PDA

View Full Version : Evidence That A Boeing 757 Really Did Impact the Pentagon on 9/11



Pages : [1] 2

jimmer
17th August 2010, 17:53
this 2004 article is just the kind of independent reporting that we here applaud and support.

this thorough analysis of the 911 pentagon destruction shows images
and evidence that are new to me.

eyewitness testimony attests that is was a plane.

'There was a huge screaming noise and I got out of the car as the plane came over.
Everybody was running away in different directions.
It was tilting its wings up and down like it was trying to balance.
It hit some lampposts on the way in.'

let you computer read this to you as you review the photo illustrations.

what say you, after reviewing this material?
airliner or missile?

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread79655/pg1

tone3jaguar
17th August 2010, 18:04
Watch this and get the full picture.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7E3oIbO0AWE

jimmer
17th August 2010, 18:06
been there. done that...
did you review the posted material?

Fredkc
17th August 2010, 18:47
The 9th anniversary of this thing approacheth, and I am not much heartened.

In the grand scheme of history, 9/11 falls somewhere between a petty shoplifting crime, and (of course) the assasination of Arch-Duke Ferdinand (See also: Gulf of Tonkin).

It is what happened because of it that is the real crime that continues unabated, to this day.
The Constitution was shredded while people watched on TV.
The US pushed towards bankruptcy.
Over a million people have been murdered for no reason whatsoever.
5 million are now homeless.
As you read this, there are people in a small building outside Las Vegas, Nevada operating remote control airplanes who are killing women, children, and the occasional terrorist at a ratio of 700:5 (that was the official "score" in 2009)

No amount of "truth" will ever change what happened on 9/11. Ever.
No one will ever see a jail cell over it, either (as there is no political party in this country "outside" of the crime).

But everything I listed above can be stopped. Can be changed. How I wish this could receive even 1/10th the attention.

S'cuze the rant.. carry on,
Fred

jimmer
17th August 2010, 18:56
fredkc,
did you review the posted analysis?
let's focus on the 911 pentagon destruction.
what hit the building?

and besides, when did the 'truth' stop mattering?

Fredkc
17th August 2010, 19:06
For me, it's a matter of perspective, and as I said "No one will ever see a jail cell over it". Ever.

By perspective I mean,
If I start putting bullet holes in people, because I claim their relative stole my wallet....

How much time spent on whether my wallet was stolen (while I continue shooting people, of course), is appropriate ?

Fred

jimmer
17th August 2010, 19:13
fred,

be bold, review the post
and then expressive your perspective.
thank you.

Beth
17th August 2010, 19:19
fred,

be bold, review the post
and then expressive your perspective.
thank you.

I think Fred's point is no matter how it happened, it happened. And should focus on the things that we need to change and can change.

Secondly, I'm not sure how much interest you'll get from the people here to hop over to ATS.

jimmer
17th August 2010, 19:38
I'm not sure how much interest you'll get from the people here to hop over to ATS.

you go where the information and investigation is, seeking reality...

there have been plenty of ATS links here.
in some ways, I see ATS as a sister site to PA. both trying to figure things out. yes?

not to twist this thread, but I just don't get the attitude that 'it doesn't matter what really happened.'
truth is truth, no matter how disturbing or unsettling.

please review the post and let us know what you find.
thanks. jimmer

Fredkc
17th August 2010, 19:49
what say you, after reviewing this material?
airliner or missile?
Read the entire post (someone get yaya some smelling salts)
My decision: Airliner.

Now, about those people we're murdering on a daily basis....
Fred

jimmer
17th August 2010, 20:01
you are the man, fred.
thank you.

ok, now that that's settled, what about all those people?
better yet, start a separate thread and we'll all chime in.
I do agree, lots of what's going on is meant to be a diversion.

back to the pentagon now...

Luke
17th August 2010, 21:31
[...]
Now, about those people we're murdering on a daily basis....
Fred

Yep. we can argue technical details but we can judge the consequences. Two wars and tens of thousands of people killed in the name of Empire, not to mention other smaller skirmishes in other countries. Nothing solved, just more pain and suffering, and yet even more people support the pyramid. Quite a PR success for PTB's.

I say "staged hollywodish affair not a crash" though. Same with Towers impacts. Great balls of fire from planes designed not to blow up like firecrackers or cars in action movies.

jimmer
17th August 2010, 21:48
I say "staged hollywodish affair not a crash" though. Same with Towers impacts. Great balls of fire from planes designed not to blow up like firecrackers or cars in action movies.

hmm.
a writer I liked was on that flight.
she doesn't write anymore.

from things I've read, the passengers and crew were redirected,
to make way from the missile.

HORIZONS
17th August 2010, 23:26
Just wondering here: How do you know the "she" was actually on the plane, or whatever it was, that hit the towers?

jimmer
17th August 2010, 23:44
"How do you know the "she" was actually on the plane..."

her husband is now a well known widower.


or whatever it was, that hit the towers?

did you review the posting, horizons?
it's long, but the guy who put it together did some excellent digging.
it's all about the specific pentagon incident and nothing to do with the twin towers.
there's lots of theories about the entire event, but this thread is about what went on
at the pentagon. plane or missile?

HORIZONS
18th August 2010, 00:23
"How do you know the "she" was actually on the plane..."

her husband is now a well known widower.



did you review the posting, horizons?
it's long, but the guy who put it together did some excellent digging.
it's all about the specific pentagon incident and nothing to do with the twin towers.
there's lots of theories about the entire event, but this thread is about what went on
at the pentagon. plane or missile?


Just to be objective here - A widower he may be, but that is not proof "she" was on the plane that hit the towers/pentagon or crashed into the ground. If it was all a set up we don't, and never will, know what happened to all the people that boarded those planes that day. You are assuming she was on the plane - because she boarded a flight - that was reported to have hit the towers/pentagon, but in fact may have been diverted by powers unknown to us and something else hit the towers/pentagon and was made to look like it was her plane. I am sure we will never know what exactly happened that day - all we can do is speculate. There is not any video nor photographs that can be trusted as absolute evidence for the 911 event.

I have not looked at your vid yet, but I will, and when I do I'll let you know. Actually, the video that I would like to see is the one from the gas station/ convenience store or whatever it was that was reported to have filmed the pentagon event, but was confiscated immediately afterwards and has never been allowed into the public domain. That vid would have some answers.

Richard
18th August 2010, 02:08
what say you, after reviewing this material?
airliner or missile?

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread79655/pg1

Missile.
As that is what I have personally concluded a while ago and reading the 6 year old thread on ATS didn't change my perception. The data put forth is quite detailed but inconclusive as it still doesn't explain where the plane tail and engines disappeared to or how a poorly trained terrorist pilot managed to hit the low target so perfectly that the entire 757 vanished inside. Sorry, the data doesn't answer some key questions and since the OP at ATS was done back in 2004 a bit more has leaked out. Check the vid below from a surveilance helicopter watching the Pentagon at the time. The video is 25 seconds and the missile/plane shoots in from the bottom left at the 23 second mark.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Vnu_yiUzls
Looks like a missile to me.


2137
just before impact

Richard
18th August 2010, 02:40
Below is a 50 min video offering a highly technical analysis presented in a way that the layman will appreciate and understand. The analysis is based on topography, obstacles, flight data, physics, and witness statements. In order to accurately determine and understand the nature of the attack, Pilots For 9/11 Truth constructed a 3D scale model of the Arlington area complete with US Geological Survey Topography, obstacles, structures and vehicles. Watch this and determine if it is possible for a 757 to navigate such a region and cause the physical damage reported at the Pentagon. Many common arguments made by those who make excuse for and support the government story are also addressed.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7134448689829125037#

SPIRIT WOLF
18th August 2010, 13:36
Remove the wool thats covering your eyes. NO full size plane hit the Pentagon that day. Do not believe the paid voices of disinformation. Even experienced pilots have stated it was an impossiblity. You really think some amateurs could turn a 757 over 300Degrees then come in to hit the building at zero feet, not even damaging the lawn? Wake up those still blinded by the official story which is being torn to shreds each day. No airliner hit the Pentagon.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/

AND, people conveniently forget the 3 ring security around the Pentagon, their own hi-res cameras and sensors would have picked up any incoming, ooops! forget, official story, only low-res gate security cameras available LOL

jimmer
18th August 2010, 14:31
ok, here we go and I love you all...

but you know, all of these arguments so far are woulda, coulda, shoulda, supported by hypothetic assumptions, reconstructed/speculated math.

could a plane do really this? (review the ATS report)
wasn't it a missile or something else? (from a suspect fuzzy video [cgi?]).
maybe your writer wasn't really on the plane. (maybe she didn't really exist. but for sure, she's on a permanent vacation.)
how could an amateur pilot do that? (maybe it was a miss, trying to hit the building center where more damage would have been caused)
north path, south path? (I almost don't care. eyewitnesses can get it wrong, especially several years after the event. even experts can get caught up in their data)
maybe the american airline was diverted and another plane or object did the damage? (and maybe the moon is an alien space craft. why not?)
does all the evidence and data matchup perfectly? (probably not, but on the other hand, life doesn't always make sense either)
maybe everything we know is wrong? (question everything, but don't lose everything in the process)

from the onsite images in the ATS investigation, it clearly shows it was a plane not a missile.
the images were taken shortly after the incident. could the site have been so quickly compromised and falsified?
how do you explain all of that away? that's the argument.
clearly, the images are authentic. yes?
I'm open to conflicting evidence, but arguments to disprove based on speculation and even 'expert' assumptions don't hold up.
the ATS report images don't lie.

'the simplest explanation gets closest to the truth.'

Fredkc
18th August 2010, 16:08
it clearly shows it was a plane not a missile. Yup.


'the simplest explanation gets closest to the truth.' Occam's Razor.

Quietly sneaking northward, from the Pentagon to the WTC...
You can pour through endless analysis of things structural, "demolition plans" and what have you, re the fall of the WTC. Much of this stuff boils down to a simple statement which is supposed to "prove" these buildings had "help":
"Jet fuel cannot burn hot enough to melt steel!"And they'd be right... as far as it went.

A simple fact always seems to be missing in all this.

The structural integrity of steel girders is dependent on three things; Its material, shape, and its rigidity (hardness).
So the standard shape is an I-bean. good choice.
The material is what is called ASTM-36. This is basically a low grade steel for construction purposes. They use a lot of it so it needs to be cheap, and easy to make.
The particulars of the heat treatment I do not know, but it is basically a balance between adding toughness without becoming too brittle, for the intended use.It takes a proper combination of the three for the steel to do its job. Lose one, and you have lost structural integrity and something's gotta give.

(Told you that story, to tell you this one) ;)
You will never guess at what temperature ASTM-36 becomes "annealed", meaning it loses its heat treated rigidity....

I'll give you a teeny hint ;)

What is the temperature of burning jet fuel?
Bingo! ;)
Fred

jimmer
18th August 2010, 16:55
fredkc,
I've heard the argument that 'fire can't melt steel.' (expert, rosie o'donnel and lose change).
that argument is based on assumptions.
your truth is very welcomed amongst the rumble .
so they went cheap on the steel (have you seen the movie, The Towering Inferno'? same plot)
and the terrorist got lucky 'taking down the towers.'

question: at WTC, the most intriguing and disturbing find is 'thermite' around the grounds
and those 'sheared' columns. that looks suspect to me.
do you have any background on that?

jimmer

Luke
18th August 2010, 17:53
Fred, I'll bite.
Open air burning temperature of jet fuel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_fuel) is about 287.5 °C (549.5 °F)
ASTM A36 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A36_steel) is a low alloy construction steel. it has melting point of 1,426–1,538 °C (2,599–2,800 °F) and have half-yield strength at 538°C (1000.4 ºF, still twice the open air burn for jet fuel, ). Towers were calculated for half yield situation (and impact of 707 btw.). After-collapse study steel used had average 115% of minimum specification yields (meaning- they used cheap but not el cheapo)
Footage from WTC shows black smoke, which means oxygen starved (cold) fire at even lower temperature.
And at least in our material-knowledge course it was specifically stated that you do not quench structural steel, as it makes it brittle, which is precisely what you do not want it to be. You want it to bend before it breaks. The yield is heightened by using specific add-ons, :chromium, cobalt, columbium, molybdenum, nickel, titanium, tungsten, vanadium or zirconium, etc. These steels are hot-rolled then air cooled in controlled environment, so they'd have as small amount of internal stress as possible. Plus every weld or hot rivet would locally ruin the quench, making structure unpredictable. But maybe americans do it different way.
This is what interested out construction professors the most : how on earth such structure folded over itself. By every law of physics even if columns would give in , the top side should go the path of least resistance ie. fall to the side of the building. Instead it went down the path of most resistance. It'll only made sense if somehow the lower part of building core mysteriously evaporated, and whole set started to act like giant piston. ... but that is far into forbidden land of CtrlDem

As for WTC steel, this is good read: http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/jom/0711/banovic-0711.html "The Role of Metallurgy in the NIST Investigation of the World Trade Center Towers Collapse"

Kari Lynn
18th August 2010, 19:57
Plane. Darn me and my slow dial up internet. ;)

But Fred, I have to agree with you. I think we need to stop standing stalled about what happened concerning 911 and concern ourselves now with what is happening because of it.

jimmer
18th August 2010, 20:26
but it does matter what happened.
what and how it happened is everything.
if it was a 'false flag' then the entire 'terrorist' thing and our response is phony.
if it was a terrorist attack, then we are justified defending ourselves and self interest.
although, you could argue how to do that the best.

so, in this pentagon part of the 911 story, it was a plane, not a missile.
this part of the event is debunked?

in all these fantastic plots and twists presented at PA,
we need to fundamentally work at separating the wheat from the chaff.

just wanna keep score.

Operator
18th August 2010, 20:29
I'm sorry, definitely no plane ... before you repeat 'review the post' ... maybe you should review it more carefully again and double check some resources.

I am not in the position to share details nor do I want to get involved in yes/no debates ... I think Spirit Wolf already hinted in the right direction.

HORIZONS
18th August 2010, 20:32
I would like to know how building 7 imploded on itself? ... no plane or jet fuel, no rocket, no tower falling over on it; just a small fire from some collateral damage and boom it implodes. Coincidence? And how come there is no wreckage of the crashed plane in Pennsylvania? Did it just vaporize when it hit? Why do not these get the same attention as the towers and the pentagon?

Arpheus
18th August 2010, 20:44
I would like to know how building 7 imploded on itself? ... no plane or jet fuel, no rocket, no tower falling over on it; just a small fire from some collateral damage and boom it implodes. Coincidence? And how come there is no wreckage of the crashed plane in Pennsylvania? Did it just vaporize when it hit? Why do not these get the same attention as the towers and the pentagon?

Because the masses of sheep dont really give a crap about what really happened back then my dear friend,thats the bottom line.

HORIZONS
18th August 2010, 21:20
Because the masses of sheep dont really give a crap about what really happened back then my dear friend,thats the bottom line.

Yes, there has been massive mind control and programing going on, so that no one gives a crap, to be sure.

jimmer
18th August 2010, 21:21
... maybe you should review it more carefully again and double check some resources.

and what would those resources be?

and I agree, there are things that don't make sense, like building 7 and finding thermite around WTC.
this thread focuses on the pentagon missile theory.

HORIZONS
18th August 2010, 21:46
and what would those resources be?

and I agree, there are things that don't make sense, like building 7 and finding thermite around WTC.
this thread focuses on the pentagon missile theory.

Well, Lets tie this altogether then - IMHO I do not see how you can solve one without the others being a part of the discussion. The evidence you post of the pentagon should work within the framework of the towers and the Penn crash as well. If not then there is a problem. If you solve one, then that evidence should work as a platform to help solving the others. After all, this was "one event" that took place to forever change the world.

Strat
18th August 2010, 22:12
What I'm curious about is why wouldn't they use a 747 for the pentagon? That would be very suspicious to have a jet/missile/whatever fly into the side of the pentagon right over the top of a highway where everyone can see it.

Operator
18th August 2010, 22:59
this thread focuses on the pentagon missile theory.

You gave the answer yourself ... a magician will let you focus on what he wants to ...
If you see a picture and someone elaborates on what you should see ... you will see it. By building a very narrow focused case the foot is already between the door.

I know very experienced military personnel, trained in obtaining details from reconnaissance pictures, they can tell ... no plane.
But their statements are not publicly available.

Be careful with material that you are being fed ...

jaybee
19th August 2010, 11:41
You gave the answer yourself ... a magician will let you focus on what he wants to ...
If you see a picture and someone elaborates on what you should see ... you will see it. By building a very narrow focused case the foot is already between the door.

I know very experienced military personnel, trained in obtaining details from reconnaissance pictures, they can tell ... no plane.
But their statements are not publicly available.

Be careful with material that you are being fed ...


Yes be careful with material that you are being fed.

That works both ways.

My interest in the 9/11 conspiracy has been re- kindled by this thread on Avalon...

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?4870-wiki-leaks-shown-to-be-insider-disinfo-release.-(camelot-should-not-be-so-hasty)


Also on the thread here about the proposed mosque at Ground Zero...where one poster in particular said something like...'we at Avalon all know that 9/11 was an inside job....'


There is something about this total belief in 9/11 being an Inside Job... and creating a climate of
a Group Belief......that is making me uncomfortable.

Like...if you don't subscribe to the Inside Job theory...that you are in some way stupid, or gulible, or blind...... peer pressure is a powerful thing...and I wonder how many people now would dare to come out and question (or re-quesstion) the 9/11 conspiracy...?

See in the thread that I posted above...how the blanket belief in 9/11 conspiracy can be used
either deliberately or unwittingly for political purposes...?

Ask yourself (directed at everyone) if you feel under pressure to CONFORM to the 9/11 conspiracy..... ?

You see...the fostering of the conspiracy, in itself COULD be conspiracy based.
I know...I know....it's a head-banger....but we have to be on our guard not to be manipulated...

Sorry Jimmer....I will get back on topic in a minute....

jaybee
19th August 2010, 11:57
Jimmer...... I skimmed through the ATS link you gave.....didn't read every word because I haven't got the head-space at the mo...lol.

But I think it was a airliner that hit the pentagon that fateful day....

There are some more pictures here...

http://www.911myths.com/html/757_wreckage.html

There is also stuff about World Trade Centre 7 and Thermite...here...

http://www.debunking911.com/index.html

jimmer
19th August 2010, 17:40
jaybee,

thanks for your thoughtful comments and thanks for the links.

as for my 911 thermite conundrum:

"Pictures of Ground Zero's cut columns disprove, once and for all,
the imaginative theories that claim evidence of the use of thermite
at the World Trade Center to induce the collapse of the buildings.
Such "evidence" is merely a misinterpretation of the ordinary effects
of cutting through the post-collapse remains of a steel structure."

http://11-settembre.blogspot.com/2007/04/real-world-tests-cut-through-steel.html

and finally, jaybee, figure out how to have your computer to read text to you,
saving your eyes, while easily accessing immense mounts of information.

HORIZONS
19th August 2010, 17:59
of interest: http://www.flight93crash.com/

jimmer
19th August 2010, 18:17
horizons,
thanks for the link.
it's tough separating the truth from 911 speculation/computer models/math and conjecture.
but I do trust bill and his certainty that the PA flight was shot down.

can you image the crisis mode the air force was in with two planes already into WTC
and another strike on the pentagon, with flight 93 still making it's run...

what would you or I do during this minute to minute nightmare?
sometimes outrageous things must be done for the greater good.

http://projectcamelot.org/mediafiles/audio/elizabeth_nelson_flight_93.mp3

Peace of Mind
19th August 2010, 19:50
Hi guys, I just have a few questions?

Does anyone here have information on the victims that were on the planes that hit the towers and the Pentagon? I’ve seen and heard from the victims families that were in the buildings, but not the planes.

Is there any leak of actual real time footage of what hit the Pentagon? I know the FBI confiscated all vids showing what hit it but they haven’t released them to the public yet. All I have ever saw was still shots (that can be photo shopped), and after the disaster photos. It’s been said that the serial numbers to the parts recovered at the sites did not match and were from many different planes…HUH? So, where’s all the footage of the immediate impact?

Why haven’t they found any of the black boxes?

I’ve been in the WTC hundreds of times and I still can’t figure out how the metal designs that were wrapped around the first 10 or so floors of T1 and T2 completely turned to dust. How does steal turn to dust? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoAa_B2kRuo

Why was Nano-thermite at the WTC site?

Thanks in advance

Peace

Kari Lynn
19th August 2010, 19:59
Not wanting to argue with anyone, but I can only go by what I see. Someone, a few years back, posted a video captured by the security cameras. Seeing it at normal speed, all you could see is the explosion. BUT.... as I had dial up, it loaded so slowly, that I could see it frame by frame. I saw windows and wings. A plane.

And the day of.... I watched on live tv as the planes crashed into the buildings.
So I'm pretty much stuck on the fact that they were planes.
Now... my question is;
How would the reporters know to go to the WTC building, point their live camera's at it and wait?

jimmer
19th August 2010, 20:07
Not wanting to argue with anyone, but I can only go by what I see. Someone, a few years back, posted a video captured by the security cameras. Seeing it at normal speed, all you could see is the explosion. BUT.... as I had dial up, it loaded so slowly, that I could see it frame by frame. I saw windows and wings. A plane.

And the day of.... I watched on live tv as the planes crashed into the buildings.
So I'm pretty much stuck on the fact that they were planes.
Now... my question is;
How would the reporters know to go to the WTC building, point their live camera's at it and wait?

thanks for your observations, kari.

as far as I know, there were no news camera there for the T1 strike. only a couple of french documentarians
got footage of T1. soon after, NY news crews came running to catch the T2 strike and the aftermath.

HORIZONS
19th August 2010, 20:11
... and now it's time for a quick break. I hope you don't mind, but I thought this fit here.
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/2zgF560QKUw?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/2zgF560QKUw?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/2zgF560QKUw?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/2zgF560QKUw?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>


It's a conspiracy!

jimmer
19th August 2010, 20:16
try this:

http://www.youtube.com/v/2zgF560QKUw?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US

horizons: insert the url code using the 'film' button, not the 'youtube' button.
it doesn't make sense, but how to embed videos

sargeist
20th August 2010, 12:07
Hi guys, I just have a few questions?

Does anyone here have information on the victims that were on the planes that hit the towers and the Pentagon? I’ve seen and heard from the victims families that were in the buildings, but not the planes.

Thanks in advance

Peace

not sure if this is what you're looking for, or even how accurate it is, but have a read of this.

http://www.wingtv.net/thornarticles/911passengerlist.html

friamin
20th August 2010, 14:25
I think there are a lot of very good points being made here but until the videos are released of the pentagon we will never know for sure what happened. It all becomes conjecture. One thing that seems to be very suspicious is that the photos from the Pentagon show parts from a 737 not a 757. There are also photos from the towers which also show an engine from a 737.
Staged or not they have effectively used this to dismantle the constitution and in turn our personal liberties and freedoms. The government has overstepped it's constitutional authority which leaves us in a very precarious position of being consumed by the very body that is only meant to protect our sovereignty as a nation and not to control us through dis-info and manipulation.
See 911 for what it is and focus your attention on what we have become as a people and as a nation. Controlled, Regulated and Oppressed......
http://www.rense.com/general69/91185.htm

jimmer
20th August 2010, 14:49
friamin, would post where you found the '737' parts evidence.
the p. 1 original ATS piece only reports and shows photos of '757' parts onsite.

from the ATS piece:

Review the facts
Size of 757 matches the initial size of hole in the building - somewhere between 13 and 16 feet (757 is 13 feet wide/high)
Rims found in building match those of a 757
Small turbine engine outside is an APU
Same engine has been clearly stated to not match a Global Hawk engine
Blue seats from 757 laying on ground in photos
Part of "American" fuselage logo visible in more than 1 photo
Engine parts photographed inside match a Rolls-Royce RB211
Structural components photographed in wreckage match Boeing paint primer schemes
Large deisel generator in front of building hit by a large heavy object
Large deisel engine outside is spun towards the building - could not be result of bomb blast or missile explosion
Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner
Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner hit the Pentagon
60+ bodies, matching the passenger list and flight crew roster identified and returned to families from Pentagon wreckage

update:
thanks for posting your evidence.
let me take a look as we all should and get back to you.

update:
looks like the rense report is pretty sketchy.
comparing the onsite engine to a museum display engine doesn't convince me.
could the two engines share part designs or look similar?
unless you wanna believe, the article doesn't convince much.
anything more fact based?

friamin
20th August 2010, 14:56
http://www.rense.com/general63/ident.htm
http://www.rense.com/general69/91185.htm

jimmer
20th August 2010, 15:24
here's a video analysis of available flight 77 crash images.
take a look.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBHi9CbrNf4&feature=related

jimmer
20th August 2010, 15:45
and now, possibly the most convincing evidence:
a detailed forensic animated reconstruction of the incident,
supported by onsite photo evidence.

going through this whole thing is difficult,
but in honor of the memory of all those who
were whisked again that day, we carry on.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVDdjLQkUV8&feature=related

jimmer
20th August 2010, 15:53
another analysis.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMqgFaNvoP8&feature=related

jimmer
20th August 2010, 15:59
eyewitness, in air account.


http://www.youtube.com/user/721508#p/search/3/Q9ag6brfWro

friamin
20th August 2010, 16:39
What I also find sketchy is that Integrated Consulting Inc does a lot of work for the government and is not solely an independent research firm. They also fail to include a picture of the initial damage done to the building by the initial impact in their animated representation.
http://www.thepowerhour.com/images/911_wtc_images/rpt2a.jpg
You can't look at that picture and say a 757 caused that small a hole. The collapsing wing theory has also been disproved.
I do enjoy the search for truth though...
:)

jimmer
20th August 2010, 16:50
ok, friamin, you're saying it was a missile,
after all the evidence here that is was a plane? did you review the ATS report on p. 1?

your photo is so severely cropped that it's hard to see anything,
except for the portion of the wall that was smashed by
one of the plane engines (accounted for in the original ATS report).

Operator
20th August 2010, 17:14
ok, friamin, you're saying it was a missile,
after all the evidence here that is was a plane? did you review the ATS report on p. 1?


Nope, friamin said it was not a 757 ...

If I had the money and time I would be able to really convince you a pink elephant ran into the pentagon. That's why I wouldn't waste to much breath over this.

jaybee
20th August 2010, 17:37
Nope, friamin said it was not a 757 ...

If I had the money and time I would be able to really convince you a pink elephant ran into the pentagon. That's why I wouldn't waste to much breath over this.

I think a pink elephant is stretching it a bit.:)...but...you have a point...with the time and money and endless production of so-called 'evidence'...
people who are excited by the idea of a monumental conspiracy.....can be convinced....even though the evidence is weak/contrived/contradictory
( ie. other kind of plane v missile )

This is what has happened with 9/11, IMO....but I'm also getting a sense of something quite sinister about it all.
The so-called conspiracy, that is....that it is being fomented by some people...for reasons best known to themselves.....
and genuine 'truthseekers' are getting caught up in it.

I like a juicy conspiracy as much as the next person....but when it comes to 9/11 one.....I'm suspiscious about motives and agenda behind it...and driving it.

When it comes to the attack on the Pentagon....I'm going with the official account.

:thumb:

Peace of Mind
20th August 2010, 17:51
hmmm....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnzh-EyxKwc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3LJXoXpAHE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0eC3uns3pA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFz7gLz7CVk

Peace

Operator
20th August 2010, 18:32
I think a pink elephant is stretching it a bit.:)...but...you have a point...with the time and money and endless production of so-called 'evidence'...
people who are excited by the idea of a monumental conspiracy.....can be convinced....even though the evidence is weak/contrived/contradictory
( ie. other kind of plane v missile )


Well I see a lot of people are trying to analyze material that was 'given' to them ...

But if e.g. videos are released 2 days after an event it makes me wonder.
It is all the non-released and too late released material that sparks the fire to think that somebody has a good reason to mess with the truth.

You don't need material to analyze. Just listen carefully to the official story (they should have the first hand evidence after all) and check if it is feasible. When you detect that parts are not feasible you know somebody with an agenda is interfering ...

It's similar to what Bill Cooper indicated in his famous speech: I don't care how much crashed disks there were, it's important that crashes happened. Those of you who are fighting over how many are wasting their time (paraphrased).

jaybee
20th August 2010, 18:59
Well I see a lot of people are trying to analyze material that was 'given' to them ...

HA! :eyebrows:


But if e.g. videos are released 2 days after an event it makes me wonder.
It is all the non-released and too late released material that sparks the fire to think that somebody has a good reason to mess with the truth.


It's all an absolute hornet's nest..... For example that plane that was almost certainly shot down. Those poor people were going to die what-ever happened...but I can see why the US Govt. was reluctant at first to admit that they had to do it...if it was going to be crashed into the White House?? which would have meant more deaths (and more embarassment...?) then
once they had said it crashed etc etc...they couldn't/wouldn't go back and change the story...



You don't need material to analyze. Just listen carefully to the official story (they should have the first hand evidence after all) and check if it is feasible. When you detect that parts are not feasible you know somebody with an agenda is interfering ...


One theory that I have toyed with is that being successfully attacked on the mainland by the
'enemy'......was a huge embarrassment to national pride...that some sections of the govt. might
have encouraged the 'Inside Job' conspiracy because...it would divert attention away from
what looks to be a almost totally successful mission by a small group of terrorists....

The World's 'Superpower' brought to it's knees...briefly... by a handful of highly organised and
motivated group of Islamic terrorists..... ???

jimmer
20th August 2010, 19:59
hmmm....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnzh-EyxKwc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3LJXoXpAHE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0eC3uns3pA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFz7gLz7CVk

Peace

I've reviewed your clips, besides the guy with his quicktime analysis
(it was a crummy security camera, every other second, video -- come on),
all the other pieces were more about the insanity of the moment rather
than anything substantive. rumors, facts, speculation. it was a mess.

so PofM, you think it was a missile?
have you reviewed the entire reason for this thread, the ATS piece?

if not, here's the link:

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread79655/pg1

Peace of Mind
20th August 2010, 20:28
Hi Jimmer,
I did look thru that and no I do not know what hit the Pentagon. All I know of the incident is that there is bad quality footage of what actually hit it, and the first reports of what people around the area (and the news) had said. Plus, there were no black boxes recovered.

