pentagon missile

[dark skies]

this might seem strange but bear with me on this


the hole in the pentagon wasnt big enough for it to have been a plane so must have been a missile right.

now last night i was watching 7 days

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

the sci fi series from the late 90's where the NSA can send someone back for 7 days to undo something that happened

now in the second episode of the second series which aired in october 1999 had someone fly a missile into the pentagon,

now ive also noticed the in the pilot episode terrorists fly a plane into the white house,

its food for thought that somethings can be blatently put out right infront of your nose and not realise it till a lot later

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

Pretty sure it was a jet.
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/index.html

[Lord Sidious]

Pretty sure it was a jet.
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/index.html

How come the vast majority of your posts are 9/11 rebuttals?
Where exactly do you stand on the whole thing?
Can you explain your theory on the topic please?

[mojo]

I checked out the article from the link above. It is written by Jim Hoffman.

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

He is critical of the offical explanation to the Twin Towers collapse.

[modwiz]

this might seem strange but bear with me on this


the hole in the pentagon wasnt big enough for it to have been a plane so must have been a missile right.

now last night i was watching 7 days

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

the sci fi series from the late 90's where the NSA can send someone back for 7 days to undo something that happened

now in the second episode of the second series which aired in october 1999 had someone fly a missile into the pentagon,

now ive also noticed the in the pilot episode terrorists fly a plane into the white house,

its food for thought that somethings can be blatently put out right infront of your nose and not realise it till a lot later

Unfortunately this will be a lot of finger pointing and he said, he said until some of the perpetrators and/or enablers go to prison and have to deal with some 'missiles' of their own. Not until then will the real story will come out.

This was the crime of the century. JFK, and the allowed bombing of Pearl Harbor, were technically last century. A lot of people were murdered at the crime scene and the continuing cover-up, as well as the bogus wars that were the intended product of the crime. Although technically they may not be murders because the government commissioned them. Murder is a legal term. In this case we have to use the more legally correct term of killed.

BTW. EWO. You are on my ignore list and anything you say will be invisible to me. You might want to put me on yours. What a gift the ignore list is.:tea:

[RMorgan]

Pretty sure it was a jet.
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/index.html

As far as I know from my researches, there´s no possibility that it was a airplane that hit the pentagon. There are hundreds of articles about his subject on the web. Just do some research and see for yourself.

I remember that the official statement was that the plane was "vaporized" on impact, which is literally impossible and ridiculous, because burning plane fuel isn´t hot enough to "vaporize" an entire plane! They had said that, because there was not a single piece of such "plane" left on the location of the impact.

[modwiz]

Pretty sure it was a jet.
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/index.html

As far as I know from my researches, there´s no possibility that it was a airplane that hit the pentagon. There are hundreds of articles about his subject on the web. Just do some research and see for yourself.

I remember that the official statement was that the plane was "vaporized" on impact, which is literally impossible and ridiculous, because burning plane fuel isn´t hot enough to "vaporize" an entire plane! They had said that, because there was not a single piece of such "plane" left on the location of the impact.

I have seen videos that tried to duplicate the speed and low altitude to do it and the jets would not, could not get low enough to hit the Pentagon. The aerodynamics of the speed and jet would not allow it to happen. The debris field on the lawn alone is enough for any thinking person. That eliminates a lot of people in America. The you have those who are afraid of where a finger might point. It is clear whoever did The Towers did the Pentagon. I will include a little clip from FOX and you might be able to connect dots and find some issues. There might even be some dual citizenship issues as well.

Here is a link to the overall article:http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/11/21/nypd-so-much-to-hide/

Here is a quote below the video:
"You heard it, didn’t you? “Israeli citizens (many thousands worked in the WTC) were told by their government to ‘take the day off’ on 9/11.” The ADL said the rumor came from an antisemitic group.
Here you saw it, it came from a Fox News report, owned by Newscorp, controlled by Rupert Murdoch, who holds Israeli citizenship. Is what Fox reported true? I don’t know but I do know that the ADL lied. What does that mean? You know what that means, I think we all do. But, today, our issue is NYPD and their inexplicable role in the greatest conspiracy of the century."

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

BTW. EWO. You are on my ignore list and anything you say will be invisible to me. You might want to put me on yours. What a gift the ignore list is.:tea:

I realise modwiz wont be reading this but just thought I would post my reasons for not ignoring anyone. I prefer not to stick my fingers in my ears and instead listen to what everyone has to say. Shutting down discussions makes it seem that one cannot argue ones point and instead relax with the knowledge that they wont have to defend their arguments.
I have not offended or been rude to modwiz so I can see no other reason for him ignoring me other than willful ignorance.


My position on 9/11 is that I think it was an inside job and we must study the facts and observations using the scientific method without bias no matter how appealing a certain scenario may be.

¤=[Post Update]=¤


[QUOTE=EYES WIDE OPEN;361465]Pretty sure it was a jet.
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/index.html

As far as I know from my researches, there´s no possibility that it was a airplane that hit the pentagon. There are hundreds of articles about his subject on the web. Just do some research and see for yourself.

.

I spent the last 4 years looking into this topic. I too for a long time thought that it was a missile but I don't think that was the case at all.

[RMorgan]

I´m not sure if it was a missile as well. Possibly not. I think they might have used some kind of explosive device.

[Eagle]

why is this still an issue? from day one footage you can see it isnt a plane, from the security cameras from across the street(that were confiscated), of course this was in inside job in prep for the Iraq and Afghan invasions. here again the plane in pennsylvania didnt really crash but was shot down. There is a method to the madness, Turn the Page!

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

Pretty sure it was a jet.
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/index.html

How come the vast majority of your posts are 9/11 rebuttals?
Where exactly do you stand on the whole thing?
Can you explain your theory on the topic please?

Please see this post that covers the movement as a whole as well as the destruction of the towers:
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?26351-The-state-of-the-9-11-truth-movement

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

[QUOTE=RMorgan;361490]


I have seen videos that tried to duplicate the speed and low altitude to do it and the jets would not, could not get low enough to hit the Pentagon. The aerodynamics of the speed and jet would not allow it to happen. The debris field on the lawn alone is enough for any thinking person.



The following link is for those that have an open mind and do not have me on ignore:
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2010/Calibration%20of%20altimeter_92.pdf
This paper is one of the 3 or 4 that convinced me that it was not a missile and that a jet could indeed execute the moves required.
Who will have the guts to challenge themselves to read it?
Remember, the paper came from this site:
http://www.journalof911studies.com/
Before you all go and call me a defender of the official story - you should check out who co-edits the site.

My only aim is too try and sort the wheat from the chaff when it comes to 9/11. Conjecture will not bring justice for the families.

[Eagle]

[QUOTE=RMorgan;361490]


I have seen videos that tried to duplicate the speed and low altitude to do it and the jets would not, could not get low enough to hit the Pentagon. The aerodynamics of the speed and jet would not allow it to happen. The debris field on the lawn alone is enough for any thinking person.



The following link is for those that have an open mind and do not have me on ignore:
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2010/Calibration%20of%20altimeter_92.pdf
This paper is on of the 3 or 4 that convinced me that it was not a missile and that a jet could indeed execute the moves required.
Whu will have the guts to challenge themselves to read it?
Remember, the paper came from this site:
http://www.journalof911studies.com/
Before you all go and call me a defender of the official story - you should check out who co-edits the site.

My only aim is too try and sort the wheat from the chaff when it comes to 9/11. Conjecture will not bring justice for the families.

I can create a paper on how to bake a cake but it dosent mean that I can actually bake.

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

why is this still an issue? from day one footage you can see it isnt a plane, from the security cameras from across the street(that were confiscated),

First of all, its NOT clear from the footage what hit the pentagon.
I feel the videos that are being withheld are being done so to distract the truth movemnt and keep the redundant debate regarding the Penatgon going for ever which will achieve nothing.
The real question I think is not what hit it, but that it was allowed to hit it. The most secure airspace in America was hit when the whole world already knew that it was under attack.

¤=[Post Update]=¤




[QUOTE=RMorgan;361490]


I have seen videos that tried to duplicate the speed and low altitude to do it and the jets would not, could not get low enough to hit the Pentagon. The aerodynamics of the speed and jet would not allow it to happen. The debris field on the lawn alone is enough for any thinking person.



The following link is for those that have an open mind and do not have me on ignore:
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2010/Calibration%20of%20altimeter_92.pdf
This paper is on of the 3 or 4 that convinced me that it was not a missile and that a jet could indeed execute the moves required.
Whu will have the guts to challenge themselves to read it?
Remember, the paper came from this site:
http://www.journalof911studies.com/
Before you all go and call me a defender of the official story - you should check out who co-edits the site.

My only aim is too try and sort the wheat from the chaff when it comes to 9/11. Conjecture will not bring justice for the families.

I can create a paper on how to bake a cake but it dosent mean that can actually bake.

What convinced you it is an unsound paper? What did it get wrong?

Do you know who Kevin Ryan is?

[Eagle]

why is this still an issue? from day one footage you can see it isnt a plane, from the security cameras from across the street(that were confiscated),

First of all, its NOT clear from the footage what hit the pentagon.
I feel the videos that are being withheld are being done so to distract the truth movemnt and keep the redundant debate regarding the Penatgon going for ever which will achieve nothing.
The real question I think is not what hit it, but that it was allowed to hit it. The most secure airspace in America was hit when the whole world already knew that it was under attack.

airspace against a plane yes, but not a missile(low flying) and as far as the damage on the street goes it to could be cause by a missile.

[RMorgan]

[QUOTE=RMorgan;361490]


I have seen videos that tried to duplicate the speed and low altitude to do it and the jets would not, could not get low enough to hit the Pentagon. The aerodynamics of the speed and jet would not allow it to happen. The debris field on the lawn alone is enough for any thinking person.



The following link is for those that have an open mind and do not have me on ignore:
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2010/Calibration%20of%20altimeter_92.pdf
This paper is on of the 3 or 4 that convinced me that it was not a missile and that a jet could indeed execute the moves required.
Whu will have the guts to challenge themselves to read it?
Remember, the paper came from this site:
http://www.journalof911studies.com/
Before you all go and call me a defender of the official story - you should check out who co-edits the site.

My only aim is too try and sort the wheat from the chaff when it comes to 9/11. Conjecture will not bring justice for the families.

This document is very technically concise indeed. However, it doesn´t explain how there were no visible pieces of the airplane at the impact location. I still don´t buy the official explanation that the plane was vaporized on impact.

[Eagle]

why is this still an issue? from day one footage you can see it isnt a plane, from the security cameras from across the street(that were confiscated),

First of all, its NOT clear from the footage what hit the pentagon.
I feel the videos that are being withheld are being done so to distract the truth movemnt and keep the redundant debate regarding the Penatgon going for ever which will achieve nothing.
The real question I think is not what hit it, but that it was allowed to hit it. The most secure airspace in America was hit when the whole world already knew that it was under attack.

¤=[Post Update]=¤




[QUOTE=RMorgan;361490]


I have seen videos that tried to duplicate the speed and low altitude to do it and the jets would not, could not get low enough to hit the Pentagon. The aerodynamics of the speed and jet would not allow it to happen. The debris field on the lawn alone is enough for any thinking person.



The following link is for those that have an open mind and do not have me on ignore:
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2010/Calibration%20of%20altimeter_92.pdf
This paper is on of the 3 or 4 that convinced me that it was not a missile and that a jet could indeed execute the moves required.
Whu will have the guts to challenge themselves to read it?
Remember, the paper came from this site:
http://www.journalof911studies.com/
Before you all go and call me a defender of the official story - you should check out who co-edits the site.

My only aim is too try and sort the wheat from the chaff when it comes to 9/11. Conjecture will not bring justice for the families.

I can create a paper on how to bake a cake but it dosent mean that can actually bake.

What convinced you it is an unsound paper? What did it get wrong?

Do you know who Kevin Ryan is?

what it got wrong is that even after all these years it is still trying to convince us that it was a plane

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

why is this still an issue? from day one footage you can see it isnt a plane, from the security cameras from across the street(that were confiscated),

First of all, its NOT clear from the footage what hit the pentagon.
I feel the videos that are being withheld are being done so to distract the truth movemnt and keep the redundant debate regarding the Penatgon going for ever which will achieve nothing.
The real question I think is not what hit it, but that it was allowed to hit it. The most secure airspace in America was hit when the whole world already knew that it was under attack.

airspace against a plane yes, but not a missile(low flying) and as far as the damage on the street goes it to could be cause by a missile.

There is no way you could have read the paper I posted in under 4 mins. Have you already dismissed new ideas before you have read them?

¤=[Post Update]=¤




why is this still an issue? from day one footage you can see it isnt a plane, from the security cameras from across the street(that were confiscated),

First of all, its NOT clear from the footage what hit the pentagon.
I feel the videos that are being withheld are being done so to distract the truth movemnt and keep the redundant debate regarding the Penatgon going for ever which will achieve nothing.
The real question I think is not what hit it, but that it was allowed to hit it. The most secure airspace in America was hit when the whole world already knew that it was under attack.

¤=[Post Update]=¤




[QUOTE=RMorgan;361490]


I have seen videos that tried to duplicate the speed and low altitude to do it and the jets would not, could not get low enough to hit the Pentagon. The aerodynamics of the speed and jet would not allow it to happen. The debris field on the lawn alone is enough for any thinking person.



The following link is for those that have an open mind and do not have me on ignore:
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2010/Calibration%20of%20altimeter_92.pdf
This paper is on of the 3 or 4 that convinced me that it was not a missile and that a jet could indeed execute the moves required.
Whu will have the guts to challenge themselves to read it?
Remember, the paper came from this site:
http://www.journalof911studies.com/
Before you all go and call me a defender of the official story - you should check out who co-edits the site.

My only aim is too try and sort the wheat from the chaff when it comes to 9/11. Conjecture will not bring justice for the families.

I can create a paper on how to bake a cake but it dosent mean that can actually bake.

What convinced you it is an unsound paper? What did it get wrong?

Do you know who Kevin Ryan is?

what it got wrong is that even after all these years it is still trying to convince us that it was a plane

Which part of the science is wrong? If you dont want to get into specifics, can you show me what evidence convinced you it was not a plane please.

[Maia Gabrial]

The damage was a perfectly shaped hole. What can make that? Explosives set in a perfect circle? If that's the case, then maybe our perpetrators wanted to leave a clue behind, hinting at an inside job..... Maybe that's why the wall didn't come tumbling down from such a huge impact either.... Wouldn't a plane have made a different type of aperture?

The official story is as much of an insult as it SUCKS.... That's why people will continue to find new reasons to question the official lies.... And sooner or later someone is going to figure it out....IMO it's because when people suspect a lie, they'll keep on digging for the truth....
As you can see Avalonians are still digging....

