the flight crew to either push the talk button on the yokes or to change the transponder code to one that tells the ATC personnel monitoring the flight that they were in a ‘hijack’ situation, would have taken mere seconds to do. Yet, this was not done. And the autopilot did not disengage though it is presumed the two pilots would have resisted and fought for their very lives and at least kicked the rudder pedals and or moved the yokes. Yet they did not do any of these things. Merely holding the push to talk button and screaming whilst having one’s head cut off would have gotten someone’s attention, I do think. Too many ways the crew could send a duress message to the ATC en route centers, and not once was this attempted. Why? The best and most reasonable reason is that these were not hijacked planes at all, but planes flown by military personnel or crews who thought they were innocently participating in the drills. And as such, these would NOT have been passenger flights, as it is illegal to use passengers in military exercises under any circumstances, due to the risk involved. This is another clue that points to the fact that no hijacking took place in this aircraft at all, because had that been the case, they had plenty of time to use a duress system to alert ATC that they were under attack in that cockpit.

more here with video and images

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/03/13/911-the-official-account-of-the-pentagon-attack-is-a-fantasy/

Oouthere
15th March 2012, 20:06
Seeing where this article originated sent tingles throughout my body :cool:

Rich

Paul
15th March 2012, 21:56
Seeing where this article originated sent tingles throughout my body :cool:

Rich

Indeed :)

WhiteFeather
15th March 2012, 22:16
Oops, Doh, looks like Donnie "Osmond" Rumsfeld has some explaining to do right about now! Ya Think?


Great Job Donnie, And Awesome Job By The Public Relations Photographer. Fantastic Photo Shoot of Donnie Helping Out, When That Granite Missile Struck The Pentagon, I Meant Plane, My Bad.


http://www.history.navy.mil/pics/9-11/pentagon_911-20.jpg

TargeT
15th March 2012, 23:44
http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Califuselage.jpg
"Piece of fuselage James Hanson, J.D., traced back to a crash in Cali, Columbia, in 1995"


it just keeps piling up.. now if only someone who acts like they want smaller government & 'Preaches' against the military industrial complex would stand up and take ownership *cough*RON PAUL*cough*

Dennis Leahy
16th March 2012, 02:57
Very well written article. Shreds the official account better than any other (Pentagon) account I've see, Thanks iceni tribe!

Dennis

Paul
26th June 2012, 02:48
The original full pdf, authored by Jim Fetzer and Dennis Cimino, documenting the Pentagon attack on 9/11, that was at the above linked VeteransToday.com link has disappeared. Via way of Jim Fetzer to Dennis Leahy comes this copy of that pdf, attached to this post.

iceni tribe
27th June 2012, 17:22
ive just been in touch with veterans today, asking why the the article has disappeared and their reply was it was taken down by request of the author.
which author Jim Fetzer or Dennis Cimino i have no idea.

Ceedub
27th June 2012, 20:03
ive just been in touch with veterans today, asking why the the article has disappeared and their reply was it was taken down by request of the author.
which author Jim Fetzer or Dennis Cimino i have no idea.

The pulling of the article should be a staggering wake up to the readers of Veteran's Today, as much or more so than the article itself. I wonder how long it was up for? I'm stunned by the reality of it even though it's the expected result, especially having found the dead link myself before reading on. Thanks for preserving it Dennis/Paul.

Gratitude, CW

iceni tribe
30th June 2012, 14:26
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBIEMHWe7dE

For consideration purposes: "9/11 Pentagon Flight Recorder Fraud Revealed"?!

Dennis speaks out.

steveofengland
3rd August 2012, 19:04
I've been having a debate with some people and using the above article I was lampooned with the following.

I've been thinking about this essay by Dennis Cimino that you posted and thought you'd find the following links interesting. The best thing about the first two links is that, although they mention 9/11, they aren't written with that in mind. In other words, there's no bias either way from the author and they're both from reputable sources.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...004Jul7_2.html

Here are two exerpts if you can't be bothered to open it:

More than 2,000 aircraft "of interest" have been detected over Washington airspace since January 2003.

The air defence system for Washington is unique and many of its operations are classified. Unveiled in January 2003, the system was created to track all flights and to intercept aircraft that follow strict protocols. It replaced the fighter patrols that guarded the nation's capital in September 2011.

And this one...

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/09/1...1.air.defense/

And this...

http://911myths.com/html/pentagon_missile_batteries.html

Cimino's entire argument hinges on the fact that any non-military plane would automatically be shot down by ground defences. In my opinion, the above links cast serious doubt over everything that he says.

So if he's wrong about that, what else is he wrong about?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash1711
He mentioned something about the cockpit door not being opened... if this can be proven then what's the governments argument against this?
Cimino was adamant that if the cockpit door was opened then it would definitely be recorded on the FDR (Flight Data Recorder).

This is a link showing a differing opinion by a pilot and his acquaintance from Delta Airlines:

http://m.voices.yahoo.com/more-9-11-myths-9151347.html

Paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 are the main points of interest.

Not sure how to carry on the debate and looking for some fightback.

===

[Mod-edit: The first three of the four links in the above post were formatted incorrectly by the original poster. The links as posted do not work, and there is no way for me to guess what they were intended to link to, so I cannot fix them.

Update - I did track down one of them. Now just the first two links are broken. -Paul.]

iceni tribe
7th August 2012, 17:39
hi steveofengland
i couldn't open the washington post article and the post from 9/11 myths is a joke ,
when the writer claims "As a professional pilot, I can say that it is unlikely that the cockpit door was monitored on the FDR" key word here is UNLIKELY and then states An acquaintance who worked in the training department at Delta Air Lines before and after 9/11 agrees that cockpit doors were probably not monitored. " again keyword here is PROBABLY.
you can give David W. Thornton the author of this rubbish the link below

9/11: PENTAGON AIRCRAFT HIJACK IMPOSSIBLE
FLIGHT DECK DOOR CLOSED FOR ENTIRE FLIGHT

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=18405

theirs 24 odd pages of good info and they take apart warren stutt version of the FDR and label him a disinfo troll.
hope this helps , ive been a few rounds myself over this issue and if you need a specific question answering i will pass it onto Rob at pilots for truth.

Prodigal Son
7th August 2012, 18:18
I've been having a debate with some people and using the above article I was lampooned with the following.

I've been thinking about this essay by Dennis Cimino that you posted and thought you'd find the following links interesting. The best thing about the first two links is that, although they mention 9/11, they aren't written with that in mind. In other words, there's no bias either way from the author and they're both from reputable sources.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...004Jul7_2.html

Here are two exerpts if you can't be bothered to open it:

More than 2,000 aircraft "of interest" have been detected over Washington airspace since January 2003.

The air defence system for Washington is unique and many of its operations are classified. Unveiled in January 2003, the system was created to track all flights and to intercept aircraft that follow strict protocols. It replaced the fighter patrols that guarded the nation's capital in September 2011.

And this one...

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/09/1...1.air.defense/

And this...

http://911myths.com/html/pentagon_mi...batteries.html

Cimino's entire argument hinges on the fact that any non-military plane would automatically be shot down by ground defences. In my opinion, the above links cast serious doubt over everything that he says.

So if he's wrong about that, what else is he wrong about?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash1711
He mentioned something about the cockpit door not being opened... if this can be proven then what's the governments argument against this?
Cimino was adamant that if the cockpit door was opened then it would definitely be recorded on the FDR (Flight Data Recorder).

This is a link showing a differing opinion by a pilot and his acquaintance from Delta Airlines:

http://m.voices.yahoo.com/more-9-11-myths-9151347.html

Paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 are the main points of interest.

Not sure how to carry on the debate and looking for some fightback.

The Washington Post and CNN articles have both been taken down already. The 911 Myths link hangs there and doesn't open. Unbelievable....

I was banned from the AboveTopSecret forum (a shill haven) a couple of weeks ago and I really do believe its because I got a little too close to the truth with what really happened at the Pentagon.... a flyover from an approach path just north of the Navy Annex complete with the fake downing of the five light poles as a decoy. It seems to be the one aspect of 911 that the Cabal really gets their panties in a twist about if anybody gets too close to solving the puzzle.

Anybody who thinks the evidence at the Pentagon is consistent with a 757 hitting it is a seriously deluded mind-controlled lemming that would make Joe Goebbels proud.....

iceni tribe
8th August 2012, 18:04
huge article by Peter Eyre – Middle East Consultant – 8/8/2012

http://eyreinternational.wordpress.com/2012/08/08/the-greatest-illusion-ever-performed-911-new-modified-version/

now ive been investigating 9 /11 for nearly 5 years now , i'm not a member of any truth group nor would i want to be , ive been toe to toe with internet trolls over many 9/11 issues and now to have a journalist with the pedigree of Peter Eyre confirming everything Ive found out for myself is shall i say rather satisfying.
now all we need is a wave of arrests from the very top down to the internet trolls who are all complicit in conspiracy to aid and abet murderers.

sentence should be from hanging to delivering the parasites to the families of the Afghans and Iraqis who have lost loved ones over this monumental farce.

Oouthere
8th August 2012, 21:38
I’m sorry, but just because someone is a journalist does not make them right (Jim Marrs got some of it wrong as well). There are SOOOOOO many provable errors in his analysis that it makes my blood boil.

I am willing to put my money where my mouth is….I’ll debate this with anyone and any point that is disproven in my theory will cost me $20, but it also works in reverse. Points that I’ll make up front….flight recorder data has to be thrown out as it does not match what happened. The arguments have to be based on physical evidence.

Rich

Dennis Leahy
28th August 2012, 01:14
I've been having a debate with some people...

I've been thinking about this essay by Dennis Cimino that you posted...

Cimino's entire argument hinges on the fact that any non-military plane would automatically be shot down by ground defences. In my opinion, the above links cast serious doubt over everything that he says.

So if he's wrong about that, what else is he wrong about?
...looking for some fightback.

You may have read a different article than the one that Dennis Cimino wrote and that Jim Fetzer submitted to Veterans Today. In that article, many aspects of the official lies were addressed. I find it condescending and totally inaccurate that you'd assert that "Cimino's entire argument hinges on " [____________] (anything. fill-in the blank) This isn't a courtroom battle where we are using false assertions to try to discredit a witness, is it? Dennis Cimino's article does not hinge on this fact. This discredits and discounts all the work he did in this very hard-hitting investigation of the facts.

Dennis C is also NOT just some guy (like me) on the Internet, interested in hearing the truth about what really happened on 9/11. Dennis C is an airline pilot with over 2000 hours of commercial flying experience over the course of 35 years, and in-depth aeronautical understanding. He also held DOD clearances above "secret." The head clowns at NIST proved that just having credentials doesn't guarantee that someone won't vomit forth lie after lie, but if you're going to go back and argue about any of the specifics in the article, I would suggest that (in addition to unmasking and foregoing anonymity), you might also want to talk a bit about your credentials to argue - on par - with Dennis C's assertions.

Shredding someone's work and throwing it in the toilet really should have some basis in fact, no? I see three broken links and a working link that leads to an obvious shill/debunker website - a site with so many screamingly obvious lies I cannot believe you would present it as evidence to bolster a case against Dennis C's article.


I’m sorry, but just because someone is a journalist does not make them right ...

There are SOOOOOO many provable errors in his analysis that it makes my blood boil.

I am willing to put my money where my mouth is….I’ll debate this with anyone and any point that is disproven in my theory will cost me $20, but it also works in reverse. Points that I’ll make up front….flight recorder data has to be thrown out as it does not match what happened. The arguments have to be based on physical evidence.

Rich
Rich,

Let's up the stakes. I'll bet you $2.3 Trillion Dollars (uncannily, the same amount that Donald Rumsfeld announced on September 10th, 2001 was missing from the Pentagon), that the official story is a lie. I'll bet that a jumbo jet did not crash into the pentagon.

Just exactly as Major General Albert "Bert" N. Stubblebine III states in this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=daNr_TrBw6E) video, that is not a jumbo jet crash site.

Just exactly as someone that I know, who actually was a United Airlines pilot, and really did fly jumbo jets - 747, 757, 767 - took one look at the images of the Pentagon and said "There ... is ... no ... way ... that ... a ... 757 ... hit ... that ... building."

I hope that if you're going to "debate" this against Major General Stubblebine, the United jumbo jet pilot I know, and Dennis Cimino, you had better have a large stash of $20 bills. Or, take my bet. I could really use the $2.3 Trillion. I could do a lot of good with that money.

==========================================

To whom it may concern:

Further to anyone who wants to "debate" or cast doubts on Dennis Cimino's article, Dennis C would request that first, unmask from your anonymous forum persona. Dennis C put himself at great risk standing up for the truth under his own name, and publishing that article. The vast, vast majority of people who have damning evidence about the US government's role in the events of 9/11 have remained silent (perhaps justifiably frightened for their family members' safety, perhaps simply cowards, and some who know the truth are sociopaths who gained financially or militarily.)

Let's give credit where credit is due, and not just do a "drive-by strafing" of Dennis C's article because it's fun to debunk people searching for 9/11 truth. As recently occurred here on the Horus Ra thread, arguing for the sake of arguing or taking "pot shots" at serious researchers for sport - this behavior is not just frowned upon at Avalon, it's not tolerated. Legitimate criticism of specific points is one thing - wholesale discounting of a man's reputation and his work is something entirely different.

Lastly, I'm going to make myself just as clear as icini tribe and Prodigal Son just did, and remind us all that 9/11 was a pretext for war - war-for-profit nonetheless - by sociopaths and psychopaths. It was the murder of approximately 3000 US citizens, and perhaps 1000 first responders that gave their all to help are also fighting cancers and other life threatening diseases.

As a direct consequence of 9/11, over ONE MILLION Iraqi and Afghani individuals are dead now, and hundreds of thousands more displaced...and their countries (except for oil fields, pipelines, and military bases) are destroyed. The Patriot Act was a direct result, as was the militarization of police and creation of the Police State, the creation and metastasis of Homeland Security and the Security State, the persecution of whistleblowers, the creation of publicly admitted, sanctioned torture, the continuation of the PNAC plans in the rest of the Middle East and Northern Africa... this ain't a game.

In my estimation, this is the nefarious work of the most evil and cunning people in recorded history - and they're not even finished yet! So, anyone wants to defend the lying sons-of-bitches, the murderous monsters and their complicit minions is gonna get an earful from me.

Avalon is an extremely diverse community, and I have no problem with debate over the specifics of how some of 9/11 was accomplished (like mini-nukes -vs- DEW -vs- nanothermite and conventional charges in the buildings), but NO ONE at Avalon should be regurgitating the official lies of the US government as the truth. I'd amend Prodigal Son's statement to read, Anybody who believes the official narrative/propaganda of 9/11, as told by the US government and NIST, is a seriously deluded mind-controlled lemming that would make Joe Goebbels proud. Further, if a person does not believe the official bedtime story but is covertly acting as a deliberate disinformation agent, they are full accomplices to domestic mass murder and international genocide.

Dennis

Sierra
28th August 2012, 02:11
It was the murder of approximately 3000 US citizens, and perhaps 1000 first responders that gave their all to help are also fighting cancers and other life threatening diseases.

As a direct consequence of 9/11, over ONE MILLION Iraqi and Afghani individuals are dead now, and hundreds of thousands more displaced...and their countries (except for oil fields, pipelines, and military bases) are destroyed. The Patriot Act was a direct result, as was the militarization of police and creation of the Police State, the creation and metastasis of Homeland Security and the Security State, the persecution of whistleblowers, the creation of publicly admitted, sanctioned torture, the continuation of the PNAC plans in the rest of the Middle East and Northern Africa... this ain't a game.

In my estimation, this is the nefarious work of the most evil and cunning people in recorded history - and they're not even finished yet! So, anyone wants to defend the lying sons-of-bitches, the murderous monsters and their complicit minions is gonna get an earful from me.

Avalon is an extremely diverse community, and I have no problem with debate over the specifics of how some of 9/11 was accomplished (like mini-nukes -vs- DEW -vs- nanothermite and conventional charges in the buildings), but NO ONE at Avalon should be regurgitating the official lies of the US government as the truth. I'd amend Prodigal Son's statement to read, Anybody who believes the official narrative/propaganda of 9/11, as told by the US government and NIST, is a seriously deluded mind-controlled lemming that would make Joe Goebbels proud. Further, if a person does not believe the official bedtime story but is covertly acting as a deliberate disinformation agent, they are full accomplices to domestic mass murder and international genocide.

Dennis

It was a well executed false flag event, in terms of the results it produced.

Bill Ryan
28th August 2012, 02:24
I've been having a debate with some people...

I've been thinking about this essay by Dennis Cimino that you posted...

Cimino's entire argument hinges on the fact that any non-military plane would automatically be shot down by ground defences. In my opinion, the above links cast serious doubt over everything that he says.

So if he's wrong about that, what else is he wrong about?
...looking for some fightback.

You may have read a different article than the one that Dennis Cimino wrote and that Jim Fetzer submitted to Veterans Today. In that article, many aspects of the official lies were addressed. I find it condescending and totally inaccurate that you'd assert that "Cimino's entire argument hinges on " [____________] (anything. fill-in the blank) This isn't a courtroom battle where we are using false assertions to try to discredit a witness, is it? Dennis Cimino's article does not hinge on this fact. This discredits and discounts all the work he did in this very hard-hitting investigation of the facts.

Dennis C is also NOT just some guy (like me) on the Internet, interested in hearing the truth about what really happened on 9/11. Dennis C is an airline pilot with over 2000 hours of commercial flying experience over the course of 35 years, and in-depth aeronautical understanding. He also held DOD clearances above "secret." The head clowns at NIST proved that just having credentials doesn't guarantee that someone won't vomit forth lie after lie, but if you're going to go back and argue about any of the specifics in the article, I would suggest that (in addition to unmasking and foregoing anonymity), you might also want to talk a bit about your credentials to argue - on par - with Dennis C's assertions.

Shredding someone's work and throwing it in the toilet really should have some basis in fact, no? I see three broken links and a working link that leads to an obvious shill/debunker website - a site with so many screamingly obvious lies I cannot believe you would present it as evidence to bolster a case against Dennis C's article.


I’m sorry, but just because someone is a journalist does not make them right ...

There are SOOOOOO many provable errors in his analysis that it makes my blood boil.

I am willing to put my money where my mouth is….I’ll debate this with anyone and any point that is disproven in my theory will cost me $20, but it also works in reverse. Points that I’ll make up front….flight recorder data has to be thrown out as it does not match what happened. The arguments have to be based on physical evidence.

Rich
Rich,

Let's up the stakes. I'll bet you $2.3 Trillion Dollars (uncannily, the same amount that Donald Rumsfeld announced on September 10th, 2001 was missing from the Pentagon), that the official story is a lie. I'll bet that a jumbo jet did not crash into the pentagon.

Just exactly as Major General Albert "Bert" N. Stubblebine III states in this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=daNr_TrBw6E) video, that is not a jumbo jet crash site.