The vid with the guy breaking down the footage of the popular (FBI) released video clearly shows the explosion before impact…he wasn’t the only one to show this.

More so, I can’t seem to find any CREDIBLE evidence or stories about the people that were on board these planes.

But, I was around the WTC, and I know there were bombs going off and anyone that was there I’m sure can confirm hearing them too. I felt the evil and the explanations giving by the Government isn't sitting well with me and many others that were involved in this whole disater. I have my many reasons to not trust what the Government claims is truth. They produce very little real facts...not even a Bin Laden. This whole sickening event was used to go to war...and it had nothing to do with 9/11

Peace

Operator
20th August 2010, 20:29
One theory that I have toyed with is that being successfully attacked on the mainland by the
'enemy'......was a huge embarrassment to national pride...that some sections of the govt. might
have encouraged the 'Inside Job' conspiracy because...it would divert attention away from
what looks to be a almost totally successful mission by a small group of terrorists....

The World's 'Superpower' brought to it's knees...briefly... by a handful of highly organised and
motivated group of Islamic terrorists..... ???

:thumb: ... you're getting warm I guess. We're not watching just a chess game ... we're watching a game and learn the rules on the fly, there are multiple players too. So be careful who is covering up
for whom in his/her own interest ... ;)

jimmer
20th August 2010, 21:58
P of M, here's an except from wikipedia:

Cockpit Voice Recorder
A photograph of the cockpit voice recorder from American Airlines Flight 77, as used in an exhibit at the Moussaoui trial.
At around 3:40 a.m on September 14, a paramedic and a firefighter who were searching through the debris of the impact site found two dark boxes, about 1.5 by 2 feet long.
They called for an FBI agent, who in turn called for someone from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB).
The NTSB employee confirmed that these were the black boxes from American Airlines Flight 77.[80]
Dick Bridges, deputy manager for Arlington County, Virginia, said the voice recorder was damaged on the outside and the flight data recorder was charred.
But he said the FBI still was confident the data can be recovered from both. Bridges said the recorders were found "right where the plane came into the building."[81]

2166

photograph of the cockpit voice recorder
from American Airlines Flight 77,
as used in an exhibit at the Moussaoui trial.


bonus round: popular mechanics analysis

I read this years ago, but for those who haven't seen or heard of this, here's the link.
please give this some attention and time. challenge yourselves.

"It was absolutely a plane, and I'll tell you why...
I saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building.
I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them..."

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/debunking-911-myths-pentagon

look, we can and will go round and round on all the vast aspects of the 911 story. it will lead nowhere.
this thread is specifically for investigating the pentagon event: was it a plane or was it something else?
if something else, where's the hard evidence. not speculation or fuzzy video that's inconclusive and left to our biases.
so far there has been plenty of hard, physical, photographic evidence presented that it was a plane. the plane. fight 77.
if it was a plane, an airliner filled with innocence, then a single, yet important act of the conspiracy story doesn't work.

jaybee
20th August 2010, 22:18
Check the vid below from a surveilance helicopter watching the Pentagon at the time. The video is 25 seconds and the missile/plane shoots in from the bottom left at the 23 second mark.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Vnu_yiUzls
Looks like a missile to me.


2137
just before impact


hmmm....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnzh-EyxKwc


Peace



I've just had a EUREKA moment.....

New theory.... It was a missile AND the airliner !!!!! ??????

The 757 was almost certainly under close surveillance..... the military knew that they had a
major problem with it. Was it heading for the Pentagon.?? After the WTC towers...they knew what
was coming. They didn't want to shoot it down over houses or roads....the plane did that big
loop round....they now knew for sure that the Pentagon was the target...they got it in their sights
(military jet???) they fired the missile.....

They MISSED the airliner but hit the Pentagon....then a few seconds later the 757 hit the
Pentagon as well !!!

They had bombed their own Department of Defence headquarters ! They had tried to
stop the 757.....but they failed to do so.

On top of everything else that was going on that day...it was decided to keep quiet about
missing the target...about hitting their headquarters. To save face.

This is why there is so much confusion + secrecy about the incident.....???

What do you think???? Could this be what happened????

jimmer
21st August 2010, 00:01
"New theory.... It was a missile AND the airliner !!!!! ??????"

and I'm a golf professional.

come on, get serious.
the pentagon happened to close to the WTC. the air force wasn't fully engaged yet.

and what about this aerial 'missile' video that's been going around (lately featured on another PA thread).
where did it come from? who shot it? where's the credibility?
some background, please.

jaybee
21st August 2010, 00:16
"New theory.... It was a missile AND the airliner !!!!! ??????"

and I'm a golf professional.

come on, get serious.
the pentagon happened to close to the WTC. the air force wasn't in the air yet.

and what about this aerial 'missile' video that's been going around (lately featured on another PA thread).
where did it come from? who shot it? where the credibility?
some background, please.


Interesting response jimmer..........mmmmmmmmmm.... and I have to say,
not what I was expecting...but it IS the conspiracy to top all conspiracies...
I must remember that. Except the Moon Landing one of course....lol.

I can't remember how long after the Twin Towers the Pentagon happened...but
I'm pretty sure it was long enough for military planes to get into the air....it was
a major attack on the USA after all...the first one on the mainland in it's history,
I believe?

I am totally serious.

Hole in one....? :cool:

LOL

jimmer
21st August 2010, 01:26
'pretty sure' we need more facts...

HORIZONS
21st August 2010, 02:16
'pretty sure' we need more facts...

Heck no! who needs facts - we just need a great conspiracy to go off on. :sarcastic: :crazy_pilot: :thumb: LOL

Peace of Mind
21st August 2010, 03:10
I appreciate the efforts jimmer. really, i do.
Since the topic is about "the pentagon" and what hit it....did you happen to find anything credible? I mean, much of the debris we see in these pictures have a possiblity to be prop there, especially when News Reporters (who were first on the sceen) reporting other wise...do we really know, who really knows? What I really want to know is who were the people that were on the planes that crashed into these buildings? I believe a lot of answers can come from there...

Peace

jaybee
21st August 2010, 11:28
"New theory.... It was a missile AND the airliner !!!!! ??????"

the pentagon happened to close to the WTC. the air force wasn't fully engaged yet.

:)



'pretty sure' we need more facts...


OK....I'll play the 9/11 'evidence' game.....as exhausting as it is........:p

Noooooooooooooooooooo how did I let this happen...lol...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_for_the_day_of_the_September_11_attacks


8:20: The Federal Aviation Administration's Boston Center flight controllers decide that Flight 11 has probably been hijacked.

8:46: Two F-15 fighter jets are ordered to scramble from Otis Air National Guard Base in Massachusetts, intended to intercept Flight 11. Because Flight 11's transponder is off, the pilots do not know the location of their target. NEADS spends the next several minutes watching their radar screens in anticipation of Flight 11 returning a radar contact.

8:46:40: Flight 11 crashes at roughly 490 mph (790km/h or 219m/s or 425 knots) into the north face of the North Tower (1 WTC) of the World Trade Center, between floors 93 and 99. (Many early accounts gave times between 8:45 and 8:50)


8:50 to 8:54 (approx.): Hijacking begins on Flight 77.

8:54: Flight 77 deviates from its assigned course, turning south over Ohio.

8:56: The transponder on Flight 77 is turned off and even primary radar contact with the aircraft is lost. During radar blackout Flight 77 turns east, unnoticed by flight controllers. When primary radar information is restored at 9:05, controllers look futilely for Flight 77 west of its previous position.[6] Flight 77 travels undetected for 36 minutes on a course heading due east toward Washington, D.C.

9:35: Based on a report that Flight 77 had turned again and was circling back toward the District of Columbia, the Secret Service orders the immediate evacuation of the Vice President from the White House.

9:37:46: Flight 77 crashes into the western side of the Pentagon and starts a violent fire. The section of the Pentagon hit consists mainly of newly renovated, unoccupied offices. All 64 people on board are killed, as are 125 Pentagon personnel.

.................................................. .......................................


That's about the Airliner.....next about the missile....


http://www.hks.harvard.edu/visions/publication/terrorism.htm#Crisis and Consequence Management



However, if some agency of the U.S. government learned that a large scale WMD attack might actually be imminent, threatening tens of thousands of lives, we expect that this structure for responding would almost instantly be pushed aside. The White House would immediately become involved and would seek to use every bit of power at America’s disposal in order to avert or contain the attack. The operational command structure would need to be capable of directing everything from CIA covert actions to strikes by bombers or missiles, be able to set up interdiction involving ground, sea, and air forces, and be able to mobilize and move thousands of soldiers (active duty, ready reserve, and National Guard) and thousands of tons of freight (in various emergency supplies and support for deployed units). Nor can any of these actions happen quickly unless plans have already been drawn up and units designated to carry them out, with repeated training and exercises to create a readiness to bring the plans to life. In this situation, the Defense Department’s capabilities would immediately become paramount. The FBI does not command such resources and does not plan to command them.


Fighter jets had been in the air for nearly an hour.


At this point I would like to say that I understand the huge problems facing the US Govt.
and military that fateful day.....and that they were faced with making some extremely
difficult decisions in a short space of time....

:thumb:

Dale
21st August 2010, 12:11
Hello! Very interesting thread, everyone.

I've given a few small presentations on 9/11, it's implications, and the "run up" to the event; and, in my opinion, it was a jet.

Not a Boeing 757, however. There was a large, low flying jet present in the sky that morning around the time of the Pentagon strike, but it didn't smash into anything. The jet used in the attack was smaller.

I've met with several pilots who have told me that a Boeing 757, going over 570 miles per hour (as the official story suggests), cannot fly at a stable rate at a height low enough to damage street lamps. When a plane that large, flying that fast, attempts to get below about 60 feet, it is forced back upward into the air. It would be incredibly difficult to stay at that low of an altitude with a target in mind - especially for a rookie pilot who struggles flying a Cessna.

I'd love to sit here and keep going on this thread, but I have to make some breakfast now :p

jimmer
21st August 2010, 14:24
thanks jaybee for the timeline.
it was my memory that the tower and pentagon events happened closer together,
but memory isn't evidence, either is speculation.
we're all leaning things with this tread.

TheCR: not a 757? but the onsite, on the ground analysis presented on p. 1 puts the
parts together as consistent with a 757. take a look if you haven't had a chance yet.
what's your take from this evidence?

Operator
21st August 2010, 17:49
TheCR: not a 757? but the onsite, on the ground analysis presented on p. 1 puts the
parts together as consistent with a 757. take a look if you haven't had a chance yet.
what's your take from this evidence?

I don't get it (or maybe I do) ... why are you 'selling' the idea so much ?

If I would tell you that I saw someone jump UP a building 30 feet high would you believe me just because I told you ? Would it be more
credible if I came with 10 witnesses ?

The thing is that it is easy to understand that a normal individual cannot jump that high. So why is it so hard to accept the fact that
certain things in this life are physically impossible like a 757 making the alleged manoeuvres.

Like I said before you don't need, and should not use, handed down material to verify if the official statements are true.

HORIZONS
21st August 2010, 19:39
I don't get it (or maybe I do) ... why are you 'selling' the idea so much ?

If I would tell you that I saw someone jump UP a building 30 feet high would you believe me just because I told you ? Would it be more
credible if I came with 10 witnesses ?

The thing is that it is easy to understand that a normal individual cannot jump that high. So why is it so hard to accept the fact that
certain things in this life are physically impossible like a 757 making the alleged manoeuvres.

Like I said before you don't need, and should not use, handed down material to verify if the official statements are true.

Maybe it was a lucky shot :laser: We could call it the lucky shot heard round the world. :) JK

Dale
21st August 2010, 20:22
TheCR: not a 757? but the onsite, on the ground analysis presented on p. 1 puts the
parts together as consistent with a 757. take a look if you haven't had a chance yet.
what's your take from this evidence?

To be honest, I have no explanation for this. The information I've gathered from the pilots I've talked to strongly suggests that a Boeing 757 could not maintain steady flight at such a low altitude, traveling at such a high rate of speed. Even the "aerobatics" performed in the skies above Washington by the hijacked jet several minutes before crashing would be extremely difficult to execute. The G-force of the execution would be quite unbearable. However, I am not a pilot, nor a terrorist, so it's impossible for me to tell you firsthand. I do respect the opinions given by the pilots and individuals I've interviewed, though.

Like I said earlier, I have given presentations on this subject a handful of times, to small groups, and I would be more than happy to revise my presentation to include more data about Flight 77 if the Avalon Community was interested.

And thanks for providing such an interesting thread! I always enjoy an intelligent discussion and debate on the 9/11 issue, or any issue for that matter :p

Operator
21st August 2010, 21:39
Maybe it was a lucky shot :laser: We could call it the lucky shot heard round the world. :) JK

Make it 3 .... 3 lucky shots in 1 day ? :confused:

jaybee
21st August 2010, 23:22
thanks jaybee for the timeline.
it was my memory that the tower and pentagon events happened closer together,
but memory isn't evidence, either is speculation.
we're all leaning things with this tread.

As the waters are so muddy re. 9/11....speculation is as good as it gets sometimes...


I don't know if anyone has every put forward a Missile and Plane speculation
before? Surely they have...,it's been 9 years now.

Perhaps it's 9/11 fatigue...repetative strain injury. Strain to the brain....:p

I probably wont be bothered about it myself in a couple days....because this 9/11
business is very draining. But I did stumble on this when I was having a google
around to see if there was anything to back up my speculation.

Or should I say...logic based speculation, without a hope in hell of ever getting anywhere...
if only for the reason that if I'm right, it's all going to be classified.

But anyway....

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/debunking-911-myths-pentagon#bigplane



Claim: Two holes were visible in the Pentagon immediately after the attack: a 75-ft.-wide entry hole in the building's exterior wall, and a 16-ft.-wide hole in Ring C, the Pentagon's middle ring. Conspiracy theorists claim both holes are far too small to have been made by a Boeing 757. "How does a plane 125 ft. wide and 155 ft. long fit into a hole which is only 16 ft. across?" asks reopen911.org, a Web site "dedicated to discovering the bottom line truth to what really occurred on September 11, 2001."

The reply to this is on the link........but I'm thinking...TWO holes. One for the missile and one
for the plane (757) ? Perhaps. Maybe.


On this Video that Peace of Mind posted the person who made it is showing that some
frames are missing. I'm speculating....are the frames that are missing... when the missile
was zooming past?

You have to watch the video really carefully to see exactly what he means. The shots after
the missing frames show what looks like the nose of a plane still there...when the fire
is burning.... From when the missile hit? He's not saying that... I am.

For anyone who hasn't seen my last two posts... I'm saying that the military could have
tried to shoot down the 757 but missed and went into the building just before the plane
did.... I'm also thinking that the plane was probably banking which wouldn't leave such
a big hole as some people think?

mnzh-EyxKwc


That's probably all I've got....so make of it what you will....

:thumb:

jimmer
24th August 2010, 20:30
here's a youtube link to a coast to coast debate' discussing what happened at WTC.
both sides of the argument are represented (though, no flight 77 discussion).

it's interesting to listen to the 'no inside job' group keep asking,
'where did you get that?' 'there's no evidence of that.'

give a listen if you have the time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzdSbjTEFcs&feature=related

jaybee
24th August 2010, 22:03
look, we can and will go round and round on all the vast aspects of the 911 story. it will lead nowhere.
this thread is specifically for investigating the pentagon event: was it a plane or was it something else?
.




Ahem.........:)


I see you've changed your mind about your thread....which you are perfectly entitled
to do, of course.


I don't know what on earth happened to flight 77....re, Pentagon.


But one line of enquiry is....if the plane didn't hit the Pentagon...where did it go?


On the news on the day...at 2:55 and at 5:16...they say that they have
a report...that there is a fire at the Mall...which isn't very far from the Pentagon.


I understand that there was massive confusion on that day...but I think it's a bit
weird....ie. where did that report come from? Was there a fire at the Mall?

:confused:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxV2X0vwSas&feature=related

jimmer
25th August 2010, 01:19
jaybee,
so I saved some bandwidth not opening a new thread.
besides, seems that any useful, factual information on 77 has been presented.
(more is welcome.)

nonetheless, the conversation facts, speculation, rebuttals are interesting.
the two tribes rarely meet.

Teakai
25th August 2010, 02:33
I think there are a lot of very good points being made here but until the videos are released of the pentagon we will never know for sure what happened. ]

I suspect that if the public ever gets to lay eyes on them they will likely to have been doctored. Just as they did with the JFK assasination video.

jimmer
25th August 2010, 19:38
"Just as they did with the JFK assasination video."

I'd start a new thread for that one. doctored video?

all in all, I'm satisfied that we have ended one myth about 911.
most here agree that it was a plane and not a missile that hit the pentagon.
from there, the conversation continues.
and in the end, we honor those who's lives were taken away that day.

Celine
25th August 2010, 19:39
"we"?

Ok perhaps you should start a poll..

jimmer
25th August 2010, 19:41
"we"?

Ok perhaps you should start a poll..

gee, are you talking about..."we honor those who's lives were taken away that day.'

jaybee
25th August 2010, 21:27
all in all, I'm satisfied that we have ended one myth about 911.
most here agree that it was a plane and not a missile that hit the pentagon.
.


No we haven't.

The more you look into it the more confusing it becomes.

This news report.....with information coming in as it happens is actually very telling.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxV2X0vwSas&feature=related


But...this is going to be my last post on this thread (probably)

And I still have a strong feeling that the promotion of the conspiracy...is in itself a conspiracy.

Driven by conspirators....catching genuine truth-seekers in the net....

But the waters are so muddy now....we'll probably never get to the bottom of it.

jimmer
25th August 2010, 21:44
thank you, jaybee.
at least your thinking cap on.
see you around the forums.

god bless the souls of 77.

jaybee
25th August 2010, 21:48
thank you, jaybee.
at least your thinking cap on.
see you around the forums.

god bless the souls of 77.


Bless everyone who died that day......and their families.

:sad:

Operator
26th August 2010, 00:06
all in all, I'm satisfied that we have ended one myth about 911.
most here agree that it was a plane and not a missile that hit the pentagon.


I go with Celine ... if you started a poll I wonder what the results would be ...

I am still puzzled by the fact that in another thread you find someone crazy who sees UFO's while there are mountains in the way
and yet you maintain the 757 story while it is physically impossible too ...

You still try to sell the case ... or from your words I understand you even thought you already sold the case ....

Of course you are free to believe what you want and you are free to discuss anything you want ... but please don't force it unto others.

Beth
26th August 2010, 00:18
I'm definitely down for a poll.

Celine
26th August 2010, 00:33
gee, are you talking about..."we honor those who's lives were taken away that day.'

Bien..non...

i was talking about what you said in a previous quote..

"all in all, I'm satisfied that we have ended one myth about 911."

SPIRIT WOLF
27th August 2010, 22:53
I think that we have concluded most definately that a Boeing 757 DID NOT hit the pentagon that day

jimmer
27th August 2010, 23:00
congratulations, spirit wolf.

SPIRIT WOLF
27th August 2010, 23:05
congrats on what may I ask? No one buys the official line, we have our senses wide open, not fools the Gov takes us for

Agape
28th August 2010, 00:24
Was there a bomb on the plane ?

:panda:

SPIRIT WOLF
28th August 2010, 01:44
There simply was no passenger jet

Zook
30th August 2010, 16:08
There simply was no passenger jet

A good morning to you, Spirit Wolf.

This is my first nontrivial post on Project Avalon and second post overall, so big greets for all ProAvalonians and their quadruped keepers. Now that that's out of the way; in my Telugu subculture, I was introduced to three basic principles of enlightenment, at least, as I understand them: Satyam (Truth); Nyanam (Fairness); Dharmam (Justice). So for me, 9/11/2001 truth is really the satyam of those attacks. Nyanam and dharmam are post-satyam considerations.

If we apply satyam to the Pentagon attack, there is no plausible case for a Boeing passenger jet impact. A hole may be bigger than the object passing through it; but the object may not be bigger than the hole. The photos of the Pentagon impact zone *unequivocally* and *irrefutably* fix a maximum size for the hole and any object alleged to have entered the hole. This maximum size excludes the *entry* of a Boeing airliner. This means that if the allegation of a Boeing airliner impacting the wall was true, then the airliner's wings and jet engines would have to be found outside. This is not the case. End of story.

Of course, the preponderance of the evidence confirms the absence of an airliner impact (Citgo station northside Boeing approach analysis which conflicts with the official flight path of the southside attacking object (e.g. missile/drone/etc.; downed lampposts); the scarcity of surveillance video from arguably the most defense-sensitive place on Earth; alleged terrorist Hani Hanjour's magic airliner manouevres; etc.


Cheers
Uncle Zook

Operator
30th August 2010, 17:31
Was there a bomb on the plane ?

What plane ... ?

Would you consider white phosphor a bomb ? ... then yes ...

Zook
31st August 2010, 07:05
this 2004 article is just the kind of independent reporting that we here applaud and support.

this thorough analysis of the 911 pentagon destruction shows images
and evidence that are new to me.

eyewitness testimony attests that is was a plane.

'There was a huge screaming noise and I got out of the car as the plane came over.
Everybody was running away in different directions.
It was tilting its wings up and down like it was trying to balance.
It hit some lampposts on the way in.'

let you computer read this to you as you review the photo illustrations.

what say you, after reviewing this material?
airliner or missile?

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread79655/pg1


Definitely not an airliner due to relatively small size of entry hole; but if we consider non-entry impact, then no significant Boeing airliner debris was found outside the Pentagon. So the damage was created by something other than a Boeing airliner.

Out of curiosity, Jimmer, why are you so adamant that it was a Boeing airliner? Do you not think it was an inside job? I'm sure we can agree that the four attack events on that fateful day were interconnected. So if I can demonstrate inside planning at any one node of the "attacks", then I effectively demonstrate inside planning at all the nodes.

My question to you then is, how do you think it serves the truth if we focus on evidence of Inside Job that is somewhat pliable to distortion/misrepresentation (e.g. the Pentagon attack), when there exists evidence of Inside Job that is rock solid (e.g. the collapse of WTC7). Proven at the one node, the Inside Job extends to all the nodes. The false flag attack on the Pentagon can thus be established (yet again).

To wit, Pentagon airliner analysis is not required for proof of Inside Job; merely for corroborative purposes. If, however, proof not corroboration is being sought by analyzing this particular node (when a better node exists), then that can only obstruct the truth, e.g. by diverting focus from rock solid to somewhat pliable evidence. OTOH, corroboration at this particular node is a legitimate pursuit of the truth, and precisely because it assumes the evidence for Inside Job already exists at the other node ... which it does.


Cheers
Uncle Zook

Bomack
1st September 2010, 08:26
[...] I've talked to several pilots about the 9/11 attacks, and their answers were nearly the same when I brought up the Pentagon dilemma. [...] A plane that large flying that fast at that low of an altitude would be defying physics. The lowest that 757 could get to the ground at that speed, without losing control, would be roughly 60 feet. A strong, physical draft would push the plane upward extremely fast, preventing the plane from maintaining that particular altitude and speed; all of which would be causing a great deal of instability for the inexperienced pilot, as well.
[...]

Note: This response is in regards only to the physics of a 757 flying fast at a low level. Pilot experience, local terrain, or any other factors are not a consideration in this particular discussion.

Hi Cipher,

The physics you're referring to are called Ground Effect.
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_effect_in_aircraft
The most significant of these effects is known as the Wing In Ground (WIG) effect, which refers to the reduction in drag experienced by an aircraft as it approaches a height approximately equal to the aircraft's wingspan above ground or other level surface, such as the sea. The effect increases as the wing descends closer to the ground, with the most significant effects occurring at an altitude of one half the wingspan. It can present a hazard for inexperienced pilots who are not accustomed to correcting for it on their approach to landing, but it has also been used to effectively enhance the performance of certain kinds of aircraft. [...] Flying close to a surface increases air pressure on the lower wing surface (the ram or cushion effect) and decreases air acceleration so the ground effect improves the aircraft lift to drag ratios in two ways. Momentum is still balanced because the air pressure beneath the wing is pressing on the underlying surface—the water or flat land.

The Wing In Ground Effect doesn't create a "pushing up" force, but rather a "cushion" effect. Think of it like this: A surfer has to exert a lot of force and energy to get up enough speed to catch a wave. But once he (she) finds that "sweet spot" it takes little to no energy to go like a bat (not a perfect analogy here but I think it'll do). This condition is what can make it dangerous, even for experienced pilots, because if they're not paying attention and get caught they will find themselves running out of runway very fast. I'm not a pilot but, with close to 3,000 hours flying as a crew member with SAC, I have experienced this on several occasions. When you're coming in for a landing expecting a full-stop, the engines are all but turned off and you can see the runway whisking by just feet below you through the over-wing hatch porthole, and you can actually feel a floating sensation, and then all of a sudden the pilot slams all the engines to full thrust and the plane starts shuddering like you can't believe . . . yah, it can be a little disconcerting, especially when you're in an EC-135 Tanker that's full of gas! But never did I experience a "pushing-up" effect, only a "floating" effect.

Back to the Ground (WIG) Effect. Here are two websites that offer excellent explanations and uses of WIG Effect: Ground Effect in Aircraft (http://www.aviation-history.com/theory/ground_effect.htm) and Ground Effect and WIG Vehicles (http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/aerodynamics/q0130.shtml).

They've actually been designing WIG vehicles for years now to take the most advantage of this effect. Most are designed for over-water use and here is an excellent "commercial":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSeZ1eQzDvI

The Air Force has been using WIG to their advantage for many years. All of their low-level attack fighters, bombers, and cruise missiles which use Terrain Following Radar so they can hug the ground in order to avoid detection use it, and the TFR all but eliminates the need for flat level ground. Flying practically undetectable at low-level and with the higher speeds obtained from the WIG Effect adds another element to Stealth aircraft. Oh, and this also pertains to large aircraft. Most people don't have the faintest idea what the old, antique, lumbering-looking B-52 can do and it is still in use today!

I took three clips of Low Passes from u-boob and I made a little "music video" for ya Cipher. I've never done anything like this before but I wanted to make it a little fun. The first two are 747 Jumbo Jets in a gear-up flaps-up condition, which means they have to be running at a fair clip otherwise these monsters would just fall out of the sky. But pay particular attention to the last clip. It is a KC-135 (basically a Boeing 707 airframe), which is quite comparable to a 757, and he's probably doing in the neighborhood of 500 MPH because his engines are screaming when he flies by! Anyway I hope y'all enjoy this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MaXCAHTm-Y4

I know this is a fairly long post. I am a naturally slow, meticulous, and thorough sort of fella (Hey, I'm a Virgo! LOL!) who doesn't always talk alot but when I do I strive to say it in a way that everyone can understand. So for that I apologize. But hey, this Thursday I'll be yet another year older, so it can only get worse! Maybe you all can grant me that this one time!

So back to the main topic (sort of):

Could a Boeing 757 be used to strike the Pentagon? ABSOLUTELY!
Could a Cruise Missile be used to strike the Pentagon? ABSOLUTELY!
What do I think hit the Pentagon?
I don't mean to leave anyone in suspense but I'm really tired right now and I need to think on how I want to say it. I hope you'll understand.

Thanks and Warmest Wishes To All!

Bob

jimmer
1st September 2010, 13:36
bob, before your next installment,
and since we're still debating this, I suppose that you reviewed the p. 1 article that kicked this all off.
if so, how do you reckon the same day onsite airline wreckage and report that bodies were removed
from the building (+60 noted at the end of the article)?

thanks for the clarifications.

Zook
1st September 2010, 14:23
Note: This response is in regards only to the physics of a 757 flying fast at a low level. Pilot experience, local terrain, or any other factors are not a consideration in this particular discussion.
[...]
But pay particular attention to the last clip. It is a KC-135 (basically a Boeing 707 airframe), which is quite comparable to a 757, and he's probably doing in the neighborhood of 500 MPH because his engines are screaming when he flies by! Anyway I hope y'all enjoy this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MaXCAHTm-Y4

I know this is a fairly long post. I am a naturally slow, meticulous, and thorough sort of fella (Hey, I'm a Virgo! LOL!) who doesn't always talk alot but when I do I strive to say it in a way that everyone can understand. So for that I apologize. But hey, this Thursday I'll be yet another year older, so it can only get worse! Maybe you all can grant me that this one time!

So back to the main topic (sort of):

Could a Boeing 757 be used to strike the Pentagon? ABSOLUTELY!
Could a Cruise Missile be used to strike the Pentagon? ABSOLUTELY!
What do I think hit the Pentagon?
I don't mean to leave anyone in suspense but I'm really tired right now and I need to think on how I want to say it. I hope you'll understand.

Thanks and Warmest Wishes To All!
Bob

Hi Bob,

I'm not convinced wrt the KC-135. The background music interfered with sound of the jet as it approached and climbed again over the desert floor. In any event, I didn't detect any significant screaming noise from the engines until it started to climb again. 500mph doesn't seem credible just by watching the approach and flyby (over the parked trucks). About the 3:14 mark. It appears to me that the pilot only stepped on the throttle after he was past the trucks and that his approach speed was relatively modest (akin to that of a landing passenger jet). Note also the height of the plane over the trucks; definitely higher than the level of the entry hole at the Pentagon building.

Back to the question, could a Boeing 757 be used to strike the Pentagon? You stated "ABSOLUTELY!". I have less optimism. IMO, the KC-135 bears little resemblance to the flight speeds, flight heights, and general flight dynamics of the alleged Boeing 757 that was said to have crashed into the Pentagon.


cheers
Uncle Zook

Bomack
2nd September 2010, 09:03
Jimmer,

Well did you read the note I placed at the beginning of my presentation? The presentation was only a discussion of whether or not a large jet plane can fly close to the ground at high speed without losing control. I was not inferring that it did happen this way, I was only showing that it COULD be done.

Uncle Zook, Glad to meet ya!


Back to the question, could a Boeing 757 be used to strike the Pentagon? You stated "ABSOLUTELY!". I have less optimism.