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

[QUOTE=RMorgan;361490]


I have seen videos that tried to duplicate the speed and low altitude to do it and the jets would not, could not get low enough to hit the Pentagon. The aerodynamics of the speed and jet would not allow it to happen. The debris field on the lawn alone is enough for any thinking person.



The following link is for those that have an open mind and do not have me on ignore:
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2010/Calibration%20of%20altimeter_92.pdf
This paper is on of the 3 or 4 that convinced me that it was not a missile and that a jet could indeed execute the moves required.
Whu will have the guts to challenge themselves to read it?
Remember, the paper came from this site:
http://www.journalof911studies.com/
Before you all go and call me a defender of the official story - you should check out who co-edits the site.

My only aim is too try and sort the wheat from the chaff when it comes to 9/11. Conjecture will not bring justice for the families.

This document is very technically concise indeed. However, it doesn´t explain how there were no visible pieces of the airplane at the impact location. I still don´t buy the official explanation that the plane was vaporized on impact.
These links should answer your questions:
bodies and wreckage;
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/photos/index.html
explanation of debris scattering:
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/analysis/conclusions/debris.html

[toad]

A plane seems far more logical to me then any kind of missile. I'm not sure if any of you have witnessed any kind of missile impacting a solid target, but the amount of damage it creates is substantial. Far more then a plane would supposedly do. Also lets assume there is a conspiracy, a missile would require far more people to be involved, logistically speaking, then there would be needed to pull this off, it would be far easier to hire some Muslim extremist to pull of this jihad. In my opinion the real conspiracy involving the entirety of 9/11 is; perhaps instead of holograms/missiles/planting explosives, maybe they just paid off some extremist to perpetrate something some of them long to execute, and that is jihad. It would seem far easier, less of a chance of mistakes, and cheaper, to not only allow them into our territory, but to apply them with the necessary resources to pull this off, it wouldn't be hard, and there would be less people involved, and the less people involved the less chance of the secret being leaked. Too many people run away with tiny details and the speculation just fractals off into incredible theories. If you're the US gov't or some rogue entity of malicious individuals, and you want to create a reason to suspend certain civil liberties and give rise to an excuse to go to war, you would want to make sure this goes off without a hitch, and without leaks, using missiles and other things that some purpose, greatly raise the odds of failure and exposure. I think this could've all been done much simpler.

But who knows, maybe the stars aligned and these jihadist actually pulled something off at the right time, in the right conditions, things of this nature certainly do happen. The grandness of this event has cause a vast amount of scrutiny, and speculation as it should, but we all know appearances can be deceiving.

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

Great post toad. Occams razor in action. The simplest explanations is usually the correct one.

[Eagle]

why is this still an issue? from day one footage you can see it isnt a plane, from the security cameras from across the street(that were confiscated),

First of all, its NOT clear from the footage what hit the pentagon.
I feel the videos that are being withheld are being done so to distract the truth movemnt and keep the redundant debate regarding the Penatgon going for ever which will achieve nothing.
The real question I think is not what hit it, but that it was allowed to hit it. The most secure airspace in America was hit when the whole world already knew that it was under attack.

airspace against a plane yes, but not a missile(low flying) and as far as the damage on the street goes it to could be cause by a missile.

There is no way you could have read the paper I posted in under 4 mins. Have you already dismissed new ideas before you have read them?

¤=[Post Update]=¤




why is this still an issue? from day one footage you can see it isnt a plane, from the security cameras from across the street(that were confiscated),

First of all, its NOT clear from the footage what hit the pentagon.
I feel the videos that are being withheld are being done so to distract the truth movemnt and keep the redundant debate regarding the Penatgon going for ever which will achieve nothing.
The real question I think is not what hit it, but that it was allowed to hit it. The most secure airspace in America was hit when the whole world already knew that it was under attack.

¤=[Post Update]=¤




[QUOTE=RMorgan;361490]


I have seen videos that tried to duplicate the speed and low altitude to do it and the jets would not, could not get low enough to hit the Pentagon. The aerodynamics of the speed and jet would not allow it to happen. The debris field on the lawn alone is enough for any thinking person.



The following link is for those that have an open mind and do not have me on ignore:
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2010/Calibration%20of%20altimeter_92.pdf
This paper is on of the 3 or 4 that convinced me that it was not a missile and that a jet could indeed execute the moves required.
Whu will have the guts to challenge themselves to read it?
Remember, the paper came from this site:
http://www.journalof911studies.com/
Before you all go and call me a defender of the official story - you should check out who co-edits the site.

My only aim is too try and sort the wheat from the chaff when it comes to 9/11. Conjecture will not bring justice for the families.

I can create a paper on how to bake a cake but it dosent mean that can actually bake.

What convinced you it is an unsound paper? What did it get wrong?

Do you know who Kevin Ryan is?

what it got wrong is that even after all these years it is still trying to convince us that it was a plane

Which part of the science is wrong? If you dont want to get into specifics, can you show me what evidence convinced you it was not a plane please.

I do not refute the possibility, i refute the "Official" story, I refute that planes that crashed into the towers caused thier complete collapse, I refute to believe "experts" that contradict hands on experianced people who testified that it was "Pulled", and I refute going to war against a third world country terrorist that had the means to infiltrate and distroy key property in the US to include Tower #7.

[Eagle]

A plane seems far more logical to me then any kind of missile. I'm not sure if any of you have witnessed any kind of missile impacting a solid target, but the amount of damage it creates is substantial. Far more then a plane would supposedly do. Also lets assume there is a conspiracy, a missile would require far more people to be involved, logistically speaking, then there would be needed to pull this off, it would be far easier to hire some Muslim extremist to pull of this jihad. In my opinion the real conspiracy involving the entirety of 9/11 is; perhaps instead of holograms/missiles/planting explosives, maybe they just paid off some extremist to perpetrate something some of them long to execute, and that is jihad. It would seem far easier, less of a chance of mistakes, and cheaper, to not only allow them into our territory, but to apply them with the necessary resources to pull this off, it wouldn't be hard, and there would be less people involved, and the less people involved the less chance of the secret being leaked. Too many people run away with tiny details and the speculation just fractals off into incredible theories. If you're the US gov't or some rogue entity of malicious individuals, and you want to create a reason to suspend certain civil liberties and give rise to an excuse to go to war, you would want to make sure this goes off without a hitch, and without leaks, using missiles and other things that some purpose, greatly raise the odds of failure and exposure. I think this could've all been done much simpler.

But who knows, maybe the stars aligned and these jihadist actually pulled something off at the right time, in the right conditions, things of this nature certainly do happen. The grandness of this event has cause a vast amount of scrutiny, and speculation as it should, but we all know appearances can be deceiving.

Did you miss the fact that that part of the Pentagon had just been reinforced to prevent such an attack? a plane could not have done that much damage, especially to reinforced walls and windows

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

why is this still an issue? from day one footage you can see it isnt a plane, from the security cameras from across the street(that were confiscated),

First of all, its NOT clear from the footage what hit the pentagon.
I feel the videos that are being withheld are being done so to distract the truth movemnt and keep the redundant debate regarding the Penatgon going for ever which will achieve nothing.
The real question I think is not what hit it, but that it was allowed to hit it. The most secure airspace in America was hit when the whole world already knew that it was under attack.

airspace against a plane yes, but not a missile(low flying) and as far as the damage on the street goes it to could be cause by a missile.

There is no way you could have read the paper I posted in under 4 mins. Have you already dismissed new ideas before you have read them?

¤=[Post Update]=¤




why is this still an issue? from day one footage you can see it isnt a plane, from the security cameras from across the street(that were confiscated),

First of all, its NOT clear from the footage what hit the pentagon.
I feel the videos that are being withheld are being done so to distract the truth movemnt and keep the redundant debate regarding the Penatgon going for ever which will achieve nothing.
The real question I think is not what hit it, but that it was allowed to hit it. The most secure airspace in America was hit when the whole world already knew that it was under attack.

¤=[Post Update]=¤




[QUOTE=RMorgan;361490]


I have seen videos that tried to duplicate the speed and low altitude to do it and the jets would not, could not get low enough to hit the Pentagon. The aerodynamics of the speed and jet would not allow it to happen. The debris field on the lawn alone is enough for any thinking person.



The following link is for those that have an open mind and do not have me on ignore:
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2010/Calibration%20of%20altimeter_92.pdf
This paper is on of the 3 or 4 that convinced me that it was not a missile and that a jet could indeed execute the moves required.
Whu will have the guts to challenge themselves to read it?
Remember, the paper came from this site:
http://www.journalof911studies.com/
Before you all go and call me a defender of the official story - you should check out who co-edits the site.

My only aim is too try and sort the wheat from the chaff when it comes to 9/11. Conjecture will not bring justice for the families.

I can create a paper on how to bake a cake but it dosent mean that can actually bake.

What convinced you it is an unsound paper? What did it get wrong?

Do you know who Kevin Ryan is?

what it got wrong is that even after all these years it is still trying to convince us that it was a plane

Which part of the science is wrong? If you dont want to get into specifics, can you show me what evidence convinced you it was not a plane please.

I do not refute the possibility, i refute the "Official" story, I refute that planes that crashed into the towers caused thier complete collapse, I refute to believe "experts" that contradict hands on experianced people who testified that it was "Pulled", and I refute going to war against a third world country terrorist that had the means to infiltrate and distroy key property in the US to include Tower #7.

I agree with you 100% I am also pleased to see you are willing to accept the possibility that it was a plane. :)

[toad]

A plane seems far more logical to me then any kind of missile. I'm not sure if any of you have witnessed any kind of missile impacting a solid target, but the amount of damage it creates is substantial. Far more then a plane would supposedly do. Also lets assume there is a conspiracy, a missile would require far more people to be involved, logistically speaking, then there would be needed to pull this off, it would be far easier to hire some Muslim extremist to pull of this jihad. In my opinion the real conspiracy involving the entirety of 9/11 is; perhaps instead of holograms/missiles/planting explosives, maybe they just paid off some extremist to perpetrate something some of them long to execute, and that is jihad. It would seem far easier, less of a chance of mistakes, and cheaper, to not only allow them into our territory, but to apply them with the necessary resources to pull this off, it wouldn't be hard, and there would be less people involved, and the less people involved the less chance of the secret being leaked. Too many people run away with tiny details and the speculation just fractals off into incredible theories. If you're the US gov't or some rogue entity of malicious individuals, and you want to create a reason to suspend certain civil liberties and give rise to an excuse to go to war, you would want to make sure this goes off without a hitch, and without leaks, using missiles and other things that some purpose, greatly raise the odds of failure and exposure. I think this could've all been done much simpler.

But who knows, maybe the stars aligned and these jihadist actually pulled something off at the right time, in the right conditions, things of this nature certainly do happen. The grandness of this event has cause a vast amount of scrutiny, and speculation as it should, but we all know appearances can be deceiving.

Did you miss the fact that that part of the Pentagon had just been reinforced to prevent such an attack? a plane could not have done that much damage, especially to reinforced walls and windows

https://publicintelligence.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/010914-F-8006R-002.jpg

This is the kind of damage I would come to expect to see when a reinforced building is hit by a massive plane, descending quickly, fully fueled and a low angle, which in essence is a missile. A conventional missile would have done substantial lateral damage, but why would you need a missile? Like I said it could've been done much easier, much cheaper, and with less people involved.


Great post toad. Occams razor in action. The simplest explanations is usually the correct one.

Thanks. Occams Razor actually stats that; among competing hypothesis the one making the fewest new assumptions is usually the correct one, people often reduce that down to say that something that is simple is usually correct, which is not always the case. Just thought I would throw that out there. :P

[Eagle]

A plane seems far more logical to me then any kind of missile. I'm not sure if any of you have witnessed any kind of missile impacting a solid target, but the amount of damage it creates is substantial. Far more then a plane would supposedly do. Also lets assume there is a conspiracy, a missile would require far more people to be involved, logistically speaking, then there would be needed to pull this off, it would be far easier to hire some Muslim extremist to pull of this jihad. In my opinion the real conspiracy involving the entirety of 9/11 is; perhaps instead of holograms/missiles/planting explosives, maybe they just paid off some extremist to perpetrate something some of them long to execute, and that is jihad. It would seem far easier, less of a chance of mistakes, and cheaper, to not only allow them into our territory, but to apply them with the necessary resources to pull this off, it wouldn't be hard, and there would be less people involved, and the less people involved the less chance of the secret being leaked. Too many people run away with tiny details and the speculation just fractals off into incredible theories. If you're the US gov't or some rogue entity of malicious individuals, and you want to create a reason to suspend certain civil liberties and give rise to an excuse to go to war, you would want to make sure this goes off without a hitch, and without leaks, using missiles and other things that some purpose, greatly raise the odds of failure and exposure. I think this could've all been done much simpler.

But who knows, maybe the stars aligned and these jihadist actually pulled something off at the right time, in the right conditions, things of this nature certainly do happen. The grandness of this event has cause a vast amount of scrutiny, and speculation as it should, but we all know appearances can be deceiving.

Did you miss the fact that that part of the Pentagon had just been reinforced to prevent such an attack? a plane could not have done that much damage, especially to reinforced walls and windows

https://publicintelligence.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/010914-F-8006R-002.jpg

This is the kind of damage I would come to expect to see when a reinforced building is hit by a massive plane, descending quickly, fully fueled and a low angle, which in essence is a missile. A conventional missile would have done substantial lateral damage, but why would you need a missile? Like I said it could've been done much easier, much cheaper, and with less people involved.


Great post toad. Occams razor in action. The simplest explanations is usually the correct one.

Thanks. Occams Razor actually stats that; among competing hypothesis the one making the fewest new assumptions is usually the correct one, people often reduce that down to say that something that is simple is usually correct, which is not always the case. Just thought I would throw that out there. :P
Believe it or not it would take less people to fire a Missile then you expect. a plane could not penatrate the first ring and into the second unless it was carrying explosives, the fuel is carried in the wings and would not cause a huge gaping hole, the fuel would burn intensely and nobody could be around it for awhile and yet people were everywhere immediately afterword and in suits . I could go on but I will not argue the point further, keeping it simple applies to the theory but not to the Goverment.

[toad]

Believe it or not it would take less people to fire a Missile then you expect. a plane could not penatrate the first ring and into the second unless it was carrying explosives, the fuel is carried in the wings and would not cause a huge gaping hole, the fuel would burn intensely and nobody could be around it for awhile and yet people were everywhere immediately afterword and in suits . I could go on but I will not argue the point further, keeping it simple applies to the theory but not to the Goverment.