Just exactly as someone that I know, who actually was a United Airlines pilot, and really did fly jumbo jets - 747, 757, 767 - took one look at the images of the Pentagon and said "There ... is ... no ... way ... that ... a ... 757 ... hit ... that ... building."

I hope that if you're going to "debate" this against Major General Stubblebine, the United jumbo jet pilot I know, and Dennis Cimino, you had better have a large stash of $20 bills. Or, take my bet. I could really use the $2.3 Trillion. I could do a lot of good with that money.

==========================================

To whom it may concern:

Further to anyone who wants to "debate" or cast doubts on Dennis Cimino's article, Dennis C would request that first, unmask from your anonymous forum persona. Dennis C put himself at great risk standing up for the truth under his own name, and publishing that article. The vast, vast majority of people who have damning evidence about the US government's role in the events of 9/11 have remained silent (perhaps justifiably frightened for their family members' safety, perhaps simply cowards, and some who know the truth are sociopaths who gained financially or militarily.)

Let's give credit where credit is due, and not just do a "drive-by strafing" of Dennis C's article because it's fun to debunk people searching for 9/11 truth. As recently occurred here on the Horus Ra thread, arguing for the sake of arguing or taking "pot shots" at serious researchers for sport - this behavior is not just frowned upon at Avalon, it's not tolerated. Legitimate criticism of specific points is one thing - wholesale discounting of a man's reputation and his work is something entirely different.

Lastly, I'm going to make myself just as clear as icini tribe and Prodigal Son just did, and remind us all that 9/11 was a pretext for war - war-for-profit nonetheless - by sociopaths and psychopaths. It was the murder of approximately 3000 US citizens, and perhaps 1000 first responders that gave their all to help are also fighting cancers and other life threatening diseases.

As a direct consequence of 9/11, over ONE MILLION Iraqi and Afghani individuals are dead now, and hundreds of thousands more displaced...and their countries (except for oil fields, pipelines, and military bases) are destroyed. The Patriot Act was a direct result, as was the militarization of police and creation of the Police State, the creation and metastasis of Homeland Security and the Security State, the persecution of whistleblowers, the creation of publicly admitted, sanctioned torture, the continuation of the PNAC plans in the rest of the Middle East and Northern Africa... this ain't a game.

In my estimation, this is the nefarious work of the most evil and cunning people in recorded history - and they're not even finished yet! So, anyone wants to defend the lying sons-of-bitches, the murderous monsters and their complicit minions is gonna get an earful from me.

Avalon is an extremely diverse community, and I have no problem with debate over the specifics of how some of 9/11 was accomplished (like mini-nukes -vs- DEW -vs- nanothermite and conventional charges in the buildings), but NO ONE at Avalon should be regurgitating the official lies of the US government as the truth. I'd amend Prodigal Son's statement to read, Anybody who believes the official narrative/propaganda of 9/11, as told by the US government and NIST, is a seriously deluded mind-controlled lemming that would make Joe Goebbels proud. Further, if a person does not believe the official bedtime story but is covertly acting as a deliberate disinformation agent, they are full accomplices to domestic mass murder and international genocide.

Dennis


Hi, All:

In response to the discussion above, Jim Fetzer's colleague Dennis Cimino wrote to the Avalon Forum with a requested clarification.

Jim Fetzer has also now applied to join Project Avalon as a member (and has been accepted). I also assured Dennis Cimino and Jim Fetzer that the following statement would be posted.








The reason that the VT article; "The Official Account about the Pentagon attack is a FANTASY" written by myself and sponsored by Prof Fetzer at Veteran's Today was 'pulled' is that Veteran's Today made that story unavailable immediately after my Vancouver Hearing talk referencing the article. The excuse given by VT at the time was that they were 'repairing it' or doing something to fix it, when in fact, this would have required Jim Fetzer's approval as he was the submittal agent. They did NOT have authority to mess with that article or make it OFF LINE. Hence, I then demanded ALL WORK OF MINE be removed from Veteran's Today, via Jim Fetzer, and the story was moved to Fetzer's website. It is not appropriate for anyone in your blog to cite or infer CRIMINALITY occurred and was the reason for article removal. That is not correct. The reason was that Veteran's Today, without Fetzer's approval, had made that story UNAVAILABLE after I had specifically referenced it in my speech in Vancouver, B.C. on June 17, 2001. I have issues with anyone inferring that anything in that story was CRIMINALITY on either my part or Jim Fetzer's part.

feel free to contact me if you need further explanation or contact Jim Fetzer at

jfetzer@d.umn.edu (jfetzer@d.umn.edu)

Thanks,

D. Cimino

Oouthere
28th August 2012, 02:37
Hiya Dennis,

I'll give you any credentials you want....I'd love to talk on the phone to debate this. The truth needs to be in the open but it needs to be only the truth.

Richard L. Rogers
Wiggins, MS

Dennis Leahy
28th August 2012, 03:14
Hiya Dennis,

I'll give you any credentials you want....I'd love to talk on the phone to debate this. The truth needs to be in the open but it needs to be only the truth.

Richard L. Rogers
Wiggins, MSHi Richard,

If you have data, please make it public.

Jim Fetzer just joined. I invited Dennis Cimino to join as well. (I hope he does.) Then I would not need to be a go-between if you have specific points to argue.

Besides, I'm going to be worthless to argue with if you're going to talk about technical issues beyond my understanding, such as aeronautical engineering and the capability of a jumbo jet to fly at high speed and low altitude (this is just an example of one of the kinds of details that I see people arguing about the Pentagon missile puncture site) - or other technical issues that Dennis C will have to answer.

My bet is working backwards: A jumbo jet (757) did not slam into the Pentagon. I bet $2.3 Trillion Dollars on that. They have even had 11 years to make fake footage, but even they know they can't show that big 'ol wingspan approaching the building, grass unscathed, and visually "explain" how those wings didn't leave "wing prints."

I was talking to a 9/11 deunker (I'm not saying you're a debunker) not too long ago about the impossibility of WTC building 7 to have fallen a free-fall speed in any sort of natural collapse. He explained that the buildings were mostly full of air, so there you have it. The physics of the structural steel is dismissed and the notion is inserted that the physics formulas do work out, because there was nothing but air in the way. I suppose if 3 miracles can happen on one day (the first, second, and third steel framed buildings in history to collapse due to fire) that perhaps both wings of the 757 could have inexplicably sheared off moments before impact, and were sucked into the partial vacuum created by the fuselage zooming past - thus entering the same missile, er, I mean fuselage impact hole and leaving no "wing prints" on the building's exterior. The guy I spoke with about building 7 would probably remind me that a jumbo jet is mostly air anyway.

Heck, maybe you're not even contesting the impact was not a jumbo jet. Maybe you're focused on other details like cabin doors or NORAD blips or something. You said about Dennis C's article:
"There are SOOOOOO many provable errors in his analysis that it makes my blood boil." I should probably shut up and give you a chance to list the provable errors. But, let me ask the one burning question first: Do you agree with the official story of what happened at the Pentagon on 9/11, and did a 757 slam into the Pentagon or not? (oops, that was two questions)

Dennis

Oouthere
28th August 2012, 03:39
Hiya Dennis,

My only argument is a plane did hit the Pentagon. There are photos of the front landing strut, a few rims, and the turbine that everyone says does not fit but it actually does. The turbine fits the RB211 engine from a 757 and it is one of the last turbines on the shaft. Aluminum cans disappear in a camp fire and so would the skin of an aircraft. The impact hole was over 90' across when seen after the fire truck stream moved.

In the 1990's AA made over 100 remote landings using a 737 with an accuracy of a few centimeters. If you took the center of the roadway for your GPS coordinates it would make sense for the aircraft to take out the light poles. IMO it is foolish to believe someone crammed a light pole in a taxi, drove it down the roadway (with no one else noticing), getting out and throwing glass around your car to simulate an impact.

The black box data would need to be disregarded completely. The impact angle would be impossible (273' high at less than one second before impact) as the light poles were less than 40' high. Besides, if your plane is being remoted in would you want that to show-up?

I agree with much of the truther movement, not all of it though. I believe the WTCs were rigged. I believe the aircraft over Shaksville, PA was shot down since an engine was found approximately 2000' feet away with debris sites at 3 miles and 8 miles out. I also believe the impact aircraft at the WTCs did hit and were remoted in. There are pictures of engines.

Overall, aircraft were used but not as told by the official story. Forget the data, look at the physical evidence.

Rich

Paul
28th August 2012, 04:15
Jim Fetzer has also now applied to join Project Avalon as a member (and has been accepted). I also assured Dennis Cimino and Jim Fetzer that the following statement would be posted.








... It is not appropriate for anyone in your blog to cite or infer CRIMINALITY occurred and was the reason for article removal ...

Thanks,

D. Cimino


I removed the sentence that had the word "criminality" in it, from a post a couple of months ago above. I'm not sure who was being labeled "criminal", as the sentence was ambiguous. But it was not appropriate in any case ... as Dennis Cimino states.

Paul
28th August 2012, 05:11
There are photos of the front landing strut, a few rims, and the turbine that everyone says does not fit but it actually does.
What happened to the rest of the plane?


Aluminum cans disappear in a camp fire and so would the skin of an aircraft.
But not the bulk of the engines. And it would take a roaring fire to even get the aluminum parts. No such plane is visible in the early pictures, nor had any such major fire even begun then, must less lasted long enough to disappear the bulk of any such plane.


The impact hole was over 90' across when seen after the fire truck stream moved.
But the hole was much smaller in the earlier pictures. What sort of crash of a large plane can (1) enter a building through a small hole, then (2) enlarge the hole 20 minutes later?

The black box data would need to be disregarded completely.
The absence of honest black box data cannot be ignored. The absence of any substantial portion of the surveillance video cannot be ignored.

Such absence of evidence of a major cover-up, as surely you'd agree. Such a cover-up could have included planting small portions of airplane hardware, given all the other evidence tampering and suppression that was obviously done. So we cannot take pictures of such hardware as reliable evidence, much less as the only reliable evidence to the exclusion of all else.


I agree with much of the truther movement, not all of it though. I believe the WTCs were rigged.
Good.


I also believe the impact aircraft at the WTCs did hit and were remoted in. There are pictures of engines.
No - not pictures of the engines as in pictures of more or less all of the engines reliably identifiable as being the two main engines.


Overall, aircraft were used but not as told by the official story. Forget the data, look at the physical evidence.
We don't know what was used. The physical evidence is too little and too easily planted, given the scope of the coverup that occurred here.

Paul
28th August 2012, 05:16
Aluminum cans disappear in a camp fire and so would the skin of an aircraft.
What do you use for your camp fires? Must be hot stuff.

Jet fuel burns at 260-315 °C (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_fuel) in the open air, and aluminum melts at 660 °C (http://cans.planetark.org/recycling-info/facts.cfm).

Jet fuel doesn't burn nearly hot enough in open air to melt, much less evaporate rather instantly, aluminum.

Dennis Leahy
28th August 2012, 06:00
Hiya Dennis,

My only argument is a plane did hit the Pentagon. There are photos of the front landing strut, a few rims, and the turbine that everyone says does not fit but it actually does. The turbine fits the RB211 engine from a 757 and it is one of the last turbines on the shaft. Aluminum cans disappear in a camp fire and so would the skin of an aircraft. The impact hole was over 90' across when seen after the fire truck stream moved.

In the 1990's AA made over 100 remote landings using a 737 with an accuracy of a few centimeters. If you took the center of the roadway for your GPS coordinates it would make sense for the aircraft to take out the light poles. IMO it is foolish to believe someone crammed a light pole in a taxi, drove it down the roadway (with no one else noticing), getting out and throwing glass around your car to simulate an impact.

The black box data would need to be disregarded completely. The impact angle would be impossible (273' high at less than one second before impact) as the light poles were less than 40' high. Besides, if your plane is being remoted in would you want that to show-up?

I agree with much of the truther movement, not all of it though. I believe the WTCs were rigged. I believe the aircraft over Shaksville, PA was shot down since an engine was found approximately 2000' feet away with debris sites at 3 miles and 8 miles out. I also believe the impact aircraft at the WTCs did hit and were remoted in. There are pictures of engines.

Overall, aircraft were used but not as told by the official story. Forget the data, look at the physical evidence.

Rich
Hi Rich,

Ahhhhh.. we can drop our swords. We're not THAT far apart. :~)

Now, if I can recommend not to paint Dennis C's article (and thus him and his overall reputation) with such a wide and dismissive brush. By now, you know he's not a journalist, he's an experienced commercial pilot who had the skills to analyze this Pentagon 757 crash hoax (my words) and wrote it up as an article.

I'm going to leave to others more knowledgeable about 757 engine parts whether that part was from a 757. (I heard it was "proven" to be from a 727, and suspected to be from a jet shot down over Columbia - but I'm just parroting, which is worthless. Dennis C and/or Jim Fetzer and others that know or have extensively studied the 757 will show up soon.)

I do think you had better check out the size of the impact hole, before the wall collapsed. Wasn't it about 16 feet? Photos after the wall fell down won't help us get to the truth. You had to have seen some of the photos showing many intact vertical columns and intact windows to the left and right of the impact hole.

Have you seen any of those incredible photos of a piece of straw shot halfway through a tree by a tornado? With enough acceleration, even a small mass has a lot of force. An "F5" tornado is about 261 to 319 MPH (I looked it up.) A jet would have been going even faster than an F5 tornado, correct? The minimum skin thickness on a jet wing is about 1/16" thick. That's not aluminum foil, it's actually pretty substantial. Imagine the damage a 1/16" minimum (plus struts are even thicker) thick aircraft aluminum wing, fifty-five feet long would do flying into a building at over 300 miles an hour.

To the architects of the 9/11 plan:
This was a really stupid (or really arrogant) plan, to take a 125 foot wingspan jet and say it had "disappeared like a can in a campfire" (or whatever they said) except for a central hole. If I was a psychopath planning this, I would have had explosives going off to the left and right of the missile, to at least make fake "wing marks." I would have also made damn sure I had some major faux "impact" damage from those big, heavy engines. If a piece of straw can penetrate halfway through a tree, think what one of those [____] ? pound engines should have done at that impact speed.

Nope, no jumbo jet. "If the glove does not fit, you must acquit." Er, in this case, the damage size and pattern does NOT fit a jumbo jet. I'd hate to be the one to argue with Stubblebine on what he saw and did not see in the photos that he "examined very carefully." He wasn't just "pretty sure." Dennis C concurs.

Just like at the WTC three-ring circus, where it is best to focus on the over 100 feet of free-fall acceleration speed observed by everyone (thanks to high school physics teacher David Chandler) including NIST, of building 7, I think that it is wise to focus on the impact area on the Pentagon, and not get too far away with the NORAD details or cabin doors opening... If there is no jumbo jet "fingerprint" on the Pentagon, then a jumbo jet did not crash into the Pentagon, and the other anomalies of that (supposed) flight and flight path are moot. There is no jumbo jet "fingerprint" on the Pentagon. Stubblebine, and the United pilot I know and Dennis C are correct that we were fed yet another steaming pile on that day, from that location.

I recently saw a story that showed that over 80% of what is shown, said, and printed as the "news" involves zero (ZERO!) investigative reporting, but rather is from "information" handed to the 'news' outlets, and simply read as if it is news. I have a pretty strong hunch the figure was even higher on 9/11. Especially comical was the BBC reporting that Building 7 had collapsed about 20 minutes before being imploded. Time magazine reported the words of a guy by the name of David Marra:

David Marra, 23, an information-technology specialist, had turned his BMW off an I-395 exit to the highway just west of the Pentagon when he saw an American Airlines jet swooping in, its wings wobbly, looking like it was going to slam right into the Pentagon: “It was 50 feet off the deck when he came in. It sounded like the pilot had the throttle completely floored. The plane rolled left and then rolled right. Then he caught an edge of his wing on the ground. There is a helicopter pad right in front of the side of the Pentagon. The wing touched there, then the plane cart-wheeled into the building.”My daughter would probably leave small marks in the grass at the Pentagon if she did a cartwheel there. I'm pretty sure a cartwheeling jet would too. More disinformation for the disinformation stew. An astounding pile of lies were officially spewed on 9/11, wrapped in fear and other highly charged emotion to bypass our BS detectors. Eventually, we calmed down, separated the emotion from the logic, and recognized a large percentage of what really went on that day.

I assume that they tortured Bradley Manning for a year and will find him guilty (regardless if they have any evidence) at least partially as an example to all the guys in the US military that know (pieces of) the truth of 9/11. Hell, maybe some young soldier has a copy of security footage that clearly shows the Pentagon missile. The current inhabitants of the US government would probably consider it treasonous to show it to the American public. I consider it treasonous not to. I still have faith that the psychopaths in the military are heavily outnumbered by good, honest people. I think something is going to show up.

Dennis

sdv
28th August 2012, 07:07
It might have been this thread that inspired me to research plane crashes and I found a database of photographs of just about every plane crash in the history of aviation - planes that exploded in the air, burst into flames, were shot down, nosedived into the ground and then exploded, crashed into buildings, and so on (all of which has confirmed my superstition that flying in an aeroplane is unnatural and human beings should not do so!) - there always is a lot of debris. The few photos I have seen of the aftermath of what happened at the Pentagon just do not match what it really looks like when a plane crashes into a building and then explodes or explodes and then crashes into a building.

Jim Fetzer
28th August 2012, 07:25
This is pretty bad. Richard does not appreciate that parts were planted, just as the piece of fuselage that came from a crash in Cali, Columbia, back in 1995 was planted. We know a lot about the Pentagon and the other crash sites, all of which appear to have been fabricated. For openers, let me observe that, based upon BTS records, Flights 11 and 77 were not even scheduled to fly that day. According to FAA Registration data, the planes corresponding to Flights 93 and 175 were not even de-registered until 28 September 2005. So how can planes that were not in the air have crashed on 9/11? And how can planes that crashed on 9/11 have still been in the air four years later?

Pilots for 9/11 Truth, moreover, have studied air/ground communications and determined that Flight 93 was in the air but was over Champaign-Urbana, IL, at the time that it was supposed to be crashing in Shanksville, PA, and that Flight 175 was also in the air but was over Harrisburg and Puttsburgh, PA, long after it had allegedly hit the South Tower. I have done quite a lot on the Pentagon, so I will add links to some of my articles about it, where the most recent is the most comprehensive on all the crash sites:

"What Didn't Happen at the Pentagon"
http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2010/01/what-didnt-happen-at-pentagon.html

"Inside Job: Seven Questions about 9/11"
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/07/05/inside-job-seven-questions-about-911/

“9/11: Planes/No Planes and ‘Video Fakery’”
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/02/20/911-planesno-planes-and-video-fakery/

“Reason and Rationality in Public Debate: The Case of Rob Balsamo”
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/04/01/reason-and-rationality-in-public-debate-the-case-of-rob-balsamo/

“Fakery and Fraud in the 'Official Account' of 9/11”
http://donaldfox.wordpress.com/2012/06/22/jim-fetzers-vancouver-powerpoint/

Since Dennis asked that I shift the article from Veterans Today to my blog, here is a link to the article, which includes important videos as well as the photos of the original:

“The official account of the Pentagon attack is a fantasy” (with Dennis Cimino)
http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2012/06/official-account-of-pentagon-attack-is.html

steveofengland
28th August 2012, 10:07
Thanks so much for the links and evidence, once I've studied it and grasped what I can from all of it I'll be sure to address all the issues that made me feel like I was losing the battle.
Its all made so much harder by people just dismissing me as just a "conspiracy nut" and then bringing a lot of other conspiracies to the fore, to be then picked apart by mindless sleepers intent on debunking anything and everything for kicks.
I'd also like to thank Jim Fetzer for coming along to help with this discussion, where would we be without people like yourself and Dennis C.
Thank you.