Alright, you caught me there (Guess I was a little over-enthusiastic)! I should have said yes, but only with an experienced pilot. And even then it would be a difficult task at that location because of the terrain lay-out, surrounding structures, etc. An inexperienced person trying for it in a passenger jet? I wanna tell you something . . . That's completely laughable. He'd be lucky to even make his first turn without falling out of the sky! (Unless he had help?)


IMO, the KC-135 bears little resemblance to the flight speeds, flight heights, and general flight dynamics of the alleged Boeing 757 that was said to have crashed into the Pentagon.

I didn't say they were the same, I said they are comparable. And they are. The KC-135 is basically a 707. It has a narrower fuselage and is shorter than the Boeing 707 jetliner. Boeing's commercial designation for the KC-135 is the Model 717. The reason I used a KC-135 to compare with is because it's really hard to find videos of commercial airliners doing these stunts. It seems that that the pilot's bosses don't like that too much! On the other hand, you see it all the time in the military.

KC-135
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0d/100225-F-3252P-617.jpg/300px-100225-F-3252P-617.jpg

Length: 136 ft 3 in (41.53 m)
Wingspan: 130 ft 10 in (39.88 m)
Height: 41 ft 8 in (12.70 m)
Max takeoff weight: 322,500 lb (146,000 kg)
Maximum Fuel Load: 31,275 US gal (118 kL)
Maximum speed: 580 mph (933 km/h)
Cruise speed: 530 mph
Powerplant: 4× (R/T) CFM International CFM56 (F108-CF-100) turbofan, 21,634 lbf () each

707
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/be/Turkish_Airlines_Boeing_707_at_Zurich_-_April_1976.jpg/300px-Turkish_Airlines_Boeing_707_at_Zurich_-_April_1976.jpg

Length: 145 ft 1 in (44.07 m)
Wingspan: 130 ft 10 in (39.90 m)
Height: 42 ft 5 in (12.93 m)
Max takeoff weight: 257,000 lb (116,570 kg)
Maximum Fuel Load: 17,330 US gal (65,590 l)
Maximum speed: - -
Cruise speed: 540 kn (1000 km/h)
Powerplant: 4× Pratt & Whitney JT3D-1: 17,000 lbf (75.6 kN)

757
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4c/Ba_b757-200_g-bpei_takeoff_arp.jpg/300px-Ba_b757-200_g-bpei_takeoff_arp.jpg

Length: 155 ft 3 in (47.32 m)
Wingspan: 124 ft 10 in (38.05 m)
Height: 44 ft 6 in (13.56 m)
Max takeoff weight: 255,000 lb (115,680 kg)
Maximum Fuel Load: 31,275 US gal (118 kL)
Maximum speed: 580 mph (933 km/h)
Cruise speed: 530 mph
Powerplant: 2× Rolls-Royce RB211, Pratt & Whitney PW2037, PW2040, or PW2043 turbofan engines rated at 36,600 lbf (163 kN) to 43,500 lbf (193 kN) thrust each

By the way, this is a France AF KC-135. Pause it at about 0:04 and you can see better how low it is.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kruy-Ici-J8

Samson
2nd September 2010, 12:53
Proof that the pentagon didn't get hit by a boeing 757 is far more convincing. The review of facts in the article that goes with this topic are not proven. Eyewittnesses are not creadable (200 ppl 200 different storys)
Seats were not found, there were no bodys identified or returned to their families... just think the plane vanishes and keeps bodys intact? The wheel found has 8 holes a 757 has 10. The flightrecorder data does not match.
Now just look at the perfect round hole on inside of the pentagon. That suggest the 'plane' was more or less intact at that moment... After bumping through all those colums it comes out leaving a perfect round hole in the wall and then vanishes completly leaving nothing but a bucket full of debris...

86 cameras filmed the impact... the first years only 5 frames of one camera were released to the public... the 2 tapes that are available now prove nothing.

"Do the orders still stand?" ...was asked, proven fact. WHAT ORDERS?
What is the point in this plane no plane nonsense if the broader picture proves this was for Sure an inside job?

It wouldnt surprise me if 10% or more of the 'awake' members of this beautiful forum still believe the oficicial story around 911
Im not able to make it But i would like to see a topic with a poll that asks Was 911 an inside job? To know for sure.
2 trillion dollars were stolen that day, 3000 killed... More then a million were killed in the illegal war that was started after this event.
9 years after, none of the real terrorists is prosecuted behind bars or hanged... theyre still robbing us with the banksters with trillions at once.
Destroying our planet and lives in every possible way they can think of.
First you have to get mad real mad...Im not gonne take this anymore

greetings

Eligos
2nd September 2010, 13:09
Good one Samson!

Zook
2nd September 2010, 13:34
Jimmer,

Well did you read the note I placed at the beginning of my presentation? The presentation was only a discussion of whether or not a large jet plane can fly close to the ground at high speed without losing control. I was not inferring that it did happen this way, I was only showing that it COULD be done.

Uncle Zook, Glad to meet ya!

Alright, you caught me there (Guess I was a little over-enthusiastic)! I should have said yes, but only with an experienced pilot. And even then it would be a difficult task at that location because of the terrain lay-out, surrounding structures, etc. An inexperienced person trying for it in a passenger jet? I wanna tell you something . . . That's completely laughable. He'd be lucky to even make his first turn without falling out of the sky! (Unless he had help?)

I didn't say they were the same, I said they are comparable. And they are. The KC-135 is basically a 707. It has a narrower fuselage and is shorter than the Boeing 707 jetliner. Boeing's commercial designation for the KC-135 is the Model 717. The reason I used a KC-135 to compare with is because it's really hard to find videos of commercial airliners doing these stunts. It seems that that the pilot's bosses don't like that too much! On the other hand, you see it all the time in the military.

Hi Bob (likewise!),

I should have stated it more clearly. Mea culpa. I did not mean that the two types of jets weren't similar ... only that the flight dynamics of the KC-135 in the video do not match the flight dynamics of the putative Boeing jet that is alleged to have hit the Pentagon. I agree that the KC-135 jet in itself is very comparable to the Boeing jetliners depicted below, especially the 707.



[...]
By the way, this is a France AF KC-135. Pause it at about 0:04 and you can see better how low it is.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kruy-Ici-J8

I paused it at 0:04. The lowest height of the KC-135 is still about three times higher than the putative "attacking" Boeing jetliner that allegedly flew over the Pentagon lawn and slammed into the building. Definitely, the speed appears to be minimal, akin to takeoff speed. Here's a comparison chart for jetliner takeoff speeds:

"http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/performance/q0088.shtml"

Now, I'm no pilot (though I like to play one on the internet), but even if we add another 100mph
to the takeoff speed of a Boeing 737 (150mph), that still only puts the speed of the KC-135 in the video at approx. 250mph, well below the screaming speed of 500mph+ that the attacking jetliner is said to have possessed. Hence my comment that the flight dynamics are not comparable. FWIW, I do believe that a passenger jetliner (or something resembling that) did approach the Pentagon that day, but that it did so from the Northside of the Citgo gas station in striking contradiction to the official story's Southside approach (as required by the downed light poles). I also believe that this approaching jetliner flew over the Pentagon.

Why not just crash the jetliner into the building you may legitimately ask? We can only speculate, but I can come up with a very good reason. If you have time, watch "The PentaCon"
investigative video:

"http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5296595694237574426#"

Here's my speculative reasoning: I think we can agree that a hijacked jetliner was required to maintain the posture of the modern Arabian tale (of a renegade Saudi sheikh and his nineteen minions attacking America). Given this, they made sure that a jetliner would be seen by anyone and everyone who looked up into the sky that day and in those moments. However, many things stood in the way of a direct hit on the Pentagon, particularly, on that side which housed the accounting offices (the desired target wall of the five walls for various reasons). For instance, a Northside Cito gas station approach and crash was impossible because of the overpass stop sign structure that obstructed access. Two, a Southside approach was equally problematic because of the light poles and the generator that were in the way. Who knows how an attempted crash would have turned out if they used a jetliner to ram through these light poles and the generator? The planners simply could not take the chance of an aborted attack if the jetliner crashed prematurely or away from their intended target area (e.g. side with the accounting offices). Three, as has already been stated, even the best of pilots would have had a hard time controlling a jetliner supposedly travelling at 500mph+ just a few feet above the Pentagon lawn (e.g. the ground effect). Eighth-megaton silver canaries have little in common with 5-lb seagulls flying low over the ocean waves. Even hovercraft have to be specifically designed for the task, and they only operate at modest speeds.

So, basically, you would have uncertainty in outcome if you used a Boeing jetliner to carry out the attack, yet you require a Boeing jetliner to maintain the tall Arabian tale. We can be confident that - after extensive risk-benefit analysis - the planners decided to go ahead with a scenario that had great chance of success, and not a 50-50 proposition. One such scenario: a Boeing jetliner would fly over the Pentagon roof via a Northside approach (and this is more or less verified by the Citgo witnesses, especially the gas station employee who stated that the jetliner pulled up just as it reached the Pentagon to avoid hitting the stop sign structure) and also a missile would be launched via a Southside approach and this would actually do much of the damage (here, the missile was likely camouflaged with American Airlines markings to further confuse the issue in the minds of the eyewitnesses; also, the use of preplanted explosives in conjunction with the missile attack is very likely, e.g. to create a fireball commensurate with a Boeing jetliner impact).

This two-pronged attack scenario (possibly three-pronged with the use of preplanted explosives) fits the observable evidence better than the official story of a Boeing jetliner impact. I'm sure they would have simply crashed the Boeing jetliner into the Pentagon if it were possible, e.g. highly probable. IMO, the extra props were required only because of the extremely low probability of success in using a simple Boeing jetliner crash.

In any event, I would still focus primarily on the collapse of WTC7 (e.g. to prove the Inside Job). There, the evidence forces all speculation out of the equation.


Cheers
Uncle Zook

Fredkc
2nd September 2010, 15:22
Sigh....

I hate to be the stick in the mud, but.
when someone who is convinced a 757 didn't hit the Pentagon...

When you figure out where they took the 185 passengers and crew, shot 'em in the head and buried them.
Please, send me a Pm, because then you'd have something useful to proceed upon.
Fred

Operator
2nd September 2010, 16:31
When you figure out where they took the 185 passengers and crew, shot 'em in the head and buried them.
Please, send me a Pm, because then you'd have something useful to proceed upon.


Well I won't pm you since I don't have details but only an idea about what has happened. It's an horrible story anyway.
Even the Nazi's during WWII stopped shooting bullets in peoples head, too bloody, too personal, too time consuming ... they found other ways.
The only hint I have here is ... where are all the bodies from the twin towers ? We've all seen them being present before the collapse.

In case of the planes ... I think there could be a lead of a trail starting at radar operators and traffic controllers. Somehow there must be witnesses among them that all together should give us a complete trace in time where the planes were etc.

Now I don't know if you are familiar with the "Illuminati card game" (You'll find it on youtube) but there's one card about 18 1/2 minutes missing time (if I remember correctly).
If this is possible at all and credible ... could it be they messed with time so we can't get the puzzle together ?

There are lots of UFO cases where time is messed up (minutes in earth time were days somewhere else and vice versa). Could it be they indeed have this technology and used it ... ?

I fully understand that you are 'touched' by the questionable loss of lives but maybe the above is yet something useful for someone to proceed upon.

SPIRIT WOLF
2nd September 2010, 17:15
During my investigations into 9/11, beginning literally the minute the Naudet brothers film was shown on UK TV, I had niggling doubts before then but seeing that clip of the 'plane' striking the first tower, I replayed and magnified that clip hundreds of times. Then Something in my brain said "this is a bit weird". What niggled my senses was the flash a microsecond before the 'plane' hit. I spent hundreds of hours trying to work that out. Then my investigator mode got the better of me and I began, from that point in 2002 to research and investigate the whole series of events. Sometimes spending 12 hours a day or more. It became something I simply had to do. Over the years, especially when my website was up and running, before it got hacked to death then finally removed I was called a heartless British bastard simply by stating I could not accept official explanations of what happened that day. In the early stages there were very few whom stood up and said "there is something wrong here guys". Those that did were immediately attacked for being anti government unpatriotic communist bastards. Thankfully that has changed with a massive amount of evidence presented by professionals stating the official story is bogus. Yes I am sorry about the loss of lives that day and am not belittling that one bit. BUT I do stand up and say the US government were the ones responsible for those deaths, not the alleged terrorists and certainly not the 9/11 truthseekers. Its still a debate as to whether two airliners crashed into the twin towers. Despite all the so called videos showing the second aircraft, certain evidence states that itself was a clever piece of hoaxing. We are covering the Pentagon hoax right here. If planes did not hit these buildings we are faced with several questions. What did bring the towers down? If there were planes on the other hand were they the actual flights in question? or were they clever mockups using other aircraft? Then that begs the question what happened to the real flights and all the passengers? The onion has so many layers and its taking time peeling those layers one at a time. This debate could get heated by those accepting blindly the official line as otherwise it upsets their cosy world of their reality, on a day to day basis. Unfortunately I among many others are here to pull you out of that cosy box and shake you out of that blinded reality and show you the actual reality. But I am not a heartless bastard. I strive for TRUTH,JUSTICE & FREEDOM..........you will get no BS from me.

jimmer
2nd September 2010, 17:36
s w,
about that 'flash.' could it be the massive impact of the airline nose into the concrete and steel?
both planes show the same kind of flash with both planes striking the same construction materials.
I've seen all the videos pointing out that the plane shadow doesn't reach the building before the 'flash,' so it has to be an explosion,
but the videos are of such poor quality that unless you want it to be so, the proof is not in the viewing.

SPIRIT WOLF
2nd September 2010, 17:41
Agreed, the quality of available video material is poor, but one needs to look at all possible scenarios, checking all evidence, including the 'no plane' one which makes sense in one way but difficult to accept in another. You really need to spend an awful lot of time digging into researching this, I mean an awful amount of time. Glossing over a few vids and a few testimonies will not cut it. You need take in data from every available source. Many heard explosions in the towers but clever media played this down making those that reported hearing the explosions to be mistaken. This is very deep and very complex, it was designed that way so future investigations would be difficult and time consuming.

jimmer
2nd September 2010, 17:57
so sw, could the flash be from the massive, brutal impact?

Zook
2nd September 2010, 19:07
Sigh....
I hate to be the stick in the mud, but.
when someone who is convinced a 757 didn't hit the Pentagon...


I hate to be the mud. Still, when someone who is convinced a 757 did hit the Pentagon ...
In any event, I'll bet the farm and the country charm of the farmer's daughter that this guy here
( :frusty: ) thinks that it didn't?



When you figure out where they took the 185 passengers and crew, shot 'em in the head and buried them.
Please, send me a Pm, because then you'd have something useful to proceed upon.
Fred

Conjecture is helpful, Fred ... in microscopic amounts. Observation remains our best tool. The physical evidence gathered at the Pentagon site is not consistent with a 757 impact (specifically, the Northside approach path of the observed putative offending jetliner). Solve the physical evidence first; and that will also lead you to the whereabouts of the 185 passengers and crew. A proper investigative process extends from the observable evidence.


Cheers
Uncle Zook

Operator
2nd September 2010, 20:28
so sw, could the flash be from the massive, brutal impact?

Nope ... it takes time for an explosion to develop, material will be thrown away from the explosion. In the videos presented you see a plane vanish in a building
and explosion follows later. It is not at all surprising that pods were found under the so called planes ...
You can't have an aluminum plane crumbling massive steel beams like butter ... You need to prep them ...

In the case of the pentagon an entry was created by white phosphor explosives ... it declares why the hole is neatly round, again no material was blown outward,
a fire develops later and the few frames of footage available even corroborate it. There is a flash, white smoke and something seem to follow the explosion.

In less than a decade before 2001, during the first gulf war the US military was proud to present footage where you see missiles with precision flying through a window.
A little later that seems no achievement what so ever because a rooky terrorist with zilch experience can fly a complete airliner with extreme speed exactly to a spot where
it benefited the pentagon the most.

jimmer
2nd September 2010, 20:51
everyone should take as much effort to 'debunk' rumors as theorizing to 'prove' them.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/1227842

from popular mechanics investigations of the 911 inside job theory:

Where's The Pod?
Claim: Photographs and video footage shot just before United Airlines Flight 175 hit the South Tower of the World Trade Center (WTC) show an object underneath the fuselage at the base of the right wing.
The film "911 In Plane Site" and the Web site LetsRoll911.org claim that no such object is found on a stock Boeing 767. They speculate that this "military pod" is a missile, a bomb or a piece of equipment on an air-refueling tanker.
LetsRoll911.org points to this as evidence that the attacks were an "inside job" sanctioned by "President George Bush, who planned and engineered 9/11."


FACT: One of the clearest, most widely seen pictures of the doomed jet's undercarriage was taken by photographer Rob Howard and published in New York magazine and elsewhere (opening page).
PM sent a digital scan of the original photo to Ronald Greeley, director of the Space Photography Laboratory at Arizona State University. Greeley is an expert at analyzing images to determine the shape and features of
geological formations based on shadow and light effects. After studying the high-resolution image and comparing it to photos of a Boeing 767-200ER's undercarriage, Greeley dismissed the notion that the Howard photo reveals a "pod."
In fact, the photo reveals only the Boeing's right fairing, a pronounced bulge that contains the landing gear. He concludes that sunlight glinting off the fairing gave it an exaggerated look.
"Such a glint causes a blossoming (enlargement) on film," he writes in an e-mail to PM, "which tends to be amplified in digital versions of images—
the pixels are saturated and tend to 'spill over' to adjacent pixels." When asked about pods attached to civilian aircraft, Fred E. Culick, professor of aeronautics at the California Institute of Technology, gave a blunter response: "That's bull. They're really stretching."


BIG PLANE, SMALL HOLE

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/debunking-911-myths-pentagon#bigplane


once you've had time to review PM's expert analysis, please respond.
thanks.

Fredkc
2nd September 2010, 21:18
Then Something in my brain said "this is a bit weird". What niggled my senses was the flash a microsecond before the 'plane' hit.

I recall seeing a vid once that focused on this as a bit of mischief. Seems all the networks had that little flash at impact.

I'd be interested in what you found on this, Barry.

I remember the speculation from it was that therefore all the networks were involved in the conspiracy.
________________________________________
This brings me to another 'human nature' problem.
Now we have:
Hundreds of MSM Network employees,
thousands of air traffic controllers on the eastern seaboard,
Hundreds of government employees, when you add up all the little chores needed,
Perhaps 10 or 20 high level movers and shakers,
and all of these people (and perhaps one family member each) who are all keeping the greatest secret of the 20th century...

Centered in a town (Washington DC) where two people can't keep a secret until lunchtime.

Obviously, I don't get it. ;)
Fred

Operator
2nd September 2010, 21:27
thousands of air traffic controllers on the eastern seaboard,


You are right Fred ... question is can we come up with a single person especially from the group above ?
On itself it would be fishy if we wouldn't be able to locate some of these people ...

So ... anyone in the USA with interesting contacts ?

Fredkc
2nd September 2010, 21:30
So ... anyone in the USA with interesting contacts ?
Yes, but she swears she doesn't sell that stuff anymore. ;)

SPIRIT WOLF
2nd September 2010, 22:20
everyone should take as much effort to 'debunk' rumors as theorizing to 'prove' them.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/1227842

from popular mechanics investigations of the 911 inside job theory:

Where's The Pod?
Claim: Photographs and video footage shot just before United Airlines Flight 175 hit the South Tower of the World Trade Center (WTC) show an object underneath the fuselage at the base of the right wing.
The film "911 In Plane Site" and the Web site LetsRoll911.org claim that no such object is found on a stock Boeing 767. They speculate that this "military pod" is a missile, a bomb or a piece of equipment on an air-refueling tanker.
LetsRoll911.org points to this as evidence that the attacks were an "inside job" sanctioned by "President George Bush, who planned and engineered 9/11."


FACT: One of the clearest, most widely seen pictures of the doomed jet's undercarriage was taken by photographer Rob Howard and published in New York magazine and elsewhere (opening page).
PM sent a digital scan of the original photo to Ronald Greeley, director of the Space Photography Laboratory at Arizona State University. Greeley is an expert at analyzing images to determine the shape and features of
geological formations based on shadow and light effects. After studying the high-resolution image and comparing it to photos of a Boeing 767-200ER's undercarriage, Greeley dismissed the notion that the Howard photo reveals a "pod."
In fact, the photo reveals only the Boeing's right fairing, a pronounced bulge that contains the landing gear. He concludes that sunlight glinting off the fairing gave it an exaggerated look.
"Such a glint causes a blossoming (enlargement) on film," he writes in an e-mail to PM, "which tends to be amplified in digital versions of images—
the pixels are saturated and tend to 'spill over' to adjacent pixels." When asked about pods attached to civilian aircraft, Fred E. Culick, professor of aeronautics at the California Institute of Technology, gave a blunter response: "That's bull. They're really stretching."


BIG PLANE, SMALL HOLE

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/debunking-911-myths-pentagon#bigplane


once you've had time to review PM's expert analysis, please respond.
thanks.

Take the blinkers off, its a beautiful world here in reality. PM is party line media, thought you might know that. YOU please go around the internet doing some research on real experts, pilots, structural engineers, all are out there with their proven evidence. Why beat yourself up accepting the ridiculous party line?

SPIRIT WOLF
2nd September 2010, 22:26
I recall seeing a vid once that focused on this as a bit of mischief. Seems all the networks had that little flash at impact.

I'd be interested in what you found on this, Barry.

I remember the speculation from it was that therefore all the networks were involved in the conspiracy.
________________________________________
This brings me to another 'human nature' problem.
Now we have:
Hundreds of MSM Network employees,
thousands of air traffic controllers on the eastern seaboard,
Hundreds of government employees, when you add up all the little chores needed,
Perhaps 10 or 20 high level movers and shakers,
and all of these people (and perhaps one family member each) who are all keeping the greatest secret of the 20th century...

Centered in a town (Washington DC) where two people can't keep a secret until lunchtime.

Obviously, I don't get it. ;)
Fred

It was designed to be absolute chaos that day, and it was, conveniently planned exercises running that morning, that takes care of all of your questioning areas Fred, all those on the ground doing their various jobs were in midst of what they were told were exercises, then when things started to go pear shaped they were in the middle of total chaos. No one would have known what was going on around them

SPIRIT WOLF
2nd September 2010, 22:32
my take on the flash seen just before the 'plane' hit the first tower seems to me to be the initial explosion being set off.

wynderer
2nd September 2010, 22:50
It was designed to be absolute chaos that day, and it was, conveniently planned exercises running that morning, that takes care of all of your questioning areas Fred, all those on the ground doing their various jobs were in midst of what they were told were exercises, then when things started to go pear shaped they were in the middle of total chaos. No one would have known what was going on around them

our country was traumatized that day -- everyone in shock -- probably a lot of massive techno mind control going on -- & MANY subliminals on TV, w/those images of the planes going into the Towers over & over & over again

inside job, for sure

SPIRIT WOLF
2nd September 2010, 22:53
exactly, you had the best psy-ops working on this and they planned it well, but not thinking equally trained would start to question and analyse

Bomack
2nd September 2010, 23:25
our country was traumatized that day -- everyone in shock -- probably a lot of massive techno mind control going on -- & MANY subliminals on TV, w/those images of the planes going into the Towers over & over & over again

inside job, for sure

And they are STILL doing it to us this very day! What gets me is how the masses continue to buy into this stuff. Well the PTB are very experienced at manipulating peoples emotions in order to steer them whatever direction they want. For example: Naturally, people love heroes and they hate villains. So if you want to steer people's attention away from the real truth all you have to do is create a villain (where there is none) and create a hero (where there is none) and give it to the mass media, where they have a hayday with it! (LET'S ROLL!) The focus is now turned away from the truth, and everyone returns to work the next day, receives their paycheck on Friday, and they're happy! It is the same concept that a magician uses in his MAGIC ACT . . . which by the way is what the Pentagon was. IMO of course!

Hiram
3rd September 2010, 00:22
I don't usually post on this topic, as I was deeply involved into this researching this for the last 8 years. I met William Rodriguez, the last man to exit the North Tower before it collapsed. It was coming down around him and he dove under a firetruck in order to take shelter. He was the head janitor that day, and he had the only master-key to the towers. He was running up the stairs with the firefighters opening the doors on each floor with the key...they were mysteriously locked that day.

They would run down the halls on each floor checking if people were still there...and he described he and a firefighter looking into one particular office and seeing a man staring at his computer...still working!!! They tried to get him to leave but he just waved them away saying he was too busy for this nonsense. This is the bane of our age no????

In my assessment, 911 was an attempt to create a modern myth. A terrible one at that. They were very successful with this myth, but a sizeable portion of the populace was not susceptible to this myth, and rejected and rebuked the very idea as absurd.

Flight 93.....cell phone calls? Not a chance. What about Airphone calls? That flight wasn't even equipped with air-phones according to the FBI. So who made all the calls? That is where this gets really disturbing.

The Pentagon? Well thats been covered pretty thoroughly here.

Has anyone talked about the fact that the NSA reported to the media that they received a call to them on that day stating: Angel is Next. Followed by a number of very sensitive codes? "Angel" was the code name for Air-Force one that day in 2001. Who calls the NSA???

What were the codes that were listed?

Well we know that Air-Force One took off from the florida airport like a "scalded-ape" WITHOUT fighter escort and seemed to vanish for the next few hours. reports are that all fighters were told NOT to approach Air-Force one. No one knows where it went.

Where did it show up? Barksdale air-force base in Louisiana. Whats at Barksdale? The "Nightwatch" planes. They are the planes which used to fly 24 hours a day during the coldwar, and are meant to be able to run an entire war from the air in the event of attack. The "strange white plane" over Washington DC on 911 looked alot like one of these Nightwatch planes. Bomack knows what I'm talking about.

Well where did Air-Force One go next that day? That evening it mysteriously lands at Offutt AFB in Nebraska. Head of USSSTRATCOM. Why? The control of all of America's WMDs is coordinated through here.

So here is my wacky theory: The codes that were listed in the "Angel" phone call were launch codes. Also I think an entity was calling around secure lines immitating either the president's or the VPs voice perfectly. This was a coup. The only way the heads of state could be sure that the weapons were secure, was to first go to Barksdale, and then once they were sure they wouldn't be killed when they landed, they went to Offutt.

Thats my theory.

So who did the coup?

Fredkc
3rd September 2010, 01:11
Happy Birthday Bomack.
(mine isn't for another 60 days)


Naturally, people love heroes and they hate villains. So if you want to steer people's attention away from the real truth all you have to do is create a villain (where there is none) and create a hero (where there is none) and give it to the mass media, where they have a hay day with it!
The best movie line, re. that I've heard is from "Reign Of Fire":

"Envy the country that has heroes!!
I say pity the country that needs them."

by the way... please don't think I am blinkered in all this. And if any of the research bunch is feeling froggy, I would sure love an explanation for this one:


jdXGSefI6pM

For those impatient, it begs the silly question:
What was UAL175 doing at 30,000 ft., west bound, over the Con-US a full hour after it had supposedly hit the WTC?

But, good ol' human nature has been a good instructor for me. So when I am faced with a puzzle, I tend to look long and hard there, because "People usually do what people usually do."

And, the best kinda plot is the one you keep simple, and what could be simpler than having the planes actually hit the buildings; with or without 'help'?

Fred

Operator
3rd September 2010, 03:20
And, the best kinda plot is the one you keep simple, and what could be simpler than having the planes actually hit the buildings; with or without 'help'?


So you still think it is even possible ? ... There is no way you could do it ... and on top of that it would only jeopardize the real operation which has still
been proven successful till this day. Even here we're at 120+ posts still seriously discussing it (Jimmer will be happy).

viking
3rd September 2010, 11:09
New perspectives upon previously released videos proves conclusively that a missile was used to attack the Pentagon on 911.

Yeah right ... A 757!!!! Not sure it would fit in here!!!

http://www.wholelook.com/missile/missile3/Cruise5b.gif

http://www.fourwinds10.com/siterun_data/government/fraud/911_attack/news.php?q=1283449288

viking

Bomack
4th September 2010, 21:11
So here is my wacky theory: The codes that were listed in the "Angel" phone call were launch codes. Also I think an entity was calling around secure lines immitating either the president's or the VPs voice perfectly. This was a coup.

HIRAM! YIKES! (It's happened before)

Bomack
4th September 2010, 22:36
Happy Birthday Bomack.
(mine isn't for another 60 days)

Thank you much Fred! I will try to be here to send wishes on yours!


What was UAL175 doing at 30,000 ft., west bound, over the Con-US a full hour after it had supposedly hit the WTC?

If I recall this was another question (fact) that the 911 commission ignored. I believe there are only two possibilities. Either this was the REAL Flight 175 OR it was a DECOY AIRCRAFT using Flight 175's Transponder Codes (Maybe to throw-off the ATC during the time of the attack?). In either case it probably wasn't meant to be released to the media and was probably another 'blip' (of many) in the plan.


And, the best kinda plot is the one you keep simple, and what could be simpler than having the planes actually hit the buildings; with or without 'help'?

The Magic Act! Everyone loves magic! And it's even way easier to perform on TV, where the majority of the world's population is going to see it. You tell everyone it was a hijacked 757, you release a video (which really doesn't show anything) and say 'There's The Plane!', you create a huge explosion and fire ball (which focuses the viewer's attention) with lots of THICK BLACK SMOKE, and WALA! As far as locals go, you wouldn't really have that many eyewitnesses because everyones focused on getting to work (hey, it's Monday morning!) and the rest could be "handled"...in an unlimited number of ways.

I believe a 757 (or similar) was used at the Pentagon, but it (or nothing else) actually struck it. It was used as a prop in a magic act!

Oh by the way. I should say this is all "theory" and just something to broaden everyones imagination. Think outside the box!