Perhaps the only reason we see pictures of people in suits there 'immediately afterward' is because the fire was so hot no one was around to take photos until the heat had subsided? Why would the gov't or whoever is pulling these strings want to execute an overly complex scheme when they could accomplish the same thing with less. Launching a missile at the Pentagon would require more people to be involved then say if someone just paid some terrorists to hijack a plane and smash into the Pentagon. The black soot from smoke and flames seems to emanate quite aways away in each direction and seems to have been hot enough to leave quite a bit of residue. Missiles explode and do not normally burn, and to say a plane such as the one that could have very well hit the Pentagon is incapable of creating a huge gaping hole is quite ignorant. Almost as if their is some kind of conclusive evidence to support such a claim. We're making lots of assumptions here, but given the nature of this incident and the evidence we have, assumptions are about all we're left with.

[Eagle]

Believe it or not it would take less people to fire a Missile then you expect. a plane could not penatrate the first ring and into the second unless it was carrying explosives, the fuel is carried in the wings and would not cause a huge gaping hole, the fuel would burn intensely and nobody could be around it for awhile and yet people were everywhere immediately afterword and in suits . I could go on but I will not argue the point further, keeping it simple applies to the theory but not to the Goverment.

Perhaps the only reason we see pictures of people in suits there 'immediately afterward' is because the fire was so hot no one was around to take photos until the heat had subsided? Why would the gov't or whoever is pulling these strings want to execute an overly complex scheme when they could accomplish the same thing with less. Launching a missile at the Pentagon would require more people to be involved then say if someone just paid some terrorists to hijack a plane and smash into the Pentagon. The black soot from smoke and flames seems to emanate quite aways away in each direction and seems to have been hot enough to leave quite a bit of residue. Missiles explode and do not normally burn, and to say a plane such as the one that could have very well hit the Pentagon is incapable of creating a huge gaping hole is quite ignorant. Almost as if their is some kind of conclusive evidence to support such a claim. We're making lots of assumptions here, but given the nature of this incident and the evidence we have, assumptions are about all we're left with.
“Ignorance” as you would like to mention, is believing in what the media has told you, not accepting inconsistencies in the story, and we still having this discussion.

[modwiz]

Reading this thread only reinforces the concept of the Earth vibrating into two different dimensions for me. There truly does seem to be two very distinct kinds of humans. Each has quite a few variables, but I can see a bifurcation area. The demonstration of people who can look at the damage at the Pentagon and see two very different scenes is just stunning to me.

[toad]

Believe it or not it would take less people to fire a Missile then you expect. a plane could not penatrate the first ring and into the second unless it was carrying explosives, the fuel is carried in the wings and would not cause a huge gaping hole, the fuel would burn intensely and nobody could be around it for awhile and yet people were everywhere immediately afterword and in suits . I could go on but I will not argue the point further, keeping it simple applies to the theory but not to the Goverment.

Perhaps the only reason we see pictures of people in suits there 'immediately afterward' is because the fire was so hot no one was around to take photos until the heat had subsided? Why would the gov't or whoever is pulling these strings want to execute an overly complex scheme when they could accomplish the same thing with less. Launching a missile at the Pentagon would require more people to be involved then say if someone just paid some terrorists to hijack a plane and smash into the Pentagon. The black soot from smoke and flames seems to emanate quite aways away in each direction and seems to have been hot enough to leave quite a bit of residue. Missiles explode and do not normally burn, and to say a plane such as the one that could have very well hit the Pentagon is incapable of creating a huge gaping hole is quite ignorant. Almost as if their is some kind of conclusive evidence to support such a claim. We're making lots of assumptions here, but given the nature of this incident and the evidence we have, assumptions are about all we're left with.
“Ignorance” as you would like to mention, is believing in what the media has told you, not accepting inconsistencies in the story, and we still having this discussion.

I never said I didn't accept inconsistencies in the story, there are holes in just about every story. The events of this day were massive, and impacted us all deeply. I would expect such inconsistencies. I've never said anything about the media, but just cause they are the media doesn't mean they lie all day about everything. I'm highly skeptical in nature, I could careless what the media is telling me, I make judgments based on the things I see and the evidence I have in front of me. I used to believe this very same missile theory along time ago, but over time and after countless hours debating theories of all shapes and sizes, I just don't see it anymore, it makes lil sense, and the evidence. what lil of it there is, suggests otherwise to me.


Reading this thread only reinforces the concept of the Earth vibrating into two different dimensions for me. There truly does seem to be two very distinct kinds of humans. Each has quite a few variables, but I can see a bifurcation area. The demonstration of people who can look at the damage at the Pentagon and see two very different scenes is just stunning to me.

We are all very different, past experiences, the knowledge we attain threw out life all plays into the objective nature of humanity. This very subject, affected us all in so many ways, it is no surprise many of us feel very deeply about certain things regarding it.

[modwiz]

Believe it or not it would take less people to fire a Missile then you expect. a plane could not penatrate the first ring and into the second unless it was carrying explosives, the fuel is carried in the wings and would not cause a huge gaping hole, the fuel would burn intensely and nobody could be around it for awhile and yet people were everywhere immediately afterword and in suits . I could go on but I will not argue the point further, keeping it simple applies to the theory but not to the Goverment.

Perhaps the only reason we see pictures of people in suits there 'immediately afterward' is because the fire was so hot no one was around to take photos until the heat had subsided? Why would the gov't or whoever is pulling these strings want to execute an overly complex scheme when they could accomplish the same thing with less. Launching a missile at the Pentagon would require more people to be involved then say if someone just paid some terrorists to hijack a plane and smash into the Pentagon. The black soot from smoke and flames seems to emanate quite aways away in each direction and seems to have been hot enough to leave quite a bit of residue. Missiles explode and do not normally burn, and to say a plane such as the one that could have very well hit the Pentagon is incapable of creating a huge gaping hole is quite ignorant. Almost as if their is some kind of conclusive evidence to support such a claim. We're making lots of assumptions here, but given the nature of this incident and the evidence we have, assumptions are about all we're left with.
“Ignorance” as you would like to mention, is believing in what the media has told you, not accepting inconsistencies in the story, and we still having this discussion.

I never said I didn't accept inconsistencies in the story, there are holes in just about every story. The events of this day were massive, and impacted us all deeply. I would expect such inconsistencies. I've never said anything about the media, but just cause they are the media doesn't mean they lie all day about everything. I'm highly skeptical in nature, I could careless what the media is telling me, I make judgments based on the things I see and the evidence I have in front of me. I used to believe this very same missile theory along time ago, but over time and after countless hours debating theories of all shapes and sizes, I just don't see it anymore, it makes lil sense, and the evidence. what lil of it there is, suggests otherwise to me.


Reading this thread only reinforces the concept of the Earth vibrating into two different dimensions for me. There truly does seem to be two very distinct kinds of humans. Each has quite a few variables, but I can see a bifurcation area. The demonstration of people who can look at the damage at the Pentagon and see two very different scenes is just stunning to me.

We are all very different, past experiences, the knowledge we attain threw out life all plays into the objective nature of humanity. This very subject, affected us all in so many ways, it is no surprise many of us feel very deeply about certain things regarding it.

Oh yes they do.

Today, the 48th anniversary of the criminal killing of our 35th president and there still is not a single newperson in a 24 hour constant news cycle that will doubt the official single shooter, Warren report official version of the assassination and someone wants to think that the media does not lie all day, every day. It's their freakin' job and they would lose it if they didn't.

Caution: Rectal yoga being practiced by some posters.

[Kindred]

this might seem strange but bear with me on this


the hole in the pentagon wasnt big enough for it to have been a plane so must have been a missile right.
r

I'll simply provide this video to answer your question...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxLf6mTg-io

[DouglasDanger]

Let me add a what if..
what if the thing that hit the pentagon did not do what it was suposed to...
from what video i have seen it was not a normal missle, to large, it was not a 747/727 plane, to small,
what is nearly the size of a small plane yet designed to destroy entire cities, and could have malfunctioned because of miscalculated debree in its path that would affect its function?( aka hitting light poles)....

IMHO the pentagon and the area around it was suposed to be gone, why else would cheney head to a nuklear bunker as rumors tell he did...

P.s. Take this last bit with a grain of salt.. four went missing from the kursk.... there is still one missing and I believe it will be the catalyst for WW3 to officially start by claiming it came from Iran and it is written that it will be blown out of the sky by isreal's newly implemented missle defence system..

[Eagle]

Let me add a what if..
what if the thing that hit the pentagon did not do what it was suposed to...
from what video i have seen it was not a normal missle, to large, it was not a 747/727 plane, to small,
what is nearly the size of a small plane yet designed to destroy entire cities, and could have malfunctioned because of miscalculated debree in its path that would affect its function?( aka hitting light poles)....

IMHO the pentagon and the area around it was suposed to be gone, why else would cheney head to a nuklear bunker as rumors tell he did...

P.s. Take this last bit with a grain of salt.. four went missing from the kursk.... there is still one missing and I believe it will be the catalyst for WW3 to officially start by claiming it came from Iran and it is written that it will be blown out of the sky by isreal's newly implemented missle defence system..

I would agree with your observation, not as big as a 747 but much bigger than a Criuse Missile. I do not know what it is but it was packed with explosives, and if it had malfunctioned, be very greatful.

[WhiteFeather]

Granite Bunker Missile, I say no more. Lets view the surveillance cameras, Ohh that's right there wasn't any cameras around the nerve center of The USA. Only One. And it didnt show a plane, not even close to a plane. If i may interject further, everything was a lie. WTC 7 Is The Gem Of It All. And the fact that jet fuel isn't close to being hot enough to melt steel. The explosions give it away, this is the clue. The explosions.

If you must know the truth of 911, i present it here peeps. *****5 Stars Easy*****


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsRFGn_9Vw0

[Guaxini]

hi everybody, i'm new around here :)

anyone seen this video? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ld7fn2qykv4&feature=results_main&playnext=1&list=PL26D065388E9E238B
or this one? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsWZHKIg3Cs

its clear for me that something went wrong that day and is much more clear to me that US government (mom and dad) don't have major discussions in front of their kids (all the people in america).

sorry if i hurt someone, not my intention..just making a point.

[Guaxini]

no it wasn't a lie, it happened xD china back then had major investments in banks based in the twin towers, and the euro was gettin to big i mean BIGGER then the dollar or other currency to keep up..what im trying to say is that someone crash the world economy and it all happen in the USA. OOOUH and of course blame the middle east the muslins lol serious? for what? oil?! sorry, sorry to bring peace and democracy sorry.. LOL face it you can't handle it.. the european crusades had their end long time ago, but after many centuries they are back. USA crusade in the XXI century A.C .


PS- GOD BLESS AMERICA..

[Precog]

The answer really is quite simple. There were a number of cameras that covered that area which record 24/7. If the video footage were to have a plane hitting the Pentagon it would not have been destroyed because it would support the story we were told. That would have kept most people from ever questioning 9/11. No plane could have made it through that much concrete.

[mosquito]

I like to think of myself as an open, questioning person, so I'm prepared to examine the evidence once again and look at the links Eyes wide open has provided.

What I see is in no way conclusive - debris which could come from a 757, debris which could come from a 767......

For me, there are several things which stand out :

Where is the tailplane ? I'd appreciate hearing from an experienced air crash investigator as to the likelihood of the vapourisation of the entire fuselage following a forward impact.

The neatly burned hole and the depth of penetration of the "plane". Now I don't know for sure, but I very much doubt that Boeing fit their planes with high-explosive armour peircing warheads, the nose cone (to my knowledge) is filled with avionic equipment. These planes aren't designed to destroy buildings, they're designed to fly passengers in comfort (ha bloody ha) and safety. I'd like to hear from an aeronautical engineer.

The flight recorders didn't show anything useful ?????? F*ck off, pleeeeeease !!!!

The real clincher for me is the impounding of the evidence. How difficult would it be for the FBI to release a few more seconds video footage to prove the point ? Not very.

[toad]

Believe it or not it would take less people to fire a Missile then you expect. a plane could not penatrate the first ring and into the second unless it was carrying explosives, the fuel is carried in the wings and would not cause a huge gaping hole, the fuel would burn intensely and nobody could be around it for awhile and yet people were everywhere immediately afterword and in suits . I could go on but I will not argue the point further, keeping it simple applies to the theory but not to the Goverment.

Perhaps the only reason we see pictures of people in suits there 'immediately afterward' is because the fire was so hot no one was around to take photos until the heat had subsided? Why would the gov't or whoever is pulling these strings want to execute an overly complex scheme when they could accomplish the same thing with less. Launching a missile at the Pentagon would require more people to be involved then say if someone just paid some terrorists to hijack a plane and smash into the Pentagon. The black soot from smoke and flames seems to emanate quite aways away in each direction and seems to have been hot enough to leave quite a bit of residue. Missiles explode and do not normally burn, and to say a plane such as the one that could have very well hit the Pentagon is incapable of creating a huge gaping hole is quite ignorant. Almost as if their is some kind of conclusive evidence to support such a claim. We're making lots of assumptions here, but given the nature of this incident and the evidence we have, assumptions are about all we're left with.
“Ignorance” as you would like to mention, is believing in what the media has told you, not accepting inconsistencies in the story, and we still having this discussion.

I never said I didn't accept inconsistencies in the story, there are holes in just about every story. The events of this day were massive, and impacted us all deeply. I would expect such inconsistencies. I've never said anything about the media, but just cause they are the media doesn't mean they lie all day about everything. I'm highly skeptical in nature, I could careless what the media is telling me, I make judgments based on the things I see and the evidence I have in front of me. I used to believe this very same missile theory along time ago, but over time and after countless hours debating theories of all shapes and sizes, I just don't see it anymore, it makes lil sense, and the evidence. what lil of it there is, suggests otherwise to me.


Reading this thread only reinforces the concept of the Earth vibrating into two different dimensions for me. There truly does seem to be two very distinct kinds of humans. Each has quite a few variables, but I can see a bifurcation area. The demonstration of people who can look at the damage at the Pentagon and see two very different scenes is just stunning to me.

We are all very different, past experiences, the knowledge we attain threw out life all plays into the objective nature of humanity. This very subject, affected us all in so many ways, it is no surprise many of us feel very deeply about certain things regarding it.

Oh yes they do.

Today, the 48th anniversary of the criminal killing of our 35th president and there still is not a single newperson in a 24 hour constant news cycle that will doubt the official single shooter, Warren report official version of the assassination and someone wants to think that the media does not lie all day, every day. It's their freakin' job and they would lose it if they didn't.

Caution: Rectal yoga being practiced by some posters.

I think we may be misunderstanding one another. They do not lie about everything. Just because they are the media does not mean their reports denote fabrications, sports/weather/etc... It is not so black in white. The media most likely is reporting what they are told. People lie, I'm not denying the fact that most things regarding foreign/domestic policy, political agendas..etc are most likely fabricated to serve ones own agenda. This is absolutely true.