Oouthere
28th August 2012, 11:33
Due to my scheduling and other commitments I'm having a hard time putting forth my case.....but I'll stick it all on one posting (if possible). But 9/11 needs to be studied by everyone as a third party investigator (i.e. remove emotions and far fetched technology).

Rich

Jim Fetzer
28th August 2012, 13:34
Well, either we believe in logic and evidence or we do not. Why are you begging the question by assuming that "far fetched technology" was not used? The whole idea was to fool the American people. Do you recall the interview with Donald Rumsfeld and Richard Myers in which they were asked if the Pentagon ever used weapons or devices that were in the development stage and, with some hemming and hawing, Rumsfeld said that, under some special conditions, they might do that? If they had used some kind of directed energy device by creating and electromagnetic field to destroy the computerized components on the King Air A-100 that crashed near the Eveleth-Virginia Airport in Minnesota on 25 October 2002, killing Senator Paul Wellstone, his wife Shiela, their daughter, three aides and the two pilots, are you telling me that that didn't happen because it would have used "far fetched technology"? The Directed Energy Professional Society held its 8th annual meeting in Hawaii in 2004. I recommend "The Sen. Wellstone Assassination", http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Vbf49kzWFw and "The NTSB Failed Wellstone", http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/070605_wellstone.shtml And bear in mind Sherlock Holme's wise maxim: "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth".

Dennis Leahy
28th August 2012, 14:01
Due to my scheduling and other commitments I'm having a hard time putting forth my case.....but I'll stick it all on one posting (if possible). But 9/11 needs to be studied by everyone as a third party investigator (i.e. remove emotions and far fetched technology).

Rich
Hi Rich,

Please don't "deus ex machina" out. I would tell you that Dennis C was "hurt" by allegations that "There are SOOOOOO many provable errors in his analysis that it makes my blood boil." but in truth, he's more pissed off than hurt. He and I had quite an email exchange over the past day or so, and I can predict that after what he feels were sweeping, negative, debunking-style generalities that (if left unchallenged) utterly discount his 10,000 hours of in-depth research for that article, as well as leave the impression that he, as the author, was inept and allowed numerous, easily provable falsehoods in the article ...well, a hit-and-run followed by a scheduling conflict that prevents you from going toe-to-toe with Dennis C and the data is not going to make this right.

Hey, life happens, and you may be needed elsewhere - not a problem. However, since you're unable to take the time to back-up your assertions right now, and since Dennis C (after spending 10,000 hours already) is ready to debate any specifics in that article and show that not only is his data solid but that he is competent to make the statements in the article, well, I'd recommend an unqualified public apology. Later, when you have the time, and if you decide to pursue it, you could then discuss specific points one by one where you feel there is an error and have data (not just conjecture) that backs each assertion.


You're right. Emotion has to be off the table so we can look at facts. You've gotta admit that your post (#15 in this thread) is emotionally charged, and putting the shoe on the other foot, you'd be pretty pissed off if it was you, your integrity and credibility, and your 10,000 hours of research that was being scoffed at, right?

Dennis

Bill Ryan
28th August 2012, 14:19
-------

Hi, Jim -- a personal note to welcome you to the forum. Glad to have you here.

My own $.02 to the interesting debate.

1) It's clear to me that although there must be shills on many of the 9/11 discussions (after all, the agencies are very good at what they do!), there's also the factor that good folk are simply pretty upset about everything that happened (and very rightly so). This passion fuels their opinions.

The detailed facts of what happened that day are still not 100% clear (at least, to me). That leaves room for many heated, but sincere, opinions. And some folks, as is always the case, are simply more well-informed than others.

The problem is in differentiating who's a provocateur and who's simply new to the debate, or who may just not have read enough.

2) Personally, there are many details I still don't understand. But my own view is that this is not important.

We can all agree that it was an inside job, and the purpose of that (the justification for the 'war on terror', increased national and global surveillance, and the creeping onset of NWO in general), a decade later, is crystal clear to anyone who cares to open their eyes.

While I'd love to know the full story in all its detail, I suggest that we should not get too sidetracked by minor disagreements about the logistics of the incident.

3) Here is information I can contribute which I'm as sure as I can be is reliable.

a) In April 2010 I met and interviewed a young lady who, as a US Army medical trainee, ended up in the room where and when the decision was made to shoot down Flight 93. She witnessed the executive decision when it was made by conference call. The full account (including an interview with her in her own unaltered voice) is here. Elizabeth Nelson is not her real name.

http://projectcamelot.org/elizabeth_nelson_flight_93.html

Full transcript:
http://projectcamelot.org/lang/en/elizabeth_nelson_flight_93_transcript_en.html

What's interesting about this first-hand witness report is that the decision to shoot down the plane was made by senior military personnel who knew nothing of the 'inside job'. They were following military "by-the-book' protocol. Flight 93 was not responding to communications (the transponders had been turned off), and was entering restricted airspace.

The authorities could have come clean about the whole Flight 93 incident, but instead chose to invent the entire "Let's Roll" story -- which was a fabrication (see below).

b) The important Project Camelot witness, Henry Deacon (real name Arthur Neumann) who was a very gifted electronics engineer, and who Kerry Cassidy and I got to know personally over hundreds of hours of meetings and conversation, told us that he had worked personally on the guidance system for the two aircraft that were steered into the twin towers by remote control override. His account is here:

http://projectcamelot.org/livermore_physicist_3.html

The control signals were relayed from a third aircraft that has become known by 9/11 researchers as "the white plane". There were software modifications that permitted the two target planes to make maneuvers beyond their regular flight characteristics. The planes were guided remotely from thousands of miles away. ('Henry' told us where the control center was, but we pledged not to reveal his workplace.)

Henry knew nothing about the 'hijackers', what happened at the Pentagon or Shanksville, what happened to the passengers, or any other logistics. As usual, everything was highly compartmentalized. He did confirm that no phone calls were made from any of the planes, and that all that theater was fabricated and dramatized.

The interesting part of Henry's experience (for me) was that at his place of work, everyone there was briefed several hours before the incident about what was going to be on the news later that day. They were told [my glib paraphrase]: "Don't worry -- this is just one of our projects."

Henry was appalled when he heard that, and realized for the first time what he'd been working on. Black projects engineers are always just told the design and functional specs for a device to be created, and never told what it would be used for. No need to know.

For the next several hours, he debated with himself whether to sabotage the operation. He was in a position to do that: he could have reprogrammed the software so that the planes would miss their targets. The price he would have paid was that his sabotage would certainly quickly have been identified -- after the event -- and he would have spent the rest of his life in military jail, or worse.

He chose to do nothing. He now lives with that. None of us in the free world are gifted to know from our experience what immense dilemmas and conflicts good people, working on the inside, are subjected to.

Oouthere
28th August 2012, 14:25
Just so you know I work with the phone company and we are do to be hit by Isaac.....

Rich

gripreaper
28th August 2012, 15:05
He chose to do nothing. He now lives with that. None of us in the free world are gifted to know from our experience what immense dilemmas and conflicts good people, working on the inside, are subjected to.

The amount of energy surrounding this event, no way anyone could have vibrated in such a way to sabotage it. It was a catalytic event which started a hallmark shift in consciousness, an awakening to the truth of how things really are, and continues to do so every day.

Even though it was tragic and accelerated the elite agenda, it also woke up the sleeping populace that "Camelot" and the age of freedom, liberty and the land of the free and the home of the brave is BS, and that the elite are behind it all.

The inertia of that catalyst can still be felt worldwide, and it is incumbent upon us to continue the message and the awakening.

Neal
28th August 2012, 15:27
Welcome to Project Avalon Jim. It's nice to have you join the forum.

Here's a post I made from thread a while back:



snip... Pentagon...still not sure how the plane liquified on impact. Yeah, there was a fire..but not a lot remained on the ground. It COULD have been a missle. /snip...

For an amazingly comprehensive expose of 9/11 complete with pictures and documents, please look at Murdering Liberty, Killing Hope - When Psychopaths Rule the World (dl.dropbox.com/u/16017306/911%20Final%20Unedited.pdf) an eBook by Jeff Prager. It includes the image I attached that shows the side of the Pentagon building AFTER the cranes starting knocking in around as well as a picture of the exit hole, among other photos. Where's the plane? Mind you, the roof was intact and still connected before the construction crews showed up.

Also, that section of the Pentagon had been renovated prior to 9/11 and the only people allowed to move back in was the Office of Naval Intelligence where 42 of 44 employees died in that missile attack. Allegedly they were investigating bonds coming due that were issued by Bush Sr. in Sept. 1991. Fishy, eh?

Sorry for getting off topic a little bit... :tape:

There was definitely no plane that hit the Pentagon. When I showed this picture to a colleague who had served 8 years in the Navy on a submarine, he was visibly shaken and said, "I spent 8 years in the Navy for nothing?!".

18018

Griff
28th August 2012, 16:14
It is difficult to keep our emotions from affecting our (often strongly held) opinions on the topic of 9/11, since so much of what has happened since hinges on the events of that day. I myself have fumed over many of the discrepancies and outright lies in the official accounts, and have been in more than a few heated arguments over what happened that day, how it happened, and more importantly why. I have discovered over the years that my most convincing arguments are based on the scientific facts that refute the official story.
Speaking personally, 9/11 marked the day that I really began to question the accounts of what was happening in world events that appeared in the MSM. I knew as it was happening day that the official story was not the real one. First, from what I knew of NORAD defense capabilities, it would be impossible for one, let alone two, aircraft to be allowed to fly into the WTC without being intercepted. Second, I knew something was seriously wrong with the way the towers came down as it was happening. It was not until several days later that I saw the footage of WTC7 coming down, and that only re-enforced my disbelief!
I have read much over the last decade about that day and the events that lead to it. The more I read, the more convoluted and confusing the story seemed to get, with seemingly reliable sources often with conflicting stories, and key pieces of the puzzle that are missing and will probably never be known in our lifetimes. The three main things I can be sure of, and the main arguments I use in discussions of 9/11 are the following:

1) WTC 1, 2 and 7 did not collapse as the result of fires, as jet fuel does not burn at a high enough temperature to significantly weaken the structural steel. No steel-reinforced concrete structure, before or since 9/11, has ever collapsed as the result of fire.
2) These building were brought down by controlled demolition as evidenced by their initial free-fall acceleration and collapse into their own footprint. This is ONLY possible through the use of specifically timed explosives (nano-thermite) to eliminate the structure underneath, as is blatantly evident in every video of the collapses.
3) Jet aircraft crashes (even at high velocities) leave expansive debris fields, but with key components such as landing gear and engine assemblies largely intact do to the extremely high strength and high temp. resistance of their construction. This was not observed at either the Pentagon or the Pennsylvania crash site of flight 93.

I can include some other points, but these by themselves are enough to refute the official story. My own background as a mechanical engineer, former private pilot, and aerospace industry worker give me some creditability in this regard, but much of it is laid out in the excellent work of Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth, and that of David Ray Griffin.

See:
http://www.ae911truth.org

The argument is then clear: Since the official story is scientifically impossible, what really did happen?

I'd also like to welcome Jim to the forum, as I'm sure he can bring much more to light on 911 than any of us know.

Thanks

Griff

Belle
28th August 2012, 18:46
Can anyone say the name Michael Ruppert? Has anyone read "Crossing the Rubicon" published in August 2004? The State Department can't refute his 9/11 theory raised in "Crossing the Rubicon"...the evidence was too solid.


In the following video, "The Truth and Lies of 9/11", Michael Ruppert provides background evidence as to why 9/11 had to happen and what it's purpose was in a lecture in Portland in November, 2001.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQR2z4YCzDw




Interesting video of Michael Ruppert on the Joe Rogan Experience December 27, 2011. In the course of this interview, he touches on what he believes happened at the pentagon and why. Be warned...the language is raw and may be offensive to some.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsQqhuIbb6U




Michael Ruppert has focused more on the 'why's' of 9/11 and the result, the direction the country/world has been moved to because of it. Yet, he is anathema to news outlets...his name will not be mentioned...imo because he tells the truth that cannot be refuted. Mentioning his name or interviewing him in the MSM is to open a can of worms tptb cannot afford to have opened.

In frustration, he put out the following video in August, 2011...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vp_-pdqigXo



We can focus our attention arguing the details of 9/11 or we can focus our attention on the 'why's' and 'wherefore's' of it all that directly leads to the end game...collapse.

EYES WIDE OPEN
28th August 2012, 18:59
Just so you know I work with the phone company and we are do to be hit by Isaac.....

Rich

Be safe amigo.

modwiz
28th August 2012, 19:06
Now we have amigos. Maybe it's my Aspberger's, but I see fed people. People who breathe together at least.

Must be my Aspberger's. :rolleyes:

Just ignore the retard. :jester:

I'd like to welcome Jim Fetzer here. I enjoy his articles at VT, a site I visit, and am enriched at, daily. The comments can be very rich there also.

EYES WIDE OPEN
28th August 2012, 19:10
Now we have amigos. Maybe it's my Aspberger's, but I see fed people. People who breathe together at least.

Must be my Aspberger's. :rolleyes:

Just ignore the retard. :jester:



Who are you talking to?

wynderer
28th August 2012, 19:18
wanted to bump this because i agree about hi-tech weapons being used during 9/11

also because Jim mentions Paul Wellstone -- i'd been thinking about him recently -- he was a good man of integrity -- i think he was taken out the same way the young Kennedy was, some new weapon directed at the planes -- real-time testing


Well, either we believe in logic and evidence or we do not. Why are you begging the question by assuming that "far fetched technology" was not used? The whole idea was to fool the American people. Do you recall the interview with Donald Rumsfeld and Richard Myers in which they were asked if the Pentagon ever used weapons or devices that were in the development stage and, with some hemming and hawing, Rumsfeld said that, under some special conditions, they might do that? If they had used some kind of directed energy device by creating and electromagnetic field to destroy the computerized components on the King Air A-100 that crashed near the Eveleth-Virginia Airport in Minnesota on 25 October 2002, killing Senator Paul Wellstone, his wife Shiela, their daughter, three aides and the two pilots, are you telling me that that didn't happen because it would have used "far fetched technology"? The Directed Energy Professional Society held its 8th annual meeting in Hawaii in 2004. I recommend "The Sen. Wellstone Assassination", http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Vbf49kzWFw and "The NTSB Failed Wellstone", http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/070605_wellstone.shtml And bear in mind Sherlock Holme's wise maxim: "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth".

modwiz
28th August 2012, 19:21
Who, who, who? Is there an owl in here?

Who did 9/11? Whoever allowed it to happen and then covered it up. The ones helping to cover it up, at any level, are aiding and abetting criminals. Whether they are aware of their abetting is an honest question. I can only observe actions, not motives.

A disclaimer: I am :jester:

EYES WIDE OPEN
28th August 2012, 19:38
Who, who, who? Is there an owl in here?

Who did 9/11? Whoever allowed it to happen and then covered it up. The ones helping to cover it up, at any level, are aiding and abetting criminals. Whether they are aware of their abetting is an honest question. I can only observe actions, not motives.

A disclaimer: I am :jester:

Huh? Don't get it. Owl? I just wanted to know who you were referring to when you said "ignore the retard". Don't really see an answer in your reply but whatever dude.

I hope Dennis joins this thread as well as Jim. I will read it with interest but refrain from commenting as I know what I can get like in the heat of the moment. And its not good. For me or the board!

modwiz
28th August 2012, 19:41
Who, who, who? Is there an owl in here?

Who did 9/11? Whoever allowed it to happen and then covered it up. The ones helping to cover it up, at any level, are aiding and abetting criminals. Whether they are aware of their abetting is an honest question. I can only observe actions, not motives.

A disclaimer: I am :jester:

Huh? Don't get it. Owl? I just wanted to know who you were referring to when you said "ignore the retard". Don't really see an answer in your reply but whatever dude.

I am claiming retard honors for myself. Calling others retards is not OK.

I may have other names for you, but retard is not one of them. Even if it was OK.

EYES WIDE OPEN
28th August 2012, 19:44
Who, who, who? Is there an owl in here?

Who did 9/11? Whoever allowed it to happen and then covered it up. The ones helping to cover it up, at any level, are aiding and abetting criminals. Whether they are aware of their abetting is an honest question. I can only observe actions, not motives.

A disclaimer: I am :jester:

Huh? Don't get it. Owl? I just wanted to know who you were referring to when you said "ignore the retard". Don't really see an answer in your reply but whatever dude.



I may have other names for you, but retard is not one of them.

Care to enlighten me?

edit. actually please dont. I dont care and dont what to be drawn into word games. Think of me what you will. Whatever makes you happy.
Peace to you.

can we stay on topic.

modwiz
28th August 2012, 19:51
Who, who, who? Is there an owl in here?

Who did 9/11? Whoever allowed it to happen and then covered it up. The ones helping to cover it up, at any level, are aiding and abetting criminals. Whether they are aware of their abetting is an honest question. I can only observe actions, not motives.

A disclaimer: I am :jester:

Huh? Don't get it. Owl? I just wanted to know who you were referring to when you said "ignore the retard". Don't really see an answer in your reply but whatever dude.



I may have other names for you, but retard is not one of them.

Care to enlighten me?

No! Furthermore, I will take my leave now so that worthy contributors can fill this important thread. We have a new member, Jim Fetzer. I do not want him to get a bad idea of the forum and what I have had to say needs to conclude now. I know there can be no discussion of this topic without you showing up, EWO. Must be all those links you have ready to post for our 'enlightenment' on a subject you seem well 'schooled' in. :bolt:

EYES WIDE OPEN
28th August 2012, 19:55
Who, who, who? Is there an owl in here?

Who did 9/11? Whoever allowed it to happen and then covered it up. The ones helping to cover it up, at any level, are aiding and abetting criminals. Whether they are aware of their abetting is an honest question. I can only observe actions, not motives.

A disclaimer: I am :jester:

Huh? Don't get it. Owl? I just wanted to know who you were referring to when you said "ignore the retard". Don't really see an answer in your reply but whatever dude.



I may have other names for you, but retard is not one of them.

Care to enlighten me?