SPIRIT WOLF
4th September 2010, 23:21
Looking back at some of the research work done over the years, maybe there was not only that mysterious white plane circling overhead, plus the military came forward with one of their planes being in the vicinity, lets suppose a 'plane' rogue airliner or mockup of said airliner were to fly fast and low(not exactly ground level) and flew over Pentagon just as something else hit the Pentagon?. In the chaos and confusion aka smoke n mirrors this would make ideal psy-ops

jimmer
5th September 2010, 15:08
ok, as much as I'd like to give this up, it's hard when you see this video.
this thread was started specifically to discuss whether or not a plane hit the pentagon on 911.
to get this conversation back on track, watch this statement from an eyewitness
of the real time event.

question everything, but don't loose it all in the process.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1dd_1177892305

and this one that verifies and shows passenger bodies within the pentagon structure...

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=671_1184955324

SPIRIT WOLF
5th September 2010, 18:06
The witness in question is a paid stoolie, I have several other vids that show witnesses to an object, not a plane, no matter how much wool is covering your eyes you are in the minority I'm afraid. try and see sense, logic here. Bodies recovered from the Pentagon only prove that yes innocents were killed. Does not mean flight passengers were among them. Please do not give me the rubbish that they have been identified by experts, experts toeing the official line. You will never convince those of us whom have researched this tirelessly since the events. For the final time, NO, A 757 DID NOT HIT THE PENTAGON on September 11th 2001. You need see more research vids, not put up nonsense by the authorities.

jimmer
5th September 2010, 18:25
I've lots of evidence on both sides, SW.

from the video, the on-site dna matched passenger dna.

and sorry, credible witnesses with nothing to gain say it was a plane.
on-site evidence says it was a plane.

theories and speculation is not something to hang your beliefs on.

I know I'm against the PA grain with all of this, but so be it.

Luke
5th September 2010, 19:08
from the video, the on-site dna matched passenger dna.
Last time I checked, Dna matching was time consuming process, and even the most basic procedures of matching need week to be completed. which means there could be no on-site testing, only that samples were taken on site. Meaning you could easily switch them. As for bodies- remember, it was a building site, there were workers there!

on-site evidence says it was a plane
Haven't seen such evidence yet. All photo evidence says no object size of 757 can struck that building in such place without damaging elements like electrical spools directly on flightpath. Every plane on such height create serious wing-on-ground effect meaning grass and all elements like grass would be disturbed. they were not. meaning object was too small to generate enough of that effect i.e small wing lift.
As for witnesses, only experienced air force personnel or trained spotters are credible in judging size and speed low flying fast object. Just see amount of perspective distorted plane photos that pass for "morphing ufo's"even on this forum. Optics a b*tch .

With amount of money and time that came into creating this whole 911 psy-op they made sure that hollywood-trained "all crash generates fireball" crowd will fall for it. My guess is, there is at least one hollywood screenwriter out there, that thinks why this attack is so similar to what he was commissioned to write. Or maybe he's deep-sixed already. And there is only one company that specializes in demo-jobs such precise. Same one that was contracted to clean the site afterwards.

I'm wondering though, what they have on these people that completly shut them up. For this op planning and execution, I'd say at least 1000 people would be involved on level that they need to know what is going on (demo crews, aircraft trainig, pilots, security). It seems like every counterintelligence officer's nightmare, unless they have very solid hooks on those people or they did ole NKWD-style machineguns-behind-stormtroopers trick or both.

Coup theory is quite interesting one, especially in light of recent "pentagon hacking/armed nuke flight" incident. There is something to it.
It was obvious to me that there was economic collapse scheduled in that timeframe too, but "somehow" it was re-scheduled for 2008. Military was appeased by two wars, but then, there were 4th gen events, not 2nd gen military wanted (and wants now even more). The ball is still in play on that front, and with "wimp-in-chief", they might have their excuse to take action and steer "great country to its global destiny" no matter the costs. It's only a matter how much more mess in how little time current "political facade" will do. "Support the troops" might get whole new meaning.

SPIRIT WOLF
5th September 2010, 19:49
I've lots of evidence on both sides, SW.

from the video, the on-site dna matched passenger dna.

and sorry, credible witnesses with nothing to gain say it was a plane.
on-site evidence says it was a plane.

theories and speculation is not something to hang your beliefs on.

I know I'm against the PA grain with all of this, but so be it.

No problem, you are entitled to believe whatever you wish. On site DNA testing matched? You do of course realise you are trusting the evidence given by those paid by the government, and seeing as the US government were complicit in the whole 9/11 tragedy you are unwittingly accepting any BS the US government wants to feed you. You obviously have not done very much research, some of us have, 8 years and a great deal of 12 hours a day for month in month out. I also have the experience of being able to state my views from a professional viewpoint, working alongside many within the darker more secretive areas. No theories or speculation. You need see evidence presented by real professionals within areas such as pilots, structural engineers, physicists, plus those whom were at the scene, a great many firefighters will attest to realtime events in New York for example. NOT paid disinfo merchants. You need to see things without the US government supplied blinkers you are wearing.

Zook
5th September 2010, 20:09
Hi Jimmer,


I've lots of evidence on both sides, SW.

There is lots of evidence on one side, true; but primarily mischief on the other.



from the video, the on-site dna matched passenger dna.

An assertion is not evidence.



and sorry, credible witnesses with nothing to gain say it was a plane.
on-site evidence says it was a plane.

No one is disputing that a jetliner flew near the Pentagon just before the explosive fireball on the facade. The dispute is between the dueling accounts of jetliner impact and jetliner flyover



theories and speculation is not something to hang your beliefs on.
I know I'm against the PA grain with all of this, but so be it.
It doesn't matter if you're against the PA grain, Jimmer. Copernicus was against the Ptolemian grain, but in the end he was right. Your burden is the evidential grain that is stacked against you.
Be that as it may, the documentary at the following URL does an excellent job of shredding Mike Walter's credibility:

http://www.megavideo.com/?v=HSOXBSNX

Below is a partial transcript of the interview Mike Walter gave to Bryant Gumbel:

------------------------------------beginExcerpt------------------------------------
GUMBEL: Tell me, if you could, about the manner in which the--the plane struck the building. I ask that because, in the pictures we have seen, it appears to be a gash in the side of the Pentagon as if the plane went in vertically as opposed to horizontally. Can you tell me anything about that?

Mr. WALTER: Well, as I said, you know, there were trees obstructing my view, so I saw it as it went--and then the--then the trees, and then I saw the--the fireball and the smoke. Some people have said that the plane actually sent on its side and in that way. But I can't tell you, Bryant. I just know that what I saw was this massive fireball, a huge explosion and--and a--the thick column of smoke and then an absolute bedlam on those roads as people were trying to get away. I mean, some people were going on the emergency lanes, and they were going forward while others were trying to back up. But one woman in front of me was in a panic and waving everyone back, saying, 'Back up. Back up. They've just hit the Pentagon.' It was--it was total chaos.
----------------------------------------------------------end------------------------------

Here, Mike Walter is credible in his statements of seeing a large jetliner, after all, there is corroborating evidence of that fact. Certainly, the flyover hypothesis itself requires a large jetliner. However, he is immaterial wrt impact at The Pentagon, as evidenced by his own comments in the Bryant Gumbel interview (see above excerpt).

But here's the key thing about Walter, he is impeachable based on his contradictory accounts. On the one hand he says that his view of the impact was obstructed by trees. But in the liveleak video (see below), he impeaches himself by claiming to have seen the jetliner enter the Pentagon with its wings folded in, ostensibly to reconcile the jetliner entry into the Pentagon with the small garage-sized hole (that was described by Bob Pugh, freelance photographer who was on site in the immediate aftermath of the event). Not only is Walter contradicting his own earlier account of obstructed view, but the physics of the collision event would have forced the wings to fold *out* towards the collision object and not fold back towards the fuselage. Try ramming an open umbrella into a concrete barrier (or ram it into a soft spot on the ground, to save your wrists). The umbrella will try to flatten out, not fold back in. Also, if you look at the jetliner impacting one of the Twin Towers, there is no evidence of "folding wings". Indeed, the wings were strong enough that they sliced through the columns like a knife through butter.


"http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1dd_1177892305"

-----------------------------beginTranscript----fromLiveLeakvideo----------------------
What I saw was the actual jet going in but the wings folded back like this, so that's why when you look at the hole and say 'well it's not big enough', well that's why ... the wings were not strong enough to withstand the impact ... they folded back and that's why the jet went in and that's why the hole that you see is not as large as you might imagine in another structure.
--------------------------------------------end-------------------------------------------------

I think we can safely and without prejudice, color Mike Walter "immaterial and impeached". Bailiff, please help Mr. Walter into the dustbin of history.


Cheers
Uncle Zook

Luke
6th September 2010, 14:19
Overall interesting article on Washington's blog: Dick Cheney's Oily Dream (http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2010/09/dick-cheneys-oily-dream.html)
Part that caught my attention:

Cheney also knew 9/11 was going to happen. The government knew that terrorists could use planes as weapons -- and had even run its own drills of planes being used as weapons against the World Trade Center and other U.S. high-profile buildings, using REAL airplanes -- all before 9/11.
Wonder what sources there are for that. But military personnel training for 911 scenario using real planes makes me wonder if they learned how to prevent the gig or they were training howto make the gig.

jimmer
6th September 2010, 14:40
the pentagon construction (reinforced, thick concrete) is a fortress compared to the twin tower construction.

and I realize that many have invested lots of time and effort debunking the events of 911
("...8 years and a great deal of 12 hours a day for month in month out.")

oh, forget about it...
throughout this long thread, if those who are not vested in the 'pentagon' conspiracy theory can't see that a plane crashed into the building,
then no reasonable evidence will ever convince them. and the moon is made of green cheese...

the true believer will never be shaken from their beliefs, even when confronted with the brutal truth.

over and out.

Fredkc
6th September 2010, 15:19
...and so I come back to the elephant in the bathroom.

What happened on 9/11 was tragic.

What happened on 9/12 was worse.

Yes, I know that is off-topic. and therein lies the shame.

Fred

Zook
6th September 2010, 15:55
Hi Jimmer,


the pentagon construction (reinforced, thick concrete) is a fortress compared to the twin tower construction.

and I realize that many have invested lots of time and effort debunking the events of 911
("...8 years and a great deal of 12 hours a day for month in month out.")

oh, forget about it...
throughout this long thread, if those who are not vested in the 'pentagon' conspiracy theory can't see that a plane crashed into the building,
then no reasonable evidence will ever convince them. and the moon is made of green cheese...

the true believer will never be shaken from their beliefs, even when confronted with the brutal truth.

over and out.

The preponderance of the evidence (physical, circumstantial, videographic, multinodal, etc.) only supports the one conclusion, namely, that 9/11/2001 was an inside job. Each individual piece of evidence can be isolated and analyzed in itself; but in the end, it must be woven into its rightful place on the overall tapestry. If you fail to understand this, then I really do believe that, in your world, the moon is made of green cheese.

But hey, it's your own integrity that you're messing with ... and that's your privilege and right.

Cheers
Uncle Zook

Zook
6th September 2010, 16:08
Hi Fred,


...and so I come back to the elephant in the bathroom.


What happened on 9/11 was tragic.
At the very least. But it was much more than that. It paved the way for what happened on 9/12; 9/13; 9/14 ...


What happened on 9/12 was worse.
9/12 would have happened differently had it not been for 9/11. That begs the question, which is worse? The cause or the effect?


Yes, I know that is off-topic. and therein lies the shame.
Fred
Start a new thread, Fred. With so many having lost so much ... and so few having gained so much ...I'm confident that such a thread would be far from uninteresting.

Cheers
Uncle Zook

SPIRIT WOLF
6th September 2010, 21:02
the pentagon construction (reinforced, thick concrete) is a fortress compared to the twin tower construction.

and I realize that many have invested lots of time and effort debunking the events of 911
("...8 years and a great deal of 12 hours a day for month in month out.")

oh, forget about it...
throughout this long thread, if those who are not vested in the 'pentagon' conspiracy theory can't see that a plane crashed into the building,
then no reasonable evidence will ever convince them. and the moon is made of green cheese...

the true believer will never be shaken from their beliefs, even when confronted with the brutal truth.

over and out.
We have now many experts in many fields whom have provided evidence to the contrary of officialdom, evidence you cannot dispute. But if it makes you happy and lets you sleep at night we can go along with the magical notion of a large airliner skimming inches above the grass at over 300mph making a neat hole in the Pentagon and almost completely disintegrating to tiny bits n pieces. We can also magicly believe soft nosed airliners managed to melt into structural sound steel buildings without disintegrating on impact, even entering and almost exiting the building. Yes of course, it matters not that the engine on the sidewalk did not fit the actual plane it allegedly fell off, and that whilst everything else was pulversided to dust a convenient paper passport flew down onto the streets from the impact in NY. Of course, now I've seen the light, I'm now in la-la land, its peaceful and serene here and all the nice government people keep me warm and safe with their blankets of truths.

Snowbird
7th September 2010, 03:55
Forgive me if I am not excited by the sight of a 9/11 discussion. Yes, I agree that the truth desperately needs to be examined and brought forward. And, I so support those who travel the globe giving professional presentations to bring forth the truth of this horror.

For those who wonder why after all this time, non of the air traffic controllers or the military personnel or eye witnesses have not come forward to tell their stories, I have two responses. One, they want to live to see their children grow up and two, many have already come forward...certainly not to talk to the government or the mainstream media, but they have covertly approached the victims' families. How do I know this? I have heard some of the family members state this very thing. The victims' family members know the truth of what happened. They have done the deep deep research.

What hit the Pentagon? A missile and a possible holographic plane. This "plane", was definitely not a Boeing 757. It was also definitely not flight 77.

I hate to sound so cold on this thread, but where were the strewn bodies and luggage, etc.? Yes, I have seen many pictures of burned unidentifiable bodies. Does anyone really think that our government is telling truth when they state that these bodies were recovered and returned to the families? And again, I don't mean to sound cold and heartless, but I have read that there exists a distinct possibility that a few, if not more than a few, of the passengers, especially some of the more famous ones, are alive and well...they just look a lot different than they used to look.

Jimmer, I wish you well, but may I ask if you are by chance the author of the ats piece? Yes, I did read it. And I'm sorry, but I'm not impressed. Please, I beg you, do not come to PA and use Popular Mechanics as a source material. The majority of posters here are so very beyond all that.

William Rodriguez is one of my true heroes in this life. He is a great man!

jimmer
7th September 2010, 12:21
snowbird, I am not the author of the ATS piece -- just a concerned citizen looking for the facts.
as for the destructor of the pentagon, what leads you to even contemplate a 'holographic plane'?
that just doesn't add up. where's your evidence? mixing syfi with reality doesn't help here.

you are the first to say, 'we don't want your kind here.'
thanks for that.

bennycog
7th September 2010, 12:27
Right at this moment there is a tv program on in australia called "9 11 state of emergency"
I did not want to watch it because i knew before watching it that it would be more spoof to keep the sheep laying to rest.. and it has not dissapointed in that regard.
my question is how can they have so many people to go on camera and blatently lie about the goings on of that day..
for example one person comes on and says that he seen people still in there seats burnt alive in the pentagon.. they showed footage of the object hitting the building.. but the only footage is one frame when it just comes into view and the last few frames of when you see the explosion happen.. nothing was shown in between.. and they keep saying the name al-qaeda .... al-qaeda.
nothing has come up about builing 7 as of yet too..
has this program been in anyother country? i find the whole thing very suss.......

bennycog

Zook
7th September 2010, 15:05
Hi Jimmer and Snowbird,


snowbird, I am not the author of the ATS piece -- just a concerned citizen looking for the facts.
as for the destructor of the pentagon, what leads you to even contemplate a 'holographic plane'?
that just doesn't add up. where's your evidence? mixing syfi with reality doesn't help here.

you are the first to say, 'we don't want your kind here.'
thanks for that.

While the use of holographic planes to carry out one or more nodes of the attacks is possible, discussion of said topic is not helpful in proving the Inside Job nature of the attacks; and precisely because such "evidence" cannot readily be established. Indeed, iot distracts from the evidence that can be readily established. Likewise, discussion of the fate of the 500 or so
putative passengers (combining the respective plane manifests) cannot readily be established, and, too, distracts from the focus on the readily provable evidence.

Jimmer, you provided a video clip of Mike Walter who claims to have seen a Boeing jetliner impact the Pentagon. I impeached his testimony by pointing out that he had at least two contradictory versions of the alleged impact event.

In one, he explains in detail how the wings folded back upon impact (demonstrably false; slam an open umbrella into the ground and you will know why), and how that had allowed the fuselage to enter the relatively small hole at the impact point (of whatever slammed into the Pentagon; missile??).

But in an earlier interview with Bryant Gumbel (on 9/12/2001), this is what he said:

------------------------------------------beginExcerpt----------------------------------
September 12th 6AM eastern on CBS:
Quote:

Mr. WALTER:"...and I could see over in the distance the American Airlines jet as it kind of banked around, pivoted and then took a steep dive right into the Pentagon"
(this is completely irreconcilable with the official story.)
...
"GUMBEL: Did you see it hit the Pentagon? Was the plane coming in horizontally or did it, in fact, go on its wing as--as it impacted the building?

Mr. WALTER: You know, the--the--the--there were trees there that kind of obstructed it, so I kind of--I saw it go in. I'm not sure if it turned at an angle. I've heard some people say that's what it did. All I know is it--it created a huge explosion and massive fireball and..."
(Why was he less sure about details of the impact on the day after 9/11 when he was telling his story to the world?)
...
"GUMBEL: Tell me, if you could, about the manner in which the--the plane struck the building. I ask that because, in the pictures we have seen, it appears to be a gash in the side of the Pentagon as if the plane went in vertically as opposed to horizontally. Can you tell me anything about that?

Mr. WALTER: Well, as I said, you know, there were trees obstructing my view, so I saw it as it went--and then the--then the trees, and then I saw the--the fireball and the smoke. Some people have said that the plane actually sent on its side and in that way. But I can't tell you, Bryant. I just know that what I saw was this massive fireball, a huge explosion and--and a--the thick column of smoke and then an absolute bedlam on those roads as people were trying to get away."
------------------------end----------------------------------------------------------------

Now, an impact is a reasonable conclusion given that he stated seeing both a Boeing jetliner and a huge fireball. However, he clearly did not see the impact. He merely assumed that the plane had struck the building. Two contradictory accounts: observed impact with explicit detail versus assumed impact with no details. I have thus impeached Mike Walter's credibility. If you are genuinely interested in a debate of the evidence, you will respond on this matter.

And you will also respond on the evidence I provided earlier confirming (without a shadow of doubt) the Northside Citgo approach of the putative jetliner (thanks to the investigative work of Craig Ranke and Aldo Marquis). The compelling thing about Ranke(Marquis)'s witnesses is that they all assume the Boeing jetliner crashed into the Pentagon, just like you do, Jimmer. But that part of their testimony is immaterial; after all, the Inside Jobbers planned the Pentagon attack as a sleight of hand (so that potential witnesses would arrive at the desired conclusion, namely, that a jetliner did indeed crash into the Pentagon). What is material ... is that all the witnesses placed the jetliner to the Northside of the Citgo gas station. And that scuttles the official story told by the Inside Jobbers and their myrmidons; a story told with downed light poles on the Southside of Citgo; a story that cannot be reconciled with the Northside establishment of the putative jetliner flight path.

Of course, you may continue to respond by ignoring the evidence. That's your choice.


Cheers
Uncle Zook

Luke
7th September 2010, 15:22
bennycog, its quite simple:

“The greater the lie, the greater the chance that it will be believed”
“Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it”
(Attributed to Adolf Hitler)

As for planes , etc.
Without ability to travel/see into past we can not establish what happened. We can speculate for ages, and this really do not change anything. S*it happened. And if we still invest our energy in supporting system that committed this crime, it will happen again, when it will be politically expedient to do so.

9/11 was not separate event- history of such actions is quite long. History of regimes killing their own citizens is even longer. As long as this system lasts , there will be more such events and there would be bigger events. Whatever is needed to keep people fleeced.

How to break this cycle of viciousness should be topic of our talk, not chasing specters.

Zook
7th September 2010, 15:38
[...]
you are the first to say, 'we don't want your kind here.'
thanks for that.

Snowbird did not say that. He merely implored you not to come here with Popular Mechanics as a source material. I second Snowbird's request. PM is a rag. Don't know whether it was always a rag; but definitely, sometime after 9/11/2001, the existing editorial staff was replaced with minions of the Inside Jobbers. Alas, minions do what minions are meant to do. Sure enough, PM's explanations (wrt 9/11) jumped languages almost overnight, going from readable English to blinking crayola Minionese. Juvenile. Pseudoscience. Duckfactory. These are some of the words that come to mind as I struggle through my pocket version of Minionese 101.


Cheers
Uncle Zook

Luke
7th September 2010, 16:30
(...)Don't know whether it was always a rag; but definitely, sometime after 9/11/2001, the existing editorial staff was replaced with minions of the Inside Jobbers. Alas, minions do what minions are meant to do. Sure enough, PM's explanations (wrt 9/11) jumped languages almost overnight, going from readable English to blinking crayola Minionese. Juvenile. Pseudoscience. Duckfactory. (...)
Quite simple really. It's peer-reviewed, right ?
Look at the machanism. Govt/officials are implied in any non-official story. Every "respectable" scientist out there is either on government payroll directly, or his research grants are govt sponsored - given all private research labs are in India or Eastern Europe right now. These guys know wherefrom their bread comes. They would not bite the hand that feed them. They have years of experience in self-denial.
Ever wondered why for example, space program went nowhere from the moment ex-nazi specialists retired? Same principle. Free energy? same principle. Off-the grid technology? Same principle.

Peace of Mind
7th September 2010, 17:10
Hi guys,

We must all remember the truth will never have unanswered questions attached to it.

The truth is evident and undeniable to everyone because we are all a part of the truth/real. Fruad has a noticable vibration to it and it can be easily detected by anyone who is of rightousness. The key to pulling wool over the eyes is to keep people in fear/negativity/ lower vibrations, so they can't tell what's real or not...as they are so used to the negative vibes to know the differences.

So, just to add to the discussion, and the unmasking of this horrific event... below are a few links to further aid in the research, the truth always comes out...sooner or later.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Wzn1gBgPEo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXr_sGrUFO4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ek-Q0T9wK2g

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWEHsbz6uAc

If they can get away with this, just imagine what’s next. Within the underground of conspiracy talk; it’s been said for decades the governments have been planning a stage alien invasion (by using holograph technology). The outcome is supposed to force all people to give up their weapons in exchange for peace. This is how the government plans to seize complete power over the populace. If the masses can’t protect themselves from threats both foreign and domestic…the PTB wins, well, that’s what they figure.

Holographs are very real. His a clip where A news show is using a holograph to broadcast the news…http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPgdBsh90jg
About 5 years ago, the Japanese created a television set that will allow you to see in 3D, smell and touch the images. http://www.betanews.com/article/3D-TV-with-Touch-Smell-by-2020/1124471972

What? You said you need more to ponder on? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clWz_ZJd6dc

The TV’s has been pushed back to about 2020, but when I first heard about it in the early part of this decade, it was said they will be ready for sell by 2008. And, I thought the excessive campaigning a couple years ago for Digital screening TV’s were meant for our viewing pleasures…now I’m starting to see how these upgraded tools can be used in future sinister plans.

We can over come all of this nonsense, but we can't fear the change that is needed to come with it. Heaven/glory (on Earth) has no room for hate, procrastinators and cowards.

With that said.... I do see a glorious future where this event has played a very important role...probably the main catalyst in obtaining the paradise we all yearn for...

Peace

jimmer
7th September 2010, 21:52
ok, I took a look.

here's where I'm coming from:
prove it factually and outright, without really crappy-distorted videos, wild holographic speculations and personal attacks.

here's where others are coming from:
I know it's a was set-up and I will send endless hours back engineering data, fuzzy videos and reading only that which supports my view, to prove it.

this thread was to focus one aspect of the 911 questions, not the entire convoluted scenario.
rather than distorting the initial presentation (from page 1) with other disparate arguments, stick to the topic (where's the moderator?) and present the best
arguments that the passenger plane, flight 77, did not cause the damage to the pentagon.
so far, the rebuttals have all been speculation with a couple of 'eyewitnesses' disputing the on-the-ground evidence.
from the sources I've reviewed and posted, I believe the 'the hard, documented evidence' is convincing that flight 77 came home.

and did I say, I love you all...

SPIRIT WOLF
7th September 2010, 22:10
OK blinkered one lets put it this way, even though the majority of researchers know full well the official story is ridiculous, we have not got 100% proof of this, we rely on common sense, logic and the vast experience of professionals stating the official line is nonsense. Not one professional pilot could pull off a 330degree turn and come in inches above the ground at speed in order to hit the Pentagon. We also see one 16ft hole as damage. Official line is plane banked slightly to left just before hitting building shearing off port wing and engine. The wing would have crumpled but a massive engine would have remained outside, it did not. The Starboard engine would have impacted and left a sizeable mark on the building, it did not and was never recovered from inside. The very idea of a plabe being flown by a rank amateur and performing such miraculous moves is beyond belief. The official line also cannot prove 100% a plane hit the building. We are told, by officials it did. STALEMATE?
If more time was available to me I'd gladly go and get all the links to materials that will open your eyes. but for now try this one, professional pilots.................www.911pilotsfortruth.org

jimmer
7th September 2010, 22:19
hard, on-site evidence (from page 1 analysis).
please top this.

22662267226822692270

SPIRIT WOLF
7th September 2010, 22:28
LOL you call that hard on site evidence? Please, we are mature intelligent people, can see when a piece or two of contrived conveniently placed small anomalous debris is photographed. As for other debris, where are the 2 very very large engines? Made from titanium, would most certainly have survived, damaged but recognisable as 757 engines. You cannot as they were absent! Prove to me please that the plane hit the building.

SPIRIT WOLF
7th September 2010, 22:37
Imagine the 757 as a large aluminum tube, with heavy almost indestructable engines, its nose made from carbon materials. Even if a very experienced pilot managed to fly this tube at just above the ground and rammed it into the building, a very tough reinforced building, at lets be sensible and say 300mph, well below the impossible official line of over 500mph, it would totally crumble as it hit the building, certainly not gouge a 16ft hole and penetrate several layers of reinforced building.

Snowbird
8th September 2010, 02:56
snowbird, I am not the author of the ATS piece -- just a concerned citizen looking for the facts.
as for the destructor of the pentagon, what leads you to even contemplate a 'holographic plane'?
that just doesn't add up. where's your evidence? mixing syfi with reality doesn't help here.

you are the first to say, 'we don't want your kind here.'
thanks for that.

There were multiple eye witnesses at the Pentagon, several of whom saw completely different flying objects. One couple saw and heard a powerful jet fly so low over their vehicle that they both ducked while inside. When the thing had crossed over them and their vehicle and they realized, all within split seconds, that they were still alive, they looked up at the flying object. It was a solid white jet and was extremely powerful.

Other people saw an American Airlines Boeing 757. One woman in particular was sitting in her vehicle on the freeway in front of the Pentagon with a perfect viewpoint of the nose of the "757" as it hit the Pentagon. She said that what happened happened in slow motion. When the nose of the "757" hit the Pentagon, she said that it was as if the nose melted. She described a kind of etheric melting of this jet's nose. There was yet another man who clearly saw and heard a plain white jet that he said was the size of a private jet, not a commercial jet. One of the employees inside the Pentagon, who miraculously survived this horror, was in the area where the "thing" came into the Pentagon. There was no jet plane.

So, we have to ask ourselves, who is right? Which of these people saw what really happened? How much of what they saw was real or advanced technology that we cannot conceive of?

One thing that Kerry Cassidy has stated from her research into the black operations, otherwise known as the Shadow Government, is that this black ops has technology (of course at our expense) that is approximately 1,000 years ahead of the technology that we currently live with. This means, that holograms are common place for those who organize and direct false flag operations.

We also have to understand that the vast majority of court proceedings are won by circumstantial evidence and not direct evidence. Its the gathering of hoards and hoards of circumstantial evidence, which by the way, is what is taking place now and has been since 9/11/2001, that tells the whole story piece by piece by piece.

You needn't thank me for anything, whether positive or negative. I would never go so far as to attempt to tell a poster that they are not wanted on PA. This is because as soon as I post those words, I will be the one removed from PA.

You have every right to post your opinions. Your opinions do not have to agree with my own. This is what makes our world go around. The only thing that we are responsible for, is to learn how to all play together in the sandbox. :nod:

High-Ranking Army Officer - Missile Hit Pentagon

Radiation Expert Claims High-Radiation Readings
Near Pentagon After 9/11 Indicates
Depleted Uranium Used

Two high profile radiation experts concur Pentagon strike involved use of a missile. Also Geiger counter readings right after the attack shows high levels of radiation 12 miles away from Pentagon crash site.

A radiation expert and high-ranking Army Major, who once headed the military's depleted uranium project, both contend the Pentagon was hit by missile, not a commercial jetliner, adding high radiation readings after the strike indicate depleted uranium also may have been used.

http://www.rense.com/general67/radfdf.htm


http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/imagenes_sociopol/911_90_09.jpg

No jetliner could possibly make it through all of these concrete pods and come out an exit hole.

bennycog
8th September 2010, 03:52
we really need to get as much of our research.. and footage and analyisi on the mainstream tv.. i am sure not all of the msm reporters and investigators are under the thumb of the tptb..
we just need one reporter to take the story and the people can demand the rest..
because with programs like the one that was on last night, will just put everyone back to sleep who might have started to wake up to this whole mess.
never mentioned building 7 once. and praised bush and all the wa*&%ers involved. and since it was a 9 yr anniversary a lot of people around the world would have watched it.. it really hits that nerve with me that they can so easily take the people of this planet for a ride..

Zook
8th September 2010, 08:30
Hi, Jimmer

ok, I took a look.

here's where I'm coming from:
prove it factually and outright, without really crappy-distorted videos, wild holographic speculations and personal attacks.