[WhiteFeather]

An Airline Pilot With 30 Years of Service Stated It would have taken him 10 Times to Perform This Perfect Maneuver, striking The Pentagon With This Perfect Precision! The So-Called Pilot from The Pentagon Attack, couldn't even fly a small Cessna Plane, let alone a 757. Hope This Helps Your Investigation! PS Where was The Landing Gear, Engines, Seats, Wings and last not least Passengers??????

[Guaxini]

Question. if you type some site that does not exist on the web what happen? for example this one http://www.bushisaterrorist.com/ , it would appear something like this, "Oops! Google Chrome could not find www.bushisaterrorist.com" (i use google chrome)

wanna see something funny? ^^ type www.itanimulli.com, the site does not exist but he is redirected to other site. itanimulli is illuminati backwards. try it just for the fun :D

[NewFounderHome]

This 911 subject is interesting, let's start with the Pentagon. If we take a look at the specs of a Boeing 757 wing span http://www.boeing.com/commercial/757family/pf/pf_200tech.html or even the height of the plane’s tail and then we ask ourselves why there isn’t any plane parts outside the building. There is a lot of structure in a wing and where not talking about the sheet metal, the tanks the wiring, the hydraulics and so much more. One question, where did they find the motors? Where did they find the landing gears? How do we make disappear all the mass material of all the structure? How do we make disappear Aluminum, steel, chrome, Inconel? We can apply these questions to the Pentagon and more sites of that sad, very sad day. But I invite everybody to answer, how do we make disappear a Boeing 757 with a wing span of 124 ft 10 in by 44 ft 6 in and melt or make disappear these materials.

[toad]

An Airline Pilot With 30 Years of Service Stated It would have taken him 10 Times to Perform This Perfect Maneuver, striking The Pentagon With This Perfect Precision! The So-Called Pilot from The Pentagon Attack, couldn't even fly a small Cessna Plane, let alone a 757. Hope This Helps Your Investigation! PS Where was The Landing Gear, Engines, Seats, Wings and last not least Passengers??????

Apparently they were very lightly trained, with the dead set objective to smash a plane into the Pentagon. Freak actions occur daily that professionals could not reenact without numerous failures, this to me says lil about the events on that day.

If you actually seek pictures of that day there are quite a few of the remnants of those particular parts of that plane. I'm almost reluctant to even post them cause they will immediately be dismissed as fake or planted or whatever else. It seems as though certain folks(and I'm in no way speaking about anyone in this thread in particular) are dead set on believing certain theories,. and will stop at nothing to dismiss the official idea.

One thing I'd like to ask those who do not believe there were planes involved in not only the Pentagon crash, but all of them involved, and I can only assume if you think a missile hit the Pentagon I may as well assume you believe there were no planes involved what so ever. What happen to all the people aboard those planes?

[Guaxini]

An Airline Pilot With 30 Years of Service Stated It would have taken him 10 Times to Perform This Perfect Maneuver, striking The Pentagon With This Perfect Precision! The So-Called Pilot from The Pentagon Attack, couldn't even fly a small Cessna Plane, let alone a 757. Hope This Helps Your Investigation! PS Where was The Landing Gear, Engines, Seats, Wings and last not least Passengers??????

Apparently they were very lightly trained, with the dead set objective to smash a plane into the Pentagon. Freak actions occur daily that professionals could not reenact without numerous failures, this to me says lil about the events on that day.

If you actually seek pictures of that day there are quite a few of the remnants of those particular parts of that plane. I'm almost reluctant to even post them cause they will immediately be dismissed as fake or planted or whatever else. It seems as though certain folks(and I'm in no way speaking about anyone in this thread in particular) are dead set on believing certain theories,. and will stop at nothing to dismiss the official idea.

One thing I'd like to ask those who do not believe there were planes involved in not only the Pentagon crash, but all of them involved, and I can only assume if you think a missile hit the Pentagon I may as well assume you believe there were no planes involved what so ever. What happen to all the people aboard those planes?
no idea. where are the black boxes on the 93, or the one that crashed in to the pentagon?

[DouglasDanger]

An Airline Pilot With 30 Years of Service Stated It would have taken him 10 Times to Perform This Perfect Maneuver, striking The Pentagon With This Perfect Precision! The So-Called Pilot from The Pentagon Attack, couldn't even fly a small Cessna Plane, let alone a 757. Hope This Helps Your Investigation! PS Where was The Landing Gear, Engines, Seats, Wings and last not least Passengers??????

Apparently they were very lightly trained, with the dead set objective to smash a plane into the Pentagon. Freak actions occur daily that professionals could not reenact without numerous failures, this to me says lil about the events on that day.

If you actually seek pictures of that day there are quite a few of the remnants of those particular parts of that plane. I'm almost reluctant to even post them cause they will immediately be dismissed as fake or planted or whatever else. It seems as though certain folks(and I'm in no way speaking about anyone in this thread in particular) are dead set on believing certain theories,. and will stop at nothing to dismiss the official idea.

One thing I'd like to ask those who do not believe there were planes involved in not only the Pentagon crash, but all of them involved, and I can only assume if you think a missile hit the Pentagon I may as well assume you believe there were no planes involved what so ever. What happen to all the people aboard those planes?

grain of salt needed but think about this....
When there is a mock exercise running at the same time it is easy to asssume what happened.. plane one was on target,( tower 1) plane 2 had its terrorist flunkies chicken out and arrive at its destination fine ( intended for tower 2, remote plane intended for exercise diverted to take its place), plane three was shot down as the pilot terroist flunkie had no clue how to fly and the passengers where regaining control, (building 7 had no remote plane for it so they brought it down with the excuse of fire).. this leaves the last one for the pentagon, as witness have said, they heard and saw a big plane low over the rooftops but not on the same tragectery as what hit the pentagon, if you where to get a missile by so it does not turn up on radar ( where its fired from what etc) would you not, if your an intellegent villan, have something shadow it to confuse radar towers on what it actually was?
either way it is plausable that any one of the planes could have been shot out of the air over the ocean buy those running the exercizes and the remote opperated excercize planes put in thier place and rammed into the buildings... this would put the dead passengers at the bottom of the ocean never to be found.

[mosquito]

One thing I'd like to ask those who do not believe there were planes involved in not only the Pentagon crash, but all of them involved, and I can only assume if you think a missile hit the Pentagon I may as well assume you believe there were no planes involved what so ever. What happen to all the people aboard those planes?

Some faulty logic there friend Toad !!!

We know that planes hit WTC 1 & 2 because we've all seen the footage. The FBI has impounded all footage of what hit the pentagon. Why ? If it's in the "interests of national security" to impound said footage, why is it not also in the "interests of national security" to grab all the video footage of the WTC crashes ?

[Franny]

A few thoughts and questions for the plane-hitting-the-Pentagon theorizers:

A 125 foot wide plane shaped object hit a NY tower and made a plane shaped, thoʻ much larger, hole in the building and occurs again a short time later. Both objects captured on film looking like planes too.

How does a 125 foot wide plane shaped object hit a building and leave a 16-18 foot round hole? Captured on lots of film but not shown.

Not the best analogy but remember the shape board toys that so many little kids play with? It has a star shaped opening and only a star shaped piece fits into it, a circle shaped opening and only a circle shaped piece fits into it, a rectangular shaped opening and only a rectangle shaped piece fits into it etc...

What would be the shape and type of an object that could fly thruʻ the air and leave a 16-18 foot round hole in a building such as the Pentagon with itʻs heavy reinforcement?

Said planeʻs wings and engines, which are much harder than the nose of the plane, did not touch the recently heavily-reinforced Pentagon. Had they done so there would have been huge damage, explosions and fire on the outside, but there was none. The Pentagon fire originated on the inside.

How does the fuel in the wings magically dissipate and the wings and very hard engines vaporize and disappear without touching the wall just as the relatively soft nose of the plane hits and pierces the it?

The soft nose pierces the Pentagon but the much harder wings/engines canʻt? Or is the building is too hard so they vaporize into nothingness -- without having touched it?

There are still YT clips of Donald Rumsfeld saying that a missile hit the Pentagon, then correcting himself and saying plane. Oops, wondered about that one...

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

Believe it or not it would take less people to fire a Missile then you expect. a plane could not penatrate the first ring and into the second unless it was carrying explosives, the fuel is carried in the wings and would not cause a huge gaping hole, the fuel would burn intensely and nobody could be around it for awhile and yet people were everywhere immediately afterword and in suits . I could go on but I will not argue the point further, keeping it simple applies to the theory but not to the Goverment.

Perhaps the only reason we see pictures of people in suits there 'immediately afterward' is because the fire was so hot no one was around to take photos until the heat had subsided? Why would the gov't or whoever is pulling these strings want to execute an overly complex scheme when they could accomplish the same thing with less. Launching a missile at the Pentagon would require more people to be involved then say if someone just paid some terrorists to hijack a plane and smash into the Pentagon. The black soot from smoke and flames seems to emanate quite aways away in each direction and seems to have been hot enough to leave quite a bit of residue. Missiles explode and do not normally burn, and to say a plane such as the one that could have very well hit the Pentagon is incapable of creating a huge gaping hole is quite ignorant. Almost as if their is some kind of conclusive evidence to support such a claim. We're making lots of assumptions here, but given the nature of this incident and the evidence we have, assumptions are about all we're left with.
“Ignorance” as you would like to mention, is believing in what the media has told you, not accepting inconsistencies in the story, and we still having this discussion.

I never said I didn't accept inconsistencies in the story, there are holes in just about every story. The events of this day were massive, and impacted us all deeply. I would expect such inconsistencies. I've never said anything about the media, but just cause they are the media doesn't mean they lie all day about everything. I'm highly skeptical in nature, I could careless what the media is telling me, I make judgments based on the things I see and the evidence I have in front of me. I used to believe this very same missile theory along time ago, but over time and after countless hours debating theories of all shapes and sizes, I just don't see it anymore, it makes lil sense, and the evidence. what lil of it there is, suggests otherwise to me.


Reading this thread only reinforces the concept of the Earth vibrating into two different dimensions for me. There truly does seem to be two very distinct kinds of humans. Each has quite a few variables, but I can see a bifurcation area. The demonstration of people who can look at the damage at the Pentagon and see two very different scenes is just stunning to me.

We are all very different, past experiences, the knowledge we attain threw out life all plays into the objective nature of humanity. This very subject, affected us all in so many ways, it is no surprise many of us feel very deeply about certain things regarding it.

I think we are on the same page Toad. Another great post. :)
I agrre that the media is very poor. 90% is controled by a small group of people. However, to think they lie about EVERYTHING is just not true. They lie lots. yes. But not about EVERYTHING. Again, we agree.

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

An Airline Pilot With 30 Years of Service Stated It would have taken him 10 Times to Perform This Perfect Maneuver, striking The Pentagon With This Perfect Precision! The So-Called Pilot from The Pentagon Attack, couldn't even fly a small Cessna Plane, let alone a 757. Hope This Helps Your Investigation! PS Where was The Landing Gear, Engines, Seats, Wings and last not least Passengers??????

programmed auto pilot may be the answer here.

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

This 911 subject is interesting, let's start with the Pentagon. If we take a look at the specs of a Boeing 757 wing span http://www.boeing.com/commercial/757family/pf/pf_200tech.html or even the height of the plane’s tail and then we ask ourselves why there isn’t any plane parts outside the building. There is a lot of structure in a wing and where not talking about the sheet metal, the tanks the wiring, the hydraulics and so much more. One question, where did they find the motors? Where did they find the landing gears? How do we make disappear all the mass material of all the structure? How do we make disappear Aluminum, steel, chrome, Inconel? We can apply these questions to the Pentagon and more sites of that sad, very sad day. But I invite everybody to answer, how do we make disappear a Boeing 757 with a wing span of 124 ft 10 in by 44 ft 6 in and melt or make disappear these materials.

Please read the links I have already posted earlier in this thread. :) You may have missed them.
They show motors and wreckage and explain the distribution of debris.
There is not much point bringing up the same questions when the answers have already been posted in the thread. We will all end up going in circles.
Perhaps a better form of moving this forward would be to look at the links / answers I have provided and disscuss them rather than reapeting the same questions. :)

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

[QUOTE=WhiteFeather;361857]An Airline Pilot With 30 Years of Service Stated It would have taken him 10 Times to Perform This Perfect Maneuver, striking The Pentagon With This Perfect Precision! The So-Called Pilot from The Pentagon Attack, couldn't even fly a small Cessna Plane, let alone a 757. Hope This Helps Your Investigation! PS Where was The Landing Gear, Engines, Seats, Wings and last not least Passengers??????

Apparently they were very lightly trained, with the dead set objective to smash a plane into the Pentagon. Freak actions occur daily that professionals could not reenact without numerous failures, this to me says lil about the events on that day.

If you actually seek pictures of that day there are quite a few of the remnants of those particular parts of that plane. I'm almost reluctant to even post them cause they will immediately be dismissed as fake or planted or whatever else. It seems as though certain folks(and I'm in no way speaking about anyone in this thread in particular) are dead set on believing certain theories,. and will stop at nothing to dismiss the official idea.
[QUOTE]

This is spot on. I found it hard to admit I had been wrong regarding the pentagon but at the end of the day, its about truth right? I spent alot of time defending the missile idea but eventually had to admit I was wrong. Being wrong is a good thing as it elevates one to a new level of understanding.
At all costs, we must avoide confirmation bias in our judgement. Its poor science.
Admitting a plane hit the pentagon does NOT mean that therfore you have to beilve the offfical story. People need to realise that.

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

A few thoughts and questions for the plane-hitting-the-Pentagon theorizers:

A 125 foot wide plane shaped object hit a NY tower and made a plane shaped, thoʻ much larger, hole in the building and occurs again a short time later. Both objects captured on film looking like planes too.

How does a 125 foot wide plane shaped object hit a building and leave a 16-18 foot round hole? Captured on lots of film but not shown.



This is in correct information that had been repeated for years. I too bought into it for a while.

Please read this:

http://www.oilempire.us/pentagon.html#p7EPMc1_6
and click on the "false claims v 9/11 truth" at the top right.
The missile and hole too small ideas are compleatly destroyed using nothing but observations.
The site above is a 9/11 truth site.

[Earlybird]

dont need a weather man to tell which way the wind blows-my two year nailed it " I can see the dark with my eyes closed"

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

I like to think of myself as an open, questioning person, so I'm prepared to examine the evidence once again and look at the links Eyes wide open has provided.


Many thanks for taking the time to discuss this rather than ignore it.




I I'd appreciate hearing from an experienced air crash investigator as to the likelihood of the vapourisation of the entire fuselage following a forward impact.



Well, in an earlier thread on this topic with regards to ground resistance of the jet, another member went to a pilots forum and asked them what their thoughts were.... They seem sure that the jet could have indeed made this flight path.

http://www.flightlevel350.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=14058

They seem sure regarding the ground effects but are dismissive of truthers which is a shame.
After reasercjing other areas ground effect is not really a problem at high speeds.