No! Furthermore, I will take my leave now so that worthy contributors can fill this important thread. We have a new member, Jim Fetzer. I do not want him to get a bad idea of the forum and what I have had to say needs to conclude now. I know there can be no discussion of this topic without you showing up, EWO. Must be all those links you have ready to post for our 'enlightenment' on a subject you seem well 'schooled' in. :bolt:

chill dude. you don't need to worry about me posting questions that might challenge your ideas. I already said I will be reading only.




I hope Dennis joins this thread as well as Jim. I will read it with interest but refrain from commenting as I know what I can get like in the heat of the moment. And its not good. For me or the board!

I really did not expect all this stuff from the past to be dug up. I have not even posted my thoughts on this topic in this thread. I just said I hoped the storm was not going to be too bad and wished another forum member well.
I cant seem to do anything right.
Sigh.
Now, please. can we move on. :)
Im off to the music thread!

4evrneo
28th August 2012, 21:42
Well, I as much as the next person get very emotionally charged in this topic, BUT, it seems to me (someone with little educational background) that this event in history is in the past, we may never know the truth but what we all know is that the underlying agenda, is to enslave, divide and conquer, etc. The only reason I am posting to this thread is because I have some questions :

Do you think we will ever get the truth?

How will this inspire you/us to live, knowing that these kinds of GAMES are being played upon us?

I am sincerely asking because this topic frustrates me and fills me with sadness, I really want to know what impact these debates should/can have. IMO, we all agree that this was an inside job, but what can we do about it? Can we do something about it?
I truly hope that all the attention on this subject will bring people together, not cause a wider rift.

Annette

wynderer
28th August 2012, 22:01
hi Annette -- maybe part of it is not forgetting all the people who died such terrible deaths, needlessly -- what always breaks my heart is thinking of the people who held hands as they jumped [crying now] -- in a sense, finding the truth is for them --?

oops -- just saw this thread is about the Pentagon 'plane' , so i'm off topic

Jim Fetzer
28th August 2012, 22:28
"Were the 9/11 crash sites faked?" (Seattle, on 13 June 2012):

Part 1
http://archive.org/details/scm-75926-drjamesfetzerinseattlejune1320

Part 2
http://archive.org/details/scm-75938-drjamesfetzerinseattlejune1320

modwiz
28th August 2012, 23:03
Well, I as much as the next person get very emotionally charged in this topic, BUT, it seems to me (someone with little educational background) that this event in history is in the past, we may never know the truth but what we all know is that the underlying agenda, is to enslave, divide and conquer, etc. The only reason I am posting to this thread is because I have some questions :

Do you think we will ever get the truth?

How will this inspire you/us to live, knowing that these kinds of GAMES are being played upon us?

I am sincerely asking because this topic frustrates me and fills me with sadness, I really want to know what impact these debates should/can have. IMO, we all agree that this was an inside job, but what can we do about it? Can we do something about it?
I truly hope that all the attention on this subject will bring people together, not cause a wider rift.

Annette

All. All of us alternative forumers? Even we 'seem' to have our doubters as to the depth of the depravity of 9/11. The details are needed for those still in the dark. The rest of us have the implications of the crime to deal with. The impact on society has been profound. 9/11 has created a false reality where poeple feel that the indignities of the TSA are better than another 9/11 happening. In their minds the TSA is keeping them safe frpm haveing Mooslims holding box cutters to their throats as they are crashed into buildings. People holding on to this kind of fear will strip naked if they feel it will keep their nightmares safely inside their imaginations. We in some form of understanding have clowns to the left of us, criminals to the right stuck in the middle with the rest of us.

People will start coming together when they realize that is the first step we have to take to solve the rest of our problems. The TV was meant to isolate us in our homes and break up the information sharing (intel) that allows for an informed populace. Now, with TV, they give us extreme positions and send us out to fight over them at work or parties.

The TV has to go. Many apologize or make excuse for it, but they are under the spell. If you have cable you monetarily support the problem. This army needs to be starved. The peasants, sheeple if you prefer, continue to feed the occupational forces and then expect them to go away or change their behavior.

Life is good for them, why should they change?

I, like you, want to see people come together and rediscover community again. It requires getting away from electronics and meeting in the real world, out there.

wynderer
28th August 2012, 23:12
i think we were all being whammied w/subliminals while we watched the planes hitting the towers again ... & again... & again.....

Time-Warner kept on coming to my door & offering me better & better deals on cable a month or two before 9/11 -- i was raised w/o tv, raised my children w/o it, & used my tv only for movies & documentaries from the library -- but the deal they finally offered was so low that i gave it a 3-month try [cancelling gladly at the end]

later, i thought that they must have wanted as many people as possible to be glued to their tv sets for the crime against our country & the world aka 9/11

Huma
29th August 2012, 04:39
Bill, I ask you, what happened to Arthur? Is there a way he can be reached? A lot of his credentials have been hard to validate publicly, but really, just assuming he's telling the truth, why does he not speak now? The last I heard of him was in a Camelot conference that you, Kerry, and he were present at, (awake and aware 2011 if I recall) and you publicly called him out on some contradictions and discrepancies (as you should). Frankly, *if* he is being truthful, he is probably one of the most important witnesses you have ever spoke too, and really, we should be talking about this guy more, even just in the context of 9/11, if he indeed did play the part he claims. He should join the forums, I think that would be productive.

EYES WIDE OPEN
29th August 2012, 05:22
Well, I as much as the next person get very emotionally charged in this topic, BUT, it seems to me (someone with little educational background) that this event in history is in the past, we may never know the truth but what we all know is that the underlying agenda, is to enslave, divide and conquer, etc. The only reason I am posting to this thread is because I have some questions :

Do you think we will ever get the truth?

How will this inspire you/us to live, knowing that these kinds of GAMES are being played upon us?

I am sincerely asking because this topic frustrates me and fills me with sadness, I really want to know what impact these debates should/can have. IMO, we all agree that this was an inside job, but what can we do about it? Can we do something about it?
I truly hope that all the attention on this subject will bring people together, not cause a wider rift.

Annette

All. All of us alternative forumers? Even we 'seem' to have our doubters as to the depth of the depravity of 9/11.

I must say I would be surprised to see someone on this forum who still trusts the official version of events.I certainly have not come across such a person.
I have however noticed that there are people like myself who want things clarified and for who certain scenarios that have been proposed by the alternative community don't make sense and/or are confusing just as Bill said. The no planes idea being one of them. I have not been convinced on this point so am looking forward to reading this thread with an open mind. I will not be commenting on it however as I seem to annoy people.

Also am I correct in thinking that Arthur has "gone dark" and will probably never contact bill again (for his own safety) but perhaps Bill can clarify?

Oouthere
29th August 2012, 13:22
Hiya Dennis,

My intention was never an intentional hit-and-run, I’m not like that.

Just so you know who I am…I joined the Army National Guard (my father had been an Army Ranger during the Korean war) for a brief period after the Iranian hostage situation due to patriotic reasons. While in boot camp I was in the chow hall line and saw the two soldiers ahead of me had to mark an “x” for their name on the roster. We had just finished map reading class and this showed there was no way for them to call in live fire using coordinates. I do not want to place my life in the hands of people like this so I left the Guard and went full time Air Force.

My first 5 years was administration and the next five years was A-10/F-16 avionic systems. Like most others I received awards and was nominated for many (i.e. strips for exceptional performs, below-the-zone promotion, sergeant of the quarter, master European technician, etc). I completed the requirements for a degree in avionic technologies but did not receive it since the college was late in mailing my transcripts and the cut-off date expired (separation from Air Force). I have about 90 hours total college, mostly through the Air Force.

After separation I worked as a marine electrician and then moved into a marine electronics group. From there I got a job with BellSouth as a line man and then tested into an electronics tech position of which I have held for the last 12 years. I just want you know I am not a complete idiot (though close at times)!

I fell for the official story as I am a patriot. But later came to realize we were set-up. I have been kicked-out of both sides forums for asking them to prove their statements, anti-official story and pro-official story. This subject needs to be addressed as it would in a court, prove your point per the evidence. At one time statements held a lot for me, but no longer. I have since found that there are sociopaths on both sides of the lines. I on occasion work with them and know how to find the truth irregardless of what is stated (so long as the evidence is still there). We have to forget the statements for the most part and focus on the physical evidence. Data can easily be manipulated and distorted (unless write-only technology is involved and even then can be falsified) so the physical evidence is the only part that is confirmable. Even technology has its glitches (mis-routed texts, mis-translated gps signals, false radar signals, etc). Just like some believe the last four seconds of the black box data is missing/corrupt.

People in the alternative community do the same thing as mass media, keep pounding a story until those that listen will believe it. One of the most dangerous people is someone that believes a story and has the wrong facts or distorted facts. I have walked out of a conference because someone well known in the alternate media was out right lying. I confronted this person after the talk and we e-mailed each other numerous times. Without me inquiring this person told of being an insider and refused to put the truth in the public because it would ruin their career. Briefly after that e-mail exchange we dropped communications.

But anyway, the points need to be made as this could turn into a civil war. Are you willing to send your children to their death because you made an error? or made points that were inaccurate? Or made claims that are physically impossible? I am not. We are the race of humanity and need to take care of each other the best way we can. I believed CIT’s story for a long time but after numerous sleepless night realize it can’t work. Know we are on the same side, but the facts need to be correct….especially if this turns into a civil war.

I’ll reread the article and give my evidence as time permits. Rather stuck in a building at this time due to Isaac…lol

Rich

Bill Ryan
29th August 2012, 13:37
am I correct in thinking that Arthur has "gone dark" and will probably never contact bill again (for his own safety) but perhaps Bill can clarify?

Yes, that's pretty much correct. After being out of circulation for a full two years, he made an appearance at the Camelot Awake and Aware conference in September 2011 -- where on the Saturday evening he stated on the public speaker's panel that (my paraphrase) he could not verify that HAARP had the capabilities that it was rumored to have.

I was astonished. I was sitting next to him, and challenged him. In 2008, he had sent me an e-mail after the May Sichuan earthquake (and after Ben Fulford had posted a YouTube video stating that this was caused by HAARP). Henry told me that Ben Fulford had not got his account quite correct about how HAARP worked, but he confirmed that it could cause earthquakes -- and much else -- and was "a handy-dandy tool".

I reminded him of this statement, and asked him how he now appeared to be saying something different. Henry was flustered, and said that he could not remember contacting me about HAARP previously. I think he was fully truthful. This was not the first time he could not remember having written something important to us.

Henry was probably the most important of all the many Camelot witnesses, but now Kerry and I agree that he cannot be relied upon and we both feel sure he was heavily "leaned on" after his July 2009 public statement at the Barcelona Exopolitics Conference that he had personally been to Mars. Jake Simpson -- who later became similarly unreliable -- told us at that time that "Henry would never be permitted to make that statement again."

Oouthere
29th August 2012, 15:30
The first point is no wing impact point on the building. This photo shows otherwise:

http://911review.com/attack/pentagon/imgs/hole11.jpg


An aircraft for the most part is an aluminum frame structure with a thin skin made as lite as possible. This photo is from a 6 mph impact with a puppy (just kidding)!

http://technabob.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/plane_crash_curiosity.jpg


There is no reason to believe the bomb resistant wall should have sustained damage like the WTCs’ clean cut penetrations.

http://www.funnydailydose.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/911-wtc1.jpg

The WTCs had the main supports towards the inside of the tower and therefore easy to penetrate siding was the only obstacle. Unlike the Pentagon which has steel reinforced columns toward the outside of the building due to bomb resistant upgrades.

http://static.ddmcdn.com/gif/wtc-tube.jpg

I do believe this wall was intentionally targeted due to the accounting office and missing funds. Even though the “true terrorists” were willing to do this, the people and structure are still considered a resource and not be completely wasted.

To go one step further in this point that an aircraft did hit, you can also add the 5 light poles that were knocked over in front of the Pentagon.


http://archives.du.souk.free.fr/911/pentagon/wherelightpolesfell.jpg

And the generator in front of the Pentagon as well as a neat punch out in the surrounding fence reflecting an engine penetration.

http://www.911research.com/pentagon/evidence/photos/docs/generator_fence2.jpg

I guess this will be one part at a time….

Rich

4evrneo
29th August 2012, 15:57
wynderer,
I guess most of my frustration comes from the endless debates I have had with my father, he still believes that the media wouldnt lie to him. Sadly, he is not awake and doesnt understand a great many things. He was a Marine in Vietnam twice and a very proper raised man but denies that this was an inside job. I in no way meant to sound like I want to minimalize this issue or the great sad loss of many innocent lives. Its very important to me and I truly hope the truth does come out. I guess the frustration also comes from the lack of people in my life who I could really discuss this with, that deeply feel the way I do. Most people I know choose to watch the Tv and not even discuss it. It is also one of the reasons I dont have Tv anymore. I too am deeply heartbroken that this and other atrocities happen daily around our world. I do try very hard each day to live honestly and with compassion and weed out as much negativity as I can. (sorry off topic also)

I pray for truth and justice.
Annette

4evrneo
29th August 2012, 16:04
The TV was meant to isolate us in our homes and break up the information sharing (intel) that allows for an informed populace. Now, with TV, they give us extreme positions and send us out to fight over them at work or parties.

The TV has to go.
Life is good for them, why should they change?

I, like you, want to see people come together and rediscover community again. It requires getting away from electronics and meeting in the real world, out there.

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?42516-9-11-The-Official-Account-of-the-Pentagon-Attack-is-a-Fantasy&p=545951&viewfull=1#post545951

Thank you Modwiz,

I agree,

Annette

Paul
29th August 2012, 16:26
This photo is from a 6 mph impact with a puppy
Dang - that puppy is going to make one mean watch dog when it grows up :).

iceni tribe
29th August 2012, 16:48
Oouthere

your first image is a composite picture produced by a pretend 9/11 truth site , cant remember which at the mo , i think it may be steven jones and the gang at 9/11 what ever.if you tone down the colour you get this

http://i753.photobucket.com/albums/xx171/naf09_2010/9%2011%20and%207%207/pentagon_boeing_large2.jpg

which is far more revealing



try these images taken before the collapse .

http://i753.photobucket.com/albums/xx171/naf09_2010/9%2011%20and%207%207/E6A893DC63.jpg

http://i753.photobucket.com/albums/xx171/naf09_2010/9%2011%20and%207%207/11_9.jpg

and did your 757 go through all this to make that neat itty bitty hole

http://i753.photobucket.com/albums/xx171/naf09_2010/9%2011%20and%207%207/traj2.jpg

http://i753.photobucket.com/albums/xx171/naf09_2010/9%2011%20and%207%207/pentagonwall.jpg

is this were the nose of your 757 came through !!

check the pristine grass in this , can you see any luggage , seats , tail section , wings etc etc, in fact can you honestly see anything resembling a 757 crash.

http://i753.photobucket.com/albums/xx171/naf09_2010/9%2011%20and%207%207/2-1.jpg

http://i753.photobucket.com/albums/xx171/naf09_2010/9%2011%20and%207%207/blue2.jpg

http://i753.photobucket.com/albums/xx171/naf09_2010/9%2011%20and%207%207/NoWayBaby.jpg

http://i753.photobucket.com/albums/xx171/naf09_2010/9%2011%20and%207%207/NoPlaneHere.jpg

steveofengland
29th August 2012, 17:53
As to what may come of all this? From what I see there are those that accept the official version, those that support the truth, and those that have accepted the truth and that's the end of the matter. With a "oh well you can't do anything about it" attitude.
Then after a few administration changes and decades later the truth although not officially recognised will be accepted by the majority.
Though I prey that doesn't happen and the scum that invented the whole plan are brought to justice.

778 neighbour of some guy
29th August 2012, 18:13
http://i753.photobucket.com/albums/xx171/naf09_2010/9%2011%20and%207%207/pentagonwall.jpg



I was a bricklayer for three years, that fifth image in this post were the nose came out.........that hole does not look like its been made by a severely slowed down airplane.

1. debry outside of that hole.................. not enough to have punched through a wall reinforced with concrete and rebar and some decent quality bricks ( there is flex in that you know.)

2. The distance travelled by the nose/the wideness of the plane fusilage, the distance from the outside wall/ the diagonal flightpath( any wall or substance for that matter increases in thickness when something passes through it and so does the resistance it meets) Take a square block of clay and poke a stick through it............ take the same block of clay and poke a stick through it diagonally, you might just run out of stick before you punch through the other side.

3. what i am missing is this, the supposed plane crashed through 6 massively reinforced walls, the last wall should have the least of the impact damage since the object punching through would have spent allmost all of its kinetic energy at that point and yet look at that image.....wall 1 point of impact wall 2 well ok maybe it got through all that concrete reinforced with rebar the size of you wrists column after column after column after column ( etc). That leaves us with an impact trajectory completely devoid of any debrees on an impossible angle to penetrate from wall 3 upto 5 to be suddenly cofronted with a pretty nice round hole in wall nr 6.

4. Go figure, someone blew a hole in that wall to make sure whatever it was they wanted out of the building got out of the building and they could not use the front door for that, either that or its just mice with very dangerous breath.

5. The hole blasted through that wall has been made with a substance that went of so fast it did not even give the edges the time to crumble down, masonnery makes a real dusty and huge pile of crap when it comes crashing down, something blew through there, look at it, on the inside you see everything leaning backward and on the outside everything has been blown outward with a dead space in the middle, some thing stuck or attached to that wall blew up to leave a mark like that, someone wanted to get out of that building really fast with something substantial as luggage, i wonder were the doors are in the 4th ring of the building.

Just another robbery were they came and went through the wall, the first hole was made to camouflage the bang from the exit hole in the third ring, its a ****ty b movie scenario, very very very sad so many people had to pay the price they payed, and this is slightly of topic but the wtc................ all i think is................... they needed those two towers to come down to get away with whatever was in building 7..... a diversion strategy, crashed into its own footprints to cover up the tracks of what ever it was that went on there.

Ps........... besides being a bricklayer i used to do many things. one of those thing was being in the military for three years as a tanker ( drove them) That hole is not by just some piece of alluminium that survived all that resistance on the way to that last wall, that wall was blown out by something that was invented with the single purpose of making loud noises and displace anything or everybody that it made contact with....BOOM.....and Elvis has left the building through a private exit.

2 cents, for what they are worth that means.

Oouthere
29th August 2012, 19:30
The next point is concerning lack of debri from impact craft. The below picture is of a 747 that caught on fire while landing. Combine a heavy generator impact, penetration of a bomb resistant wall, and then basically going through three full buildings there should not be much left.