Factually and outright? Sure ... and I'll throw in logically as well. Law of conservation of linear momentum. Fact of the known Universe. WTC7. Apply the LoCoLM. Upper mass colliding into lower mass (at any height in the building) must reduce the speed of the combined mass. This was not observed. For over six seconds after the penthouse collapsed into the roofline, the building fell at free fall speed. Take a stopwatch and time the roofline descending. Free fall speed. Not reduced speed. Ergo, lower mass was removed wherever it was present. Fact. Indeed, the collapse of WTC7 has all the classical features of a standard controlled demolition (central kink, ejected squibs, free fall speed, vertical collapse, etc.); many video clips of standard controlled demolition are available for comparative purposes. But are you waiting for a magic moment? Fair enough. Here is a video clip released by NIST.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XH_Lv_sevwY&feature=player_embedded

Two things. Note the chronometer ... it flows continuously. But note the penthouse on the roof. At 17:03:41:15 it`s in the video. By 17:03:41:18 it`s gone. You have to be quick with the pause button. May require several attempts to get the clip to stop where you want it to. But i got it to stop at both of the times shown above. Basically, in 3/100ths of a second, the penthouse disappears. Can you spell E-D-I-T-I-N-G. But why would NIST want to edit out the penthouse collapse sequence? To remove the sound of (planted) explosives going off? Who knows? You`d have to ask NIST. I just provide the magic moment of NIST`s deception (one of many).

So we have, using LoCoLM, established the incontrovertible fact of standard controlled demolition of WTC7. That logically excludes Osama bin Laden and points to Inside Job (at the WTC7 node of the attacks, and therefore, at all nodes of the attacks). I have thus proven it factually and outright, without really crappy-distorted videos, wild holographic speculations and personal attacks.


here's where others are coming from:
I know it's a was set-up and I will send endless hours back engineering data, fuzzy videos and reading only that which supports my view, to prove it.


One might easily say that you're projecting your conduct of evidence collection unto others.


this thread was to focus one aspect of the 911 questions, not the entire convoluted scenario.
rather than distorting the initial presentation (from page 1) with other disparate arguments, stick to the topic (where's the moderator?) and present the best
arguments that the passenger plane, flight 77, did not cause the damage to the pentagon.
so far, the rebuttals have all been speculation with a couple of 'eyewitnesses' disputing the on-the-ground evidence.
from the sources I've reviewed and posted, I believe the 'the hard, documented evidence' is convincing that flight 77 came home.

and did I say, I love you all...

Incredible. Simply incroyable! The establishment of Inside Job at one node of the attacks establishes the Inside Job at all nodes. Ergo, the Pentagon attack evidence is mostly relevant as corroborating evidence. If potential evidence collected at the Pentagon node does not corroborate with Inside Job (firmly established via WTC7 node) , then it is not evidence at all and must be discarded. To wit, a discussion of WTC7 is topical with this thread because it lays the groundwork for corroborating evidence. The corroborating evidence at the Pentagon node is found not in holographic planes, suppositions, vague videos, or personal attacks ... but in the unimpeachable testimonies of a dozen or so witnesses who all agree with you, Jimmer, in stating that a jetliner crashed into the Pentagon, but who all also place the jetliner to the Northside of the Citgo gas station. That scuttles the official story which cites downed light poles as evidence that the offending aircraft approached the Pentagon from the Southside of Citgo. But wait, I gave you more; for I also discredited your witness, Mike Walter, for his contradictory accounts of jetliner impact.

Again, I entreat you to abandon your defense of the indefensible. Failing that, you`re messing with your own integrity and no one else can be blamed for that.


Cheers
Uncle Zook

Dale
9th September 2010, 02:53
Okay, I thought I wouldn't end up in this discussion again, but here I am.

In regards to the conventional theory that a Boeing 757, specifically Flight 77, flew into the Pentagon; I must say, there are some slight problems.

1) A Boeing 757, flying at the official speed given, traveling low enough from the ground to damage lamp posts; could not, physically, do so. The lowest a plane in these circumstances could get would likely be 50 feet, under the control of an expert pilot.

2) Witnesses of the event all describe different things. Many do describe a Boeing 757, and an explosion; but can we prove a direct relation just because of the correlation? Many witnesses also described all sorts of jets, ranging in size; as well as other objects that go unnamed.

3) The taxi cab driver who made the famous claim that the Boeing 757 flew directly above his cab, knocking down street lamps in the process, has been found lying about his story as well as denying it.

4) The aerobatic moves that the jet supposedly made, including the turns, twists, and odd maneuvers; are nearly impossible for seasoned pilots to attempt under ideal circumstances.

5) All of the alleged hijackers on the morning of September the 11th were unreasonably ill-experienced. They could hardly manage a Cessna. Boeing 757's are an entirely different plane; highly difficult to manage, let alone perform incredible maneuvers at high rates of speed under very high G-Forces.

6) Evidence recalled by witnesses also puts the plane at a more northern approach; skewering the official report of the event.

I don't have time to link all of these points with their respective sources, but I welcome you all to continue with your research. There are many, many, many more in which I've forgotten to include, it's getting late here :p

Now, I heard an interesting story about the 9/11 events from someone who might know a bit about the day. He had told me that the plan was to use four, real Boeing jets to hit four targets. These jets were to be remotely operated. Two of the jets hit their targets; the twin towers. The collapse of several buildings in that area were largely in part due to hidden explosives installed the months prior under the guise of maintenance work.

One of the jets lost control over the state of Pennsylvania, and was consequently allowed to be shot down.

During a last minute review of the operation, sometime in the days prior to, it was noted that the Boeing 757 that was to hit the Pentagon could not fly at an altitude and speed adequate to make the damage needed. It was physically impossible. It was then decided that the Boeing 757 would fly as low as possible over the Pentagon while a smaller projectile did the actual damage. A sleight of hand trick. The Boeing 757 would then be flown out toward the ocean for an eminent plunging into the water.

From what it sounded like, the 9/11 attacks were planned much in advance; but whichever group was planning it, made some mistakes and needed to go through and correct them at the last minute. The plan didn't work as perfectly as imagined, being roughly a third of Americans now have doubts on the official 9/11 story; but it apparently convinced the other two thirds.

Okay, that's all for now. Good night!

Fredkc
9th September 2010, 04:37
Fred, being off-topic once again.

Imagine a group of incredibly evil people:
Come in the backyard and step on your pet turtle, on the way in.
Then murder family members to emotionally traumatize you.
Then kidnap other sons and daughters sending them to die on foreign land, over a lie.
Then basically destroy what little was left of the government we owned, in favor of one that owns us.
Then murdered between 300K and 1 Mil. people who never did a thing to us.
Then made at least 4-5 million of them homeless.
Then drove our economy into a ditch, while making billions for their friends.And a group of very sincere, and passionate people, ignore everything but the turtle.

Ten years later they are still sniffing around, trying to find footprints on the turtle's back.
Even though we know who did all the rest.
Even though nothing will bring that turtle back to life.
Even though all of the rest continues, even while I type this.

You know what they call that, when the folk who did all this meet one another?

A "Clean Getaway".
Fred

SPIRIT WOLF
9th September 2010, 14:09
I know of a group of people, with a powerful backup whom have sufficient evidence to bring certain individuals, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice to book, to be prosecuted for crimes committed on September 11th 2001. But they face huge problems in bringing these individuals to court. The money is available, the legal staff are available, but the US administration would bend over backwards to stop such court action. Fred, we are not overlooking anything, we just have hands tied. The above quoted individuals are smirking in our faces and telling us we can do nothing about it, and we can't.

Agape
9th September 2010, 15:14
People are feeding on anothers grief like vultures , from times immemorial, and spend energy on where is nothing to achieve. They never learn but keep teaching others on how the world should be, misusing each other.
People are dying all around the world, everyday, have you noticed ? Do you celebrate also suicide attacks in Baghdad and Mumbai, or Chechnia or plane crashes all around the world killing thousands each year or are those others less important.
You who consider yourself good , and special and think of having no equals, do you think that you would be the right to rule the world , full of those poor, unequal and unspecial ?

People have mistakes. That's why they're people. They have obsessions too and some even have love.

But look to your own heart first before you judge . For the truth and the deception are residing there in embrace.


:angel:

SPIRIT WOLF
9th September 2010, 17:02
I'm saddened by this World daily, the poverty, the injustices, the total unfairness and inequality of it all. I care a great deal. I'm moved when I see people being hurt, killed, made homeless, I do have a sensitive side within this cold exterior. One being cannot change the ways of this World, only unity of the masses can.

Zook
9th September 2010, 17:16
Hi Agape,


People are feeding on anothers grief like vultures , from times immemorial, and spend energy on where is nothing to achieve. They never learn but keep teaching others on how the world should be, misusing each other.


With all due respect, the Hindu philosophical concepts of Sathyam (Truth), Nyayam (Fairness), and Dharmam (Justice) are not the memes of vultures. They are three guiding principles that shine light on the journey of the spiritual man. If truth is being assailed, it's the duty of the journeying man to defend it. Burying the brain in the gregarious grains of the foamy terrain ... is the duty of the proverbial ostrich. If you prefer being afraid, then be afraid. But please, permit those of us who are trying to defend the truth and find enlightenment, the courtesy of an unobstructed journey.




People are dying all around the world, everyday, have you noticed ? Do you celebrate also suicide attacks in Baghdad and Mumbai, or Chechnia or plane crashes all around the world killing thousands each year or are those others less important.


Why are people dying all around the world, everyday? Are they dying primarily because of natural factors; or primarily due to unnatural orchestration? Why are you shifting focus away from the root cause or causes and the root criminal or criminals? Why do you equate investigation with celebration of morbidity?




You who consider yourself good , and special and think of having no equals, do you think that you would be the right to rule the world , full of those poor, unequal and unspecial ?


Why are you investing this discussion with negative energy and your own personal prejudices? Has anyone here who claims to be genuinely pursuing truth, made parallel claims of infallibility, insurmountability, divine rights royalty, or guardianship?




People have mistakes. That's why they're people. They have obsessions too and some even have love.

But look to your own heart first before you judge . For the truth and the deception are residing there in embrace.


:angel:

It should be pointed here that while all humans have truth and deception as potentialities within their heart; we do not all possess the same ratio. Some human hearts have a Truth/Deception ratio (or T/D) of 1; others have this ratio equal to 1000; still others have it at 0.001. I'd like to think my own T/D is a teraunit ... but if I was to be honest with myself, I would have to acknowledge its closer proximity to unity.


Cheers
Uncle Zook

jimmer
9th September 2010, 19:09
this thread topic certainly upset the hornet nest.

big picture, the simplest explanation gets closest to the truth.

Occam's razor (or Ockham's razor) is the principle that "entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity."
The popular interpretation of this principle is that the simplest explanation is usually the correct one.
Simplest is not defined by the time or number of words it takes to express the theory;
"[simplest] is really referring to the theory with the fewest new assumptions."

and finally, in my life I try to make a difference with things I have some control of.
that means work at levels that I can directly participate, improve, prosper, build upon and impact.
for those vast areas that are beyond my control (NWO, Bilderbergs, etc.),
I work at the grassroots to promote self-reliance, responsibility, curiosity, education -- staying real.
to me, that means being politically aware, voting, participating locally,
joining / supporting groups of like minding individuals that I respect --
all while keeping balanced, positive and determined (playing golf when possible).

this is my last entry on this thread and thanks for participating.
see you around the forum. jimmer

Zook
9th September 2010, 20:13
Hi Jimmer,



this thread topic certainly upset the hornet nest.
big picture, the simplest explanation gets closest to the truth.

Occam's razor (or Ockham's razor) is the principle that "entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity." The popular interpretation of this principle is that the simplest explanation is usually the correct one. Simplest is not defined by the time or number of words it takes to express the theory; "[simplest] is really referring to the theory with the fewest new assumptions."

You're abusing Occam's Razor. How the razor actually cuts is like this: if two valid explanations exist for the same observed phenomena, then the simplest explanation is closest to the truth. Id est, facts, logic, ratiocination, etc. ... are still required to measure the initial validity of each explanation, e.g. before they can be compared with each other.



and finally, in my life i try to make a difference with things I have some control of.
that means work at levels that I can directly participate, improve, prosper and build upon.
and for those vast areas that are beyond my control (NWO, Bilderbergs, etc.), work at the grassroots to promote self reliance, investigation, finding truth from the chaff and always stay aware. that means being politically aware, voting, participating locally, joining / supporting groups of like minding individuals and keeping mentally founded. if that sounds two dimensional, so be it. this is my last entry on this thread.

Forgive me, but it's not cricket if, after making a claim and having the claim rejected by the factual evidence, you retreat from the discussion prior to withdrawing that claim or after attempting to whittle the truth further with Occam's Razor.


Cheers
Uncle Zook

SPIRIT WOLF
9th September 2010, 21:31
Perhaps he has seen the logic that by attempting to sway intelligent reasoning from illogical media and official arm twisting, he sees we are correct in our various assertions, so he is bowing out gracefully from the arena, knowing he cannot win.

Zook
10th September 2010, 03:06
Hi Spirit Wolf,


Perhaps he has seen the logic that by attempting to sway intelligent reasoning from illogical media and official arm twisting, he sees we are correct in our various assertions, so he is bowing out gracefully from the arena, knowing he cannot win.

Here's hoping that's the case. Indeed, if we apply Occam's blade to the Pentagon node, there's the government explanation that places the putative jetliner on the Southside of Citgo, but this explanation is invalidated by the Northside Citgo witnesses, none of whom are asked to recollect anything more complex than which side of the station the jetliner flew; and all of them recollecting the same thing. Moreover, all of them believe that the jetliner crashed into the Pentagon. This can only mean that the alleged Southside flight path is not true and that the Inside Jobber's legerdemain worked precisely as intended.

With the government's explanation forced into implausibility, Occam's slicer tells us to proceed to the plausible explanations (whatever their number) and to pick the simplest one.


Cheers
Uncle Zook

Zook
10th September 2010, 05:26
Hi Fred,


Fred, being off-topic once again.

Imagine a group of incredibly evil people:
Come in the backyard and step on your pet turtle, on the way in.
Then murder family members to emotionally traumatize you.
Then kidnap other sons and daughters sending them to die on foreign land, over a lie.
Then basically destroy what little was left of the government we owned, in favor of one that owns us.
Then murdered between 300K and 1 Mil. people who never did a thing to us.
Then made at least 4-5 million of them homeless.
Then drove our economy into a ditch, while making billions for their friends.

And a group of very sincere, and passionate people, ignore everything but the turtle.

Ten years later they are still sniffing around, trying to find footprints on the turtle's back.
Even though we know who did all the rest.
Even though nothing will bring that turtle back to life.
Even though all of the rest continues, even while I type this.

You know what they call that, when the folk who did all this meet one another?

A "Clean Getaway".
Fred

Understand that 35lbs of metaphorical U-233 is required to attain critical mass.

Imagine a factory where metaphorical uranium ore is being enriched.
Imagine you have 20lbs.
Imagine you are negotiating for 5 more pounds.
Imagine you receive 3.
Imagine several years passing by.
Imagine you get your hands on 6 more pounds.
Imagine two more years passing by.
Imagine you scrape together 3 more pounds.
Imagine that you are now 2lbs away from manufacturing a metaphorical nuclear device that has the potential to obliterate a power structure that:
kills pet turtles; murders family members; kidnaps sons and daughters and sends them to die on foreign lands over a lie; destroys the government of the people, by the people, for the people, and replaces it with one that owns them; murders 300-1000K other people that never did a thing to warrant it; makes approx. 4000-5000K of the other people homeless; drives the domestic economy into the ditch while simultaneously looting the domestic coffers ...

Now imagine a well-meaning manager in the factory, even yourself perhaps, rolling in a tray of donuts and hot coffee for the workers. Imagine the tray accidentally knocking over an ashtray into a nearby wastebasket stuffed with paper. Imagine a burning cigarette resting on the ashtray just before it falls into the wastebasket. Imagine the local six o'clock news reporting a devastating fire at the local enrichment factory. Imagine good news: all the workers got out safely. Imagine - for the sake of metaphor - that all the U-233 was destroyed. Imagine the spectre of another two decades under the existing power structure. Imagine going around begging for private monies so that you may begin another enrichment factory. Imagine receiving a donation of 2lbs of U-233 to get the ball rolling.

You now only have 33 lbs to go before critical mass and an opportunity to detonate the long anticipated metaphorical nuclear device and save all of humanity! Well done ... good show!


Cheers
Uncle Zook

Snowbird
10th September 2010, 11:54
People are feeding on anothers grief like vultures , from times immemorial, and spend energy on where is nothing to achieve. They never learn but keep teaching others on how the world should be, misusing each other.
People are dying all around the world, everyday, have you noticed ? Do you celebrate also suicide attacks in Baghdad and Mumbai, or Chechnia or plane crashes all around the world killing thousands each year or are those others less important.
You who consider yourself good , and special and think of having no equals, do you think that you would be the right to rule the world , full of those poor, unequal and unspecial ?

People have mistakes. That's why they're people. They have obsessions too and some even have love.

But look to your own heart first before you judge . For the truth and the deception are residing there in embrace.


:angel:

Agape, 9/11 was a perpetrated massive and heinous action against the people of the U.S. which is where I live, and against innocent people from Iraq. After the so called planes were said to have been piloted by so called enemies, the people of the U.S. stood with the then, so called president, against the so called enemies and supported the start of a so called war against these so called enemies in a land that had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11. It took a small minority a while to start to put the pieces together, but as time has passed, the intellect and hearts of people from around the world began to come forth and share those pieces with each other. This massive action has become the catalyst that has brought these people from around the world together....we now understand the basic truths about not only 9/11, but truths that have been purposely hidden away from the people of this world for thousands of years.

Justice is real and is desperately needed in the U.S. where this heinous action was planned and carried out by several of the world's governments. The circumstantial evidence has been gathered by people all around the globe. There is a court somewhere in the U.S. that will allow this evidence to be brought forth and once a conviction is brought forth, because of this one heinous action, false flags will cease to occur. With this conviction, the sleeping people will be forced to awaken to what is and has, transpired around them for thousands of years. They will be forced to wake up.

THIS, is the very reason that our government will not allow this court proceeding. THIS, is the very reason why we continue to concentrate on one heinous false flag operation that has killed directly or indirectly, hundreds of thousands of people, our own included.

Operator
10th September 2010, 13:53
[COLOR="#00bfff"]Agape, 9/11 was a perpetrated massive and heinous action against the people of the U.S. which is where I live, and against innocent people from Iraq.

I think it's safe to expand on that and say it was against the populous of the world. Look at the documentary in this thread: http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?5389-A-documentary-more-powerful-than-Loose-Change-...-blows-the-lid-off-the-Inside-Job!

What I am still amazed about is ... if citizens can easily sort out that the world was deceived big time that day how come not a single government in this world with all their agencies etc. stood up
against this form of state terrorism ? It also shows that e.g. the United Nations is useless because the original reason of it's existence is to question malpractice and solve these situations.

It's not the attacks that scare me ... but the lack of follow up by any nation and/or lack of people getting organized to stand up against this.

Agape
10th September 2010, 14:56
Agape, 9/11 was a perpetrated massive and heinous action against the people of the U.S. which is where I live, and against innocent people from Iraq. After the so called planes were said to have been piloted by so called enemies, the people of the U.S. stood with the then, so called president, against the so called enemies and supported the start of a so called war against these so called enemies in a land that had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11. It took a small minority a while to start to put the pieces together, but as time has passed, the intellect and hearts of people from around the world began to come forth and share those pieces with each other. This massive action has become the catalyst that has brought these people from around the world together....we now understand the basic truths about not only 9/11, but truths that have been purposely hidden away from the people of this world for thousands of years.

Justice is real and is desperately needed in the U.S. where this heinous action was planned and carried out by several of the world's governments. The circumstantial evidence has been gathered by people all around the globe. There is a court somewhere in the U.S. that will allow this evidence to be brought forth and once a conviction is brought forth, because of this one heinous action, false flags will cease to occur. With this conviction, the sleeping people will be forced to awaken to what is and has, transpired around them for thousands of years. They will be forced to wake up.

THIS, is the very reason that our government will not allow this court proceeding. THIS, is the very reason why we continue to concentrate on one heinous false flag operation that has killed directly or indirectly, hundreds of thousands of people, our own included.


No doubt it was and I can only pass late condolences over to you and few scattered thoughts. Questions still remain, hanging in the air, as now as then...

I remember the day quite well , I was in Dharamsala , 1800m/above sea level and though I never watched TV that time , that day we all knew about it, some local shops and restaurants had TV sets on and I just stood there in awe and could not believe my eyes this is for real,
just like everyone else.
It still brings tears to my eyes and heart and kind of shock that US were attacked. One could well imagine it'd mean the beginning of next world war. Which was not far from the truth because as you've pointed out and what went on in Iraq , one and half year later, I saw on TV as well,
that time in Bodhgaya 2003, we had small tv set in reception office and BBC kept broadcasting the news from Iraq, burning oil rigs for 24 hours a day.

There were prayers held in the temple for the victims . My immediate fear was ''who did it, and will they start a war''. It felt to be an attack. It was strongly dependent on US government how they respond.
If that was the case, it could have turned really bad for everyone , imagine Iraq or any other country amasing sufficent number nuclear weapons to start a war that time ( and sacrificing their own people for the sake of 'holy war' ) . The worst scenario one would imagine and fortunatelly enough it did not happen.

My next immediate impression before I could read newspapers in following few days was exactly about what is being discussed here : the attack happened from inside not outside of US.
Knowing there are forces in your own country that are always against your own government ( like every other perhaps ) but the situation of US and its freedom thinking and opinionated population is different from other countries I know about.
Your people were also permitted to hold weapons for their own defense. It's not the case everywhere .
But, knowing the number of people in America who hold very strong opinions against every standing government of theirs, why because you are strong and you are many and people feel the need to express their own freedoms and views on life in many different ways,
and considering many of those might be clue head figures working in industry, military or politics and research etc.,
lots of money and power being in private sector and shared among those individuals who are not exactly either 'democratic' or strictly socially oriented as they'd prefer to take the control and power to their own hands,
one can easily imagine that such attacks could be easily 'sponsored' and orchestrated by them.

And, it'd be useless speculation on my side ( or anyones perhaps..) as who were 'those people' because it's only too easy to make the most visible ones and names scapegoats,
not too forget that those real criminals with evil intents have their agenda and names well covered and don't allow the suspicion about them to arise.


At the same time, I believe that AlQuida ( sorry I forgot how to spell them lol ) admitted to be behind those attacks ( now I'm aware that speculation goes they were payed to say so..)

I'm not trying to side anyone for purpose because crimes against humanity committed by terrorist organisations , such as AlQuieda and others are still happening and they are not 'innocent little chicks' , they are people indoctrined with strong religious sort of beliefs and anti-US and anti-everyone else moods since childhood and their utmost faith is the very same fanaticism that allowed nazism to flourish in Europe at the beginning of last century,
they do believe in themselves and in taking power over the world by force.

So if I'm to place my bets somewhere I'd imagine the event being co-orchestrated by both parties and well covered those with true responsibility, I imagine it was to stand for a warning.
I also believe that there were several possible post scenarios to happen and there was more agreement from the Arab world , it could well result in 'holy war' against all of us, for whatever sake.

So, I think, the world needs to stand vigile, and refrain from throwing the responsibility on single side because wars happen as result of long lasting power tensions that we know are real in this world, to this day,
and it's not again just two three countries taking part , there is China, Korea, Israel, Islamic countries, and everyone else plotting their agendas and amasing military power.


Praying for peace

:angel:

bennycog
11th September 2010, 06:31
I know of a group of people, with a powerful backup whom have sufficient evidence to bring certain individuals, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice to book, to be prosecuted for crimes committed on September 11th 2001. But they face huge problems in bringing these individuals to court. The money is available, the legal staff are available, but the US administration would bend over backwards to stop such court action. Fred, we are not overlooking anything, we just have hands tied. The above quoted individuals are smirking in our faces and telling us we can do nothing about it, and we can't.

would this stop them seeing another country to help get all the evidence out to the people of the world.. a country that is not going to ridicule the people of the US but embrace the truth that will be givin forth and help them create the country it once was..

Swami
11th September 2010, 10:47
See the "boeing" hit the Pentagon...

http://s60.radikal.ru/i169/1003/f7/5dbc426c4403.gif

http://bigwobble.myfreeforum.org/about1082.html

SPIRIT WOLF
11th September 2010, 14:13
Nice try, typical example of CGI. If that were for real the US authorities would have paraded that up and down the country, in fact it would have made global news. Its a clever put up. Next.........

Agape
11th September 2010, 16:18
See the "boeing" hit the Pentagon...


http://bigwobble.myfreeforum.org/about1082.html

It looks like arabic youtube , from right to left ? Who did it..

Swami
11th September 2010, 16:25
It looks like arabic youtube , from right to left ? Who did it..

Ask the guy who posted it....

Fredkc
11th September 2010, 16:34
Curioser yet, though all the text is mirrored the view of the building is not.

"Ask the guy who posted it...."

ok, Swami, "It looks like arabic youtube , from right to left ? Who did it ?" ;)

SPIRIT WOLF
11th September 2010, 19:19
would this stop them seeing another country to help get all the evidence out to the people of the world.. a country that is not going to ridicule the people of the US but embrace the truth that will be givin forth and help them create the country it once was..

Whom would be brave enough to face the wrath of the US?

TigaHawk
11th September 2010, 21:48
If someone has not posted this allready....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5FhQc-LJ-o&feature=fvw



This alone, to me says 911 needs to be investigated again, by indipendant investigators from different countries, and the fact alot of the origional witnesses "comitted suicide" and some, generaly shortly before a court date where they were fighting to try and reveal evidence or the such in court about 911.

One person was interview'd by Alex jones 2 weeks before the court date, he deliberately asked her if she had any suicidal thoughts, she replied iwth hell no, it was her full intention to battle this out in court for the trouth to be revealed. She "comitted suicide" 2 days before the court date. Generaly females dont hang themselves either, they go for a... more gentle? way out, ie pill overdose or cutting the wrist.


It would be very interesting to hear now, if any of the people interviewed in teh video i posted, recently "comitted suicide" or died a suspicious death.


If they have, and further investigations prove more witnesses that testified against what the MSM/Government reports said got killed also.... hell im stupid for asking this but...... What does a country do when it becomes blatantly obvious that the people running it are lying to the people and killing the people who try to expose it?

Is there any type of redundancy plan in place for a situation like this?


The only thing i can see is a revolt/uprising against the government, would the military shoot their own people? would they be able to see through the lies? When the MSM is in kahoots with the government how are the people going to coordinate? Especialy when they can kill communications, and the internet.


:(

wynderer
11th September 2010, 22:03
today being 9/11 -- i made the mistake of watching a video of the Towers being hit -- i know, Agape, that worse things have happened, are happening, & will happen -- but -- it's the people who leaped from the furnace behind them & held hands on the way down -- such love & courage -- it always makes me cry as i am crying now

those responsible for such deaths -- a quote for them:
"Though the mills of God grind slowly, yet they grind exceeding small;
Though with patience He stands waiting, with exactness grinds He all"
- Friedrich Von Logau

what goes around, comes around, sooner or later

SPIRIT WOLF
11th September 2010, 22:21
The UK has been showing various docs at night, mostly old stuff, declaring the official line, sinking it deeper into the minds of sheeple whom swallow it completely

TigaHawk
12th September 2010, 05:23
The UK has been showing various docs at night, mostly old stuff, declaring the official line, sinking it deeper into the minds of sheeple whom swallow it completely

I know, they aired a doco recently in Australia. Asked my work colleagues what they thought about 9/11, thye sya without a doubt it was Bin Laden, and say the US wouldent want to go to war or make a false flag event beacuse war costs so much money and they're in alot of debt because of it :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Its kinda sad.

Ixopoborn
12th September 2010, 09:40
The UK has been showing various docs at night, mostly old stuff, declaring the official line, sinking it deeper into the minds of sheeple whom swallow it completely


I know, they aired a doco recently in Australia. Asked my work colleagues what they thought about 9/11, thye sya without a doubt it was Bin Laden, and say the US wouldent want to go to war or make a false flag event beacuse war costs so much money and they're in alot of debt because of it :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Its kinda sad.

Sad indeed. My personal experience is very similar. Very sad, very sad.

wynderer
12th September 2010, 09:44
Standing Army
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdd7d37G17U

this documentary, about my country's military bases in 716 [edit -- oops! i think it must have been 716 bases] countries in this world -- this is why i think getting out the truth about 9/11 is so important -- because at the present time, the USA is THE military power in the world, the great empire , & thus the major military power behind the NWO

the truth about 9/11 is thus not a small truth about one gov'ts war on its citizens -- gov'ts all over the world do that on a regular basis -- it's the truth about a huge step in the NWO getting control over the lives & minds of people all over the world --

jaybee
12th September 2010, 11:43
I'll tell you what is really sad......that the 9/11 Inside Job conspiracy could itself be a

PSYOPS job...???? Driven by 'agents' and catching genuine 'truthseekers' in the net of

deception?

This quote is from a thread on GLP.....

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message446234/pg1




Know this, that anyone who believes the 911 conspiracy theories has tagged themselves as "handled" and "contained". This means that you have been successfully diverted and neutralized. You believe the psyops mind control program about 911, and have stopped looking for any other answers to the day that changed the world.


Strong words? But something to be considered.


My own views on the Pentagon 9/11...have changed after looking into it more closely...

And I now think that the Pentagon was made to look as if an airliner crashed into it..
to cover up the shooting down of flight 77 over the Atlantic...???

NOT because the whole of 9/11 was an 'inside job'...but because flight 77 was hijacked
and HAD to be dealt with....

bennycog
12th September 2010, 14:49
Whom would be brave enough to face the wrath of the US?

For my childrens future i will gladly put my hand up to be part of facing the wrath of not the US but the so called controllers..
Are we not getting told again and again that if we live with fear we will never ascend, or move into the new age or be confronted by our ET friends or be in the right vibration..

bennycog

Zook
12th September 2010, 14:59
Hi Mother Jayne,


I'll tell you what is really sad......that the 9/11 Inside Job conspiracy could itself be a PSYOPS job...???? Driven by 'agents' and catching genuine 'truthseekers' in the net of
deception?


I've always wondered about this myself. In the end, I made the decision that no fear is worth comprising one's eternal soul. If you don't stand behind the truth in this lifetime, you'll pay for it in another. My cosmic sense overriding my terranean sense, if you will.