¤=[Post Update]=¤

This graphic of the flight path and crash is also interesting as it also covers the footage.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVDdjLQkUV8&feature=player_embedded#!

[araucaria]

no it wasn't a lie, it happened xD china back then had major investments in banks based in the twin towers, and the euro was gettin to big i mean BIGGER then the dollar or other currency to keep up..what im trying to say is that someone crash the world economy and it all happen in the USA. OOOUH and of course blame the middle east the muslins lol serious? for what? oil?! sorry, sorry to bring peace and democracy sorry.. LOL face it you can't handle it.. the european crusades had their end long time ago, but after many centuries they are back. USA crusade in the XXI century A.C .


PS- GOD BLESS AMERICA..

Erm, I think I was still spending francs in 2001. The Euro didn't come into currency until 1st Jan 2002 as I recall... :)

[modwiz]

I hope the OP will indulge me in what I believe is a relevant tangent to this topic. It is a link to the very brilliant website of Gilad Atzmon. He has some deep insight to certain kinds of people that I believe applies to this thread and topic.
http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/jonathon-blakeley-a-guide-to-hasbara-trolls.html

[Lord Sidious]

An Airline Pilot With 30 Years of Service Stated It would have taken him 10 Times to Perform This Perfect Maneuver, striking The Pentagon With This Perfect Precision! The So-Called Pilot from The Pentagon Attack, couldn't even fly a small Cessna Plane, let alone a 757. Hope This Helps Your Investigation! PS Where was The Landing Gear, Engines, Seats, Wings and last not least Passengers??????

programmed auto pilot may be the answer here.

Google Home Run.




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=384CCzUKHtA

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

I hope the OP will indulge me in what I believe is a relevant tangent to this topic. It is a link to the very brilliant website of Gilad Atzmon. He has some deep insight to certain kinds of people that I believe applies to this thread and topic.
http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/jonathon-blakeley-a-guide-to-hasbara-trolls.html

Dont really like what modwiz is suggesting.
Not that he will read this as he has me on ignore.
I would prefer modwiz says what he means rather than just imply it and also clarify who that link it aimed at.

Besides which, its totally off topic. What has internet trolling got to do with this discussion? Unless different opinions = internet trolling in the eyes of some. We have all been civil to each other have we not? Confused. :help:

[noxon medem]

- sorry for digressing on the subject .

Another only piece of evidence
from the 9.11 illusion .


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lKZqqSI9-s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lKZqqSI9-s

(listen)

There are explosive charges going off
in the (north) tower that was first hit ,
when the second (remotecontrolled) airplane
hit the second (south) tower .

Of course it can be blamed on air and oxygene
given a sudden burst by the second plane crash ,
but if you study this videoclip , it seems that the
timed advanced explosives are synced with the hit .
( slightly before the shockwave of the second planehit .

( maybe there were no planes , but I choose to
operate within that logic , for now .

If so, that means that it was rigged , by someone
trusted to operate in the wtc buildings.

( do not think Bin Laden would have that perogative ..).

[WhiteFeather]

Apparently someones eyes aren't wide open enough, yet! There's always hope.

[Eagle]

Please do not be offended by anything I may have said in the post, it was not the fact so much as to what hit the buildings as it is to why. I feel deep down that the Government had a lot to do with it in order to start the current wars. This was done to take away a lot of American freedoms in preparation for what is to come next. I feel that there is another 911 event to happen soon as a final push toward total control of not only the US but the world as a whole. This all may sound crazy and farfetched to you but with as long as I have been in “involved” I tend to be a little pessimistic at times
Peace my brothers, pray and meditate that we may prevent this from happening.

[toad]

Please do not be offended by anything I may have said in the post, it was not the fact so much as to what hit the buildings as it is to why. I feel deep down that the Government had a lot to do with it in order to start the current wars. This was done to take away a lot of American freedoms in preparation for what is to come next. I feel that there is another 911 event to happen soon as a final push toward total control of not only the US but the world as a whole. This all may sound crazy and farfetched to you but with as long as I have been in “involved” I tend to be a little pessimistic at times
Peace my brothers, pray and meditate that we may prevent this from happening.

If the real objective behind these events is to get us into the middle east again and to reduce our freedoms some more, I don't see why they would need to go threw all that trouble. I personally believe they couldve done it far more simpler, one theory for instance would be 'them' hiring men from the middle east to perpetrate these acts. Obviously dead men do not need money but the ideology behind these individuals could easily explain why they may want to make money and commit jihad. This plan could have been orchestrated with far far less people, would have far less chance of failing, and the men responsible for motivating the attacks could have helped allow them into the territory and explain the targets. This is just a theory, I have very lil evidence to even suggest such things.

I would just like to disclaim that I do not believe the official story. I find that there are anomalies threw that day that cannot be overlooked, and that to me suggest that there was more involved then what more people would like to admit. These anomalies could include the shorting of UA/AA stock in the days before 9/11, the lack of high ranked officials on that side of the Pentagon, the lack of most anyone on that side of the Pentagon that was reinforced, the incompetence of the FAA to handle the tracking of those aircraft and the delayed response to the military, yet the FAA handled the landing of over 3,500 in a matter of hours without any major problems, 9/11 Commission failed to investigate building 7, NTSB was not allowed to investigate the crashes. None of these things are proof of missiles or demolition, however they are indeed anomalies and they are food for thought.

[Guaxini]

no it wasn't a lie, it happened xD china back then had major investments in banks based in the twin towers, and the euro was gettin to big i mean BIGGER then the dollar or other currency to keep up..what im trying to say is that someone crash the world economy and it all happen in the USA. OOOUH and of course blame the middle east the muslins lol serious? for what? oil?! sorry, sorry to bring peace and democracy sorry.. LOL face it you can't handle it.. the european crusades had their end long time ago, but after many centuries they are back. USA crusade in the XXI century A.C .


PS- GOD BLESS AMERICA..

Erm, I think I was still spending francs in 2001. The Euro didn't come into currency until 1st Jan 2002 as I recall... :) the euro came into circulation in 2002, correct (mea culpa). for it was not necessary that all member states reach certain standards of competition in the market in order to start using the euro? in order to pay debts in euros without going bankrupt? it is synonymous with growth in the eurozone. not to mention the Chinese giant who was waking up.

how I remember it was.

[WhiteFeather]

An Airline Pilot With 30 Years of Service Stated It would have taken him 10 Times to Perform This Difficult Take Off Maneuver, striking The Pentagon With Such Perfect Precision! The So-Called Terrorist Pilot On The Pentagon Attack, couldn't even fly a small Cessna Plane, let alone a 757. Hope This Helps Your Investigation! PS Where was The Landing Gear, Engines, Seats, Wings and last not least Passengers?

Check This Out Peeps.. Did he just say preyed open by a missile/airplane at :37 seconds.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9q_i_IMV4Sg

[araucaria]

[...] how I remember it was.

Yes and the euro, which started at around 70 cents, took a few years to overtake the dollar. My point was that, although some subsequent events may have been planned, the causes of 9/11 are to be found more in the period before than in the period after :)
E.g. Rumsfeld's Sept 10 declaration regarding the disappearance of several trillion?

If I was your wonderful age of 19, my friend, for events over 10 years ago, I would not be relying solely on memory ;)

[modwiz]

An Airline Pilot With 30 Years of Service Stated It would have taken him 10 Times to Perform This Difficult Take Off Maneuver, striking The Pentagon With Such Perfect Precision! The So-Called Terrorist Pilot On The Pentagon Attack, couldn't even fly a small Cessna Plane, let alone a 757. Hope This Helps Your Investigation! PS Where was The Landing Gear, Engines, Seats, Wings and last not least Passengers?

Check This Out Peeps.. Did he just say preyed open by a missile/airplane at :37 seconds.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9q_i_IMV4Sg

I may have mentioned this already in this thread, but I watched a video where repeated attempts to fly the jet at the requisite height at the stated speed of travel was impossible. The lift of the wing and speed would not allow the jet to fly that low. Aerodynamically impossible.

[Referee]

A jet flew through the most secure airspace in the world to hit the most secure above ground building in the world. Which has a ton of security cameras on the outside of the building and they give us is 5 or 6 frames I want to see all the cameras.

It was a missile or a small plane fitted with explosive material. There is no way a jet could punch through that building that far. And funny how that particular side just received a renovation right before. And how convenient for the plane to hit in the Budget Analysts office. Since they lost 2.3 [edit Trillion] the day before.

[modwiz]

A jet flew through the most secure airspace in the world to hit the most secure above ground building in the world. Which has a ton of security cameras on the outside of the building and they give us is 5 or 6 frames I want to see all the cameras.

It was a missile or a small plane fitted with explosive material. There is no way a jet could punch through that building that far. And funny how that particular side just received a renovation right before. And how convenient for the plane to hit in the Budget Analysts office. Since they lost 2.3 Billion the day before.

I believe it was 2.3 Trillion.

[Lord Sidious]

A jet flew through the most secure airspace in the world to hit the most secure above ground building in the world. Which has a ton of security cameras on the outside of the building and they give us is 5 or 6 frames I want to see all the cameras.

It was a missile or a small plane fitted with explosive material. There is no way a jet could punch through that building that far. And funny how that particular side just received a renovation right before. And how convenient for the plane to hit in the Budget Analysts office. Since they lost 2.3 Billion the day before.

I believe it was 2.3 Trillion.

Indeed it was trillion.

[toad]

A jet flew through the most secure airspace in the world to hit the most secure above ground building in the world. Which has a ton of security cameras on the outside of the building and they give us is 5 or 6 frames I want to see all the cameras.

It was a missile or a small plane fitted with explosive material. There is no way a jet could punch through that building that far. And funny how that particular side just received a renovation right before. And how convenient for the plane to hit in the Budget Analysts office. Since they lost 2.3 Billion the day before.

I believe it was 2.3 Trillion.

A strange coincidence indeed.

[Lord Sidious]

A strange coincidence indeed.

Ask Dov.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dov_S._Zakheim

[Referee]

Ask Dov.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dov_S._Zakheim

Also ask Dr. Phil :p

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_D._Zelikow

[Lefty Dave]

Who stood to gain ???? Follow the money !
Who was arrested that day with explosives in their van ??

[Referee]

Who stood to gain ???? Follow the money !

Black Budgets Payoffs for years to come.

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

An Airline Pilot With 30 Years of Service Stated It would have taken him 10 Times to Perform This Difficult Take Off Maneuver, striking The Pentagon With Such Perfect Precision! The So-Called Terrorist Pilot On The Pentagon Attack, couldn't even fly a small Cessna Plane, let alone a 757. Hope This Helps Your Investigation! PS Where was The Landing Gear, Engines, Seats, Wings and last not least Passengers?



Everything above has already been answered in this thread. :biggrin1:

[WhiteFeather]

A jet flew through the most secure airspace in the world to hit the most secure above ground building in the world. Which has a ton of security cameras on the outside of the building and they give us is 5 or 6 frames I want to see all the cameras.

It was a missile or a small plane fitted with explosive material. There is no way a jet could punch through that building that far. And funny how that particular side just received a renovation right before. And how convenient for the plane to hit in the Budget Analysts office. Since they lost 2.3 Billion the day before.

I believe it was 2.3 Trillion.

Agreed Modwiz:

Donald Rumsfeld annouced that more than $2 trillion in Pentagon funds had gone missing. He made this astonishing statement on September 10th, perfect timing to keep the story from making any news. And in fact others go further, pointing to the fact that "accountants, bookkeepers and budget analysts" were killed in the Pentagon attack, and suggesting this, along with the destruction of information, was a possible motive for the attack.

However, those pulling off the 9/11 "inside job" decided that if they crashed into just the right spot of the Pentagon, then they could kill many of those who might uncover the problem or tell the public about it, and perhaps also destroy vital documentary evidence.


http://www.911myths.com/html/rumsfeld__9_11_and__2_3_trilli.html

[modwiz]

A jet flew through the most secure airspace in the world to hit the most secure above ground building in the world. Which has a ton of security cameras on the outside of the building and they give us is 5 or 6 frames I want to see all the cameras.

It was a missile or a small plane fitted with explosive material. There is no way a jet could punch through that building that far. And funny how that particular side just received a renovation right before. And how convenient for the plane to hit in the Budget Analysts office. Since they lost 2.3 Billion the day before.

I believe it was 2.3 Trillion.

Agreed Modwiz:

Donald Rumsfeld annouced that more than $2 trillion in Pentagon funds had gone missing. He made this astonishing statement on September 10th, perfect timing to keep the story from making any news. And in fact others go further, pointing to the fact that "accountants, bookkeepers and budget analysts" were killed in the Pentagon attack, and suggesting this, along with the destruction of information, was a possible motive for the attack.

However, those pulling off the 9/11 "inside job" decided that if they crashed into just the right spot of the Pentagon, then they could kill many of those who might uncover the problem or tell the public about it, and perhaps also destroy vital documentary evidence.


http://www.911myths.com/html/rumsfeld__9_11_and__2_3_trilli.html

This is how 'they' can say they tell us everything and we are just stupid sheep who don't pay attention and follow up. Unfortunately, as a group/majority, they're kinda right. Although, our 'no news' media helps to make these 'in plain sight' moments disappear or be buried in places like the voluminous NYT. The very next day Donny boy was even heard saying that a missile hit the pentagon. Another truth buried quickly. You see, our leaders tell us the truth, for a nanosecond on occasion, then the media does its' job.

Didn't that list of sayings by Plato have one about citizens paying attention or getting crappy government? Well, we don't have the former and get the latter. It's like a freakin Bugs Bunny cartoon. 'What a bunch of maroons'.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

Of course the whole thing does stink, but I'm not so hung up on what specifically hit the pentagon as to the reasons behind it. That said, I still find it very hard to believe that, unlike using planes to hit the twin towers, they would use something different - a missile - in the middle of an area surrounded by public space (and a highway) and hope, just hope 'that nobody actually saw it', or worse filmed it.

Did they just get very lucky, or were all those who saw a plane swooping down, heading for the pentagon, lying/bought out/threatened?

[WhiteFeather]

I hate to beat an old dog to death, i couldn/t hold back. ATTENTION: WTC 7 Was (Pulled ,,,,Meaning Taken Down by a very professional and controlled means) And Conveniently On Sept 11, 2001. Lucky Larry Silverstein The Then Leaseholder Of The WTC was advised by The FDNY Chief that the building was going to be pulled, have a listen. Remember this Conversation Larry? You lucky son of a Zion! Your Karma Awaits You At Godspeed!!!!!!!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WYdAJQV100

$$$$$ Lucky Larry Silverstein LeaseHolder Of The WTC, You Made Billions On That Transaction $$$$$


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ScGZCqEyGM

Ohh And A Great Nugget Of A Link Here: http://www.wanttoknow.info/911/black_eagle_trust_fund

[WhiteFeather]

Pretty sure it was a jet.
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/index.html

How come the vast majority of your posts are 9/11 rebuttals?
Where exactly do you stand on the whole thing?
Can you explain your theory on the topic please?