747 Burns Upon Landing (http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/docs/afc_747fire1.jpg)

But we do have the usual culprits that shows aircraft parts in and around the Pentagon:

Fueslage or door (http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj16/stannrodd/Mysterypart2.jpg)

Turbine minus blades (http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/analysis/conclusions/docs/mystery_engine_s.jpg)

Aircraft skin (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-S1oLT4KgUD0/TngSPGAUH0I/AAAAAAAAAd8/3ozQW1BrPLw/s1600/American3.jpg)

Structural part (http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/pentagon/docs/holding_debris.jpg)

757 RB211 engine diffuser (http://www.911research.com/pentagon/evidence/photos/docs/diffuser.jpg)

Various fuselage parts (http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h208/papa_giorgio/C-O-N-spiracies/PlaneParts.jpg)

757 Front landing strut (nearly twice as tall as a man). (http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/photos/docs/landinggear.jpg)

757 Rim (http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/docs/hub_context.jpg)

Various aircraft pieces (http://911blogger.com/images/112as1.jpg)

Actuator (http://images.sodahead.com/profiles/0/0/2/3/7/2/1/5/5/actuator-plane-parts-77552349720.jpeg#actuator%20plane%20parts)

Turbine part (http://ts4.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=5043451918418143&id=e51046f15c07dfb8c2c87f388347dae2)


Rich

Arrowwind
29th August 2012, 19:41
You know, it was clear to me that the pentagon crash was BS from the instant the first photos where put on the TV. Its just mind boggling how stupid or repressed or brainwashed the American people can be.... dito for the crash in the field. Looking at those photos and seeing them for what it is instantly is not gut intuition, is not conjecture, is not rocket science. It is the ability to interpret reality independently based on empiracal observation. That people have to dedicate their lives to proving the the obvious for those who are blind is a dam shame but obvioulsy our educational system has succeded in leaded the sheeple in exactly how to not think and to be lead by their noses with incredible ease by media, shapeshifters, liars, crooks and murderers

Keep up the good work all 9/11 Truth Sayers... we must never give up hope that truth might someday make a difference.

Oouthere
29th August 2012, 20:18
Oouthere

your first image is a composite picture produced by a pretend 9/11 truth site , cant remember which at the mo , i think it may be steven jones and the gang at 9/11 what ever.if you tone down the colour you get this

...


http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/docs/metcalf3.jpgLet's take this a different route, above is a much more telling image before the collapse. Notice the damage extends from the generator to the far side of the photo.

Oouthere
29th August 2012, 20:24
Oouthere

and did your 757 go through all this to make that neat itty bitty hole

http://i753.photobucket.com/albums/xx171/naf09_2010/9%2011%20and%207%207/traj2.jpg

http://i753.photobucket.com/albums/xx171/naf09_2010/9%2011%20and%207%207/pentagonwall.jpg


Let's see, one generator impact, one bomb resistant wall penetration, three building penetrations, roughly 300 mph @ 160,000lbs....yes.

Notice the landing gear hubs? (http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/images/articles/911-images/pentagon-debris-007-landinggear.jpg)

And don't try to say these were preplanted parts, it is impossible.

Rich

Oouthere
29th August 2012, 20:35
check the pristine grass in this , can you see any luggage , seats , tail section , wings etc etc, in fact can you honestly see anything resembling a 757 crash.

http://i753.photobucket.com/albums/xx171/naf09_2010/9%2011%20and%207%207/2-1.jpg

http://i753.photobucket.com/albums/xx171/naf09_2010/9%2011%20and%207%207/blue2.jpg

http://i753.photobucket.com/albums/xx171/naf09_2010/9%2011%20and%207%207/NoWayBaby.jpg

http://i753.photobucket.com/albums/xx171/naf09_2010/9%2011%20and%207%207/NoPlaneHere.jpg

Contrary to popular belief parts do disappear in a fire. (http://www.baaa-acro.com/photos/B747-200-Air%20France-Madras.jpg)

¤=[Post Update]=¤

The only reinforced wall is the outside wall and that was due to the OK bombing incident. The other walls were of standard building design.

Cidersomerset
29th August 2012, 21:20
Like most of us on here I am not a aviation or explosives expert, but like a jury in a trial very few start out as experts and its with the weight
of argument , probability and who benifits from a crime that a verdict is arrived at........After the initial shock of 9/11 and apportioning blame..
Four wars were iniated by the Neo-con led Bush administration......Afghanistan, Iraq, Terror/muslim world and the American people via 'Homeland Security'..

Who Benifitted Bush and the neo-cons, mil ind complex , Halliburton and many other organisations and a lot of deals involving the elites getting more rich
and powerfull at the expence of thousands of killed and injured coalition troops and millions in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere .....There was certainly
nothing in it for Bin Laden, other than possibly help Ciada create the foundation for over a decade of slaughter....To gain control of drugs , Oil and minerals
for the Rich and powerfull who run the world !

Its from this perspective that I think 9/11 was a inside job....Classic 'False Flag' operation..

From a eye witness who was there on the day...She saw no evidence of a plane !!

88JQL4esHFg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_30TpBo-V_Ds/TQ0CdIQzg5I/AAAAAAAAAQ8/hs_DdBb8JNI/s1600/pentagon%252Battack%252Bearly%252Bpicture.jpg

http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/analysis/damage/docs/compmix2.jpg


http://i.cdn.turner.com/trutv/trutv.com/graphics/conspiracy/story/government-lies/911-10yrs/pentagon.jpg

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?40835-Architects-and-Engineers-and-9-11-research-

I checked and I have posted a few threads that maybe of interrest to those not experts but interrested...
plus there is many more in the forum index....Cheers

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?47317-9-11-Flight-93-Banned-Newscast

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?47140-9-11-TRUTH-Jewish-Ex-Marine-SPEAKS-OUT-on-Zionist-Israeli-Involvement--MUST-WATCH-

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?45610-Rich-Hall-analysis...9-11..-presents-3D-graphics-update..

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?45506-C2CAM-9-11-Truth-Enigmas-05-20-2012--Coast-To-Coast-AM-

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?41614-Where-Did-The-Towers-Go-Dr-Judy-Wood-in-the-UK....Sky-200-TV-with-Theo-Chalmers.

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?43345-Pentagon-ready-to-resume-9-11-trial

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?37093-Psychologists-Explain-911-Denial...

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?36025-Richard-Gage-interview-on-Jack-Blood-Radio-show....19th-Nov-2011..

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?30173-Architects-and-Engineers-solving-the-mystery-of-WT7

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?30166-Thermite-Experiment-on-metal-car

Paul
29th August 2012, 21:54
Let's take this a different route, above is a much more telling image before the collapse. Notice the damage extends from the generator to the far side of the photo.
Nice picture ... but where's the plane ?

Paul
29th August 2012, 22:03
As is well known from courts of law, political meetings and web forums, both sides of any dispute can continue to present arguments for their position without limit, regardless of how obviously wrong some positions might be.

The 9/11 issues had been rather quiescent on this forum for the last few months, but have flared up again. I wonder if that's just the random coincidence of several people taking an interest in it again, or if the timing of this renewed energy of conflicting comments has a larger significance.

danceblackcatdance
29th August 2012, 22:08
no planes at either site... watch 'september clues' on YouTube!

i also agree about the hi-tech weapons involvement...

Bill Ryan
29th August 2012, 23:13
From a eye witness who was there on the day...She saw no evidence of a plane !!

88JQL4esHFg

Right. April Gallup, a Pentagon employee, evacuated the building (with her young son) from the very hole in the wall that the 'plane' was supposed to have created when it 'crashed'. She stated that there was absolutely no plane to be seen.

http://washingtonpost.com/national/after-911-woman-who-was-at-pentagon-remains-skeptical/2011/08/10/gIQAUtQDGK_story.html

Selene
29th August 2012, 23:56
Let's see, one generator impact, one bomb resistant wall penetration, three building penetrations, roughly 300 mph @ 160,000lbs....yes.

Notice the landing gear hubs? http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/images/articles/911-images/pentagon-debris-007-landinggear.jpg

And don't try to say these were preplanted parts, it is impossible.

Rich

http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/7351/pentagondebris007landin.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/525/pentagondebris007landin.jpg/)

Well, Oouthere, I wouldn’t know a landing gear hub if one landed on my head, but I can say this: yes, they sure look like plants.

If you mean those round hubcap-looking things in the linked photo you attached, the photo certainly does not show them as they were found, in situ, but as having clearly been sorted and moved together against that wall at some later time. There’s no scarring on that wall, and also what appears to be a new pink trash bag (which should have melted from the heat) behind them. The earlier site photos show no such thing.

This (from skepticproject.com) is not a photo from the actual incident, but of a stack of collected debris taken at some later date, by which time almost anything could have been “planted” into the debris on the cordoned-off site.

So yes, it is entirely possible that the hubs were planted.

If you are as careful – and skeptical – as you claim to be, this photo is a rickety one to use as your supporting evidence.

And to have gotten it from “skepticproject.com” ….. Oh my lordy – that’s just too, too funny. You're braver than I thought.

Cheers,

Selene

DeDukshyn
29th August 2012, 23:59
I think it may well be possible that whatever weaponry was used to vaporize whole steel and concrete beams of the WTCs (don't argue - just check any of the hundreds of vids on youtube that show this happening without a doubt), may have also been involved in the other incidences of 9/11. This may explain some of what we see.

¤=[Post Update]=¤


"And don't try to say these were preplanted parts, it is impossible."

But 9/11 in itself was possible? That makes no sense - of course plants are possible.

Spellbound
30th August 2012, 00:04
Bill, if I may ask...what is your take on 9/11?? Do you believe the official account?? Do you think it was an inside job (so to speak)?? Did the US gov't actually do it to themselves....or was it actually terrorists (but the govt knew about it in advance and allowed it to happen)?? I'd be interested to know your opinion here.

Dave - Toronto

Cognitive Dissident
30th August 2012, 01:13
Hi Dave, just jumping in to link to one of Bill's earlier posts - he is clear that it is an inside job. I cannot see how anyone in their right mind, who actually looks at the evidence, could conclude otherwise.

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?42516-9-11-The-Official-Account-of-the-Pentagon-Attack-is-a-Fantasy&p=545470#post545470

Spellbound
30th August 2012, 01:44
Hi Dave, just jumping in to link to one of Bill's earlier posts - he is clear that it is an inside job. I cannot see how anyone in their right mind, who actually looks at the evidence, could conclude otherwise.

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?42516-9-11-The-Official-Account-of-the-Pentagon-Attack-is-a-Fantasy&p=545470#post545470

My apologies, CD. I hadn't read the entire thread. Ahhh, yes...the Elizabeth Nelson interview....I have it on my hard drive and I've brought it up in discussions with others many times. I've always thought Flight 93 was shot down. What I grapple with though, is were there terrorist highjackers involved (with all the planes) or not?? Perhaps Henry Deacon was right and the planes were being controlled remotely...but controlled by who?? The US Gov't?? By Bush, et el?? I have a slightly hard time buying into that. Perhaps by some faction within the govt (on a very deep level....illuminati/NWO ....not related to a Presidential level). Again, were terrorist highjackers involved?? I believe they were...but then it could have been hand in hand with people here in the West. Perhaps there were highjackers but things were helped along by other parties (black ops). Perhaps John Lear was correct in that the towers were brought down by futuristic WOMD disintegration weaponry. Perhaps it all ties in together. I just don't see how the US govt (on a presidential level) could be behind this on their own as a so called inside job.

Dave - Toronto

Cognitive Dissident
30th August 2012, 01:55
I think that "inside job" is clumsy nomenclature but its the most well known-phrase, so I guess we're stuck with it.
Only the easy questions, eh?!
I have no idea who really did it, any more than I can tell you who conspired to kill JFK. The short answer is, a whole bunch of people.
Two quick points:
"Terrorists" is wrong - they spent a lot of time partying in Vegas before 9/11 so deep convinctions about anything probably not their main motivation. "Mercenaries" probably a better description.
I haven't read it yet, but from her interviews I think that Judy Wood's Where did the Towers Go? may be onto something. In other words, exotic weapons were involved.

Anyway. Tactically, stage 1 is to convince people that the official story is a lie. Don't think you have to complete stage 2 (who did it?) in order to achieve stage 1. That is too much of a reach. Gotta stay empirical.

DeDukshyn
30th August 2012, 02:06
Hi Dave, just jumping in to link to one of Bill's earlier posts - he is clear that it is an inside job. I cannot see how anyone in their right mind, who actually looks at the evidence, could conclude otherwise.

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?42516-9-11-The-Official-Account-of-the-Pentagon-Attack-is-a-Fantasy&p=545470#post545470

My apologies, CD. I hadn't read the entire thread. Ahhh, yes...the Elizabeth Nelson interview....I have it on my hard drive and I've brought it up in discussions with others many times. I've always thought Flight 93 was shot down. What I grapple with though, is were there terrorist highjackers involved (with all the planes) or not?? Perhaps Henry Deacon was right and the planes were being controlled remotely...but controlled by who?? The US Gov't?? By Bush, et el?? I have a slightly hard time buying into that. Perhaps by some faction within the govt (on a very deep level....illuminati/NWO ....not related to a Presidential level). Again, were terrorist highjackers involved?? I believe they were...but then it could have been hand in hand with people here in the West. Perhaps there were highjackers but things were helped along by other parties (black ops). Perhaps John Lear was correct in that the towers were brought down by futuristic WOMD disintegration weaponry. Perhaps it all ties in together. I just don't see how the US govt (on a presidential level) could be behind this on their own as a so called inside job.

Dave - Toronto

My 2 cents is that 'the Presidential level' is the puppet level. Only the select of that level even have comprehension. Does that help? ;)

Spellbound
30th August 2012, 03:05
Hi Dave, just jumping in to link to one of Bill's earlier posts - he is clear that it is an inside job. I cannot see how anyone in their right mind, who actually looks at the evidence, could conclude otherwise.

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?42516-9-11-The-Official-Account-of-the-Pentagon-Attack-is-a-Fantasy&p=545470#post545470

My apologies, CD. I hadn't read the entire thread. Ahhh, yes...the Elizabeth Nelson interview....I have it on my hard drive and I've brought it up in discussions with others many times. I've always thought Flight 93 was shot down. What I grapple with though, is were there terrorist highjackers involved (with all the planes) or not?? Perhaps Henry Deacon was right and the planes were being controlled remotely...but controlled by who?? The US Gov't?? By Bush, et el?? I have a slightly hard time buying into that. Perhaps by some faction within the govt (on a very deep level....illuminati/NWO ....not related to a Presidential level). Again, were terrorist highjackers involved?? I believe they were...but then it could have been hand in hand with people here in the West. Perhaps there were highjackers but things were helped along by other parties (black ops). Perhaps John Lear was correct in that the towers were brought down by futuristic WOMD disintegration weaponry. Perhaps it all ties in together. I just don't see how the US govt (on a presidential level) could be behind this on their own as a so called inside job.

Dave - Toronto

My 2 cents is that 'the Presidential level' is the puppet level. Only the select of that level even have comprehension. Does that help? ;)

Yes, that's basically what I was alluding to.

Dave - Toronto

Bill Ryan
30th August 2012, 04:19
Do you believe the official account??

No. :)


Do you think it was an inside job (so to speak)??

Yes, of course. It was a false flag event, well-planned beforehand (which they really only just got away with, everything considered. Plenty of things went wrong that day).

Dr Bill Deagle (for one) relates in Part 1 of his December 2006 Granada Forum Lecture (https://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2221852945040630461) how, well prior to 9/11, he found himself in a conversation with senior officials over dinner when this plan was being discussed. The PATRIOT act was all drafted in advance. Rumsfeld made a slip of the tongue and mentioned the 'missile that hit the Pentagon'. Bush made another slip and referred to when he saw the first plane hit the WTC on TV... etc, etc, etc, etc.


Did the US gov't actually do it to themselves?


Yes... depending on what you mean by the 'US govt'. Only a certain proportion of the govt knew what was happening (and only some of the senior military). The intel agencies, at a senior level, almost certainly knew well in advance.


or was it actually terrorists (but the govt knew about it in advance and allowed it to happen)??


No. The 'terrorists' (if they indeed existed!) were patsies, like Lee Harvey Oswald in the murder of JFK.

Paul
30th August 2012, 04:43
I just don't see how the US govt (on a presidential level) could be behind this on their own as a so called inside job.
I'm guessing that the then President George W. Bush himself was told to play the game, or die young.

I'm guessing that his father, former President George H. W. Bush, as well as Secretary of Defense Donald R. "Rummy" Rumsfeld were in it up to their reptilian eyebrows (do reptiles have eyebrows?).

I'm also guessing that any "Islamic" terrorist hijackers involved were about as essential to the overall operation as sequins on a dancer's tutu.

Huma
30th August 2012, 05:40
am I correct in thinking that Arthur has "gone dark" and will probably never contact bill again (for his own safety) but perhaps Bill can clarify?

Yes, that's pretty much correct. After being out of circulation for a full two years, he made an appearance at the Camelot Awake and Aware conference in September 2011 -- where on the Saturday evening he stated on the public speaker's panel that (my paraphrase) he could not verify that HAARP had the capabilities that it was rumored to have.

I was astonished. I was sitting next to him, and challenged him. In 2008, he had sent me an e-mail after the May Sichuan earthquake (and after Ben Fulford had posted a YouTube video stating that this was caused by HAARP). Henry told me that Ben Fulford had not got his account quite correct about how HAARP worked, but he confirmed that it could cause earthquakes -- and much else -- and was "a handy-dandy tool".

I reminded him of this statement, and asked him how he now appeared to be saying something different. Henry was flustered, and said that he could not remember contacting me about HAARP previously. I think he was fully truthful. This was not the first time he could not remember having written something important to us.

Henry was probably the most important of all the many Camelot witnesses, but now Kerry and I agree that he cannot be relied upon and we both feel sure he was heavily "leaned on" after his July 2009 public statement at the Barcelona Exopolitics Conference that he had personally been to Mars. Jake Simpson -- who later became similarly unreliable -- told us at that time that "Henry would never be permitted to make that statement again."

Do you believe Bill, that with both Jake and Arthur/Henry, because they have both become similarly unreliable, that this has put a cold chill into any future whistle blower testimony of equivalent caliber? It seems like an awful tragedy that we can't pick his mind a bit more.

Oouthere
30th August 2012, 13:11
So let me get this right, you are shown:

a. Numerous aircraft parts both inside of the buildings and outside of the buildings.

b. Parts far to heavy to be moved or planted without a fork lift and no way to get to those parts with a fork lift at the time of the photo.

c. Physical evidence of an incoming craft knocking over light poles that required over 120' wingspan or two incoming craft to knock over both rows of poles..

d. Physical impact evidence of a generator in the flight path.

e. Positively identified 757 parts to include the front landing strut, two rims, a turbine blade, and diffuser section of an engine. ALL but one of which are too heavy to be moved by hand.

If you follow this illogical no plane path, it will take you down a fairy tale road. The plane was at the Pentagon and it is proven in physical evidence, but just like those awaiting the return of Jesus.....you never see it.