This quote is from a thread on GLP.....

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message446234/pg1




I just skimmed through the GLP message. The author has no knowledge of elementary physics if he thinks that the conservation of linear momentum would allow near free fall speed of WTC7 in the absence of controlled demolition, and he must think that to believe that 9/11/2001 was not an Inside Job. And/Or the author has no research skills because not only is there massive amounts of physical evidence that vectors into a determination of Inside Job; but a wide basket of circumstantial evidence. E.g. put options on American Airlines (Buzzy Krongaard); "Project for a New American Century" (PNAC) excerpts that suggest the need for a catalyzing event to usher in the age of full spectrum dominance by the military industrial complex; Five Dancing Israelis; Ptech; Odigo; Urban Moving Systems; lack of fighter jet deployment after the first putative plane had hit WTC1; Norman Mineta's testimony about Cheney monitoring the Boeing jetliner as it flew towards the Pentagon; Pakistan ISI - a puppet intelligence agency of the CIA - forwarding $100,000 to Mohammed Atta one of the alleged hijackers (this was probably a false flag money transfer to prop up the neoArabian tale of Osama bin Laden, nineteen Saudi blackhearts, boxcutters, and a cave that opens to a call for sesame); Rumsfeld's announcement on September 10, 2001 that some 2.3 trillions could not be accounted for in the Pentagon's coffers and the coincidental result of the Pentagon missile attacking the particular wing of the Pentagon that housed the accounting offices (I mean, ask yourself this, if an independent terrorist with minimal flying skills was aiming a Boeing at a target, would he aim for the center of the target where a hit would have some chance of success ... or a side of the target where a miss would be more likely?); Larry Silverstein's suspicious purchase of the twin towers in the months leading up to the attacks (googlesearch 'asbestos, twin towers, and Larry Silverstein'); his infamous "pull" statement; and his attempt to collect twice the insurance money by having his lawyers argue that the twin tower attacks were two separate events; Operation Northwoods; Marvin Bush's connection to Securacom, the security agency implicated in several nodes of the attacks; the fact that some of the alleged terror pilots being alive after September 11, 2001; etc. etc. etc. And/Or the author is a disinformation stooge (and one can find literally thousands of these gutless beings) that has opted for fear, fortune and fool's fame over the defense of truth.



Strong words? But something to be considered.


Disinformation is a mishmash of weak words strung together to frighten and manipulate the masses. Their weakness is exposed by shedding light on the truth. The only consideration for disinformation and their decorated mules ... is the dustbin.



My own views on the Pentagon 9/11...have changed after looking into it more closely...
And I now think that the Pentagon was made to look as if an airliner crashed into it.. to cover up the shooting down of flight 77 over the Atlantic...???

NOT because the whole of 9/11 was an 'inside job'...but because flight 77 was hijacked
and HAD to be dealt with....

The big hole in that logic is that the physical and circumstantial evidence at all attack nodes prove government planning and execution. A smaller hole, but still a hole, is this ... if we assume for a nanosecond that you are correct - no, make that a femtosecond - namely, that the government overrode "Houdini Hani" (Hanjour)'s control with remote technology, then why not steer the Boeing jetliner towards the Atlantic when it was some 50 miles out (as per Norman Mineta's testimony of Cheney's orders) ... why have the Boeing come within several feet of the Pentagon rooftop at all for the flyover? Or why have a missile fired into the accounting offices of the Pentagon? And why even shoot any of the Boeings? Why not have them land somewhere where Swat units would be in place to handle a hot hijacking situation?

It just doesn't make logical sense, Mother Jayne. I mean, you'd really have to dull Occam's razor to find any shred of truth in the official account. But I`m glad that you accept the Northside Citgo approach testimony. That`s a key piece of the puzzle.


Cheers
Uncle Zook

jaybee
12th September 2010, 17:02
Hi Mother Jayne,

Hi Uncle Zook......:p


I just skimmed through the GLP message. The author has no knowledge of elementary physics if he thinks that the conservation of linear momentum would allow near free fall speed of WTC7 in the absence of controlled demolition, and he must think that to believe that 9/11/2001 was not an Inside Job.

Maybe WTC 7 was badly damaged and brought down with a controlled demolition...? I don't have
a problem with that...if that is the case. Why it would be kept secret is a seperate issue...but
doesn't in itself point to an overall 'inside job'.




And/Or the author has no research skills because not only is there massive amounts of physical evidence that vectors into a determination of Inside Job; but a wide basket of circumstantial evidence. E.g. put options on American Airlines (Buzzy Krongaard); "Project for a New American Century" (PNAC) excerpts that suggest the need for a catalyzing event to usher in the age of full spectrum dominance by the military industrial complex; Five Dancing Israelis; Ptech; Odigo; Urban Moving Systems; lack of fighter jet deployment after the first putative plane had hit WTC1; Norman Mineta's testimony about Cheney monitoring the Boeing jetliner as it flew towards the Pentagon; Pakistan ISI - a puppet intelligence agency of the CIA - forwarding $100,000 to Mohammed Atta one of the alleged hijackers (this was probably a false flag money transfer to prop up the neoArabian tale of Osama bin Laden, nineteen Saudi blackhearts, boxcutters, and a cave that opens to a call for sesame); Rumsfeld's announcement on September 10, 2001 that some 2.3 trillions could not be accounted for in the Pentagon's coffers and the coincidental result of the Pentagon missile attacking the particular wing of the Pentagon that housed the accounting offices (I mean, ask yourself this, if an independent terrorist with minimal flying skills was aiming a Boeing at a target, would he aim for the center of the target where a hit would have some chance of success ... or a side of the target where a miss would be more likely?); Larry Silverstein's suspicious purchase of the twin towers in the months leading up to the attacks (googlesearch 'asbestos, twin towers, and Larry Silverstein'); his infamous "pull" statement; and his attempt to collect twice the insurance money by having his lawyers argue that the twin tower attacks were two separate events; Operation Northwoods; Marvin Bush's connection to Securacom, the security agency implicated in several nodes of the attacks; the fact that some of the alleged terror pilots being alive after September 11, 2001; etc. etc. etc.

Phew.....ok.......IMO....all the things above could...with time.....LOTS of time...be explained away or put down to greed, misinfo, confusion..including some of the alleged hijackers being alive.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I think 7 of the 19 are said to be alive but there's stuff about stolen
passports?



The big hole in that logic is that the physical and circumstantial evidence at all attack nodes prove government planning and execution. A smaller hole, but still a hole, is this ... if we assume for a nanosecond that you are correct - no, make that a femtosecond - namely, that the government overrode "Houdini Hani" (Hanjour)'s control with remote technology, then why not steer the Boeing jetliner towards the Atlantic when it was some 50 miles out (as per Norman Mineta's testimony of Cheney's orders) ... why have the Boeing come within several feet of the Pentagon rooftop at all for the flyover?

Flight 77 might not have got that near to the Pentagon....another passenger jet could have
flown over around the time of the 'explosion'......(see Ahkanaten's post in your thread)



Or why have a missile fired into the accounting offices of the Pentagon?

That MAY have been opportunist? Or it might have copped it because of it being in the vacinity
of the mainly unoccupied area?



And why even shoot any of the Boeings? Why not have them land somewhere where Swat units would be in place to handle a hot hijacking situation?

Now...this is a point that I have thought about...re my theory. And it DOES bother me.

But....I'm thinking that......in the panic and confusion...and time constraints during what ammounts to a war situation...when the military didn't know what was coming next....
and hadn't got a complete handle on the situation....it was probably decided to go with
'war' protocol...and shoot them down...rather than enter into a protracted hijack situation
during a time of attack......when there was uncertainty about the extent of the attack.

I don't know how easy it is to land an airliner with remote control?

That's the best I can do, for now, with the points you've made.

I'm still sticking with my theory.

:thumb:


for anyone who might be vaguely interested in my 'theory'.........it's in post 5 in the thread linked to below.....:)



http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?5389-A-documentary-more-powerful-than-Loose-Change-...-blows-the-lid-off-the-Inside-Job!

SPIRIT WOLF
12th September 2010, 21:29
Remote controlled planes is a subject all by itself. But do know they have very successfully flown large planes via remote control since the 1970's. Several docs have been produced and shown on tv over the years. These days its simple as ABC to take off, fly and land anything with wings.

Ahkenaten
12th September 2010, 21:54
Concerning the events at the Pentagon on 9.11.01, I have gone back into my notes and dug up the following: on the morning of September 11, 2001, a C130H piloted by a Lt. Col. Steve O'Brien was dispatched to reconnoiter an incoming unidentified plane into the DC airspace. He got a visual ID on the plane (he said it was a 757) and informed the authorities. He followed the plane and reported back that it had "crashed into the Pentagon." In one of the many strange coincidences that occurred on that day, the very same plane was dispatched to Shanksville, PA where it reported that it had seen black smoke where a plane had crashed into the ground. The plane was ID'd at both sites by witnesses on the ground. My personal theory is that this plane provided the fog and confusion under which a missile was launched at the Pentagon building. It also provides a link between segments of the narrative that day, in a connect the dots exercise pointing to a planned and orchestrated event that could not possibly have been undertaken, as we are told we must believe, by a bunch of guys in turbans in a cave somewhere in Afghanistan using a laptop hooked up to a satellite phone. Just a thought. The dramatic presence of a big slow-moving plane like the C130H also cemented itself in witnesses' minds, adding plausibility to the official story that a big jet ha crashed into the bldg.

Snowbird
12th September 2010, 23:59
Hi Uncle Zook......:p

Maybe WTC 7 was badly damaged and brought down with a controlled demolition...? I don't have
a problem with that...if that is the case. Why it would be kept secret is a seperate issue...but
doesn't in itself point to an overall 'inside job'.

Phew.....ok.......IMO....all the things above could...with time.....LOTS of time...be explained away or put down to greed, misinfo, confusion..including some of the alleged hijackers being alive.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I think 7 of the 19 are said to be alive but there's stuff about stolen
passports?

Flight 77 might not have got that near to the Pentagon....another passenger jet could have
flown over around the time of the 'explosion'......(see Ahkanaten's post in your thread)

That MAY have been opportunist? Or it might have copped it because of it being in the vacinity
of the mainly unoccupied area?

Now...this is a point that I have thought about...re my theory. And it DOES bother me.

But....I'm thinking that......in the panic and confusion...and time constraints during what ammounts to a war situation...when the military didn't know what was coming next....
and hadn't got a complete handle on the situation....it was probably decided to go with
'war' protocol...and shoot them down...rather than enter into a protracted hijack situation
during a time of attack......when there was uncertainty about the extent of the attack.

I don't know how easy it is to land an airliner with remote control?

That's the best I can do, for now, with the points you've made.

I'm still sticking with my theory.

:thumb:


for anyone who might be vaguely interested in my 'theory'.........it's in post 5 in the thread linked to below.....:)

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?5389-A-documentary-more-powerful-than-Loose-Change-...-blows-the-lid-off-the-Inside-Job!

Jaybee, by no means should anyone ever arbitrarily believe what others believe simply because others insist upon this. We must at all times stand on our own.

There is however, massive amounts of circumstantial evidence that has been gathered by thousands of people around the world and brought together for the sole purpose of setting the record straight so that justice can prevail for those who no longer have voice in the matter. Countless books have been authored by these and hundreds of videos have been produced by these and hundreds of professional people have made a life-decision to travel around the globe and present evidence within their chosen fields, to people who, like yourself, cling to the official governmental account of what happened during 9/11.

We are not requesting that a contest of numbers of books or videos or hours of study be compared on these threads, but I will offer that simply between those people here on PA who have performed the extensive homework over these 9 years, the number of hours studying, the books read, the lectures listened to, the videos watched, the people we have talked to about this crime, would number in the tens of thousands. Some of the people on this thread alone, have been harassed and experienced character assassination because of this study.

I cannot count the number of times that my eyes and ears and heart have been opened during these 9 years. The ah ha moments and the oh my God moments, are simply too many to count. My mind has been changed. My outlook has been changed. My trust-in has been changed. All by September 11, 2001 and its aftermath.

The recent Pentagon study video on another thread, is one of those moments. I have now been further educated and I now fully and completely understand that a Boeing 757 did not, could not have, hit the Pentagon. This is the effect of massive and continuing study. Your mind has also been changed and I will guarantee that as you begin to really spend the time and effort to study this issue as many on these threads have done, you too will experience those ah ha moments and those oh-my-God moments just like the rest of us. I will guarantee that with every other site that was hit on 9/11, your mind will change, your eyes will see differently and your heart will tell you, in no uncertain terms, that this new information before you is what really happened.

O.I.C.

jaybee
13th September 2010, 09:36
[COLOR="#00bfff"]Jaybee, by no means should anyone ever arbitrarily believe what others believe simply because others insist upon this. We must at all times stand on our own.

Exactly....and on this I am evidently standing alone. What I'm saying is not going to be
popular with the supporters of the Official Account....and it's not going to be popular
with the supporters of the Inside Job Conspiracy. So be it. I have no axe to grind and no
agenda.....I am free to think outside the box...AND outside the box within the box...:)



There is however, massive amounts of circumstantial evidence that has been gathered by thousands of people around the world and brought together for the sole purpose of setting the record straight so that justice can prevail for those who no longer have voice in the matter.

A noble sentiment...but NOTHING is proved beyond reasonable doubt, IMO.




Countless books have been authored by these and hundreds of videos have been produced by these and hundreds of professional people have made a life-decision to travel around the globe and present evidence within their chosen fields, to people who, like yourself, cling to the official governmental account of what happened during 9/11.


Mmmmmmmm....'cling' is a very emotive word...and I wonder how deliberate your use of
this word is?

If I were 'clinging' to the Official Account....I wouldn't be saying what I am about flights 77 + 93.

But perhaps you think I'm 'clinging' because I don't deny the existence of Militant Islamic Jihad...and that because of that.... I fall foul of the 'doctrines' of the Inside Job CT...?



We are not requesting that a contest of numbers of books or videos or hours of study be compared on these threads, but I will offer that simply between those people here on PA who have performed the extensive homework over these 9 years, the number of hours studying, the books read, the lectures listened to, the videos watched, the people we have talked to about this crime, would number in the tens of thousands. Some of the people on this thread alone, have been harassed and experienced character assassination because of this study.


'Some'....? That's a bit vague...and how would you know, anyway?

I have never bought into the Complete Inside Job theory...although up until now, I haven't looked
at it more deeply. It took me about 3 weeks to reach the conclusions that I have....after
being jolted into intellectual action, lol, by this thread....

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?4870-wiki-leaks-shown-to-be-insider-disinfo-release.-(camelot-should-not-be-so-hasty)

Key moments in THIS...Pentagon thread, for me...were Fred's posts 105 (page 11) and 114 (page 12)
And a couple of remarks made by someone else, ...but I'm not going to say who!



I cannot count the number of times that my eyes and ears and heart have been opened during these 9 years. The ah ha moments and the oh my God moments, are simply too many to count. My mind has been changed. My outlook has been changed. My trust-in has been changed. All by September 11, 2001 and its aftermath.


I had my 'oh my God' moments...while trying to suss it out....but not in the direction that
you did.....key to it all...for me...was what happened to flight 77 if it didn't hit the Pentagon.
How could it and it's passengers 'disappear'? And sadly...I do think they are in a watery
grave.... I might be wrong....BUT...I might be right.



The recent Pentagon study video on another thread, is one of those moments. I have now been further educated and I now fully and completely understand that a Boeing 757 did not, could not have, hit the Pentagon. This is the effect of massive and continuing study. Your mind has also been changed and I will guarantee that as you begin to really spend the time and effort to study this issue as many on these threads have done, you too will experience those ah ha moments and those oh-my-God moments just like the rest of us. I will guarantee that with every other site that was hit on 9/11, your mind will change, your eyes will see differently and your heart will tell you, in no uncertain terms, that this new information before you is what really happened.

I'm sorry....but you definitely cannot guarantee that.

But rest assured that IF I change my mind about anything...I will let you know.
At the moment...I think I'm on the right track.


J.B.



PS...thanks for your response and thoughts on the matter.....

Zook
13th September 2010, 17:51
Hi Mother Jayne,


Hi Uncle Zook......:p

Maybe WTC 7 was badly damaged and brought down with a controlled demolition...? I don't have
a problem with that...if that is the case. Why it would be kept secret is a seperate issue...but
doesn't in itself point to an overall 'inside job'.

Not plausible. For the reason that it would take several weeks and lots of manpower to wire a relatively modest skyscraper (for controlled demolition) much more to wire a 47-storey towering monster like WTC7. At most, your hypothesis would have had from 9:59 AM after WTC2 collapsed (and purportedly damaged WTC7) to 5:21 pm when WTC7 collapsed, a total of 7 hours and 20 minutes. Of course, we'd have to subtract some time to allow for the decision to go ahead with controlled demolition, and again afterwards, to finish wiring and evacuate WTC7 prior to its collapse; say, 20 minutes on either side and you only have 6 hours and 40 minutes to wire the building. Not possible.

Here's an URL that show the approximate collapse times of the three structures:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collapse_of_the_World_Trade_Center

We can safely say that if controlled demolition is the cause of WTC7's collapse, and every piece of credible evidence points in this direction, then it could only mean an Inside Job.



Phew.....ok.......IMO....all the things above could...with time.....LOTS of time...be explained away or put down to greed, misinfo, confusion..including some of the alleged hijackers being alive.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I think 7 of the 19 are said to be alive but there's stuff about stolen
passports?


Stolen passports? The onus is on those making the initial condemnation of the seven men (and perhaps all nineteen) based on alleged passport evidence, to then prove that the passports were stolen once it has been shown that at least seven of those men were still alive on September 12, 2001. Be alerted that Occam's Razor is standing by to slice the fat off. In any event, the passport issue merely corroborates evidence of Inside Job mischief, it is not required to prove Inside Job. So if N pieces of evidence exist, I have no problem taking one piece of controversial evidence off the analytic table. We are still left with (N-1)
pieces of evidence, with N being a very large number.




Flight 77 might not have got that near to the Pentagon....another passenger jet could have
flown over around the time of the 'explosion'......(see Ahkanaten's post in your thread)


It is alleged that Arab terrorists flew planes with four specific flight numbers. Flight 93 was puportedly shot down in Shanksville (or elsewhere). So either one of the three remaining (allegedly) hijacked planes flew several feet above the Pentagon roof, or a fifth plane flew over the Pentagon roof. What would a fifth plane be doing that close to the roof of the Pentagon? Occam's Razor, anyone? The official version states Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon; it does not refer to a flyover. The official version also states Southside Citgo approach of this putative Boeing jetliner; this is now proven to be a lie beyond any shadow of doubt. So you have to ask yourself this, given all the evidence (physical and circumstantial), is the official version credible any longer? The next question you have to ask yourself is this: if the official version is not credible, i.e. if the Insiders are not credible in the aftermath of the Job ... then what grounds are there to focus on any suspects other than Inside Jobbers?






Or why have a missile fired into the accounting offices of the Pentagon?
That MAY have been opportunist? Or it might have copped it because of it being in the vacinity
of the mainly unoccupied area?


If opportunism is the case, then those with a vested interested in destroying the accounting offices and accountants, are not Arabs. This again points to Inside Jobbers.






And why even shoot any of the Boeings? Why not have them land somewhere where Swat units would be in place to handle a hot hijacking situation?

Now...this is a point that I have thought about...re my theory. And it DOES bother me.

But....I'm thinking that......in the panic and confusion...and time constraints during what ammounts to a war situation...when the military didn't know what was coming next....
and hadn't got a complete handle on the situation....it was probably decided to go with
'war' protocol...and shoot them down...rather than enter into a protracted hijack situation
during a time of attack......when there was uncertainty about the extent of the attack.


Occam's Razor. You are looking for complex conjectural explanations when simple evidentiary explanations are bashing cymbals two inches from your ears.




I don't know how easy it is to land an airliner with remote control?
That's the best I can do, for now, with the points you've made.
I'm still sticking with my theory.

:thumb:

for anyone who might be vaguely interested in my 'theory'.........it's in post 5 in the thread linked to below.....:)

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?5389-A-documentary-more-powerful-than-Loose-Change-...-blows-the-lid-off-the-Inside-Job!


Everyone must hack their own journey through the overgrown brush that blocks the paths to truth.
Here's hoping you buy a new machete.


Cheers
Uncle Zook

HORIZONS
14th September 2010, 01:13
9-11 And The Pentagon
From Dick Eastman
9-11-10
http://rense.com/general92/pent911.htm

Luke
14th September 2010, 07:33
Or why have a missile fired into the accounting offices of the Pentagon?
That MAY have been opportunist? Or it might have copped it because of it being in the vacinity
of the mainly unoccupied area?
If opportunism is the case, then those with a vested interested in destroying the accounting offices and accountants, are not Arabs. This again points to Inside Jobbers.
Wrong thinking here. Section that was hit was in the process of renovation/strengthening, any archives were evacuated. 125 persons killed by explosion (twice the "passengers" number) were mostly construction workers.
The upgrades were made to comply with post-Oklahoma safety regulations, including explosion resistance. Section hit was only one upgraded at the time of attack.
From Wiki article: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pentagon#September_11_attacks)

t the time of the attacks, the Pentagon was under renovation and several offices were unoccupied, resulting in fewer casualties. Only 800 of 4,500 people who would have been in the area were there because of the work. Furthermore the area hit, on the side of the Heliport Entrance facade, was the section best prepared for such an attack. The renovation there, improvements which resulted from the Oklahoma City bombing, had nearly been completed.

Consider this: plane approached Pentagon from the side housing all major offices,(which should be primary target) to do flyover, made impossible acrobatic manoeuvre, flew 10 ft of the ground just to hit section most prepared to withstand such an attack. Too many "them coincidences". And that is without arguing any alternative to alleged hit.

Still valid point is, that whatever that was, it was sold to public, hook line and sinker. People made decisions to further support the system basing on that.
Think of a man that went of vendetta after loosing his kid, hunted down all perpetrators AND their families, just to go home and see people arguing IF the guys he just killed actually did that. Scale up to the 50 million people, and you have size of the problem.
People made decisions basing on emotions on 9/11. For them to acknowledge that 9/11 was an inside job means that for 9 years they lived in dreamworld with upside-down values. That they are mass murderers and war criminals and terrorists NOT knights in shining armour bringing justice they picture themselves to be.
They are tied to the story because their sanity depends on it. Deal with that.
And deal with fact so many were so easily hoodwinked. Deal with fact that there will be other such events in further years, and people would follow the emotional line on them too. Using this strategy you can make people support any war, be it Iran, China or Alpha Centauri, unless people start to actually think. Not seeing that soon though.

Zook
14th September 2010, 11:39
Hi SaiCO,


Wrong thinking here. Section that was hit was in the process of renovation/strengthening, any archives were evacuated. 125 persons killed by explosion (twice the "passengers" number) were mostly construction workers. The upgrades were made to comply with post-Oklahoma safety regulations, including explosion resistance. Section hit was only one upgraded at the time of attack.
From Wiki article: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pentagon#September_11_attacks)
[...]


I beg to differ. A casualty list of the unfortunate Pentagon employees is available here:
http://wtcdemolition.com/blog/node/2912



-----------------beginExcerpt------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spc. Craig Amundson 28 Fort Belvoir, Va. multimedia illustrator for deputy chief of staff of personnel U.S. Army
Melissa Rose Barnes 27 Redlands, Calif. yeoman second class U.S. Navy
(Ret.) Master Sgt. Max J. Beilke 69 Laurel, Md. civilian employee U.S. Army
Kris Romeo Bishundat 23 Waldorf, Md. information systems technician second class U.S. Navy
Carrie R. Blagburn 48 Temple Hills, Md. civilian budget analyst U.S. Army
Lt. Col. Canfield D. Boone 54 Clifton, Va. U.S. Army
Diana Borrero de Padro 55 Woodbridge, Va. civilian employee U.S. Army
Donna Bowen 42 Waldorf, Md. Pentagon communications representative Verizon
Allen P. Boyle 30 Fredericksburg, Va. defense department contractor U.S. Defense Department
Christopher Lee Burford 23 Hubert, N.C. electronics technician third class U.S. Navy
Daniel Martin Caballero 21 Houston, Texas electronics technician third class U.S. Navy
Sgt. 1st Class Jose Orlando Calderon-Olmedo 44 Annandale, Va. U.S. Army
Angelene C. Carter 51 Forrestville, Md. accountant U.S. Army
Sharon A. Carver 38 Waldorf, Md. civilian employee U.S. Army
John J. Chada 55 Manassas, Va. civilian employee U.S. Army
Rosa Maria (Rosemary) Chapa 64 Springfield, Va. civilian employee Defense Intelligence Agency
Julian T. Cooper 39 Springdale, Md. Navy contractor
Lt. Cmdr. Eric A. Cranford 32 Drexel, N.C. U.S. Navy
Ada M. Davis 57 Camp Springs, Md. civilian employee U.S. Army
Capt. Gerald Francis DeConto 44 Sandwich, Mass. director of current operations and plans U.S. Navy
Lt. Col. Jerry Don Dickerson Jr. 41 Durant, Miss. U.S. Army
Johnnie Doctor Jr. 32 Jacksonville, Fla. information systems technician first class U.S. Navy
Capt. Robert Edward Dolan Jr. 43 Alexandria, Va. head of strategy and concepts branch U.S. Navy
Cmdr. William Howard Donovan 37 Nunda, N.Y. U.S. Navy
Cmdr. Patrick Dunn 39 Springfield, Va. surface warfare officer U.S. Navy
Edward Thomas Earhart 26 Salt Lick, Ky. aerographer's mate first class U.S. Navy
Lt. Cmdr. Robert Randolph Elseth 37 Vestal, N.Y. U.S. Navy
Jamie Lynn Fallon 23 Woodbridge, Va. storekeeper third class U.S. Navy
Amelia V. Fields 36 Dumfries, Va. civilian employee U.S. Army
Gerald P. Fisher 57 Potomac, Md. consultant Booz-Allen & Hamilton Inc.
Matthew Michael Flocco 21 Newark, Del. aerographer's mate second class U.S. Navy
Sandra N. Foster 41 Clinton, Md. civilian employee Defense Department
Capt. Lawrence Daniel Getzfred 57 Elgin, Neb. officer in the Navy command center at the Pentagon U.S. Navy
Cortez Ghee 54 Reisterstown, Md. civilian employee U.S. Army
Brenda C. Gibson 59 Falls Church, Va. civilian employee U.S. Army
Ron F. Golinski 60 Columbia, Md. civilian employee U.S. Army
Diane M. Hale-McKinzy 38 Alexandria, Va. civilian employee U.S. Army
Carolyn B. Halmon 49 Washington, D.C. budget analyst U.S. Army
Sheila M. S. Hein 51 University Park, Md. budget and management specialist U.S. Army
Ronald John Hemenway 37 Shawnee, Kan. electronics technician first class U.S. Navy
Maj. Wallace Cole Hogan Jr. 40 Fla. U.S. Army
Jimmie Ira Holley 54 Lanham, Md. civilian accountant U.S. Army
Angela M. Houtz 27 La Plata, Md. civilian employee U.S. Navy
Brady K. Howell 26 Arlington, Va. management intern for chief of intelligence U.S. Navy
Peggie M. Hurt 36 Crewe, Va. accountant U.S. Army
Lt. Col. Stephen Neil Hyland Jr. 45 Burke, Va. personnel issues U.S. Army
Robert J. Hymel 55 Woodbridge, Va. civilian management analyst Pentagon
Sgt. Maj. Lacey B. Ivory 43 Woodbridge, Va. U.S. Army
Lt. Col. Dennis M. Johnson 48 Port Edwards, Wis. U.S. Army
Judith L. Jones 53 Woodbridge, Va. civilian employee U.S. Navy
Brenda Kegler 49 Washington, D.C. budget analyst U.S. Army
Lt. Michael Scott Lamana 31 Baton Rouge, La. U.S. Navy
David W. Laychak 40 Manassas, Va. civilian budget analyst U.S. Army
Samantha L. Lightbourn-Allen 36 Hillside, Md. budget analyst U.S. Army
Maj. Stephen V. Long 39 Ga. U.S. Army
James T. Lynch 55 Manassas, Va. civilian employee U.S. Navy
Terence M. Lynch 49 Alexandria, Va. consultant Booz-Allen & Hamilton Inc.
Nehamon Lyons IV 30 Mobile, Ala. operations specialist second class U.S. Navy
Shelley A. Marshall 37 Marbury, Md. budget analyst Defense Intelligence Agency
Teresa M. Martin 45 Stafford, Va. civilian employee U.S. Army
Ada L. Mason-Acker 50 Springfield, Va. civilian employee U.S. Army
Lt. Col. Dean E. Mattson 57 Calif. U.S. Army
Lt. Gen. Timothy J. Maude 53 Fort Myer, Va. deputy chief of staff for personnel U.S. Army
Robert J. Maxwell 53 Manassas, Va. civilian employee U.S. Army
Molly L. McKenzie 38 Dale City, Va. civilian employee U.S. Army
Patricia E. (Patti) Mickley 41 Springfield, Va. financial manager Defense Department
Maj. Ronald D. Milam 33 Washington, D.C. assistant to the Secretary U.S. Army
Gerard (Jerry) P. Moran Jr. 39 Upper Marlboro, Md. engineering contractor U.S. Navy
Odessa V. Morris 54 Upper Marlboro, Md. budget analyst U.S. Army
Brian Anthony Moss 34 Sperry, Okla. electronics technician first class U.S. Navy
Teddington H. Moy 48 Silver Spring, Md. civilian employee U.S. Army
Lt. Cmdr. Patrick Jude Murphy 38 Flossmoor, Ill. U.S. Navy
Khang Ngoc Nguyen 41 Fairfax, Va. Navy contractor
Michael Allen Noeth 30 New York, N.Y. illustrator/draftsman second class U.S. Navy
Spc. Chin Sun Pak 25 Lawton, Okla. U.S. Army
Lt. Jonas Martin Panik 26 Mingoville, Pa. U.S. Navy
Maj. Clifford L. Patterson Jr. 33 Alexandria, Va. U.S. Army
Lt. J.G. Darin Howard Pontell 26 Columbia, Md. U.S. Navy
Scott Powell 35 Silver Spring, Md. BTG Inc.
(Ret.) Capt. Jack D. Punches 51 Clifton, Va. civilian employee U.S. Navy
Joseph John Pycior Jr. 39 Carlstadt, N.J. aviation warfare systems operator first class U.S. Navy
Deborah A. Ramsaur 45 Annandale, Va. civilian employee U.S. Army
Rhonda Sue Rasmussen 44 Woodbridge, Va. civilian employee U.S. Army
Marsha Dianah Ratchford 34 Prichard, Ala. information systems technician first class U.S. Navy
Martha M. Reszke 36 Stafford, Va. budget analyst U.S. Army
Cecelia E. Richard 41 Fort Washington, Md. accounting technician U.S. Army
Edward V. Rowenhorst 32 Lake Ridge, Va. civilian employee U.S. Army
Judy Rowlett 44 Woodbridge, Va. civilian employee U.S. Army
Robert E. Russell 52 Oxon Hill, Md. civilian budgetary supervisor U.S. Army
William R. Ruth 57 Mount Airy, Md. Chief Warrant Officer 4th Class U.S. Army
Charles E. Sabin Sr. 54 Burke, Va. civilian employee Defense Department
Marjorie C. Salamone 53 Springfield, Va. budget program analyst U.S. Army
Lt. Col. David M. Scales 44 Cleveland, Ohio U.S. Army
Cmdr. Robert Allan Schlegel 38 Alexandria, Va. U.S. Navy
Janice M. Scott 46 Springfield, Va. civilian employee U.S. Army
Michael L. Selves 53 Fairfax, Va. information management support center director U.S. Army
Marian H. Serva 47 Stafford, Va. civilian employee U.S. Army
Cmdr. Dan Frederic Shanower 40 Naperville, Ill. U.S. Navy
Antionette M. Sherman 35 Forest Heights, Md. budget analyst U.S. Army
Donald D. Simmons 58 Dumfries, Va. civilian employee U.S. Army
Cheryle D. Sincock 53 Dale City, Va. administrative assistant U.S. Army
Gregg Harold Smallwood 44 Overland Park, Kan. chief information systems technician U.S. Navy
(Ret.) Lt. Col. Gary F. Smith 55 Alexandria, Va. civilian employee U.S. Army
Patricia J. Statz 41 Takoma Park, Md. civilian employee U.S. Army
Edna L. Stephens 53 Washington, D.C. budget analyst U.S. Army
Sgt. Maj. Larry L. Strickland 52 Woodbridge, Va. senior adviser on personnel issues to the Joint Chiefs of Staff U.S. Army
Lt. Col. Kip P. Taylor 38 McLean, Va. adjutant general's corps U.S. Army
Sandra C. Taylor 50 Alexandria, Va. civilian employee U.S. Army
Karl W. Teepe 57 Centreville, Va. civilian employee Defense Information Agency
Sgt. Tamara C. Thurman 25 Brewton, Ala. classified employee U.S. Army
Lt. Cmdr. Otis Vincent Tolbert 38 Lemoore, Calif. U.S. Navy
Willie Q. Troy 51 Aberdeen, Md. program analyst U.S. Army
Lt. Cmdr. Ronald James Vauk 37 Nampa, Idaho watch commander U.S. Navy
Lt. Col. Karen J. Wagner 40 Houston, Texas U.S. Army
Meta L. Waller 60 Alexandria, Va. civilian employee U.S. Army
Staff Sgt. Maudlyn A. White 38 St. Croix, Virgin Islands U.S. Army
Sandra L. White 44 Dumfries, Va. civilian employee U.S. Army
Ernest M. Willcher 62 North Potomac, Md. Booz-Allen & Hamilton Inc.
Lt. Cmdr. David Lucian Williams 32 Newport, Ore. U.S. Navy
Maj. Dwayne Williams 40 Jacksonville, Ala. U.S. Army
Marvin R. Woods 57 Great Mills, Md. civilian communications manager U.S. Navy
Kevin Wayne Yokum 27 Lake Charles, La. information systems technician second class U.S. Navy
Donald McArthur Young 41 Roanoke, Va. chief information systems technician U.S. Navy
Edmond G. Young Jr. 22 Owings, Md. information technology specialist BTG Inc.
Lisa L. Young 36 Germantown, Md. civilian employee U.S. Army
--------------end-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Also, the article found here reveals the areas of most damage:
http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_4584.shtml