Not sure Myself!

[modwiz]

A jet flew through the most secure airspace in the world to hit the most secure above ground building in the world. Which has a ton of security cameras on the outside of the building and they give us is 5 or 6 frames I want to see all the cameras.

It was a missile or a small plane fitted with explosive material. There is no way a jet could punch through that building that far. And funny how that particular side just received a renovation right before. And how convenient for the plane to hit in the Budget Analysts office. Since they lost 2.3 Billion the day before.

I believe it was 2.3 Trillion.

A strange coincidence indeed.

There were many coincidences that day. A general rule of thumb is when coincidences gather in clusters, it is no coincidence.

[WhiteFeather]

A jet flew through the most secure airspace in the world to hit the most secure above ground building in the world. Which has a ton of security cameras on the outside of the building and they give us is 5 or 6 frames I want to see all the cameras.

It was a missile or a small plane fitted with explosive material. There is no way a jet could punch through that building that far. And funny how that particular side just received a renovation right before. And how convenient for the plane to hit in the Budget Analysts office. Since they lost 2.3 Billion the day before.

I believe it was 2.3 Trillion.

A strange coincidence indeed.

There were many coincidences that day. A general rule of thumb is when coincidences gather in clusters, it is no coincidence.

What Incredible Synchronicities That Day, Ehh Modwiz!

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

Pretty sure it was a jet.
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/index.html

How come the vast majority of your posts are 9/11 rebuttals?
Where exactly do you stand on the whole thing?
Can you explain your theory on the topic please?

Not sure Myself!

I have already explained where I stand on 9/11 in this very thread with a link back on page 1, post 11. Indeed, I did it when the question was originaly asked. Its there for all to see. Maybe you missed my answer? :confused:
I post rebuttals against bad science. Nothing more to it to be honest. My posts in this thread are a good example; http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?32217-Dr.-Judy-Wood-and-John-Lash-The-quintessential-talk-on-911&p=350417#post350417

[iceni tribe]

http://i753.photobucket.com/albums/xx171/naf09_2010/9%2011%20and%207%207/pentagoncctvll1.gif

sorry eyes wide shut , i cant see a plane here.......i can see a time stamp thats wrong in the left hand corner and a subliminal message telling me it's a plane inpact on the right.

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

no ....cant see a 80 ton plane here either.

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

I also do not see a plane.
But evidence of absence is not absence of evidence. I dont see a missile either.
In my opinion the other evidence when put togther is far stronger for a plane than for a missile. :)

[iceni tribe]

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

eyes wide open.... i can't see any evidence of a plane inpact , can you ?


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


am i expected to believe that if it was a plane , it went through all this re-in forced concrete and masonry and popped out the other end creating this neat itty bitty hole.
c'mon ................really

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

Have you read the whole thread? Your points regarding evidence of impact have already been addressed. Page 1 I think?
Also, I never once suggested that the plane caused the c-ring hole. Explosives and a jet are not mutually exclusive IMO. :)

[iceni tribe]

ewo

i see you've been fooled by the fraudsters legg and strutt .

here is a rebuttal to that rubbish from Dennis Cimino who has 30+ years experience in de coding FDR data .


Dennis Cimino experience and qualifications:

Electrical Engineer
Commercial Pilot Rating, since 1981
Navy Combat Systems Specialist: RADAR, ECM, cryptographic communications
Flight Data Recorder Engineer Smiths Aerospace
BA-609, IDARS, Military and Commercial
Millimeter wave RADAR and countermeasures expert since 1973
Two patents held for Doppler RADAR ( Kavouras ):
long pulsewidth RADAR droop compensation network,
and wave guide arc detection for high powered RADAR

first, I have a lot of stuff, as it's been a long time since I posted in the forum, about FLT-77 and the incongruencies between the N.T.S.B. *ahem* re-creation, allegedly based on the
FDR data from the aircraft registered in the F.A.A. registry as N644AA, which was an earlier model B-757 with '2' Rolls Royce RB-211 engines, and no in flight seat back phones. (per David Ray Griffin's excellent and extensive research that goes to the fact that the F.B.I. now won't substantiate any phone calls allegedly from this airplane, not even the infamous Babs Olson one., due to hard work and research done by Dr. Griffin.)

In any case, I've watched the N.T.S.B. recreation in Pandora's Black Box perhaps thousands of times in the years since Pilots For Truth put that out. Like most of the pilots in here, we don't just sit at the computer and watch Pandora's Black Box, but we do on occasion probably watch it again just for posterity sake.

And I came away with a couple things, from a 'pilot's viewpoint, that don't work for me...and I want you to hear me out and listen to me before you jump in with the typical ad-hominem attacks on me versus my information I am putting here.

First, during the approximate time of the alleged highjacking, there is no aircraft upset of even the slightest kind, not in altitude, not in pitch, not in yaw, not in roll, airspeed, or any other control parameter. Now I want you to ask yourself this question: You've just had a couple of middle eastern Saudi hijackers get into the cockpit (the FDR record shows no toggle for the door switch thru the DFDAU) and then commence to murder or wrestle with the captain and first officer. Now we know that Capt. Chuck Burlingame was far from a 98 pound boy with a nasal cannula and a walker parked behind his seat in the cockpit. I don't know what he could bench press, or what his first officer could bench press, but I have a real hard time with either of these men cooly sitting in their seats, while they are having their heads sawed off by a box cutter wielding, screaming maniac...without either hitting the yoke or kicking their rudder pedals. Because, as you might imagine, those two men are in a de-facto, bona-fide struggle for not just their lives, but their passengers lives, as well. I don't think they would have had narcolepsy in their final moments alive, in other words. The A/P would have, by design, disengaged, and at the very least, there would have been for a short period of time, an 'upset' of the aircraft, due to the disengagement of the autopilot. Anyone familiar with 'coffin corner' and what that infers, knows that any upset of this nature of any aircraft of this type, at high altitude, could lead to the incipient and sudden loss of control of the plane, if not corrected very rapidly and fast. It's not fathomable that one of the hijackers would be hovering over the A/P button on the panel to re-engage it repeatedly while they killed the crew. Un uh.

Then we get to the FL-180 'reset' that happens on the climb, for vertical separation and safety reasons. The flight crew does that, just like any flight crew who operates airplanes in the Positive Control Airspace above FL-180 is mandated to do. This happens, as you would expect it would, in the FDR record. On the descent, there is a disparity between the N.T.S.B. recreation, and the reality in the .CSV file, as the crew would have now been 'hijackers' and not experienced line pilots...and certainly would have no cognition, nor safety reasons, to do a Dulles local altimeter set as they barrelled on down to hit the Pentagon that morning. So why is it present in one N.T.S.B. product, and 'absent' in the other product, one might ask? Allegedly these things were derivatives of the other, and the data should have been in total agreement. But it's not.

Then we get to the rudder movements on this plane. And I have had discussions about this with other pilots, and they either are amputee's or they fly flat footed all day long and never use rudders ever. I think Boeing and Airbus might go the 'aercoupe' route and get rid of the rudder pedals altogether, it's about forty pounds of weight they could be garnering revenue from, and not paying fuel to haul around...because in this flight, that set of rudder pedals on AA-77, or N644AA, are mighty dead. They don't even really twitch, let alone show any pilot imputs on them. Now, granted, inexperienced pilots with zero flight experience might ignore rudders for a bit, but to do coordinated flight with the black ball in the bars indicating no skid or slip is going on, they had to use them when the A/P and rudder trim weren't taking care of it. Not the case on this plane. Matter of fact, on the final dive to the building, at 460 plus knots, nary a twitch of rudder. Hmmmm??

Between these things I cite, the control issues in pulling out of a 4,400 foot per minute dive, in an 80 ton inertial mass with wings, going downhill at great speed...and then rounding out in that dive for a lawn height, pole clipping venture and skittle across the pristine Pentagon lawn (post crash), without a pitch oscillation and loss of control in the pitch axis, known as PHUGOIDING or PORPOISING, this flight is an impossibility. It's an impossibility from any number of flight limitations standpoints, but more importantly, the hijacker would have actually had to use rudder to execute the nice 270 degree turn and stay in coordinated flight, and he would have had to do some rudder dance on the final end of the dive to stay lined up. And he did not. It's evident in the FDR recreation that this was not the case.

So in lieu of screaming at Mr. Stutts and Mr. Legge for decoding 'bullsh*t' as I called it, which is in fact their prerogative, I do have to admonish them for believing an 80 ton airliner flown by neophytes could round out in the bottom of a very steep dive, with a lot of downward inertia, and then slide into the CATCHERS MIT like that.

and now I want to call your attention to photos taken of the Pentagon wall within the first five or so minutes of impact.

Yep, a frenchman published a piece about this utter absurdity, and had those unretouched pics in his presentation. In them, you can clearly see vertical steel studs or parts of the wall, behind the entry hole that an 80 ton, 460 knot airliner just entered.

Was this plane made out of silly putty?

No engine entry points, no wing slots, meaning wings would have been outside the building, as there was such a paucity of wreckage, for them to be converted to pure energy release at impact, the resultant force would have obliterated that quarter of the buuilding. No empennage wreckage, no engine penetration holes, no vertical stabilzer. No luggage, no bodies, no seats. No nothing.

Now, later on, there are pics of what are presumably F.B.I. guys strewing wreckage around, and in one photo, the rivet holes have obvious corrosion marks from them. Am I to believe that piece corroded in an hour or two? From what? Why is it that the moderately pristine and amost immaculate lawn, suddenly starts to sprout parts?

I can't tell you how parts sprout up except that NO F.B.I. would put their badges in their pockets while strewing wreckage you are not supposed to move, under any circumstances. They had no license to touch that stuff. It's an aircraft CRASH SITE, for christs sake. Why the badges in pockets? Why?

April Gallop mentioned she crawled thru this 'inferno hole' just after it was created, with her son on her back. She sustained no major burns. Her hair wasn't on fire. She didn't suffer significant smoke inhalation. How can this be.

How can an 80 ton aircraft vaporize it's wings, vertical and horizontal stabilizers, and one engine that never was recovered? How could the one engine get into the building without an entry hole?

Mr. Legge, Mr Stutts, I'm not going to scream at you for decoding and then writing this paper you wrote, but clearly, neither of you has taken the time to study this event like some of us have. There are so many 'from an experienced pilot' standpoint holes, that it doesn't compute even a little bit.

and the icing on this entire 'merde' cake, is the no ACFT ID and no FLEET ID in the FDR data preamble.

and I'll go one step further. The N.T.S.B., the F.B.I., and the F.A.A., had no constructive reason to hide from all of us, particularly Aidan Monaghan, who submitted the F.O.I.A., that just wanted these parts of this plane to be identified by serial number.

Because, Mr. Legge, and Mr. Stutts, these planes create a huge paper trail when they are built. Those documents would have reinforced the government's assertion that N644AA hit the building and was destroyed that day. The on the spot, almost premeditatedly confiscated video tapes the F.B.I. grabbed that would show the plane, are not available fo rus to look at.

and for god's sake, why did it take the F.A.A. more than THREE YEARS to strike these involved aircraft from the F.A.A. registries?

I'll tell you why. Because these planes weren't involved. We know '2' were at the WTC, but we have no constructive proof that the plane the F.A.A. lost track of over the W. Virginia 'radar hole' where the FPS-117 long range, 3-d airsearch radar is located, by the way, is now said to have hit the Pentagon. Because without meeting certain criteria, per Robin Hordon's excellent outcry over this fact, that flight could never be positively known to be FLT-77.

Because, per Gerard Holmgren's excellent work, we know that FLT-77 wasn't even a scheduled carrier flight on Sept. 11th. 2001.

So I clearly have many many many problems with this from any number of standpoints, the most significant one is the bogus FDR data that is non-reality, which you so faithfully, painstakingly decoded the 4 seconds that the N.T.S.B. swears on a stack of bibles more or less, that it was unable to decode. Something is seriously wrong with this entire picture, and I am not accusing either of you of being putzes, but I think that you miss a whole lot of valid, very real reasons your assertions cannot stand in a reality based world of real aeronautics, real physics, and real airplane flight limits, when 'incompetent' pilots were allegedly performing these feats of magic you show in your paper. It's just not real, guys

and then he goes one step further

Mr. Stutts:

I now have to define your entire 'work product' as utter and total BULLsh*t. You had about 4 days to come up with a better bullsh*t story than this one, and to propose that AC ID and FLEET ID are buried in the flight parameter stream after the preamble, where it always always always is, is so beyond the pale and absurd, that it's now not conjecture that you're a COIN OP (counterintelligence) from either the U.S. government, or the mossad, but you're actually a very badly managed one, to float this sh*t.

You failed to address any of the incongruencies I published about the entire event, not even one of them. Now, as a non pilot, I don't expect you to try to understand how the entire thing is absurdity from the very start to assert that an 80 ton plane went thru the 'cat door' at the Pentagon, and didn't leave any wreckage till the F.B.I. began to seed it later that morning with the Buga, Colombia jungle weathered wreckage. I can understand that, as you would have no way to explain the lack of aircraft upset during a violent and ugly hijacking, and also, the Altimeter setting in the NTSB fabricated crap in one of their products, because they were so sloppy they failed to both see it and understand it's importance here, in that this, as well as the no aircraft upset, and the lack of rudder inputs, while not on A/P., and the impossible pullout from the dive, all were so impossible that only in a child's game could any of this hokey sh*t be believable.

So now I have to say for the record you guys are a COIN OP for the people who did this. I gave you the benefit of the doubt to prove you were not a bullsh*t mill for Sunstein's cognitive infiltration network of zio prostitutes for Israel, and you totally blew that gig here.

I tell you what. Go sell this to the National Enquirer. They might print your dissertation. But no meaningful and relevant aviation based analysis validates any of your turd feed here, because virtuallly all of your stuff has borne itself out to be so absurd that even the Enquirer would probably balk at publishing your disinformation.

I'm sorry, Mr. Stutts, but you unmasked yourself with this total, utter bullsh*t today. And we didn't even have to do it for you, you did it yourself

[Oouthere]

This topic always infuriates me as I was once believed in the official story, being 10 years prior air force my patriotism ran high at that time. Our highest government leaders are nothing more than sociopaths and we need to look at their deeds, not listen to their words.

Rich

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

ewo

i see you've been fooled by the fraudsters legg and strutt .

here is a rebuttal to that rubbish from Dennis Cimino who has 30+ years experience in de coding FDR data .