What you need to be concentrating on is the fact that the black box data has been fabricated and who let this strike happen. The WTCs have enough evidence to show they were set with explosives. Susan Lindauer has access to video tape evidence of unidentified black vans coming into the WTCs early in the morning hours several weeks before 9/11. So long as they have not been tampered with this is evidence. The planes were there and it is proven, but just like those awaiting the return of Jesus.....you never see it. The covered-up video rumor is not true as told. (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/FBI_hides_84_Pentagon_videos) According to the FBI files index only one tape showed the actual craft in flight and the impact. All others did not show those two aspects together. The Doubletree video shows an explosion but NO FLYOVER.

In a business course it was taught that a cohesive group is both positive and negative. The negative aspect is a bad idea is accepted within the group and will be promoted or at least accepting of that idea. This is exactly what is going on here, a refusal to investigate and think for yourself. It does not matter if a lawyer, doctor, police officer, president, congressman, senator, pilot, navigator, or anyone else presents a non-viable theory....it is still that, non-viable.

So let's do one more review....provable flight path damage with wingspan of over 120', provable 757 parts in and around the Pentagon, video showing incoming craft impacting Pentagon....what more do you need? Forget the testimonies and look at the PROVABLE PHYSICAL EVIDENCE.

Rich

Cognitive Dissident
30th August 2012, 13:30
Rich, you seem to be serious about this, so can we discuss the following. Just to keep things simple, how do you account for:

1) the fact that the approaching "plane" did not hit the Pentagon straight on, where it would have hit a section full of the top brass. Instead, it took a 270 degree turn (a miracle for a rookie pilot!) to hit the least occupied, least important part of the Pentagon

2) the fact that the only video released does not show a plane (there is some sort of blur - looks like a missile to me, but anyway) and crucially shows a white hot explosion at the moment of impact at the wall. In other words, high explosives. There is no way that the tip of the plane would make an explosion like that. In fact, the whole plane would only make a dirty great red explosion, which was not visible in the video.

Over to you.

Oouthere
30th August 2012, 14:03
Cognitive, goods questions.

1) I do believe this flight path was set-up to destroy the accounting section of the Pentagon in order to hide the missing trillion plus dollars. Even those in charge want minimal damage in order to secure their objective. One of the people working with Donald Rumsfeld states he did not follow his normal routine on 9/11/2001, but this route gets into perspective and witness testimony and the physical evidence needs to be adhered to or else we go back to energy weapons and no plane theories.

2) I've watched that video several hundred times. When the WTCs were hit the plane entered and a fireball exited the other side. Some people state this proves a pre-charge was set-off prior to the plane hitting the Pentagon. Not the case. The fire ball that should have started inside the building did start inside the building, but the outside fireball was created by striking the generator and creating an explosion of diesel that rolled over the building.

HaveBlue
30th August 2012, 14:07
Welcome to Jim Fetzer. I have always wanted to ask you personally why you are not a Judy wood fan? If you have explained this elsewhere could you provide a link.

Her explanation of molecular disintegration is the only one that is congruent in my view. I'm well past any thermite or nano thermite stories as the WTC towers were made from both aluminium and steel in the first place. These being the ingredients to make such compounds naturally had every right to be there in the aftermath.

On another matter, it is looking like both Henry Deacon and Jake Simpson may have been put in place to disinfo Bill, as was the infamous 'charles'.
It is looking like Bill was underestimated. Well done Bill.

danceblackcatdance
30th August 2012, 14:24
Welcome to Jim Fetzer. I have always wanted to ask you personally why you are not a Judy wood fan? If you have explained this elsewhere could you provide a link.

Her explanation of molecular disintegration is the only one that is congruent in my view. I'm well past any thermite or nano thermite stories as the WTC towers were made from both aluminium and steel in the first place. These being the ingredients to make such compounds naturally had every right to be there in the aftermath.


i'm there too, what else could disintergrate concrete & steel like that so it just floats away...

the black column is smoke from the fire, the white is powdered building :confused:

http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/erin/pics/browse.jpg

Cognitive Dissident
30th August 2012, 14:30
Cognitive, goods questions.

1) I do believe this flight path was set-up to destroy the accounting section of the Pentagon in order to hide the missing trillion plus dollars. Even those in charge want minimal damage in order to secure their objective. One of the people working with Donald Rumsfeld states he did not follow his normal routine on 9/11/2001, but this route gets into perspective and witness testimony and the physical evidence needs to be adhered to or else we go back to energy weapons and no plane theories.

2) I've watched that video several hundred times. When the WTCs were hit the plane entered and a fireball exited the other side. Some people state this proves a pre-charge was set-off prior to the plane hitting the Pentagon. Not the case. The fire ball that should have started inside the building did start inside the building, but the outside fireball was created by striking the generator and creating an explosion of diesel that rolled over the building.

Rich, thanks for your quick response. Just to be sure we are talking about this same video, is it this one? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L75Gga92WO8
Note the white explosion prior to the red explosion. I am pretty sure that diesel does not explode white. Like this explosion I just found on YouTube - diesel in a barrel explodes yellow, not white. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XriRCssS4MI

HaveBlue
30th August 2012, 14:42
I really must apologize for not reading the thread titile correctly. It is only the Pentagon being discussed and not any New Yourk incidents. Sorry. I just happen to earnestly believe the whole official 911 story full stop is a fantasy.

Dennis Leahy
30th August 2012, 15:01
I don't have a lot of time right now, but thought I'd check-in here for two purposes:

1.) remind folks to focus on the thread's intent

and

2.) collect some money


1.) Gentle reminder: This thread is not about 9/11. It's not even really about the broad subject of the Pentagon on 9/11 (though it is mostly), but rather it is about a specific article, written by Dennis Cimino with Jim Fetzer, submitted to Veterans today by Jim Fetzer. Whether Judy Wood warms up her coffee in a microwave (bad!) or on the stovetop (good!) is not relevant to the discussion. I am well aware (and sometimes guilty) of tangents that seem organic to a thread, but with (now) 90 posts in this thread, I see maybe 20 that are directly related to discussing the Dennis Cimino article. Please try to stay focused on that article. There are dozens of 9/11 threads for the other stuff.

2.) I'm going to collect on the bet. My favorite charities are Charity:Water and Doctors Without Borders (Médecins Sans Frontières), and I would like Rich to make a check for $320.00 out to one of them and send it to them. A rough count of 16 unprovable pieces of "evidence" x $20 = $320. So far.

Or, was the bet a trick? "I’ll debate this with anyone and any point that is disproven in my theory will cost me $20..." might get down to something like Bill Clinton's "it depends on what your definition of 'is' is", and when the word "disproven" is used, disproven to whom? Rich is citing videotapes from the Doubletree and another camera that were never made public as evidence? Yikes! You should pay double on that one! Link goes to another 9/11 truth debunking site, called 911Myths.com, and includes:




One (1) JVC EHG Hi-Fi videocassette, labeled Day 11 Quarters K

Video from security camera at Doubletree Hotel, 300 Army Navy Drive, Arlington, Virginia. Security video showing rotating footage from different camera locations at hotel; no camera captures impact of plane into Pentagon.


One (1) TDK video tape marked "11C"

Images captured by two separate cameras at the entrance to the Pentagon Mall Terrace parkinng lot. Images capture the impact of the plane into the Pentagon from two different cameras. Obtained from the Pentagon Force Protection Agency via USA/EDVA.
(emphasis is mine. If you have not seen this footage, and if this footage has not been scrutinized and authenticated by video experts, you have no business citing this as reference.)

I'll be back online in a few days and will add up the grand total. Maybe we should think about sending the money to a 9/11 first responder relief fund.

-Dennis


So let me get this right, you are shown:

a. Numerous aircraft parts both inside of the buildings and outside of the buildings.

b. Parts far to heavy to be moved or planted without a fork lift and no way to get to those parts with a fork lift at the time of the photo.

c. Physical evidence of an incoming craft knocking over light poles that required over 120' wingspan or two incoming craft to knock over both rows of poles..

d. Physical impact evidence of a generator in the flight path.

e. Positively identified 757 parts to include the front landing strut, two rims, a turbine blade, and diffuser section of an engine. ALL but one of which are too heavy to be moved by hand.

If you follow this illogical no plane path, it will take you down a fairy tale road. The plane was at the Pentagon and it is proven in physical evidence, but just like those awaiting the return of Jesus.....you never see it.

What you need to be concentrating on is the fact that the black box data has been fabricated and who let this strike happen. The WTCs have enough evidence to show they were set with explosives. Susan Lindauer has access to video tape evidence of unidentified black vans coming into the WTCs early in the morning hours several weeks before 9/11. So long as they have not been tampered with this is evidence. The planes were there and it is proven, but just like those awaiting the return of Jesus.....you never see it. The covered-up video rumor is not true as told. (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/FBI_hides_84_Pentagon_videos) According to the FBI files index only one tape showed the actual craft in flight and the impact. All others did not show those two aspects together. The Doubletree video shows an explosion but NO FLYOVER.

In a business course it was taught that a cohesive group is both positive and negative. The negative aspect is a bad idea is accepted within the group and will be promoted or at least accepting of that idea. This is exactly what is going on here, a refusal to investigate and think for yourself. It does not matter if a lawyer, doctor, police officer, president, congressman, senator, pilot, navigator, or anyone else presents a non-viable theory....it is still that, non-viable.

So let's do one more review....provable flight path damage with wingspan of over 120', provable 757 parts in and around the Pentagon, video showing incoming craft impacting Pentagon....what more do you need? Forget the testimonies and look at the PROVABLE PHYSICAL EVIDENCE.

Rich

Selene
30th August 2012, 16:01
So let me get this right, you are shown:

a. Numerous aircraft parts both inside of the buildings and outside of the buildings.


Well, Oouthere, per your point a):

What the immediate first-responder photos do (inadvertently) show is what appears to be some kind of fenced complex of temporary structures and outbuildings to the right of the impact area large enough to be concealing a lot of ready-made disaster “parts”. This example, one of the earliest with the impact fireball still blazing, doesn’t show any aircraft parts on the ground, only the problematic (for your case) large upright cable reels standing in front of the impact. Additionally, those six foot tall objects would surely have been mowed over by a 757 entering the building’s ground floor; to suggest (as some debunkers have attempted) that someone uprighted these reels and put them into position in the moments after impact in order to confound later conspiracy researchers is beyond ludicrous.

http://img577.imageshack.us/img577/392/fireballl.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/577/fireballl.jpg/)


b. Parts far too heavy to be moved or planted without a fork lift and no way to get to those parts with a fork lift at the time of the photo…

Per your point b):

Wheel hubs may be too heavy for a forklift, perhaps, but they ARE wheels – and can be, ummm, rolled into place….

The photo you’ve cited (below) is, again, from a rather later date, showing stacked-up and sorted debris, as I pointed on in my post # 74. If those parts were “too heavy to carry” and a forklift was never used, then how did they magically sort themselves into those piles against that wall? Harry Potter’s sorting hat, perhaps? They didn’t get into nifty piles with fresh pink garbage bags by themselves. (Note the other garbage bag in the upper left of the photo, about 20 feet along the wall.) Sorry, that’s not a debris field.

http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/7351/pentagondebris007landin.jpg

Cheers,

Selene

Oouthere
30th August 2012, 16:09
Dennis, just because you say something in regards to what you do not like makes it correct? It is your duty to disprove me....do it. Prove to me that each of those pieces did not come from a 757.

Rich

Oouthere
30th August 2012, 16:16
So let me get this right, you are shown:

a. Numerous aircraft parts both inside of the buildings and outside of the buildings.


Well, Oouthere, per your point a):

What the immediate first-responder photos do (inadvertently) show is what appears to be some kind of fenced complex of temporary structures and outbuildings to the right of the impact area large enough to be concealing a lot of ready-made disaster “parts”. This example, one of the earliest with the impact fireball still blazing, doesn’t show any aircraft parts on the ground, only the problematic (for your case) large upright cable reels standing in front of the impact. Additionally, those six foot tall objects would surely have been mowed over by a 757 entering the building’s ground floor; to suggest (as some debunkers have attempted) that someone uprighted these reels and put them into position in the moments after impact in order to confound later conspiracy researchers is beyond ludicrous.

http://img577.imageshack.us/img577/392/fireballl.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/577/fireballl.jpg/)


b. Parts far too heavy to be moved or planted without a fork lift and no way to get to those parts with a fork lift at the time of the photo…

Per your point b):

Wheel hubs may be too heavy for a forklift, perhaps, but they ARE wheels – and can be, ummm, rolled into place….

The photo you’ve cited (below) is, again, from a rather later date, showing stacked-up and sorted debris, as I pointed on in my post # 74. If those parts were “too heavy to carry” and a forklift was never used, then how did they magically sort themselves into those piles against that wall? Harry Potter’s sorting hat, perhaps? They didn’t get into nifty piles with fresh pink garbage bags by themselves. (Note the other garbage bag in the upper left of the photo, about 20 feet along the wall.) Sorry, that’s not a debris field.

http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/7351/pentagondebris007landin.jpg

Cheers,

Selene

That fenced structure to the right is the generator.

No, the engine did not even hit the ground so there is no reason to expect the fueslage to hit either. You can see where the engine hit the fenced area and there is a good distance to the fuselage.

Yeah, damaged rims can be rolled and I guess if the Hulk showed up he could move that front strut (weighing many hundreds of pounds) into the C ring section.

Oouthere
30th August 2012, 16:19
Hiya Cognitive,

Video cameras sometimes do strange things with color as I'm certain there are not pink people walking about (at least in the open). This is question that would need to be addressed to a video specialist.

mountain_jim
30th August 2012, 16:28
This would be so easy to clear up. Where is the video showing the 757 hitting the Pentagon? Or even on near approach?

Why were all the available security camera videos confiscated and the only few frames that were later released prove nothing?

These issues alone are enough for me to smell a big rat. The fact that Rumsfield slipped up and said 'missile' adds to the smell.

Veteran's Today has printed other articles discussing the missile type likely involved.

I just don't understand why you are so certain of your conclusions and so quick to trash this researcher's given the extremely questionable (in my view) state of your own 'evidence'.

Oouthere
30th August 2012, 16:46
Mountain, because there are non that are available other than the Pentagon crappy video. I am certain of my findings because people's testimonies and perceptions are not always correct (to include mine). But the physical evidence disproves this no-plane theory.

I was 10 years Air Force, very patriotic, talked my son into joining the military, helped talk my nephew into joining and now he has PTSD and it was based on lie. Not only lies from the government but also lies from the truther movement. I have a dog in this fight.....

Rich

Cidersomerset
30th August 2012, 16:49
This is what i mean about a war on American people as a result of the 9/11 false flag !!
You may say they are only doing their Job ...But if it was not for 9/11 the US constitution
would not be under so much threat from their own leaders .....

We had 30 years of of the IRA /UDF terrorism here from the sixties to the nighties so we
are used to major threats, but nothing like what happenned after 9/11...
There is also a lot of information comming out that the 'troubles' were kept going
by elements of the British military orderd to keep it going behind the scenes !


TSA Takes Over Bus Station In Tampa, DHS Agents Threaten Journalists

Thursday, 30 August 2012 09:41

zSbXJM1qVsU

'Independent Journalists documenting the level of security theatre surrounding the Republican National Convention in Tampa were
threatened with being “detained for 72 hours” by Homeland Security agents, after they filmed TSA employees occupying a Greyhound
bus station close to the security perimeter.

The reporters with the Houston Free Thinkers captured video of no less than five blue shirted TSA workers manning the ticket
office at the station, ready to conduct bag searches and pat downs on bus passengers.'

http://www.infowars.com/video-tsa-takes-over-bus-station-in-tampa-dhs-agents-threaten-journalists/

Oouthere
30th August 2012, 18:25
Like most of us on here I am not a aviation or explosives expert, but like a jury in a trial very few start out as experts and its with the weight
of argument , probability and who benifits from a crime that a verdict is arrived at........After the initial shock of 9/11 and apportioning blame..
Four wars were iniated by the Neo-con led Bush administration......Afghanistan, Iraq, Terror/muslim world and the American people via 'Homeland Security'..

Who Benifitted Bush and the neo-cons, mil ind complex , Halliburton and many other organisations and a lot of deals involving the elites getting more rich
and powerfull at the expence of thousands of killed and injured coalition troops and millions in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere .....There was certainly
nothing in it for Bin Laden, other than possibly help Ciada create the foundation for over a decade of slaughter....To gain control of drugs , Oil and minerals
for the Rich and powerfull who run the world !

Its from this perspective that I think 9/11 was a inside job....Classic 'False Flag' operation..

From a eye witness who was there on the day...She saw no evidence of a plane !!

88JQL4esHFg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_30TpBo-V_Ds/TQ0CdIQzg5I/AAAAAAAAAQ8/hs_DdBb8JNI/s1600/pentagon%252Battack%252Bearly%252Bpicture.jpg

http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/analysis/damage/docs/compmix2.jpg


http://i.cdn.turner.com/trutv/trutv.com/graphics/conspiracy/story/government-lies/911-10yrs/pentagon.jpg

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?40835-Architects-and-Engineers-and-9-11-research-

I checked and I have posted a few threads that maybe of interrest to those not experts but interrested...
plus there is many more in the forum index....Cheers

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?47317-9-11-Flight-93-Banned-Newscast

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?47140-9-11-TRUTH-Jewish-Ex-Marine-SPEAKS-OUT-on-Zionist-Israeli-Involvement--MUST-WATCH-

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?45610-Rich-Hall-analysis...9-11..-presents-3D-graphics-update..

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?45506-C2CAM-9-11-Truth-Enigmas-05-20-2012--Coast-To-Coast-AM-

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?41614-Where-Did-The-Towers-Go-Dr-Judy-Wood-in-the-UK....Sky-200-TV-with-Theo-Chalmers.

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?43345-Pentagon-ready-to-resume-9-11-trial

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?37093-Psychologists-Explain-911-Denial...

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?36025-Richard-Gage-interview-on-Jack-Blood-Radio-show....19th-Nov-2011..

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?30173-Architects-and-Engineers-solving-the-mystery-of-WT7

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?30166-Thermite-Experiment-on-metal-car

Lt Col Brian Birdwell was also near the penetration hole and had his lungs fill with jet fuel fumes:

"The morning of September 11, I stepped out and went to the men’s restroom, and took care of my business. I was about 7 or 8 steps out when flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon at the intersection of the fourth quarter in the E ring at about a 45-degree angle. I was thrown around, tossed around like a rag doll inside. I was set ablaze, breathing in black putrid smoke, inhaling aerosolized jet fuel, with the temperature of that air somewhere between 300-350 degrees. You could see flesh hanging off my arms, my eyes are already beginning to swell closed, and I had no hair. The front of my shirt is still intact, my access badge and my nametag are melted, but still hanging covered in the black soot and scorched blood. My arms are skinned alive, my pants are gone, I only have my leather belt and a portion of my pants that are in the immediate area of the belt. The flames were consuming me and I expected to pass away."


And another....