--------beginExcerpt----------------------
In this case, the hero or anti-hero is U.S. Army Major Stanley Kruter, who works in the ill-fated Pentagon accounting office, most of which was obliterated along with Naval Intelligence that day, both keepers of many lost secrets.
--------end---------------------------------


In short, both the Naval Intelligence Office and the Accounting Office were targeted, the latter being the keeper of the secret of the lost 2.3 trillion dollars.

Uncle Zook

Luke
14th September 2010, 13:48
Hmm, Interesting.
Thank you zookumar. Man learns every day :)

Zook
14th September 2010, 14:03
Hi SaiCO,

Hmm, Interesting.
Thank you zookumar. Man learns every day :)

I didn't know about the Naval Intelligence Office being a possible target of interest. So it is I who must thank you.

Cheers
Uncle Zook

Oouthere
30th September 2014, 03:32
[ Mod-edit: The following 65 posts began life on the thread 9/11 TRUTH GOES NUCLEAR: Massive Download In Progress (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?75484-9-11-TRUTH-GOES-NUCLEAR-Massive-Download-In-Progress&p=884159&viewfull=1#post884159). They were off-topic for that thread. -- Paul. ]

==

I'm a 10 year vet, my father was an Army Ranger and I have little respect for veterans today's ideas of 9/11. If people are honest with themselves they can easily come to different conclusions that make far more sense.

Operator
30th September 2014, 03:41
I'm a 10 year vet, my father was an Army Ranger and I have little respect for veterans today's ideas of 9/11. If people are honest with themselves they can easily come to different conclusions that make far more sense.

Care to share more?
What do you mean by ideas? Nuclear in particular or false flag in general?

Oouthere
30th September 2014, 03:54
Mostly in regards to the Pentagon impact. There is nothing that fits better than a 757 impacting the Pentagon. The engine parts fit, a stewardess that was caring for her father that missed that flight identified pieces of the aircraft and her best friend's arm by a bracelet (also a stewardess), numerous people stated they saw an airliner hit. It fits the generator impact, it fits the light poles being down, it simply fits. If you forget the far fetched ideas and simply look at the photo's and not listen to why someone tells you it's wrong, then it fits. Also, April Gallop was seen exiting a double wooden door and not the impact hole as she stated. One of the two people that saw her also suffered lung damage due to the jet fuel of which she said was not present.

Some people simply want conspiracy and are not after the truth. I'm only after the truth irregardless where it leads.

Operator
30th September 2014, 04:08
Mostly in regards to the Pentagon impact. There is nothing that fits better than a 757 impacting the Pentagon. The engine parts fit, a stewardess that was caring for her father that missed that flight identified pieces of the aircraft and her best friend's arm by a bracelet (also a stewardess), numerous people stated they saw an airliner hit. It fits the generator impact, it fits the light poles being down, it simply fits. If you forget the far fetched ideas and simply look at the photo's and not listen to why someone tells you it's wrong, then it fits. Also, April Gallop was seen exiting a double wooden door and not the impact hole as she stated. One of the two people that saw her also suffered lung damage due to the jet fuel of which she said was not present.

Some people simply want conspiracy and are not after the truth. I'm only after the truth irregardless where it leads.

So I take it you believe the original story is true ... ?

Could it be related to this (I felt something when I read this):


I'm a 10 year vet, my father was an Army Ranger

It hurts when the official story isn't true ... then you've put your life on the line for the wrong people.
Could that be it? Would you be able to handle it when after all it turns out to be a conspiracy?

Not trying to mock you in any way but I could strongly imagine what it would do with patriots who
may find out they have been fooled. I understand there will be broad resistance to accept such an
idea by many. I came to understand that not everybody will be able to handle the truth whatever that
maybe on whatever topic.

Oouthere
30th September 2014, 04:19
Actually I do believe WTC7 was brought down by demolitions. But it was tested on video that the beams will bend and collapse (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2TMVDYpp2Q) under a load with simple jet fuel so I cannot completely discount WTC1 and WTC2 as having collapsed because of fire. Since WTC7 did not have this, it is a good possibility that something else caused it to collapse. Plus the BBC announced the collapsed before it happened is reason for concern as well.

A Voice from the Mountains
30th September 2014, 04:40
Actually I do believe WTC7 was brought down by demolitions. But it was tested on video that the beams will bend and collapse (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2TMVDYpp2Q) under a load with simple jet fuel so I cannot completely discount WTC1 and WTC2 as having collapsed because of fire.

I can add a couple of things to this.

NIST and FEMA did the official investigations and reports on the WTC 1 & 2 collapses. FEMA's investigation was first and considered "preliminary." NIST came after. They both decided after reviewing the situation and the structural documentation (which they did not release to the public for peer review) that the most likely way to collapse the buildings would be through the trusses.

Both of these investigations determined that heating the columns until they failed wouldn't be a likely scenario, because when columns are heated, they only lose a percentage of their strength depending on the temperature. But more importantly, there were always too many cold columns in their simulations for the columns themselves to all fail from being overloaded due to strength loss from heating. The towers were over-built, so the intact columns could handle significantly more than their design loads and prevent collapse.

What FEMA and NIST both focused on instead were the trusses that linked the core columns with the perimeter columns and supported the concrete floors. FEMA said these trusses must have either expanded or contracted via sagging, and so either pushing or pulling the exterior columns, causing deflection and in that way they were structurally compromised and caused a collapse. Notice that to either expand or contract, are two completely different physical mechanisms, in literally 2 completely opposite directions, so that gives you an indication as to exactly how much they knew what they were talking about to begin with.

NIST decided that the trusses must have been sagging and so pulling the columns inward. This was their hypothesis. But when they went to test this hypothesis by recreating the perimeter column set up and attaching a truss, and heating the truss until it sagged, they couldn't produce enough "pull" force on the perimeter column to create significant deflection, to account for all the support loss. So NIST called this a "calibration" instead for their computer models, forgot about trying to physically test their hypothesis at all, and relied on computer modeling where they could play with variables until they visually achieved what they wanted to see.

If you look at NIST's report, it's about 10,000 pages if I recall correctly, and most has nothing at all to do with the meat and potatoes of what I just described, so you really have to hunt for it. In their report, NIST doesn't assert that their hypothesis is proof of anything, but then after the report was released, they released "FAQs" about their WTC reports on their websites where whoever wrote them began claiming that NIST had already proven everything and answered all questions, which is ridiculous.

gripreaper
30th September 2014, 04:51
Mostly in regards to the Pentagon impact. There is nothing that fits better than a 757 impacting the Pentagon. The engine parts fit,

what engine parts?


a stewardess that was caring for her father that missed that flight identified pieces of the aircraft and her best friend's arm by a bracelet (also a stewardess), numerous people stated they saw an airliner hit.

What about the 1200 architects, engineers, and pilots who say it does not meet the laws of physics? Are they all wrong?


It fits the generator impact, it fits the light poles being down, it simply fits.

How so?.


Some people simply want conspiracy and are not after the truth. I'm only after the truth irregardless where it leads.

Some people, who realize that the Pentagon is the MOST video surveiled building on the planet, might expect ONE video to show what happened?

And please don't get me started on the Trade Center bldg's. NO WAY jet fuel can bring down two steel and concrete buildings in less than 8 seconds, at total free fall speed with ZERO resistance, and pulverize 200 million tons of concrete into dust, and pile all the steel in 30 foot sections within it's own footprint, and NOT a single desk, or chair, or computer found.

Please, after 13 years can you please look at all the facts?

Limor Wolf
30th September 2014, 06:46
I agree with you but also read my post #9 (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?75484-9-11-TRUTH-GOES-NUCLEAR-Massive-Download-In-Progress&p=883026&viewfull=1#post883026) (again). If we fail to understand this we can push all we want but are then just wasting energy.

Yes, I understand. I grew up loving my country because I was taught that it was the land of the free and the home of the brave. We stood with our hand over our heart each morning at school and recited the pledge of allegiance to the flag, because we were told America was a Republic and had a representative government by the people, of the people, and for the people. Yes, I believed all of these things till I learned otherwise.

I was angry and I was sad when i realized we have been lied to, that our Republic was sold out, bankrupted, and pledged as collateral for the global banksters, turned from the original organic constitution into a corporatocracy run by lawyers, when the 13th amendment disallowed titles of nobility. Hundreds of thousands of my friends and family, my fellow Americans gave their lives for freedom and liberty and justice, all good honest hard working loving souls.

It's not an easy truth to grasp, not any easier than the truth of 9-11, especially for those who have vested their lives in such beliefs. But, even though the truth hurts, it will set you free.

The truth has the potential to set us free, but sometimes it can hurt badly. It helps if the object himself percieves the truth as above all else, or it may bring a very sour taste into one's mouth. However, one of the mysteries of our reality is when a great amount of evidence and proof is being well presented and still, denial or excessive caution is taking place, and here it is possible that there are some other psychological or otherwise reasons. But this is a real phenomenon that seems to be wide and spread - it may be some kind of 'skepticism as a profession' on any one subject, in the condition that one claims to examine the facts on an adequate level and from all angles. Saying that, each of us may fall into this in any one field or area of research, this happens when our internal programming has the upper hand on the actual evidence presented before us.

What's certain is that school days kool-aid tasted better than today

kemo
30th September 2014, 07:12
I think Oouthere makes a valid point. There are too many things on PA that are accepted as fact which are just either unknown, MH370 or MH17 or just opinion. Yes 1200 architects and engineers can be wrong. People on PA seem to think climate change is not real while many more than 1200 scientists say that it is and that it is man-made. There is no lobby group Engineers For 9/11 - or is there? - because there is no need for one and so we don't hear contrary opinions. For me the most compelling evidence is the collapse of the No7 building. But apart from the technical issues, one reason why I'm not totally convinced is that this would have had to have been a conspiracy so vast that it is difficult to see how they thought they could pull it off. And if it really did go all the way to the top then those people would have had to have been damn sure they could get away with it. Now that's not beyond the bounds of possibility but it's unlikely. Whoever planted the thermite, nukes are whatever must have know they did it - I know they were mind-controlled which seems to be the answer to everything at the moment - and what the consequences were. Some of those people would surely have come forward by now. They would have to have been murdered. Who ordered the murders. Well they would have had to have been murdered as well to keep them silent. I can't see how this could have been compatmentalised to that degree, but if was a conspiracy then that is what would have had to have happened. There is one other issue: human error. We like to think we know more than we actually do know. So when experts say that this can't happen or that can't happen I just think well, maybe, maybe not.

Atlas
30th September 2014, 10:19
Some people simply want conspiracy and are not after the truth. I'm only after the truth irregardless where it leads.

Some people, who realize that the Pentagon is the MOST video surveiled building on the planet, might expect ONE video to show what happened?

I know that some people think that a plane hit the Pentagon and that some don't. Like Oouthere, I'm only after the truth and I think gripreaper makes an interesting point. Indeed, I would expect a video to (clearly) show what happened. Why is there no such video 13 years after the event ?

http://tinypic.com/02/1/11793/0506/63ax9xg

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/lytetrip/Video%20cameras/pcam2.jpg

http://i422.photobucket.com/albums/pp306/22205_911/0001hrs_200109139f_hrzzgraphic.jpg

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/lytetrip/Video%20cameras/annex1.jpg

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/lytetrip/Pentagon/Pentagon%20folder%202/doubletree4.jpg

Source: Apparently Lots Of Security Cameras On The Pentagon (http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=14873)

mpennery
30th September 2014, 11:03
I expected better from the readers here. Sorry but there is absolutely, positively no chance in hell that a airliner hit the pentagon. This ridiculous argument has been thoroughly destroyed. I can't believe we are still having this discussion. Actually, let me rephrase that. I can't believe it but I see we have something here at PA that I wasn't sure we'd have and I guess I shouldn't be surprised. You know what I'm talking about but do the rest of you?

Matt

Hervé
30th September 2014, 11:12
[...]
... Indeed, I would expect a video to (clearly) show what happened. Why is there no such video 13 years after the event ?
[...]

... hmmm... let me guess...

Down for maintenance?

Looking elsewhere at the time?

The video tape got lost?

A big bug was obstructing the field of view?

Etc...

KiwiElf
30th September 2014, 12:48
Mostly in regards to the Pentagon impact. There is nothing that fits better than a 757 impacting the Pentagon. The engine parts fit, a stewardess that was caring for her father that missed that flight identified pieces of the aircraft and her best friend's arm by a bracelet (also a stewardess), numerous people stated they saw an airliner hit. It fits the generator impact, it fits the light poles being down, it simply fits. If you forget the far fetched ideas and simply look at the photo's and not listen to why someone tells you it's wrong, then it fits. Also, April Gallop was seen exiting a double wooden door and not the impact hole as she stated. One of the two people that saw her also suffered lung damage due to the jet fuel of which she said was not present.

Some people simply want conspiracy and are not after the truth. I'm only after the truth irregardless where it leads.

The "engine parts fit"? - have you been reading/researching nothing? The "engine" that was found on the pentagon lawn comes from either (1) an obsolete military navy fighter jet, or (2) a CRUISE MISSILE. That's just for starters. Where are the wings? Where is the tail? (What are you even doing here???):rolleyes:

I would suggest you start looking a little harder!

kemo
30th September 2014, 13:27
Well, I've seen some pretty grisly photos of charred bodies still strapped to airline seats, supposedly taken from inside after it happened. If that was faked then obviously the conspiracy gets even bigger. I don't know and I can't know because I wasn't there and neither am I an expert on such matters. But a member of my UFO group thinks it was an airliner and he's a physicist and not a fool. So I don't accept that is possible to "know" for certain what happened. You can read various opinions and watch videos but that doesn't make you an expert, just maybe better informed. I'm of the the only thing I do know is that I don't know anything type. I'd like the truth but then I wouldn't know if it was the truth would I. Not unless - well it's probably not going to happen. Not in my lifetime. Like JFK it will run and run. Not sure that even care any more.

Operator
30th September 2014, 13:30
I expected better from the readers here. Sorry but there is absolutely, positively no chance in hell that a airliner hit the pentagon. This ridiculous argument has been thoroughly destroyed. I can't believe we are still having this discussion. Actually, let me rephrase that. I can't believe it but I see we have something here at PA that I wasn't sure we'd have and I guess I shouldn't be surprised. You know what I'm talking about but do the rest of you?

Matt

That exact same surprise is what made me thinking about this lately. I've met very intelligent people that should be able
to connect dots very easy and still don't. There is a kind of resistance that blocks them from either doing that or accept
the outcome. Then the issue rises above 9/11 because this happens more often like the Boston bombing or Sandy Hook etc.

That's why I try to simplify the case and limit it to "The official storyline can't possibly be true. We need to get back to the
authorities and demand a more solid explanation". Just stick to their responsibilities.

I think that Amzer Zo is right ... it's not the case itself making it difficult to accept it's the programming/brainwashing that
is almost impenetrable. I got a vision recently about the text that is mentioned in the bible about the 144000 that cannot be
touched/harmed (I am not a religious believer but some texts from the bible inspire me). I came to understand that is not
about physically being harmed but they cannot be 'programmed'.

The people belonging to the group of 'non-programmed' people should not make the mistake to think that a case can simply
be solved by presenting evidence ... it goes much deeper than that. The evidence needs to be accepted.
Because many understand what follows after accepting the evidence they refuse to have a look at it. They'd rather stay
in their 'safe zone'. I saw "The Maze Runner" movie last night. There was a guy called Gally, he plays exactly that role. He's
the one being content with the situation in the relatively safe glade.

So untangling the problems in this world is not about evidence but recognizing the programming and attempting to reverse it.

Hervé
30th September 2014, 13:47
[...]

So untangling the problems in this world is not about evidence but recognizing the programming and attempting to reverse it.

Yep!

And it all has to do with how the mind works and how information is processed:

Gilbert proposed that understanding a statement must begin with an attempt to believe it; you must first know what the idea would mean if it were true. Only then can you decide whether or not to unbelieve it.
[Daniel Gilbert, "How Mental Systems Believe" ( original paper link (http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/%7Edtg/Gillbert%20%28How%20Mental%20Systems%20Believe%29. PDF))]How many of us spend the necessary time to "unbelieve" and strip false data out of our unconscious?


Which leads to "Rome (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?75444-Will-Putin-Save-Us&p=883013&viewfull=1#post883013)":

While [Time] magazine's (April 13, 2009) expose of the "behavioral economists" surrounding President Barack Obama has put an important spotlight on a dangerous disease, infecting the economic decision-making at the Oval Office, the author of the expose only scratched the surface of the actual evil underlying this hedonistic madness. The bestial notion of man as an irrational creature, driven by overwhelming impulses to seek pleasure and avoid pain, which is at the heart of the so-called "behavioral economics" dogma , came directly from Venice, the wellspring of all modern financier oligarchism. The author of this schema, which ruthlessly rejects actual human creativity, was Paolo Sarpi (1552-1623).
[http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=14216]... that's the "Black Nobility" and its uses of its knowledge about human's mind to secure its future with SRA (Satanic Ritual Abuse)....

Atlas
30th September 2014, 14:11
Well, I've seen some pretty grisly photos of charred bodies still strapped to airline seats, supposedly taken from inside after it happened. If that was faked then obviously the conspiracy gets even bigger.

Are these the photos of charred bodies (http://www.911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/photos/humanremains.html) (WARNING - DISTURBING/GRAPHIC) you saw ? Are these the only ones we have ? Because if yes, I don't think this is conclusive evidence... Were the remains identified ? and where are the other bodies ?

KiwiElf
30th September 2014, 14:26
It's very easy these days (at least since the mid 1990's with the advent of Photoshop) - to fake images, enhance or composite images, especially digital images. What you can imagine, can be created, with absolute realism depending on the skills of the "artist".

Hervé
30th September 2014, 14:40
Any need to mention "recycled" proofs/evidence from previous crashes like some pieces of aircraft palmed off as 9-11 evidence...

indigopete
30th September 2014, 14:56
Mostly in regards to the Pentagon impact. There is nothing that fits better than a 757 impacting the Pentagon. The engine parts fit, a stewardess that was caring for her father that missed that flight identified pieces of the aircraft and her best friend's arm by a bracelet (also a stewardess)

Is this a joke ? She "identified peices of the aircraft" ? Did she physically go down their and check the tail number or something ? Hey I'm sure I saw *my* best friend's cufflinks in the rubble pile as well. He wasn't on the flight - so where does that leave us ?

If you really think a 757 can do 500 Knots at 12 feet off the deck while jigging its course 2 seconds from impact to line up with the "right" window then there's a few aerodynamics labs that will be interested in hiring you.

Apart from that, the problem of fitting a 100 foot wide plane travelling at 80% the speed of sound through a 40 foot hole might call into question your best friend's eyesight (as least as far as 'bracelets' go).

gripreaper
30th September 2014, 14:59
Yes, and with disinfo campaigns, photoshop, false flags, Archonistic rituals, and the internet with 2 billion people on it, information can be skewed and manipulated.

So, discernment is key. One needs to not use absolutes on anything, but learn to triangulate information and come to the highest probability, as a percentage. I NEVER use absolutes.

I realize it's very difficult to imagine how a false flag of such magnitude, requiring so many players and so many lies, could possibly be pulled off and kept away from the full light of day or in the consciousness of the average person. It's hard for empaths to imagine the extent of psychopathic evil on this planet, and the lengths they will go to in order to maintain their power and control.

The official story is what does not sound plausible to me. A handful of desert nomads, with cell phones and box cutters, foiled the greatest air defense system on the planet, flew commercial airlines into buildings without hardly any flight skills, doing maneuvers which seasoned pilots claim are virtually impossible, and brought down two steel and concrete buildings at free fall speed, with zero resistance, pulverized 200 million tons of concrete into dust, and left the remaining debris field inside the buildings own footprint, in less than 8 seconds. Just the sheer volume of concrete debris alone should have left a pile 400 feet high. The floors pancaked? Where's the stack of pancakes?

So many questions unanswered, but so many are answered too. What we do know for sure, is the official story has the highest probability of being BS, and most of the "on the ground" witnesses are dead.

We also know, the degree of cognitive dissonance nowadays is staggering.

KiwiElf
30th September 2014, 15:08
As someone else once mentioned, if it took only a few Arabs to do 9/11, then a 100 could take over the whole country! Just a thought... :)

Daphne
30th September 2014, 15:36
Actually I do believe WTC7 was brought down by demolitions. But it was tested on video that the beams will bend and collapse (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2TMVDYpp2Q) under a load with simple jet fuel so I cannot completely discount WTC1 and WTC2 as having collapsed because of fire. Since WTC7 did not have this, it is a good possibility that something else caused it to collapse. Plus the BBC announced the collapsed before it happened is reason for concern as well.

if you believe that, you have to wonder why the building 7 was ready for controlled demo. If they needed weeks to prepare, why was it done? and if we agree that it was done, doesn't that make the rest of the story highly suspect

Oouthere
30th September 2014, 16:05
Mostly in regards to the Pentagon impact. There is nothing that fits better than a 757 impacting the Pentagon. The engine parts fit, a stewardess that was caring for her father that missed that flight identified pieces of the aircraft and her best friend's arm by a bracelet (also a stewardess)

Is this a joke ? She "identified peices of the aircraft" ? Did she physically go down their and check the tail number or something ? Hey I'm sure I saw *my* best friend's cufflinks in the rubble pile as well. He wasn't on the flight - so where does that leave us ?

If you really think a 757 can do 500 Knots at 12 feet off the deck while jigging its course 2 seconds from impact to line up with the "right" window then there's a few aerodynamics labs that will be interested in hiring you.

Apart from that, the problem of fitting a 100 foot wide plane travelling at 80% the speed of sound through a 40 foot hole might call into question your best friend's eyesight (as least as far as 'bracelets' go).

I never said I believed everything, as a matter of fact all of the radar and black box data should be discarded imo as it is tainted. I believe the aircraft were remotely flown in with the Pentagon aircraft being near landing speed. Numerous people heard the engines throttling-up before impact.

And yes, the stewardess (http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/JohnJudge/PAandAAF77.html) did go to the crash site: ...."When questions arose about Flight 77, I contacted her to raise the issues that concerned me and the speculations of others who denied the plane hit the Pentagon. She was adamant in saying it had, and told me she had been to the crash site and had seen parts of the plane. I asked her about the speculation that the plane would have made a larger hole due to the wingspan. She informed me that the fuel was stored in the wings and that they would have exploded and broken off, as the fuselage slammed through the building walls."

The hole was not nearly so small as people say, do your research and stop listening to analysis...just use your eyes. But irregardless of what people say, aluminum is used in gunpowder and burns.

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/990245fcdbe95cdcb.jpg

That's ok I'm content with my job, I've already completed the requirements for my degree in avionics technologies after being in the air force for 10 years.

Operator
30th September 2014, 16:05
Actually I do believe WTC7 was brought down by demolitions. But it was tested on video that the beams will bend and collapse (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2TMVDYpp2Q) under a load with simple jet fuel so I cannot completely discount WTC1 and WTC2 as having collapsed because of fire. Since WTC7 did not have this, it is a good possibility that something else caused it to collapse. Plus the BBC announced the collapsed before it happened is reason for concern as well.

if you believe that, you have to wonder why the building 7 was ready for controlled demo. If they needed weeks to prepare, why was it done? and if we agree that it was done, doesn't that make the rest of the story highly suspect

It's easy to 'drown' in the complexity of 9/11. That's why I think we don't need to prove anything.
Take just one element that clearly does not match their official explanation and let them clarify the
whole scenario again. Repeat this process until there are no more questions left. That's how you
debug functional errors in software. This is also how we debug a dis-functional government.

Oouthere
30th September 2014, 16:08
Actually I do believe WTC7 was brought down by demolitions. But it was tested on video that the beams will bend and collapse (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2TMVDYpp2Q) under a load with simple jet fuel so I cannot completely discount WTC1 and WTC2 as having collapsed because of fire. Since WTC7 did not have this, it is a good possibility that something else caused it to collapse. Plus the BBC announced the collapsed before it happened is reason for concern as well.

if you believe that, you have to wonder why the building 7 was ready for controlled demo. If they needed weeks to prepare, why was it done? and if we agree that it was done, doesn't that make the rest of the story highly suspect

Sure does.
G43zl4fzDQg

Oouthere
30th September 2014, 16:24
Mostly in regards to the Pentagon impact. There is nothing that fits better than a 757 impacting the Pentagon. The engine parts fit, a stewardess that was caring for her father that missed that flight identified pieces of the aircraft and her best friend's arm by a bracelet (also a stewardess), numerous people stated they saw an airliner hit. It fits the generator impact, it fits the light poles being down, it simply fits. If you forget the far fetched ideas and simply look at the photo's and not listen to why someone tells you it's wrong, then it fits. Also, April Gallop was seen exiting a double wooden door and not the impact hole as she stated. One of the two people that saw her also suffered lung damage due to the jet fuel of which she said was not present.

Some people simply want conspiracy and are not after the truth. I'm only after the truth irregardless where it leads.

The "engine parts fit"? - have you been reading/researching nothing? The "engine" that was found on the pentagon lawn comes from either (1) an obsolete military navy fighter jet, or (2) a CRUISE MISSILE. That's just for starters. Where are the wings? Where is the tail? (What are you even doing here???):rolleyes:

I would suggest you start looking a little harder!

You could not be more wrong.

The turbine shot (http://www.gamelogos.com/temp/rb211-discs.jpg) that everyone says is not from a 757 is one of the last turbines on the shaft of a RB-211 engine that fits a 757. I've counted the blades and looked-up the parts breakdowns, have you?