Dennis Cimino experience and qualifications:

Electrical Engineer
Commercial Pilot Rating, since 1981
Navy Combat Systems Specialist: RADAR, ECM, cryptographic communications
Flight Data Recorder Engineer Smiths Aerospace
BA-609, IDARS, Military and Commercial
Millimeter wave RADAR and countermeasures expert since 1973
Two patents held for Doppler RADAR ( Kavouras ):
long pulsewidth RADAR droop compensation network,
and wave guide arc detection for high powered RADAR

first, I have a lot of stuff, as it's been a long time since I posted in the forum, about FLT-77 and the incongruencies between the N.T.S.B. *ahem* re-creation, allegedly based on the
FDR data from the aircraft registered in the F.A.A. registry as N644AA, which was an earlier model B-757 with '2' Rolls Royce RB-211 engines, and no in flight seat back phones. (per David Ray Griffin's excellent and extensive research that goes to the fact that the F.B.I. now won't substantiate any phone calls allegedly from this airplane, not even the infamous Babs Olson one., due to hard work and research done by Dr. Griffin.)

In any case, I've watched the N.T.S.B. recreation in Pandora's Black Box perhaps thousands of times in the years since Pilots For Truth put that out. Like most of the pilots in here, we don't just sit at the computer and watch Pandora's Black Box, but we do on occasion probably watch it again just for posterity sake.

And I came away with a couple things, from a 'pilot's viewpoint, that don't work for me...and I want you to hear me out and listen to me before you jump in with the typical ad-hominem attacks on me versus my information I am putting here.

First, during the approximate time of the alleged highjacking, there is no aircraft upset of even the slightest kind, not in altitude, not in pitch, not in yaw, not in roll, airspeed, or any other control parameter. Now I want you to ask yourself this question: You've just had a couple of middle eastern Saudi hijackers get into the cockpit (the FDR record shows no toggle for the door switch thru the DFDAU) and then commence to murder or wrestle with the captain and first officer. Now we know that Capt. Chuck Burlingame was far from a 98 pound boy with a nasal cannula and a walker parked behind his seat in the cockpit. I don't know what he could bench press, or what his first officer could bench press, but I have a real hard time with either of these men cooly sitting in their seats, while they are having their heads sawed off by a box cutter wielding, screaming maniac...without either hitting the yoke or kicking their rudder pedals. Because, as you might imagine, those two men are in a de-facto, bona-fide struggle for not just their lives, but their passengers lives, as well. I don't think they would have had narcolepsy in their final moments alive, in other words. The A/P would have, by design, disengaged, and at the very least, there would have been for a short period of time, an 'upset' of the aircraft, due to the disengagement of the autopilot. Anyone familiar with 'coffin corner' and what that infers, knows that any upset of this nature of any aircraft of this type, at high altitude, could lead to the incipient and sudden loss of control of the plane, if not corrected very rapidly and fast. It's not fathomable that one of the hijackers would be hovering over the A/P button on the panel to re-engage it repeatedly while they killed the crew. Un uh.

Then we get to the FL-180 'reset' that happens on the climb, for vertical separation and safety reasons. The flight crew does that, just like any flight crew who operates airplanes in the Positive Control Airspace above FL-180 is mandated to do. This happens, as you would expect it would, in the FDR record. On the descent, there is a disparity between the N.T.S.B. recreation, and the reality in the .CSV file, as the crew would have now been 'hijackers' and not experienced line pilots...and certainly would have no cognition, nor safety reasons, to do a Dulles local altimeter set as they barrelled on down to hit the Pentagon that morning. So why is it present in one N.T.S.B. product, and 'absent' in the other product, one might ask? Allegedly these things were derivatives of the other, and the data should have been in total agreement. But it's not.

Then we get to the rudder movements on this plane. And I have had discussions about this with other pilots, and they either are amputee's or they fly flat footed all day long and never use rudders ever. I think Boeing and Airbus might go the 'aercoupe' route and get rid of the rudder pedals altogether, it's about forty pounds of weight they could be garnering revenue from, and not paying fuel to haul around...because in this flight, that set of rudder pedals on AA-77, or N644AA, are mighty dead. They don't even really twitch, let alone show any pilot imputs on them. Now, granted, inexperienced pilots with zero flight experience might ignore rudders for a bit, but to do coordinated flight with the black ball in the bars indicating no skid or slip is going on, they had to use them when the A/P and rudder trim weren't taking care of it. Not the case on this plane. Matter of fact, on the final dive to the building, at 460 plus knots, nary a twitch of rudder. Hmmmm??

Between these things I cite, the control issues in pulling out of a 4,400 foot per minute dive, in an 80 ton inertial mass with wings, going downhill at great speed...and then rounding out in that dive for a lawn height, pole clipping venture and skittle across the pristine Pentagon lawn (post crash), without a pitch oscillation and loss of control in the pitch axis, known as PHUGOIDING or PORPOISING, this flight is an impossibility. It's an impossibility from any number of flight limitations standpoints, but more importantly, the hijacker would have actually had to use rudder to execute the nice 270 degree turn and stay in coordinated flight, and he would have had to do some rudder dance on the final end of the dive to stay lined up. And he did not. It's evident in the FDR recreation that this was not the case.

So in lieu of screaming at Mr. Stutts and Mr. Legge for decoding 'bullsh*t' as I called it, which is in fact their prerogative, I do have to admonish them for believing an 80 ton airliner flown by neophytes could round out in the bottom of a very steep dive, with a lot of downward inertia, and then slide into the CATCHERS MIT like that.

and now I want to call your attention to photos taken of the Pentagon wall within the first five or so minutes of impact.

Yep, a frenchman published a piece about this utter absurdity, and had those unretouched pics in his presentation. In them, you can clearly see vertical steel studs or parts of the wall, behind the entry hole that an 80 ton, 460 knot airliner just entered.

Was this plane made out of silly putty?

No engine entry points, no wing slots, meaning wings would have been outside the building, as there was such a paucity of wreckage, for them to be converted to pure energy release at impact, the resultant force would have obliterated that quarter of the buuilding. No empennage wreckage, no engine penetration holes, no vertical stabilzer. No luggage, no bodies, no seats. No nothing.

Now, later on, there are pics of what are presumably F.B.I. guys strewing wreckage around, and in one photo, the rivet holes have obvious corrosion marks from them. Am I to believe that piece corroded in an hour or two? From what? Why is it that the moderately pristine and amost immaculate lawn, suddenly starts to sprout parts?

I can't tell you how parts sprout up except that NO F.B.I. would put their badges in their pockets while strewing wreckage you are not supposed to move, under any circumstances. They had no license to touch that stuff. It's an aircraft CRASH SITE, for christs sake. Why the badges in pockets? Why?

April Gallop mentioned she crawled thru this 'inferno hole' just after it was created, with her son on her back. She sustained no major burns. Her hair wasn't on fire. She didn't suffer significant smoke inhalation. How can this be.

How can an 80 ton aircraft vaporize it's wings, vertical and horizontal stabilizers, and one engine that never was recovered? How could the one engine get into the building without an entry hole?

Mr. Legge, Mr Stutts, I'm not going to scream at you for decoding and then writing this paper you wrote, but clearly, neither of you has taken the time to study this event like some of us have. There are so many 'from an experienced pilot' standpoint holes, that it doesn't compute even a little bit.

and the icing on this entire 'merde' cake, is the no ACFT ID and no FLEET ID in the FDR data preamble.

and I'll go one step further. The N.T.S.B., the F.B.I., and the F.A.A., had no constructive reason to hide from all of us, particularly Aidan Monaghan, who submitted the F.O.I.A., that just wanted these parts of this plane to be identified by serial number.

Because, Mr. Legge, and Mr. Stutts, these planes create a huge paper trail when they are built. Those documents would have reinforced the government's assertion that N644AA hit the building and was destroyed that day. The on the spot, almost premeditatedly confiscated video tapes the F.B.I. grabbed that would show the plane, are not available fo rus to look at.

and for god's sake, why did it take the F.A.A. more than THREE YEARS to strike these involved aircraft from the F.A.A. registries?

I'll tell you why. Because these planes weren't involved. We know '2' were at the WTC, but we have no constructive proof that the plane the F.A.A. lost track of over the W. Virginia 'radar hole' where the FPS-117 long range, 3-d airsearch radar is located, by the way, is now said to have hit the Pentagon. Because without meeting certain criteria, per Robin Hordon's excellent outcry over this fact, that flight could never be positively known to be FLT-77.

Because, per Gerard Holmgren's excellent work, we know that FLT-77 wasn't even a scheduled carrier flight on Sept. 11th. 2001.

So I clearly have many many many problems with this from any number of standpoints, the most significant one is the bogus FDR data that is non-reality, which you so faithfully, painstakingly decoded the 4 seconds that the N.T.S.B. swears on a stack of bibles more or less, that it was unable to decode. Something is seriously wrong with this entire picture, and I am not accusing either of you of being putzes, but I think that you miss a whole lot of valid, very real reasons your assertions cannot stand in a reality based world of real aeronautics, real physics, and real airplane flight limits, when 'incompetent' pilots were allegedly performing these feats of magic you show in your paper. It's just not real, guys

and then he goes one step further

Mr. Stutts:

I now have to define your entire 'work product' as utter and total BULLsh*t. You had about 4 days to come up with a better bullsh*t story than this one, and to propose that AC ID and FLEET ID are buried in the flight parameter stream after the preamble, where it always always always is, is so beyond the pale and absurd, that it's now not conjecture that you're a COIN OP (counterintelligence) from either the U.S. government, or the mossad, but you're actually a very badly managed one, to float this sh*t.

You failed to address any of the incongruencies I published about the entire event, not even one of them. Now, as a non pilot, I don't expect you to try to understand how the entire thing is absurdity from the very start to assert that an 80 ton plane went thru the 'cat door' at the Pentagon, and didn't leave any wreckage till the F.B.I. began to seed it later that morning with the Buga, Colombia jungle weathered wreckage. I can understand that, as you would have no way to explain the lack of aircraft upset during a violent and ugly hijacking, and also, the Altimeter setting in the NTSB fabricated crap in one of their products, because they were so sloppy they failed to both see it and understand it's importance here, in that this, as well as the no aircraft upset, and the lack of rudder inputs, while not on A/P., and the impossible pullout from the dive, all were so impossible that only in a child's game could any of this hokey sh*t be believable.

So now I have to say for the record you guys are a COIN OP for the people who did this. I gave you the benefit of the doubt to prove you were not a bullsh*t mill for Sunstein's cognitive infiltration network of zio prostitutes for Israel, and you totally blew that gig here.

I tell you what. Go sell this to the National Enquirer. They might print your dissertation. But no meaningful and relevant aviation based analysis validates any of your turd feed here, because virtuallly all of your stuff has borne itself out to be so absurd that even the Enquirer would probably balk at publishing your disinformation.

I'm sorry, Mr. Stutts, but you unmasked yourself with this total, utter bullsh*t today. And we didn't even have to do it for you, you did it yourself


Can you provide the link that the text is from please.

[Referee]

Iwill make a couple of points

1. No flight Recorder found....................It is the first time ever flight recorders were destroyed on 911 those things could probably survive a nuclear blast

2. 2 trillion cameras we get a few frames

3. FBI showed up 45 mins after collecting survallience cameras from local buisness.

4. eye witness reports of strange sounds not a plane on the day of.

5. plane parts found in the wreckage were of a different engine type then the plane reported missing.

6. Punch out hole way to small and way to deep in the building.

7. An Impossible approch and turn radius.

8. Remodel of the very side and only that side of the pentagon few weeks before

9. An eye witness on TV MSM executive in half an hour with the perfect story

10 No fighter intercepts and no AA fire from the Pentagon.

whatever hit the building was covered up NO DOUBT

[WhiteFeather]

There were more surveillance cameras in Walmart than The Pentagon WTF!!!!. Open your eyes people, we was dupped indeed. Good Going Donnie Boy, you almost got away with it, I Repeat,,,Almost!

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-LXI_1N_tgHU/Tb7eT_7XthI/AAAAAAAAAfk/kTmwx836FSk/s1600/rumsfeld+laughing+in+dod+briefing.jpg

[WhiteFeather]

Heres a great picture of Donnie (Osmond) Rumsfeld assisting the military at the pentagon on Sept 11, 2001 carrying an injured person to an ambulance. What a great photo shoot here. I didnt think you had the strength in those punie arms you evil turd.

http://statter911.com/files/2011/09/Donald-Rumsfeld-on-September-11.jpg

¤=[Post Update]=¤


Iwill make a couple of points

1. No flight Recorder found....................It is the first time ever flight recorders were destroyed on 911 those things could probably survive a nuclear blast

2. 2 trillion cameras we get a few frames

3. FBI showed up 45 mins after collecting survallience cameras from local buisness.

4. eye witness reports of strange sounds not a plane on the day of.

5. plane parts found in the wreckage were of a different engine type then the plane reported missing.

6. Punch out hole way to small and way to deep in the building.

7. An Impossible approch and turn radius.

8. Remodel of the very side and only that side of the pentagon few weeks before

9. An eye witness on TV MSM executive in half an hour with the perfect story

10 No fighter intercepts and no AA fire from the Pentagon.

whatever hit the building was covered up NO DOUBT

5. Is The Gem, a fake engine that the airplane manufacturer stated it did not come from our plane. It was almost a great prop. Good Try Donnie Boy, Good Try.

[modwiz]

IIRC, we had some thread(s) here lately about how to spot a disinfo agent. I think I remember one of the criterion being a person who had a plethora of readily available pre-prepared information and/or sites to visit. EWO is not a regular member here. He basically visits the threads that discuss some aspect of 9/11. He does stray, but I think it is an attempt to not be so obvious. He seems to struggle with the general tone of the site as a whole. Subjects like these are his bread and butter. I use this phrase with ironic intent.

This is not an indictment of mission as much as it is a post declaring someone who walks and talks like a duck. Is it so wrong to suspect a duck with so many webbed footsteps on this site?

To other posters to this thread, I cannot see any posts of EWO. He is on my ignore list because in almost a years' time he has had nothing new to say on this subject. I am hoping he has paid me the courtesy of ignoring me as well. IMO, the 'hand' is the audience he courts.

[WhiteFeather]

IIRC, we had some thread(s) here lately about how to spot a disinfo agent. I think I remember one of the criterion being a person who had a plethora of readily available pre-prepared information and/or sites to visit. EWO is not a regular member here. He basically visits the threads that discuss some aspect of 9/11. He does stray, but I think it is an attempt to not be so obvious. He seems to struggle with the general tone of the site as a whole. Subjects like these are his bread and butter. I use this phrase with ironic intent.

This is not an indictment of mission as much as it is a post declaring someone who walks and talks like a duck. Is it so wrong to suspect a duck with so many webbed footsteps on this site?