Michael DiPaula 41, project coordinator Pentagon Renovation Team -- He left a meeting in the Pentagon just minutes before the crash, looking for an electrician who didn't show, in a construction trailer less than 75 feet away. "Suddenly, an airplane roared into view, nearly shearing the roof off the trailer before slamming into the E ring. 'It sounded like a missile,' DiPaula recalls . . . Buried in debris and covered with airplane fuel, he was briefly listed by authorities as missing, but eventually crawled from the flaming debris and the shroud of black smoke unscathed.

And Another......

Dr. Thom Mayer had cleared his emergency room early Tuesday morning, in expectation that Pentagon victims would be streaming into nearby Inova Fairfax hospital where he heads the ER staff. . . . By evening, he was out at the triage site at the Pentagon, wearing one of his other hats, as medical director of the Fairfax County Fire and Rescue team. He stayed there all night and into the next day . . .

At one point, he went into the charred opening, to check on the safety of workers there "There was jet fuel all over the place. It was very smoky, and it was difficult to breathe, even with a respirator," he said. " I saw horrifying things. It looked like the inner circle of Dante. . . . I stood there wondering, how did Dante know what this would look like."

Cidersomerset
30th August 2012, 18:45
Lt Col Brian Birdwell was also near the penetration hole and had his lungs fill with jet fuel fumes:

"The morning of September 11, I stepped out and went to the men’s restroom, and took care of my business. I was about 7 or 8 steps out when flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon at the intersection of the fourth quarter in the E ring at about a 45-degree angle. I was thrown around, tossed around like a rag doll inside. I was set ablaze, breathing in black putrid smoke, inhaling aerosolized jet fuel, with the temperature of that air somewhere between 300-350 degrees. You could see flesh hanging off my arms, my eyes are already beginning to swell closed, and I had no hair. The front of my shirt is still intact, my access badge and my nametag are melted, but still hanging covered in the black soot and scorched blood. My arms are skinned alive, my pants are gone, I only have my leather belt and a portion of my pants that are in the immediate area of the belt. The flames were consuming me and I expected to pass away."


Thanks Outhere thats what i mean't to ask , there must be more witnesses that escaped who saw plane fragments if they were there ?

Is there any on vid that you have come accross ??

vyREERWkqzc

This witness saw what he thought was a small corporate jet fly into
the Pentagon from a building across the street and saw a fireball......

Oouthere
30th August 2012, 19:27
This is why we need to leave the testimonies behind, they are not reliable. Anyone that saw the incoming craft would have only seen it for a few seconds tops. Physical evidence proves this case.

This guy says he's a pilot and had pieces land on his car.

ClVHovq4iTk

Just found out that April Gallop received an undisclosed amount of money for a court settlement from American Airlines....you can't have it both ways.

Document 1 (http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o233/CameronFox/noticeofmotion.jpg)
Document 2 (http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o233/CameronFox/motion2.jpg)

Rich

Cidersomerset
30th August 2012, 19:53
This is why we need to leave the testimonies behind, they are not reliable. Anyone that saw the incoming craft would have only seen it for a few seconds tops. Physical evidence proves this case.

This guy says he's a pilot and had pieces land on his car.

If it was a plane large or small , missile or bomb the bigger picture of the whole 9/11 & later 7/7 pysops was the plan of the Neo-con group who after the fall of the wall and end of the cold war.
Needed to stay in power with the backing of Corporate America and UK .There plan was to take over/influence the oil and mineral wealth of the middle east and part of Asia . It gets a lot bigger than this
but the only way they could manipulate congress and the American public into going along with this was to stage a new pearl harbour event, which is stated in their litrature....

Most of what happened in the last 20 years was planned by the Neo-cons and their allies whether knowingly or not.......So there is no way 9/11 was a coincidence it was planned
and not by a figure head in a cave in Afghanistan who had no armed men behind him, he had to rent them for photo shoots...

We can argue how the Pentagon and other false flags were executed, but it cannot hide the fact that the US has been hijacked for the past 30 years and probably longer by
elites who have their own power agenda and the American people are there to serve them. imo....

http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o233/CameronFox/noticeofmotion.jpg

As for the claim, why not the government are telling her the terrorists did it so
to get some compansation from them via the airline makes sence for what she experianced..

It does not mean her statement is untrue of what she saw on the day !!

From her point of view , she was still blown up....

Arrowwind
30th August 2012, 20:19
Well, its pretty clear to me that a branch of the US government in a black box operation did to this, lead by Cheney with recruited Arabs.
It was a very complex and technical operation, that middle easterners would be incablabe of doing.

Has anyone been able to explain all the cars that were damaged with door handles missing and trunks popped opne with various sorts of metal meltdown that was found for blocks around the WTC site incident and immediatley repressed in the media?

Cidersomerset
30th August 2012, 20:35
Has anyone been able to explain all the cars that were damaged with door handles missing and trunks popped opne with various sorts of metal meltdown that was found for blocks around the WTC site incident and immediatley repressed in the media?




I know the answer is more complex than it looks at first sight and the work of Dr.Judy Wood must be concidered, as she knew from day one
all was not what it seemed ,,,,slightly off thread but part of the bigger picture !!

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?41614-Where-Did-The-Towers-Go-Dr-Judy-Wood-in-the-UK....Sky-200-TV-with-Theo-Chalmers

bmmQ6OWMHTI

Oouthere
30th August 2012, 20:40
I've not studied the energy weapon theory but just looking at some of the photos they seem reasonably easy to explain. A lot of the cars are pushed against the side of the road with crushed tops and damaged/manged tires. These probably had either blocked traffic for high important equipment like armored personnel carriers and they simply rolled over the top and later had to be pushed to the side with a bulldozer. Shattering glass happens in Alaska when cold fronts suddenly move threw, it happens with sudden temperature changes. Some of them may simply be thieves taking advantage of cars and the situation, using a blow torch or pry bar to get into the vehicles.....lots of explanations though.

Think for yourself, don't let someone else think for you.

Rich

HaveBlue
30th August 2012, 20:53
It is all really simple. Why won't the U.S Govt release the camera footage? A couple of pathetic pics of nothing is all they have for us. Kinda looks like they got sumpthin ta hyde dunnit?

And don't forget the 'plane' (AKA blip on radar screen) is ten miles out sir, do the orders still stand? (cheney) of course the orders still stand, have you heard something to the contrary?

and so on and so on! It ain't rocket science.

Cidersomerset
30th August 2012, 21:04
tR_pjzW98dM

This navy promotional weapons vid states that laser weapon research has been going on
for decades...they now feel they can bring it out in the open.This for me says black ops
and the 'Star Wars' missile deffence system may of had this tech from the early 90's...

Oouthere
30th August 2012, 21:05
HaveBlue, I'm not fighting that there was not inside help but this non-sense about no-plane hitting the Pentagon is separating those that look at critical and undeniable evidence with those that saw the event. There seems to be no happy place, currently here are the choices:

a. Something happened and yes there is parts but miracle grow fertilizer is responsible for them.

b. A plane hit the Pentagon as per the official story (remembering details that do not add up such as Mineta, automated aircraft intercept protocol being changed only months before 9/11, no hijacker signal from any planes, etc).

c. A plane hit the Pentagon that was allowed to impact and/or controlled/programmed by outside forces.

You tell me, which makes the most sense?

Rich

Dennis Leahy
30th August 2012, 21:24
d.) Dennis Cimino's account

Dennis

778 neighbour of some guy
30th August 2012, 21:26
1. aeroplane - an aircraft that has a fixed wing and is powered by propellers or jets; "the flight was delayed due to trouble with the airplane"

From the Thesaurus.

That is a pretty broad definition isnt it? One could interpret that in at least a dozen ways.

I am at work now so not able to upload images, but maybe someone can stick a few cruisemissile images in here that match the discription of the word aeroplane, fixed wings and an engine seem to be all it needs to qualifiy. I bet there a at least ten different US made types of cruisemissiles with varying shapes and sizes.

Paul
30th August 2012, 21:32
This is why we need to leave the testimonies behind, they are not reliable.
You just posted some testimonies yourself, earlier in this thread, and you post another one, here.

I guess the only reliable ones are the ones that agree with you?

TargeT
30th August 2012, 21:40
1. aeroplane - an aircraft that has a fixed wing and is powered by propellers or jets; "the flight was delayed due to trouble with the airplane"

From the Thesaurus.

That is a pretty broad definition isnt it? One could interpret that in at least a dozen ways.

I am at work now so not able to upload images, but maybe someone can stick a few cruisemissile images in here that match the discription of the word aeroplane, fixed wings and an engine seem to be all it needs to qualifiy. I bet there a at least ten different US made types of cruisemissiles with varying shapes and sizes.

Excelent point, this illistrates what you speak of well:

Tomahawk configuraiton:
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WMUS_Tomahawk_pic.jpg

Various configurations of cruise missles:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d4/Cruise_Missile_Comparison.jpg/640px-Cruise_Missile_Comparison.jpg

Cidersomerset
30th August 2012, 21:54
Mock up of a painted Tomahak missile...

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQkByodLiJNJWIFdMslYbuAanr0Jn-n1eKpQ3sEgOfH1qqey7V688Fwxg


http://911review.com/errors/pentagon/imgs/GH_Mtns.jpg


http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/ScreenHunter_14-Aug.-29-22.47.jpg

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/08/29/911-video-of-missile-hitting-pentagon-leaked/


http://www.sott.net/image/image/s1/23104/full/parody_flight_77.jpg


O2VXBFW-vzM

Whatever hit the Pentagon was only a piece in a much bigger conspiricy which is still
playing out !!!

modwiz
30th August 2012, 23:18
My understanding, from Veterans Today is that a Russian Granite cruise missile, pulled from the sunken sub, Kursk, was used. It's very hard casing and great weight (7 tonnes) would account for it making it through all of those walls.

One of a few stories from there:http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/02/21/jb-campbell-anatomy-of-a-frame/

The opening paragraph:

"As VT readers know, the Pentagon was hit by a Soviet-era naval cruise missile called the Granit, known by the US government as the Shipwreck, because that’s what it does: wrecks big ships such as aircraft carriers. Unlike normal cruise missiles, it is made of steel and weighs 7.7 tons. It goes 2.5 Mach and cannot be stopped by any sort of anti-aircraft weapon. It hits ships right at the waterline, which is why the 12 foot holes in the six capital (structural outer) walls of the Pentagon began right above ground level without harming a blade of grass on the lawn out front."

http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/ScreenHunter_04-Feb.-21-23.33-320x110.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/02/P700Granit.jpg

nonesuch
31st August 2012, 07:17
This is why we need to leave the testimonies behind, they are not reliable. Anyone that saw the incoming craft would have only seen it for a few seconds tops. Physical evidence proves this case.

This guy says he's a pilot and had pieces land on his car.

ClVHovq4iTk

Just found out that April Gallop received an undisclosed amount of money for a court settlement from American Airlines....you can't have it both ways.

Document 1 (http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o233/CameronFox/noticeofmotion.jpg)
Document 2 (http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o233/CameronFox/motion2.jpg)

Rich

Yeah, like the guy in the video would be allowed by authorities to pick up a piece of the evidence from the crime scene and carry it with him to Fox news to 'prove' his story. Even if he did do that, there would be a follow up story about him having to return the piece of metal he stole from the scene. I doubt his testimony very much. Just my opinion.

Oouthere
31st August 2012, 11:45
This is why we need to leave the testimonies behind, they are not reliable.
You just posted some testimonies yourself, earlier in this thread, and you post another one, here.

I guess the only reliable ones are the ones that agree with you?

That's why I said "this guy", testimonies are not reliable. I don't know if he's really a pilot.

Rich

Oouthere
31st August 2012, 12:03
People, the evidence is in front of you. If you can't accept that "our" side has also mislead us then it's your own discernment problem.

I had two witnesses see my car get hit in a parking lot by a truck that did not have its parking brake set, having rolled down a hill into my vehicle. Someone jumped into the truck later in the day and left. The witnesses left message for me with a description and we found it belonged to a Navy seaman. I had picked-up the broken reflector from his vehicle that was still on my bumper and we had a meeting with what I guess was his first sergeant. He said a friend had borrowed his truck and would never do anything like that. His friend did borrow the truck, he was not lying. We went outside with the reflector pieces and put them in place, matched up his paint marks to my vehicle but he still could not accept his friend was lying. He ended up paying for my car.

LOOK AT THE PHYSICAL EVIDENCE.

Rich

Oouthere
31st August 2012, 12:10
Were these missiles equipped with 757 landing gear parts?

Rich

iceni tribe
31st August 2012, 16:02
Oothere

lets try another direction , you agree that the black box data is nul and void , so where is the real black box data from flight 77 ?

who were the FBI agents that allegedly found the black boxes at 3 am ?

how can a 757 that has just smashed into the pentagon still be flying 20 minutes after the event ?


thats just for starters , now i will give you another angle , lets put ourselves in their shoes for a bit.

we have to get rid of the department who are investigating the missing 2.3 trillion , lets hit it with a missile that is also carrying 757 parts from the 1995 Columbian air crash that would/has confused the hell out of the truth brigade and kept them bickering for shall we say 11 years.

psssssssssssssst do you want to know who did 9/11

start here , and also follow the links from the comments at the bottom and you shall have your answer.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/08/22/911-and-zion-what-was-israels-role/

mountain_jim
31st August 2012, 17:00
Oothere

lets try another direction , you agree that the black box data is nul and void , so where is the real black box data from flight 77 ?

who were the FBI agents that allegedly found the black boxes at 3 am ?

how can a 757 that has just smashed into the pentagon still be flying 20 minutes after the event ?


thats just for starters , now i will give you another angle , lets put ourselves in their shoes for a bit.

we have to get rid of the department who are investigating the missing 2.3 trillion , lets hit it with a missile that is also carrying 757 parts from the 1995 Columbian air crash that would/has confused the hell out of the truth brigade and kept them bickering for shall we say 11 years.

psssssssssssssst do you want to know who did 9/11

start here , and also follow the links from the comments at the bottom and you shall have your answer.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/08/22/911-and-zion-what-was-israels-role/

Yes, that article is a great summary of the key Israel/Mossad involvment in 9/11. On other forums, anytime I brought up the facts about the 'dancing israelis', the Urban Moving Systems and proof of Mossad involvement, I would get shouted down. Folks don't want to hear or know the truth, including my Dad, I have found.

Here is a great link with police reports and much other documentation on this aspect of 9/11

http://www.takeourworldback.com/dancingisraelisfbireport.htm



The documents were partly declassified in 2005. However, there are many parts that are still blanked out and classified until 2030 or 2035. Apart from names of individuals, the unreleased material includes longer passages such as the section following the question: "1. Did the Israeli nationals have foreknowledge of the events at WTC and were they filming the events prior to and in anticipation of the explosion?" The fact that it's blanked out indicates that the answer is clearly not an emphatic "no".

Nonetheless, the material that has already been released is sufficient to prove that the Israelis did indeed have foreknowledge of the attacks on the WTC.

Oouthere
31st August 2012, 17:13
Oothere

lets try another direction , you agree that the black box data is nul and void , so where is the real black box data from flight 77 ?

who were the FBI agents that allegedly found the black boxes at 3 am ?

how can a 757 that has just smashed into the pentagon still be flying 20 minutes after the event ?


thats just for starters , now i will give you another angle , lets put ourselves in their shoes for a bit.

we have to get rid of the department who are investigating the missing 2.3 trillion , lets hit it with a missile that is also carrying 757 parts from the 1995 Columbian air crash that would/has confused the hell out of the truth brigade and kept them bickering for shall we say 11 years.

psssssssssssssst do you want to know who did 9/11

start here , and also follow the links from the comments at the bottom and you shall have your answer.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/08/22/911-and-zion-what-was-israels-role/

These are great questions. I agree with what a lot of the speculation in regards as to who did this, why it was done, etc.

I'm just saying that before you can get to a point of entering a court room (in hopes of putting a few people in prison or executed for being traitors) that the case has to be based on physical evidence. I will guareentee that if a U.S. supreme court is approached using black box data or witness testomonies that the physical evidence will overide everything.

Working around other incredibily bright electronic techs makes you prove your points. For a long time we had daily conference calls with probably 10 to 15 electronic techs and the object of these calls was to find if you made a mistake in your analysis of a circuit failure and why it took so long to effect the repair. People got hammered daily and you learned quickly to have your ducks in a row concerning the analysis, what steps you took to arrive at your conclusions, who you contacted, shipping number of parts, etc. Human error was basically not allowed nor accepted for the most part. This is how 9/11 needs to be looked at. This is serious with a potential of revolution.

Rich

Cidersomerset
31st August 2012, 17:27
I'm just saying that before you can get to a point of entering a court room (in hopes of putting a few people in prison or executed for being traitors) that the case has to be based on physical evidence. I will guareentee that if a U.S. supreme court is approached using black box data or witness testomonies that the physical evidence will overide everything.

If only ! these people own the courts , they have ratified all federal Judges in the US...

They have already been found guilty of crimes against humanity by a international panal of judges in Kuala Lumpa last year.......How much was that covered in the corporate media....


zn8i4C5YBOs


Vp-vdfkfZO0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
United States federal judge


In the United States, the title of federal judge usually means a judge appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the United States Senate in accordance with Article III of the United States Constitution.

In addition to the Supreme Court of the United States, whose existence and some aspects of whose jurisdiction are beyond the constitutional power of Congress to alter, acts of Congress have established 13 courts of appeals (also called "circuit courts") with appellate jurisdiction over different regions of the United States, and 94 United States district courts. Every judge appointed to such a court may be categorized as a federal judge; such positions include the Chief Justice and Associate Justices of the Supreme Court, Circuit Judges of the courts of appeals, and district judges of the United States district courts. In addition, judges of the Court of International Trade are appointed pursuant to Article III.

Other judges serving in the federal courts, including magistrate judges and bankruptcy judges, are also sometimes referred to as "federal judges"; however, they are not appointed pursuant to the procedures designated in Article III. The distinction is sometimes expressed by saying that they are not "Article III judges," because the power of these other kinds of federal judge does not derive from Article III of the U.S. Constitution. See Article I and Article III tribunals.





Tenure and salary

"Article III federal judges" (as opposed to judges of some courts with special jurisdictions) serve "during good behavior" (often paraphrased as appointed "for life"). Judges hold their seats until they resign, die, or are removed from office. Although the legal orthodoxy is that judges cannot be removed from office except by impeachment by the House of Representatives followed by conviction by the Senate, several legal scholars, including William Rehnquist, Saikrishna Prakash and Steven D. Smith, have argued that the Good Behaviour Clause may, in theory, permit removal by way of a writ of scire facias filed before a federal court, without resort to impeachment.[1]

Since the impeachment process requires a trial by the United States Senate, and since the constitutional provision concerning federal judges' tenure cannot be changed without the ratifications of three-fourths of the states, federal judges have perhaps the best job security available in the United States. Moreover, the Constitution forbids Congress to diminish a federal judge's salary. Twentieth-century experience suggests that Congress is generally unwilling to take time out of its busy schedule to impeach and try a federal judge until, after criminal conviction, he or she is already in prison and still drawing a salary, which cannot otherwise be taken away (see Nixon v. United States, a key Supreme Court case about Congress's discretion in impeaching and trying federal judges).