And a RB-211 diffusor (http://www.ennder.fr/Documents/cqes/attentat_11_09/pentagone/pg1_fichiers/Damage9.jpg) found at the Pentagon. Here's the part breakdown. (http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/pentagon/rb211-535_4.jpg)

Atlas
30th September 2014, 16:32
There's also the wheel. Could these have been put there before the event...?

http://www.allmystery.de/dateien/gg48759,1281787302,pentagon-wheel-04.jpg

http://www.oilempire.us/oil-jpg/debris1_wheel.jpg

jerry
30th September 2014, 17:23
Mostly in regards to the Pentagon impact. There is nothing that fits better than a 757 impacting the Pentagon. The engine parts fit, a stewardess that was caring for her father that missed that flight identified pieces of the aircraft and her best friend's arm by a bracelet (also a stewardess), numerous people stated they saw an airliner hit. It fits the generator impact, it fits the light poles being down, it simply fits. If you forget the far fetched ideas and simply look at the photo's and not listen to why someone tells you it's wrong, then it fits. Also, April Gallop was seen exiting a double wooden door and not the impact hole as she stated. One of the two people that saw her also suffered lung damage due to the jet fuel of which she said was not present.

Some people simply want conspiracy and are not after the truth. I'm only after the truth irregardless where it leads.

ask yourself one question what are they hiding ,and by that I mean where's the photos to prove what hit the Pentagon, SERIUOSLY , the worlds most protected building in the world and not one shred of video evidence has been released that has any merit as to what hit it what so ever. And the follow up of the FBI confiscating all surrounding videos from businesses in the area ,GIVE US A BREAK go watch your CNN

jerry
30th September 2014, 17:28
Well, I've seen some pretty grisly photos of charred bodies still strapped to airline seats, supposedly taken from inside after it happened. If that was faked then obviously the conspiracy gets even bigger.

Are these the photos of charred bodies (http://www.911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/photos/humanremains.html) (WARNING - DISTURBING/GRAPHIC) you saw ? Are these the only ones we have ? Because if yes, I don't think this is conclusive evidence... Were the remains identified ? and where are the other bodies ?Agreed lots of pics out there and were these official . Chared bodies but no AP parts call me a skeptic cause I don't buy it. Charred bodies are of the investigative team the missile took out IMHO

aviators
30th September 2014, 17:33
Exit Hole ....Exit Hole .... Exit Hole ....
If this isn't the biggest smoking gun please explain.
27450

The Pentagon exit hole is one of the most anomalous features of the Pentagon attack. It is 310 feet away from the impact area, near perfectly round and absolutely inexplicable in terms of the composite nose of a Boeing 757-200 "punching out". The other sore thumb about it is that it is avoided in ALL of the official reports. "It is not explained in the Building Performance Report, the Shoring Report, the Arlington County After-Action Report or the 9/11 Commission Report.". The only report by an engineer commenting on it was linked right here at Rense.com. This article will attempt to support Michael Meyer's position that a type of shape charge was used.
http://www.rense.com/general70/hole.htm

jerry
30th September 2014, 17:34
Actually I do believe WTC7 was brought down by demolitions. But it was tested on video that the beams will bend and collapse (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2TMVDYpp2Q) under a load with simple jet fuel so I cannot completely discount WTC1 and WTC2 as having collapsed because of fire. Since WTC7 did not have this, it is a good possibility that something else caused it to collapse. Plus the BBC announced the collapsed before it happened is reason for concern as well.yes something like space age weapons ect could have caused it to collapse BUT NOT AT FREEFALL IN ITS OWN FOOTPRINT????????????????????????

¤=[Post Update]=¤


i expected better from the readers here. Sorry but there is absolutely, positively no chance in hell that a airliner hit the pentagon. This ridiculous argument has been thoroughly destroyed. I can't believe we are still having this discussion. Actually, let me rephrase that. I can't believe it but i see we have something here at pa that i wasn't sure we'd have and i guess i shouldn't be surprised. You know what i'm talking about but do the rest of you?

Mattyes therrrrre herrrre

gnostic9
30th September 2014, 17:41
Well, I've seen some pretty grisly photos of charred bodies still strapped to airline seats, supposedly taken from inside after it happened. If that was faked then obviously the conspiracy gets even bigger.

Are these the photos of charred bodies (http://www.911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/photos/humanremains.html) (WARNING - DISTURBING/GRAPHIC) you saw ? Are these the only ones we have ? Because if yes, I don't think this is conclusive evidence... Were the remains identified ? and where are the other bodies ?

This is interesting too!http://www.911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/bodies.html

indigopete
30th September 2014, 17:43
I asked her about the speculation that the plane would have made a larger hole due to the wingspan. She informed me that the fuel was stored in the wings and that they would have exploded and broken off, as the fuselage slammed through the building walls......That's ok I'm content with my job, I've already completed the requirements for my degree in avionics technologies after being in the air force for 10 years.

Well all I can say is it's just as well you're doing avionics because physics doesn't seem to be your strong point ;)

A single RB211 engine weighs between 3000 and 4000 Kg. Thats nearly ***4 metric tones*** and there are TWO of them.

At 500 miles per hour (220 m/s) it equates to 72,000 Kilojoules of kinetic energy (72 Megajoules). To give you an idea of how much energy that is, a 6 tonne lorry doing 70 mph represents about 3 Megajoules. So imagine, 24 6-tonne lorries doing 70 miles per hour and ploughing into the same spot in a wall: that's the impact effect of only 1 of those RB-211 engines at the speed it was claimed to be moving.

I'm sorry, but your stewardess friend is either deluded or simply forgot that planes have engines. Two 3-tonne projectiles travelling at 500 mph do not change direction in a millisecond to get "sucked" through a 20 foot hole or otherwise "evaporate" on impact. Those engines were 40 feet apart and didn't even leave a stain on the wall at their supposed "impact point" so I think you'd better go back the drawing board with the "bracelet" theory.

Baby Steps
30th September 2014, 18:02
2745227451

Mostly in regards to the Pentagon impact. There is nothing that fits better than a 757 impacting the Pentagon. The engine parts fit, a stewardess that was caring for her father that missed that flight identified pieces of the aircraft and her best friend's arm by a bracelet (also a stewardess), numerous people stated they saw an airliner hit. It fits the generator impact, it fits the light poles being down, it simply fits. If you forget the far fetched ideas and simply look at the photo's and not listen to why someone tells you it's wrong, then it fits. Also, April Gallop was seen exiting a double wooden door and not the impact hole as she stated. One of the two people that saw her also suffered lung damage due to the jet fuel of which she said was not present.

Some people simply want conspiracy and are not after the truth. I'm only after the truth irregardless where it leads.

ask yourself one question what are they hiding ,and by that I mean where's the photos to prove what hit the Pentagon, SERIUOSLY , the worlds most protected building in the world and not one shred of video evidence has been released that has any merit as to what hit it what so ever. And the follow up of the FBI confiscating all surrounding videos from businesses in the area ,GIVE US A BREAK go watch your CNN

The image before the roof fell is very telling.No sign of plane or plane sized hole. But many witnesses that there was a plane. It just looks wrong.9/11 could finally trigger a consciousness shift.

ceetee9
30th September 2014, 18:38
Actually I do believe WTC7 was brought down by demolitions. But it was tested on video that the beams will bend and collapse (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2TMVDYpp2Q) under a load with simple jet fuel so I cannot completely discount WTC1 and WTC2 as having collapsed because of fire. Since WTC7 did not have this, it is a good possibility that something else caused it to collapse. Plus the BBC announced the collapsed before it happened is reason for concern as well.
With all due respect Oouthere, I'm a bit puzzled how you could believe WTC7 was brought down by demolitions, but then believe buildings 1 & 2 were brought down by jet fueled fires. Doesn't it seem odd that two buildings would come down by fires caused by the unexpected impact of planes, but the third would be brought down by a controlled (i.e., planned) demolition? It takes weeks, if not months, to plan and wire a building so that it can be brought down in its own footprint--and even then it doesn't always go as planned.

It has already been proven that office fires (stoked by jet fuel or not) cannot melt or sufficiently weaken high-rise steel structures to bring them down. And this is borne out by the fact that never in history has a single skyscraper been brought down by fires or plane impacts--of which there have been dozens if not hundreds.

I highly recommend you watch The Anatomy of a Great Deception (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0Q5eZhCPuc) documentary and visit some the better 9/11 websites like Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (http://www.ae911truth.org/), Pilots for 9/11 Truth (http://www.pilotsfor911truth.org/), Scientists for 9/11 Truth (http://www.scientistsfor911truth.org/), U.S. Military Officers for 9/11 Truth (http://www.mo911truth.org/), Firefighters for 9/11 Truth (http://web.archive.org/web/20110911032318/firefightersfor911truth.org/) and there are many more that provide real expert testimony including the impossibility of the towers being brought down by fires; much less in their own footprint a la controlled demolition style.

A Voice from the Mountains
30th September 2014, 19:04
Here are some more visual comparisons.

This was the original hole before the roof collapsed:

http://www.sott.net/image/12310/NBATP_3.jpg

http://911review.org/Wget/investigate911.batcave.net/facade-intactesma2.jpg

It's rather obvious, to me at least, that no plane went into that hole. This is the same hole that General Stubblebine (US military) was talking about when he said there was no way a plane went in there.


http://truthandshadows.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/pentagonxox30.jpg

I don't know if there's an "official explanation" for the wings but usually I hear that they folded up and were "sucked into" the hole where the fuselage went without striking the building, which doesn't sound very credible to me. I just can't realistically imagine how that could happen, after watching other (test) aircraft impacts and seeing how they actually look.

Hervé
30th September 2014, 19:31
That initial hole


http://911review.org/Wget/investigate911.batcave.net/facade-intactesma2.jpg


... and the sticking belief that a full speed flying 757 created it without leaving imprints of wings, engines, and vertical stabilizer as asserted by the official narrative is one of the best example of what's called


Cognitive Dissonance!


Cognitive dissonance:
In psychology, cognitive dissonance is the mental stress or discomfort experienced by an individual who holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values at the same time, or is confronted by new information that conflicts with existing beliefs, ideas, or values.[1][2]

Leon Festinger’s theory of cognitive dissonance focuses on how humans strive for internal consistency. When inconsistency (dissonance) is experienced, individuals tend to become psychologically uncomfortable and are motivated to attempt to reduce this dissonance, as well as actively avoiding situations and information which are likely to increase it.[1]

More there: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

Festinguer also co-authored a book titled “When prophecy fails”:

Festinger and his collaborators, Henry Riecken and Stanley Schachter, examined conditions under which disconfirmation of beliefs leads to increased conviction in such beliefs in the 1956 book When Prophecy Fails. The group studied a small apocalyptic cult led by Dorothy Martin (under the pseudonym Marian Keech in the book), a suburban housewife.[49][50] Martin claimed to have received messages from “the Guardians,” a group of superior beings from another planet. The messages puportedly said that a flood would destroy the world on December 21. The three psychologists and several more assistants joined the group. The team observed the group firsthand for months before and after the predicted apocalypse. Many of the group members quit their jobs and disposed of their possessions in preparation for the apocalypse. When doomsday came and went, Martin claimed that the world had been spared because of the “force of Good and light”[51] that the group members had spread throughout the world. Rather than abandoning their discredited beliefs, group members adhered to them even more strongly and began proselytizing with fervor.

Festinger and his co-authors concluded that the following conditions lead to increased conviction in beliefs following disconfirmation:

1. The belief must be held with deep conviction and be relevant to the believer’s actions or behavior.
2. The belief must have produced actions that are difficult to undo.
3. The belief must be sufficiently specific and concerned with the real world such that it can be clearly disconfirmed.
4. The disconfirmatory evidence must be recognized by the believer.
5. The believer must have social support from other believers.[52]

Festinger also later described the increased conviction and proselytizing by cult members after disconfirmation as a specific instantiation of cognitive dissonance (i.e., increased proselyting reduced dissonance by producing the knowledge that others also accepted their beliefs) and its application to understanding complex mass phenomena.[53]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leon_Festinger]

Any resemblance to any contemporary group is absolutely non-fortuitous…

jerry
30th September 2014, 20:08
Poor Oouthere he's either gonna wake up or go away , and either will still be quite depressing , but its for the best and it will get better with time

Operator
30th September 2014, 21:21
Poor Oouthere he's either gonna wake up or go away , and either will still be quite depressing , but its for the best and it will get better with time

Yep, it's a painful process for sure. But we should be careful not to divide ourselves into "us and them".

Here we are at post #56 already, after presenting a lot 'evidence' pro- and contra again. We'd better invest some time in
understanding the differences like I attempted in post #9 (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?75484-9-11-TRUTH-GOES-NUCLEAR-Massive-Download-In-Progress&p=883026&viewfull=1#post883026).

Whatever point of view is chosen people are often stuck to it because of factors and belief systems external to the case.
My mother e.g. simply cannot accept that people would be evil enough to inflict death and destruction on their own nation.
A different approach may be needed for each individual case.

Ahnung-quay
30th September 2014, 21:46
Operator -I was talking to a friend today about why people deny the conspiracy aspect of 9/11 when the evidence is clearly before them.

She admitted that it is so disruptive to her Polly Anna-like view point of the world that she just can't/won't go there. She's a very loving individual of average intelligence. I guess it does just hurt some people's hearts too much.

Hervé
1st October 2014, 00:11
Oouthere did post a very interesting video from a whistle blower:


G43zl4fzDQg


Interesting because it ties in with this testimony (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?75343-Inside-911-An-aristocratic-genocidal-construction.&p=881546&viewfull=1#post881546) (<---) as well as the different $$ grab schemes -- as documented by Sue Arrigo (http://pauljackson.us/sue_arrigo/) -- that resulted from that excuse for war that benefited the only 3 individuals who could have given the order to Susan's handler to tell Saddam, "Comply or else!" and leaving out THE individual who was ordering any of the three of them... since Rockefeller has been ordering the CIA and KGB from their inception (see this post (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?69621-Ukraine-Crimea-Syria-Israel-Iran-Putin-and-World-War-III&p=882518&viewfull=1#post882518) <---)

Susan's testimony is also a reminder of that - now proverbial - saying, that "The lie is different at each level"...

778 neighbour of some guy
1st October 2014, 07:53
Exit Hole ....Exit Hole .... Exit Hole ....
If this isn't the biggest smoking gun please explain.
27450

The Pentagon exit hole is one of the most anomalous features of the Pentagon attack. It is 310 feet away from the impact area, near perfectly round and absolutely inexplicable in terms of the composite nose of a Boeing 757-200 "punching out". The other sore thumb about it is that it is avoided in ALL of the official reports. "It is not explained in the Building Performance Report, the Shoring Report, the Arlington County After-Action Report or the 9/11 Commission Report.". The only report by an engineer commenting on it was linked right here at Rense.com. This article will attempt to support Michael Meyer's position that a type of shape charge was used.
http://www.rense.com/general70/hole.htm



27450


OK, here goes, I have been a bricklayer for some years and that hole is not made by an airplane, just look at it, no jagged edges at all,if you punch a hole through a brick wall it will NOT look that neat, especially because that supposed airplane went through rows and row and rows of steel reinforced concrete columns and walls and by the time it would have arrived at hole it would be completely shredded to bits and jagged pieces and nothing even remotely resembling an airplane nose cone would survive that little journey through that sort of terrain intact, let alone make a nose cone sized and shaped exit hole, utterly ridiculous, that hole is made by a shaped charge, its an exit hole all right, but not from an airplane, someone left that building through that hole with SOMETHING they wanted OUT of the building, my best guess would be a big old pile of hard drives filled with severely incriminating information , the round circumference of the hole is just a nice touch to make you think something with that shape punched through that wall, it didn't, ( a square hole would have been a bit too obvious eh)I commented on that two years ago I believe and I said approximately the same thing, that hole is NOT made by an airplane, its a door.

Btw, look at that neat little pile of rubble in front of the hole, even if a plane had speed enough to punch through that magical hole, it would not look like that, a precisely calculated controlled big badaboom device probably resembling Play Dough was stuck to that wall around the edges of the soon to be made hole and blew a nice round hole in it, They probably drew the circumference of the soon to be hole in the wall with nothing but a piece of string, a nail and a sharpie.

Special forces do entries like this all the time, they train for it and with it, and when you enter a building like that, you can also exit it in the same way, from the inside out instead from the outside in, the question is, why didn't they use the front door, nobody would notice them leaving, especially since it takes about three minutes to change clothes, so if someone chose to leave through a wall, what were they carrying that they couldn't get away with at the front door, did security even know they were in the building, don't you have to pass through security when entering and exiting, aren't those people logged in and out, pass through metal detectors and past dudes with guns and God knows what else?

Miners around the world make holes like that too in massive rock walls above and below ground, they have been making tunnels with explosives for about 150 years plus through mountains, or just looking for natural resources in tight spaces they have done this a zillion times like this, maybe with less sophisticated tools and explosives and needing more time, but its not uncommon.

I am willing to take a bet that the front door and back door explosion happened simultaneous to hide its creation and that it was prepared in advance. As a matter of fact, imo the whole purpose of the so called plane was to hide the creation of the exit hole, don't forget, the people in the Pentagon had at least the whole night to drag whatever they stole to the hole, all they needed was one bang to get out, a bang that would have attracted a lot of unwanted attention, hence front door diversion bang by supposed plane. Hide small boom in big boom, even when all you need is a small boom, you still have to hide the boom.

And Elvis left the building through a shortcut with a huge bag of very special important and valuable "doughnuts".

aviators
1st October 2014, 15:17
Btw, look at that neat little pile of rubble in front of the hole, even if a plane had speed enough to punch through that magical hole, it would not look like that, a precisely calculated controlled big badaboom device probably resembling Play Dough was stuck to that wall around the edges of the soon to be made hole and blew a nice round hole in it, They probably drew the circumference of the soon to be hole in the wall with nothing but a piece of string, a nail and a sharpie.


The hole obviously wasn't made from an aluminum airplane.
So perhaps we are looking at some advanced technology weapon here?
Not sure if this video has been debunked or is even from original footage.
But this will give you something to research if you like.
There are other videos showing sphere type objects around the planes
On 911.
5JXBZX3Kohw

outerheaven
1st October 2014, 15:45
I've always loved that the Official Story maintains that the hole in the Pentagon is small, because the plane impacted it at such speed, that the force of the impact made the wings bend backwards, collapsing in with the fuselage as it entered the building.

...

Um, guys? Anybody remember the plane-shaped cartoon cut-out on WTC 1 and 2?

9/11 is truly the day that physics just went a little wonky. ;)

A Voice from the Mountains
1st October 2014, 17:02
That's a good point, outerheaven. :)

In one case the wings, we are told, folded up so neatly when "sucked" into the hole that it appears they never even touched the outer surface of the building.

In the other case, the wings wouldn't stop for anything and barrelled straight through a dense row of steel columns.

Things that make you go "hmmmmm....."

SKIBADABOMSKI
1st October 2014, 17:47
Oouthere..

I find your theories very interesting. It's always good to have someone around with an opposite view on something and I think you're quite brave sharing what you honestly believe to be a plausible answer to something that 99% of people here will disagree with.

Personally I believe that you're mistaken or wrong but I appreciate the opposite viewpoint as it shows the side that I don't see much. I only ever see videos that will blast the official story to shreds and other than that I sadly see people whom are are so patriotic and stern but never delve into the subject any farther than what the media says or what they personally cannot except. You have thrown some stuff into the mix that I find very interesting for other reasons.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

Oouthere
1st October 2014, 18:15
The following video is one of the best I have been able to find on 911 when considering time and facts covered. James Corbett tactfully covers the convincing talking points in a short 4 minute + video that will give any deniers still out there the most serious questions to ponder. Give them pause to reflect on the evidence presented by our leaders through the unquestioning MSM. yuC_4mGTs98

It is a good video but it does against nothing that has been discussed. I am simply saying that a plane hit the Pentagon. Look at the photographic evidence:

Engine parts fit a 757
Sheet metal parts fit a 757
Landing gear parts fit a 757
Bodies from a 757
Generator damage matches a 757
Light pole damage matches a 757
The impact hole matches a 757 (http://whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES...eing_small.jpg)
So taking all of these photographs to be true and discardin

Hervé
1st October 2014, 18:36
[...]
The impact hole matches a 757 http://whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/pentagon_boeing_small.jpg
[...]


...
... ??? ...



Here are some more visual comparisons.

This was the original hole before the roof collapsed:


http://www.sott.net/image/12310/NBATP_3.jpg



http://911review.org/Wget/investigate911.batcave.net/facade-intactesma2.jpg


It's rather obvious, to me at least, that no plane went into that hole. This is the same hole that General Stubblebine (US military) was talking about when he said there was no way a plane went in there.
[...]

Published on Feb 12, 2013
Albert "Bert" N. Stubblebine III is a retired Major General in the United States Army. He was the commanding general of the United States Army Intelligence and Security Command from 1981 to 1984, when he retired from the Army. He is also known for his interest in parapsychology.

Stubblebine graduated from the United States Military Academy and received a master's degree in chemical engineering from Columbia University.[1] His active duty career spanned 32 years, and he is credited with redesigning the U.S. Army intelligence architecture during his command of the United States Army Intelligence and Security Command from 1981 to 1984.

Other U.S. Army commands that he led included the Electronic Research and Development Command (ERADCOM) and the Intelligence and Security Command (INSCOM).[2] Stubblebine was a key person in the U.S. military invasion of Grenada and was, according to a report published by the Daily Mail, "at the heart of America's military machine".[3] He is a member of the Military Intelligence Hall of Fame.[4]

Stubblebine appeared in the 2006 documentary "One Nation Under Siege"[2] in which he states, in relation to the attack on The Pentagon which took place on September 11, 2001: I look at the hole in The Pentagon, and I look at the size of an airplane that was supposed to have hit the Pentagon, and I said "The plane does not fit in that hole. So what did hit the Pentagon?"




Jc1ql4TfCZw

Dennis Leahy
1st October 2014, 19:31
Tha Arab hijacker of Flight 77 placed a statue of Mohammed on the dashboard of the jet. From that moment on, "Islamic Magic" took over. The jet WAS able to fly at a speed and altitude that defies physics. The wings and tail of the jet retracted and the entire fuselage shrunk down considerably in size (the entire 757 jet aircraft actually went right through the ground-floor window shown here:

http://911review.org/Wget/investigate911.batcave.net/facade-intactesma2.jpg
THIS IS NOT COGNITIVE DISSONANCE! It is Magic!


Islamic Magic destroyed ALL the data about the 2.3 trillion dollars that Rumsfeld announced one day before was "missing", and the Islamic Magic was so powerful it went from the "dumb" terminals in that section of the Pentagon, followed the network cables snaking through the building, went through the routers, and ERASED all the data in the servers that were not destroyed in the Magic Arab Attack. The Magic was so powerful that it erased the data from all pieces of paper filed anywhere and everywhere in the Pentagon and in other military offices in all other buildings in the US having anything to do with the missing trillions. The Magic was so strong that it confused and befuddled Maj Gen Stubblebine, one of the most qualified observers on the subject alive on Earth, into believing that the jet could not shrink into that window. The Magic was so powerful that it erased all images from all cameras mounted on and around the Pentagon and in the nearby neighborhood, except for a few frames from one camera that looks like a bomb went off in the building.

Still not convinced it was Magic?

All of the Saudi Arabian hijackers placed an identical statue of Mohammed on the dashboard of the jets they hijacked. The Magic was so strong that it made the Shanksville jet disappear (or maybe it made Cheney order it shot down.) The Magic was so strong that it made the aluminum nosecone of the jet that hit the second WTC tower go through the steel columns and appear intact on the other side. The Magic was so strong that it made the jet fuel burn at more than double the normal combustion temperature and it melted all the steel and pulverized all the concrete in the towers (and everything below the crash sites simply abandoned all of its physical properties and disintegrated itself.)

Still not convinced it was Magic?

The Islamic Magic was so powerful that it led to retaliatory wars against 2 countries where hundreds of thousands of Muslims were martyred, which certainly must have been Allah's wish, because as noted, this was Islamic Magic. The Magic is so powerful that it is still working! It created alQaeda and now ISIS/ISIL/IS to ensure that more Muslims are martyred. (Maybe Allah does not want Muslims to control all the oil and gas and lithium in the Middle East?)

So, put away your slide rules. You simply cannot figure out how all of this took place - because it was Magic.

Now maybe we can stop talking about the shrunken jet flying through the window at the Pentagon, and we can actually allow this thread to steer back to the Veterans Today article. For those still under a spell, simply go back and read the first post. If the Magic is still befuddling you (and making you want to argue about shrunken jets at the Pentagon instead of staying on-topic), spin around three times counter-clockwise while repeating "cigam" over and over until the Magic spell wears off.

Dennis

Oouthere
2nd October 2014, 03:59
[...]
The impact hole matches a 757 http://whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/pentagon_boeing_small.jpg
[...]


...
... ??? ...



Here are some more visual comparisons.

This was the original hole before the roof collapsed:


http://www.sott.net/image/12310/NBATP_3.jpg



http://911review.org/Wget/investigate911.batcave.net/facade-intactesma2.jpg


It's rather obvious, to me at least, that no plane went into that hole. This is the same hole that General Stubblebine (US military) was talking about when he said there was no way a plane went in there.
[...]

Published on Feb 12, 2013
Albert "Bert" N. Stubblebine III is a retired Major General in the United States Army. He was the commanding general of the United States Army Intelligence and Security Command from 1981 to 1984, when he retired from the Army. He is also known for his interest in parapsychology.

Stubblebine graduated from the United States Military Academy and received a master's degree in chemical engineering from Columbia University.[1] His active duty career spanned 32 years, and he is credited with redesigning the U.S. Army intelligence architecture during his command of the United States Army Intelligence and Security Command from 1981 to 1984.

Other U.S. Army commands that he led included the Electronic Research and Development Command (ERADCOM) and the Intelligence and Security Command (INSCOM).[2] Stubblebine was a key person in the U.S. military invasion of Grenada and was, according to a report published by the Daily Mail, "at the heart of America's military machine".[3] He is a member of the Military Intelligence Hall of Fame.[4]

Stubblebine appeared in the 2006 documentary "One Nation Under Siege"[2] in which he states, in relation to the attack on The Pentagon which took place on September 11, 2001: I look at the hole in The Pentagon, and I look at the size of an airplane that was supposed to have hit the Pentagon, and I said "The plane does not fit in that hole. So what did hit the Pentagon?"






One thing to remember about Stubblebine is he also concentrated and banged his head trying to walk through a wall. Just because someone is in the military does not mean they are any more apt at analysis that anyone else.

Take away the foam and the earlier picture is what is really there, not the small hole everyone wants to believe is there.

Oouthere
2nd October 2014, 04:12
Tha Arab hijacker of Flight 77 placed a statue of Mohammed on the dashboard of the jet. From that moment on, "Islamic Magic" took over. The jet WAS able to fly at a speed and altitude that defies physics. The wings and tail of the jet retracted and the entire fuselage shrunk down considerably in size (the entire 757 jet aircraft actually went right through the ground-floor window shown here:

http://911review.org/Wget/investigate911.batcave.net/facade-intactesma2.jpg
THIS IS NOT COGNITIVE DISSONANCE! It is Magic!


Islamic Magic destroyed ALL the data about the 2.3 trillion dollars that Rumsfeld announced one day before was "missing", and the Islamic Magic was so powerful it went from the "dumb" terminals in that section of the Pentagon, followed the network cables snaking through the building, went through the routers, and ERASED all the data in the servers that were not destroyed in the Magic Arab Attack. The Magic was so powerful that it erased the data from all pieces of paper filed anywhere and everywhere in the Pentagon and in other military offices in all other buildings in the US having anything to do with the missing trillions. The Magic was so strong that it confused and befuddled Maj Gen Stubblebine, one of the most qualified observers on the subject alive on Earth, into believing that the jet could not shrink into that window. The Magic was so powerful that it erased all images from all cameras mounted on and around the Pentagon and in the nearby neighborhood, except for a few frames from one camera that looks like a bomb went off in the building.

Still not convinced it was Magic?

All of the Saudi Arabian hijackers placed an identical statue of Mohammed on the dashboard of the jets they hijacked. The Magic was so strong that it made the Shanksville jet disappear (or maybe it made Cheney order it shot down.) The Magic was so strong that it made the aluminum nosecone of the jet that hit the second WTC tower go through the steel columns and appear intact on the other side. The Magic was so strong that it made the jet fuel burn at more than double the normal combustion temperature and it melted all the steel and pulverized all the concrete in the towers (and everything below the crash sites simply abandoned all of its physical properties and disintegrated itself.)

Still not convinced it was Magic?

The Islamic Magic was so powerful that it led to retaliatory wars against 2 countries where hundreds of thousands of Muslims were martyred, which certainly must have been Allah's wish, because as noted, this was Islamic Magic. The Magic is so powerful that it is still working! It created alQaeda and now ISIS/ISIL/IS to ensure that more Muslims are martyred. (Maybe Allah does not want Muslims to control all the oil and gas and lithium in the Middle East?)

So, put away your slide rules. You simply cannot figure out how all of this took place - because it was Magic.

Now maybe we can stop talking about the shrunken jet flying through the window at the Pentagon, and we can actually allow this thread to steer back to the Veterans Today article. For those still under a spell, simply go back and read the first post. If the Magic is still befuddling you (and making you want to argue about shrunken jets at the Pentagon instead of staying on-topic), spin around three times counter-clockwise while repeating "cigam" over and over until the Magic spell wears off.

Dennis

Why is it so difficult to understand that the black box data and radar data needs to be thrown away? Would you want your black box data to show that the aircraft was being remoted while using the highway as an alignment for your ground coordinates? A decade earlier they had performed over 100 consistent landings with touchdown within centimeters each time. Align the craft to the highway (hint: light poles knocked down) and impact the Pentagon (hint: black box data useless, much slower speed and remoted).

Otherwise you need to explain how the light poles were knocked over, how one landed in a taxis, how the generator was damaged, how the fireball over the pentagon would match the generator fuel spraying everywhere and burning. And even better how they landed the hi-jacked aircraft, grabbed a stewardess, burned her body, cut her arm off, and put it in the Pentagon. Then explain how they threw the aircraft parts into the air so they could land on and near cars, plus placing a part that weighs thousands of pounds in the middle of burned-up section that even a fork lift could not get to.

My theory works pretty good, yours is so full of holes it is laughable.