As of January 2010, federal district judges were paid $174,000 a year, circuit judges $184,500, Associate Justices of the Supreme Court $213,900 and the Chief Justice of the United States $223,500. All were permitted to earn a maximum of an additional $21,000 a year for teaching.[2]

Chief Justice John Roberts has repeatedly pleaded for an increase in judicial pay, calling the situation a "constitutional crisis." The problem is that the most talented associates at the largest U.S. law firms with judicial clerkship experience (in other words, the attorneys most qualified to become the next generation of federal judges) already earn as much as a federal judge in their first year as full-time associates.[3] Thus, when those attorneys eventually become experienced partners and reach the stage in life where one would normally consider switching to public service, their interest in joining the judiciary is tempered by the prospect of a giant pay cut back to what they were making 10 to 20 years earlier (adjusted for inflation). One way for attorneys to soften the financial blow is to spend only a few years on the bench and then return to private practice or go into private arbitration, but such turnover creates a risk of a revolving door judiciary subject to regulatory capture.

Thus, Chief Justice Roberts has warned that "judges are no longer drawn primarily from among the best lawyers in the practicing bar" and "If judicial appointment ceases to be the capstone of a distinguished career and instead becomes a stepping stone to a lucrative position in private practice, the Framers' goal of a truly independent judiciary will be placed in serious jeopardy."[4]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_judge

Bill Ryan
31st August 2012, 18:10
-------

The group controlling events in present day America must be delighted that smart folks are still debating the fine details of what happened on 9/11 -- over a decade ago -- while the controllers debate whether or not to give the green light on the next false flag event.

The most important things to discuss might be

1) What have we learned?
2) What have we not learned?
3) Why isn't it obvious to at least 100 million other Americans that this was a carefully constructed inside job?
4) What, when and where might the next such event be?

Tangri
31st August 2012, 18:35
-------

The group controlling events in present day America must be delighted that smart folks are still debating the fine details of what happened on 9/11 -- over a decade ago -- while the controllers debate whether or not to give the green light on the next false flag event.

The most important things to discuss might be

1) What have we learned?
2) What have we not learned?
3) Why isn't it obvious to at least 100 million other Americans that this was a carefully constructed inside job?
4) What, when and where might the next such event be?

I can answer only Q3- Because they do not chose to see , this is a will. You can not question the choice of person, without question of their coming(~deporting) point

Cidersomerset
31st August 2012, 19:49
1) What have we learned?
2) What have we not learned?
3) Why isn't it obvious to at least 100 million other Americans that this was a carefully constructed inside job?
4) What, when and where might the next such event be?



All very good questions Bill and to be fair we do try to answer them on various different threads...

The Intel agencies are always several steps ahead of us with their arsenal of 'tricks' and we are
like knats biting on the back of a elephant in their eyes, but if enough people bite we can
make a difference in the long run.....Thats at least must be our goal imo...

Knowledge is power !! The elites have known this for thousands of years. The more
this is discussed the drip drip effect may eventually get to people who have the
documentation that may be presented to a brave enough judge and jury to bring
this out into the open.

At the moment most mainstream news readers/presenters & reporters start any article
about truth seekers on 9/11 as conspiricy nuts followed by a laugh and raising of the eyebrows..
But many are not bothered by this and are trying to get the message out that 9/11 was a inside job!

I have learn't many things over the last five years , that I would not have thought possible....
But lieing to a nation to start wars for proffit is not one of them, that I knew from reading
history and nearly all wars were fought for proffit by taking your neighbours land, goods and people
from pre history thru the mighty empires of Persia , China , Greece,Rome , Arabia, Ottoman , European
and now the united states with hundreds of military bases around the world..

I thought this was just human nature , survival of the fittest and most powerfull, war and killing just
a consequence, but listening to the research of David Icke and others.There maybe more sinister reasons
for all this bloodlust , which on the surface seems so ridiculous.But the killing of millions in Iraq and Afghanistan,
is even more stupid so going down the rabbit hole and listening to many other explanations has opened my eyes.
If there are entities that feed off the terror of death and destruction. Earth would be a good place to be over the
last 10,000 years, and they would of been having a 'orgy of blood lust' for the last 100 years !!

As you know Bill every thread you can look at on several levels and the more I peer up out of the rabbit hole
the more some of the more unbelievably things that have happened in recent history makes more sence if
they were contrieved by a small elite, rather than random chance events by disperate groups ! ! just a few thoughts ..Steve

Arrowwind
31st August 2012, 20:17
-------

The group controlling events in present day America must be delighted that smart folks are still debating the fine details of what happened on 9/11 -- over a decade ago -- while the controllers debate whether or not to give the green light on the next false flag event.

The most important things to discuss might be

1) What have we learned?
2) What have we not learned?
3) Why isn't it obvious to at least 100 million other Americans that this was a carefully constructed inside job?
4) What, when and where might the next such event be?

1. we have learned that the American people have not sufficient interest in confronting their governement and that they will allow the lies to continue. .... likely because the masses are either drugged, brainwashed and/or overwhelmed with debt and survivial responsibilities. Then there is also a large portion of people who are too busy watching "reality TV" or other trash and have little capacity or interest in critical thought.
2. We have not leared how to unify and become an effective force to stand up to a criminal government, including loss of control of media, and the loss of control of legal voting.
3. They are brainwashed to believe what they are told without much question. They are involved in self service to make money and survive, involved in religous or party propaganda that limits free thought, or simply involved in recreation and consuming material goods.
4. The next event could be at any time... when the PTB determine that our repression will be taken to the next level. (I think that they are getting ready now.)

Arrowwind
31st August 2012, 20:24
HaveBlue, I'm not fighting that there was not inside help but this non-sense about no-plane hitting the Pentagon is separating those that look at critical and undeniable evidence with those that saw the event. There seems to be no happy place, currently here are the choices:

a. Something happened and yes there is parts but miracle grow fertilizer is responsible for them.

b. A plane hit the Pentagon as per the official story (remembering details that do not add up such as Mineta, automated aircraft intercept protocol being changed only months before 9/11, no hijacker signal from any planes, etc).

c. A plane hit the Pentagon that was allowed to impact and/or controlled/programmed by outside forces.

You tell me, which makes the most sense?

Rich

It makes absolutley no sense that a plane fit into a whole that is too small for it. How you could possibly think it could be is beyond me.

Arrowwind
31st August 2012, 20:30
Let's take this a different route, above is a much more telling image before the collapse. Notice the damage extends from the generator to the far side of the photo.
Nice picture ... but where's the plane ?

:confused: What? You cant see the plane? Whats the matter with you?

Oouthere
31st August 2012, 20:34
HaveBlue, I'm not fighting that there was not inside help but this non-sense about no-plane hitting the Pentagon is separating those that look at critical and undeniable evidence with those that saw the event. There seems to be no happy place, currently here are the choices:

a. Something happened and yes there is parts but miracle grow fertilizer is responsible for them.

b. A plane hit the Pentagon as per the official story (remembering details that do not add up such as Mineta, automated aircraft intercept protocol being changed only months before 9/11, no hijacker signal from any planes, etc).

c. A plane hit the Pentagon that was allowed to impact and/or controlled/programmed by outside forces.

You tell me, which makes the most sense?

Rich

It makes absolutley no sense that a plane fit into a whole that is too small for it. How you could possibly think it could be is beyond me.


Please look at both sides of the debate. The hole is over 90' across and does fit a 757 (http://www.oilempire.us/oil-jpg/pent-ricostruzionedannouw0.jpg).

Rich

Arrowwind
31st August 2012, 20:43
http://www.twf.org/News/Y2005/0307-Pentagon.html

Just minutes (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,194168,00.html?sPage=fnc/us) after the attack, standing in front of the Pentagon on September 11, 2001, Jamie (http://www.cnn.com/CNN/anchors_reporters/mcintyre.jamie.html) McIntyre, CNN's senior Pentagon correspondent since November 1992, reported:

From my close up inspection there's no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the Pentagon. . . . . The only pieces left that you can see are small enough that you could pick up in your hand. There are no large tail sections, wing sections, fuselage - nothing like that anywhere around which would indicate that the entire plane crashed into the side of the Pentagon. . . . It wasn't till about 45 minutes later . . . that all of the floors collapsed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C02dE5VKeck (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C02dE5VKeck)


Arlington (http://www.arlingtonva.us/Departments/Fire/Documents/after_report.pdf) County Fire Chief Ed Plaugher, incident commander (http://departments.firehouse.com/web/online/Terrorism-and-Front-Lines/IAFC-Members-Appointed-to-Homeland-Security-Senior-Advisory-Committee/1$1507) at the Pentagon on September 11, corroborates Jamie McIntyre's report. At the September 12, 2001, DoD briefing, when asked: "Is there anything left of the aircraft at all?" said: "there are some small pieces of aircraft ... there's no fuselage sections and that sort of thing."
In response to another question: "Chief, there are small pieces of the plane virtually all over, out over the highway, tiny pieces. Would you say the plane exploded, virtually exploded on impact due to the fuel", Plaugher responded: "You know, I'd rather not comment on that."
Victoria Clarke, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs - "presenter (http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2001/t09122001_t0912asd.html)" of the DoD briefing, did not contradict Chief Plaugher.
Evidence that a Boeing 757 struck the Pentagon?

Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Karen_Kwiatkowski), who from her fifth-floor, B-ring office at the Pentagon, witnessed "an unforgettable fireball, 20 to 30 feet in diameter," was called for stretcher duty (http://www.defenselink.mil/dodcmsshare/newsstoryPhoto/2001-09/hrs_200109114d_hr.jpg) as she and others

stared in disbelief at a smoking gash in the Pentagon . . . But no person or thing emerged from that side of the Pentagon. We heard that survivors and injured folks were being recued from the inside, . . . and out the River exit into ambulances.
There was, writes (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1566566592/thewisdomfund/) Kwiatkowski,

a strange absence of airliner debris, there was no sign of the kind of damage to the Pentagon structure one would expect from the impact of a large airliner. This visible evidence or lack thereof may also have been apparent to the secretary of defense, who in an unfortunate slip of the tongue referred to the aircraft that slammed into the Pentagon as a 'missile (http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics%20and%20History/t11182001_t1012pm.html)'.
Barbara Honegger, military affairs journalist and former White House policy analyst, writes (http://www.physics911.net/pdf/honegger.pdf) NORAD's

Gen. Larry Arnold, revealed that he ordered one of his jets to fly down low over the Pentagon shortly after the attack that morning, and that his pilot reported back that there was no evidence that a plane had hit the building.
Publicly available photos (http://www.twf.org/Gallery/911f/Pentagon911/index.html) support these statements by Jamie McIntyre, Ed Plaugher, Karen Kwiatkowski, and Barbara Honegger.
Questions about what hit the Pentagon on September 11, continued to be raised at the Dept. of Defense News (http://www.twf.org/News/Y2009/0101-DoDnews.html) Briefing (http://www.twf.org/News/Y2005/0307-DoD915briefing.pdf) on September 15, 2001.

One thing that's confusing - if it came in the way you described, at an angle, why then are not the wings outside? I mean, the wings would have shorn off. The tail would have shorn off. And yet there's apparently no evidence of the aircraft outside the E ring.
http://www.twf.org/News/Y2005/0307-Hole.jpg (http://www.twf.org/Gallery/911f/Pentagon911/index.html)
Hole reported made by a Boeing 757

The hole in the Pentagon wall - prior to the collapse of the roof - appears much too small to accomodate a Boeing 757. If only the front end penetrated the Pentagon, then the wings, a portion of the fuselage, and tail would have remained outside. But no large debris - anything resembling the Boeing 757 (http://www.freedomunderground.org/memoryhole/pentagon121.swf) wings, fuselage, or tail - is visible on the Pentagon lawn, and the lawn itself shows no sign that a Boeing 757 skidded across it or struck it.
The engines of the Boeing 757 would have survived the impact and heat. An engine (http://home.att.net/~south.tower/STengine1.htm) from a plane that struck the World Trade Center was shown on network television, and so was an engine from American Airlines Flight 587 which crashed shortly after takeoff from New York on November 12, 2001.
One photo from the Pentagon crash site shows what could be an engine part about 30 inches in diameter outside the Pentagon. Another photo shows what could be an engine part (its size is difficult to determine) inside the Pentagon. Were these parts, and another piece of debris (http://www.twf.org/News/Y2005/0307-Fragment.jpg) on the Pentagon lawn traced to Flight 77? According to George Nelson, Colonel, USAF (ret.), serial numbers (http://www.physics911.net/georgenelson.htm) on aircraft parts could confirm the plane's identity. But the FBI has refused (http://www.twf.org/News/Y2007/0924-FBIRefusesPlanesIdentity.jpg) to make that evidence available to the public.

¤=[Post Update]=¤




HaveBlue, I'm not fighting that there was not inside help but this non-sense about no-plane hitting the Pentagon is separating those that look at critical and undeniable evidence with those that saw the event. There seems to be no happy place, currently here are the choices:

a. Something happened and yes there is parts but miracle grow fertilizer is responsible for them.

b. A plane hit the Pentagon as per the official story (remembering details that do not add up such as Mineta, automated aircraft intercept protocol being changed only months before 9/11, no hijacker signal from any planes, etc).

c. A plane hit the Pentagon that was allowed to impact and/or controlled/programmed by outside forces.

You tell me, which makes the most sense?

Rich

It makes absolutley no sense that a plane fit into a whole that is too small for it. How you could possibly think it could be is beyond me.


Please look at both sides of the debate. The hole is over 90' across and does fit a 757 (http://www.oilempire.us/oil-jpg/pent-ricostruzionedannouw0.jpg).

Rich

Oh yes, and after that fireball that obviously burned up all the seats, they identified people by their finger prints.

Paul
31st August 2012, 21:33
3) Why isn't it obvious to at least 100 million other Americans that this was a carefully constructed inside job?
It wasn't obvious to me, for the first five years after 9/11, as I was busy developing some Linux kernel code, tending to the usual sorts of family matters, and running on "autopilot" so far as my awareness of the most of the "rest of the world". For those first five years, I was a red-blooded, patriotic American supporter of W (Bush), Rummy (Rumsfeld), Dick (Cheney) and Condi (Rice), in the war on those damned Islamic terrorists.

My views have changed quite a bit since then ... on many topics. It's become a full time job, just keeping up with my changing views.

Paul
31st August 2012, 21:36
:confused: What? You cant see the plane? Whats the matter with you?
The aluminum in my "tin foil" hat must be poisoning my brain. It's one of the risks of being a conspiracy theory nut job, ya now.

TargeT
31st August 2012, 21:43
. It's become a full time job, just keeping up with my changing views.

so glad to hear I'm not the only one.. haha...

if only I could get paid to do this, I end up giving "hip pocket" lectures everywhere I go, luckily it still fascinates me so it doesn't feel like a chore.

Oouthere
31st August 2012, 21:44
I agree, when you first look at the hole it does not appear large enough....but it is. Do I believe everything that was stated by our government about 9/11? Hardly any of it. But when the evidence is physically photographed (and witnessed by people of which I want to avoid a discussion of since this is supposed to be based on physical evidence only) then it needs to be accepted for what it is. If a theory does not contain an explanation for the parts it has to be dismissed.

Rich

Paul
31st August 2012, 21:46
Please look at both sides of the debate. The hole is over 90' across and does fit a 757 (http://www.oilempire.us/oil-jpg/pent-ricostruzionedannouw0.jpg).
That link goes to a picture of a hole ... without a plane.

Yes, debates have sides. So long as someone is willing to keep making the case for both sides, putting up the words, making what purport to be logical points (even if they aren't), and presenting what purports to be evidence (even if it's evidence for the other side), debates can go on forever.

I'd like to think this forum is not a debate society, but rather a place for people to share with, teach, learn from, and nurture each other, as we, both individually and as a group, increase our awareness and well being. Our collective awareness becomes part of the basis of an increasingly awake humanity.

Arrowwind
1st September 2012, 02:31
3) Why isn't it obvious to at least 100 million other Americans that this was a carefully constructed inside job?
It wasn't obvious to me, for the first five years after 9/11, as I was busy developing some Linux kernel code, tending to the usual sorts of family matters, and running on "autopilot" so far as my awareness of the most of the "rest of the world". For those first five years, I was a red-blooded, patriotic American supporter of W (Bush), Rummy (Rumsfeld), Dick (Cheney) and Condi (Rice), in the war on those damned Islamic terrorists.

My views have changed quite a bit since then ... on many topics. It's become a full time job, just keeping up with my changing views.

and I suffered ridicule from family and at work for speaking my truth which in this case I think is the truth, and espeically when I said that I could not support the impending war in Iraq.... oh well. It is very easy to get swept up in the day to day and most people I know did not really look listen or see for one reason or another.

Arrowwind
1st September 2012, 02:39
Please look at both sides of the debate. The hole is over 90' across and does fit a 757 (http://www.oilempire.us/oil-jpg/pent-ricostruzionedannouw0.jpg).
That link goes to a picture of a hole ... without a plane.

Yes, debates have sides. So long as someone is willing to keep making the case for both sides, putting up the words, making what purport to be logical points (even if they aren't), and presenting what purports to be evidence (even if it's evidence for the other side), debates can go on forever.

I'd like to think this forum is not a debate society, but rather a place for people to share with, teach, learn from, and nurture each other, as we, both individually and as a group, increase our awareness and well being. Our collective awareness becomes part of the basis of an increasingly awake humanity.

and I see in that photo two standing posts on each side of the hole with hole on both sides of them... go figure how a plane got through that with out taking them out. Also I see the bottom floor demolished with the second floor essentiall intact and those spindle looking things were on the ground... so lets guess that due to this being a big building the floor is maybe 12 feet high (especially since its an old building) to the second floor.... not tall enough for a large plane to accomodate.

Huma
1st September 2012, 09:34
With all due respect, I do see the thrust of your point here....however question 3 is without a doubt the most important question there, because if we can address that, we can then try to understand future events and how they might shape our world. These things *only* change when more of the human populace recognizes this event for what it is, and unfortunately that does mean getting the details right, not to the exclusion however of your other points made, but details yes including the ones already having been gone over included, do matter.


-------

The group controlling events in present day America must be delighted that smart folks are still debating the fine details of what happened on 9/11 -- over a decade ago -- while the controllers debate whether or not to give the green light on the next false flag event.

The most important things to discuss might be

1) What have we learned?
2) What have we not learned?
3) Why isn't it obvious to at least 100 million other Americans that this was a carefully constructed inside job?
4) What, when and where might the next such event be?

donk
10th July 2014, 20:22
I'm sure this is somewheres in his thread and discussed and debunked or whatever, but I missed it the first couple times around and really found it compelling, I never heard of Honegger or paid much attention details (ie I agree totally with bill's post above but still find new perspectives on them interesting and appreciate hearing them regardless)

4fvJ8nFa5Qk