To other posters to this thread, I cannot see any posts of EWO. He is on my ignore list because in almost a years' time he has had nothing new to say on this subject. I am hoping he has paid me the courtesy of ignoring me as well. IMO, the 'hand' is the audience he courts.

LMFAO,,,,,That's the impression i got as well, seems like he just slipped through the proverbial cracks to get on this forum, nicely stated Modwiz. Perhaps an investigation by the moderators are in order here.

[modwiz]

Heres a great picture of Donnie (Osmond) Rumsfeld assisting the military at the pentagon on Sept 11, 2001 carrying an injured person to an ambulance. What a great photo shoot here. I didnt think you had the strength in those puny arms you evil turd.

He was a wrestler in school and still fancies himself as a 'physical' guy. I wonder how he would fare in prison?

[WhiteFeather]

Heres a great picture of Donnie (Osmond) Rumsfeld assisting the military at the pentagon on Sept 11, 2001 carrying an injured person to an ambulance. What a great photo shoot here. I didnt think you had the strength in those puny arms you evil turd.

He was a wrestler in school and still fancies himself as a 'physical' guy. I wonder how he would fare in prison?

After he tries to escape to Paraguay with Boy George Bush soon, he will be arrested and tried for crimes against humanity very shortly. Thats gonna be a pain in the ass for him. Hope Donnie doesnt drop the soap in the shower.

[modwiz]

Heres a great picture of Donnie (Osmond) Rumsfeld assisting the military at the pentagon on Sept 11, 2001 carrying an injured person to an ambulance. What a great photo shoot here. I didnt think you had the strength in those puny arms you evil turd.

He was a wrestler in school and still fancies himself as a 'physical' guy. I wonder how he would fare in prison?

After he tries to escape to Paraguay with Boy George Bush soon, he will be arrested and tried for crimes against humanity very shortly. Thats gonna be a pain in the ass for him. Hope Donnie doesnt drop the soap in the shower.

He always had a kind of vampire, Count Dracula, look to me. Dollars to donuts all his red blood cells aren't his. That is one seriously creepy individual. WhateverTF he is.

As to his dropping the soap. I think that is called brown eye open.

[WhiteFeather]

I think i found the plane that struck the pentagon, look at :28 seconds in the video below. Donnie Boy Rumsfeld is being played by Tattoo on this video i posted below. Very interesting and convincing evidence of the plane here if your eyes are wide opened enough.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1x_QbVDlLbI

[ThePythonicCow]

LMFAO,,,,,That's the impression i got as well, ... Perhaps an investigation by the moderators are in order here.
That's my impression as well.

So far as I know, it doesn't usually work to moderate members for presenting views I think are wrong. Moderation works for misbehavior. For misguided views, I might post, as any member might, how I see it.

Sometimes I will go so far as to ask users with quite differing views to take it to a different thread. For example, if several members were enjoying a discussion of Nassim Haramein's physics on some thread, which I think are seriously misguided, I should not keep posting on such a thread my disagreements, to the point of overly distracting the thread. Rather I should take my contrary view to another thread instead.

I have no idea if such would apply in this thread or not -- haven't read back up in the thread to see. If some readers felt that, then I'd invite them, as usual, to report the posts they found overly distracting.

[modwiz]

LMFAO,,,,,That's the impression i got as well, ... Perhaps an investigation by the moderators are in order here.
That's my impression as well.

So far as I know, it doesn't usually work to moderate members for presenting views I think are wrong. Moderation works for misbehavior. For misguided views, I might post, as any member might, how I see it.

Sometimes I will go so far as to ask users with quite differing views to take it to a different thread. For example, if several members were enjoying a discussion of Nassim Haramein's physics on some thread, which I think are seriously misguided, I should not keep posting on such a thread my disagreements, to the point of overly distracting the thread. Rather I should take my contrary view to another thread instead.

I have no idea if such would apply in this thread or not -- haven't read back up in the thread to see. If some readers felt that, then I'd invite them, as usual, to report the posts they found overly distracting.

He can be amusing. In an impish way these topics are like putting some cheese into a mousetrap. That is not the intention of them but he always shows up. Like it was his job or something. :confused:

[WhiteFeather]

LMFAO,,,,I think i just wet myself again, time to go change me draws Brb.

[WhiteFeather]

Heres a great picture of Donnie (Osmond) Rumsfeld assisting the military at the pentagon on Sept 11, 2001 carrying an injured person to an ambulance. What a great photo shoot here. I didnt think you had the strength in those puny arms you evil turd.

He was a wrestler in school and still fancies himself as a 'physical' guy. I wonder how he would fare in prison?

After he tries to escape to Paraguay with Boy George Bush soon, he will be arrested and tried for crimes against humanity very shortly. Thats gonna be a pain in the ass for him. Hope Donnie doesnt drop the soap in the shower.

He always had a kind of vampire, Count Dracula, look to me. Dollars to donuts all his red blood cells aren't his. That is one seriously creepy individual. WhateverTF he is.

As to his dropping the soap. I think that is called brown eye open.

LMFAO Brown Eye Open!

[Referee]

IIRC, we had some thread(s) here lately about how to spot a disinfo agent. I think I remember one of the criterion being a person who had a plethora of readily available pre-prepared information and/or sites to visit. EWO is not a regular member here. He basically visits the threads that discuss some aspect of 9/11. He does stray, but I think it is an attempt to not be so obvious. He seems to struggle with the general tone of the site as a whole. Subjects like these are his bread and butter. I use this phrase with ironic intent.

This is not an indictment of mission as much as it is a post declaring someone who walks and talks like a duck. Is it so wrong to suspect a duck with so many webbed footsteps on this site?

To other posters to this thread, I cannot see any posts of EWO. He is on my ignore list because in almost a years' time he has had nothing new to say on this subject. I am hoping he has paid me the courtesy of ignoring me as well. IMO, the 'hand' is the audience he courts.

My fellings on this matter are much the same! I wonder what time of day he usually posts?

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

IIRC, we had some thread(s) here lately about how to spot a disinfo agent. I think I remember one of the criterion being a person who had a plethora of readily available pre-prepared information and/or sites to visit. EWO is not a regular member here. He basically visits the threads that discuss some aspect of 9/11. He does stray, but I think it is an attempt to not be so obvious. He seems to struggle with the general tone of the site as a whole. Subjects like these are his bread and butter. I use this phrase with ironic intent.

This is not an indictment of mission as much as it is a post declaring someone who walks and talks like a duck. Is it so wrong to suspect a duck with so many webbed footsteps on this site?

To other posters to this thread, I cannot see any posts of EWO. He is on my ignore list because in almost a years' time he has had nothing new to say on this subject. I am hoping he has paid me the courtesy of ignoring me as well. IMO, the 'hand' is the audience he courts.

LMFAO,,,,,That's the impression i got as well, seems like he just slipped through the proverbial cracks to get on this forum, nicely stated Modwiz. Perhaps an investigation by the moderators are in order here.

I find It interesting that because I don't agree with you regarding the pentagon, you have to suggest that I be "investigated". Is that your default position against those that dont agree with you?
They they are not to be trusted?
Like I have already said, please re-read this thread to see where I am coming from.

I do not have modwiz on ignore as I prefer to read what everyone has to say rather than put my fingers in my ears.
His accusation that just because I can argue my case and know where to look for info, that I should therefore must be some kind of "disrupter" is once again, just paranoia and po0r logic. I note he does not aim that accusation at those that post just as much information as I do that support HIS side of the argument. Its hypocritical.

I also note that the long rebut you posted against Frank Leggs Pentagon paper ends with the author also engaging in personal attacks against Frank Legg.
I have no problem reading science papers but when the authors have to resort to name calling, the author and papers tend to lose credibilty in my eyes. They should stand or fall on the science within them. There is nothing scientific about name calling. I also very nicely asked you for a link but you did not provide one. I thought that was forum rule?

Also, the argument that just because I post here more than anywhere else in the forum, I should therefore be treated with suspicion is just paranoia.
This subject interests me and I have worked with the families and Sibel Edmonds so it follows that I would post here the most.

Does expressing my opinion on here because its different to yours mean that I should be ganged up on and name called?
Remember its OTHERS that are making this personal and laughing at insults aimed at me. Its others that are making this personal. NOT me.
I only ever want to talk about the science.
But dont worry folks. Its clear that adult discussion is not possible without me being acused of being something I am not. A heard mentality has suddenly appeared here and I feel bullied. Im outta here. You win. Last time I checked posting my own opinion did not mean I was a disinfo artist but apparently, it seems that way now. :blink:

[iceni tribe]

EWO ,

New Paper At The Journal Of 9/11 Studies - FDR Analysis Performed By Frank Legge and Warren Stutt


Warren Stutt Decode Shows Altitude too high to Impact Pentagon
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...&p=10778240

Warren Stutt's admitted lack of expertise with respect to FDR Investigation
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...&p=10799563


RA - PA Correlation, proving the "Altitude Divergence" calculated by Legge/Stutt was due to RA measuring from an object higher than ground level. Fatal to the Legge/Stutt argument.
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...&p=10794074

If Legge/Stutt "Altitude Divergence" calculations were correct, Aircraft would be slamming into the ground. IAD ILS RWY 01R Approach Analysis, Instruments required for IFR Flight Based on Regulation.
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...&p=10793490

Calculations based on Stutt Theory with respect to RA Tracking Capability, proving Stutt's theory false.
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...&p=10794159

Explains Lack Of Attention To Detail in the very first paragraph of the Legge/Stutt "Paper"
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...&p=10793061

Proof of Legge trying to weasel his way out of mis/disinformation he has presented
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...&p=10793501

the people at Journal Of 9/11 Studies have been mis directing everyone , a A3 skyhawk went into the pentagon firing a missile just before impact. controlled by remote control by the guys at Raytheon.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S81H2ohG4ko

[Dennis Leahy]

I only ever want to talk about the science.

Hello, Eyes

I'm going to take you at your word, and ask you to step back to the time before anyone had time to send out any info or disinfo. Go back to the moments when there was an explosion at the Pentagon, the original photos from journalists first on the scene, and the impression of those journalists first on the scene.

Regardless of what anyone later said, or analyzed... using the tools you and I have for out own scientific analysis (our eyes wide open), what would the side of the Pentagon look like if a jumbo jet (Boeing 757, wingspan 124 feet, 10 inches and 44 feet, 6 inches tall) actually hit it?

You have to admit that the "footprint" on the wall is all wrong.

Have you ever seen photos of a piece of straw that has punctured a tree during a tornado? Then you know that even light objects, seemingly flimsy, will make a dramatic footprint when traveling at hundreds of miles an hour. I have seen the gauge of aluminum sheeting used in airplane construction, and it is not aluminum foil - it's actually pretty significant. And of course, the wings have a skeletal structure of even more substantial aluminum parts.

http://physics911.net/images/boeing2.jpg

And then there are those two VERY substantial engines that did not leave a footprint...

...and the unscathed lawn, so we know the wings didn't just fall off of the 757 before impact with the wall (the only way they could have gone in through the hole created by the jet body (or missile, or planted explosives in the wall.)

And the initial reporter on the scene said he saw no sign of jet debris.

And military officer April Gallop (a survivor of the Pentagon explosion site) saw no jet pieces and smelled no kerosine.


OK, so that is the INITIAL info that we get. Why would we listen to the most unlikely string of events that would have been required for the official story to be accepted as even possible? It has no plausibility. Dozens of surveillance cameras were confiscated to either analyze something or to hide something - and any objective person, at this point, has to admit that it HAS to be that they are hiding.

I can see why you do not just jump on the bandwagon, and support whatever the popular theory happens to be. You demand of yourself a dispassionate analysis of scientific data. Your eyes are wide open. Without even mentioning what other people see, do your own eyes allow you to believe that a 124 foot wingspan jumbo jet with two immense engines left that footprint on the Pentagon?

So, again, I'm taking you at your word that you are interested in the scientific analysis, and I have to ask you what convinces you not to believe your own eyes (as a primary method for gathering scientific data)?

Physics911 analysis of missing wings:
http://physics911.net/missingwings

Boeing 757-200 specs:
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/757family/pf/pf_200tech.html

Dennis

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

Dennis, first of all, thank you for your great post. Its refreshing to see that not everyone that holds a different viewpoint from me has to resort to name calling and suggesting I am a disinfo agent or resort to ignoring me. I refuse to debate with others that suggest prefer to imply I am trying to put out disinfo on purpose.
They are not worth my time. Throwing around insults certainly wont convince me. This is a "disscussion" forum is it not?

Dennis, give me a bit of time and I will try and address your excellent and valid points.

¤=[Post Update]=¤


EWO ,

New Paper At The Journal Of 9/11 Studies - FDR Analysis Performed By Frank Legge and Warren Stutt


Warren Stutt Decode Shows Altitude too high to Impact Pentagon
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...&p=10778240

Warren Stutt's admitted lack of expertise with respect to FDR Investigation
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...&p=10799563


RA - PA Correlation, proving the "Altitude Divergence" calculated by Legge/Stutt was due to RA measuring from an object higher than ground level. Fatal to the Legge/Stutt argument.
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...&p=10794074

If Legge/Stutt "Altitude Divergence" calculations were correct, Aircraft would be slamming into the ground. IAD ILS RWY 01R Approach Analysis, Instruments required for IFR Flight Based on Regulation.
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...&p=10793490

Calculations based on Stutt Theory with respect to RA Tracking Capability, proving Stutt's theory false.
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...&p=10794159

Explains Lack Of Attention To Detail in the very first paragraph of the Legge/Stutt "Paper"
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...&p=10793061

Proof of Legge trying to weasel his way out of mis/disinformation he has presented
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...&p=10793501

the people at Journal Of 9/11 Studies have been mis directing everyone , a A3 skyhawk went into the pentagon firing a missile just before impact. controlled by remote control by the guys at Raytheon.




None of those links work. You may have copied the shortned versions of the links maybe?

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

I will reply in greater detail and to your other points soon but for now, I will post this for your consideration:

Take a look at this photograph:

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

This photo was reproduced in the FEMA Report, we can see the punctured walls extending a great deal further (50 feet to the north of the impact hole center.) than the smaller total figure of 65 feet that is often mentioned. Here is another photo:

http://911review.com/errors/pentagon/imgs/fig_3_8.jpg

When all the photo evidence is considered, an outline of the damage can be worked out.

In this annotated photograph, regions of punctured walls are outlined in red, and regions of breached limestone are outlined in green. (note the white and green cars on the image below and the photo above)

http://911review.com/errors/pentagon/imgs/delmont1.jpg


Regarding the wings, I will address this when I have more time as well as (what I consider to be ) how the incorrect hole width calculation may have been arrived at. I will also address the lack of debris.
Many thanks.

[Dennis Leahy]

EWO, I think I can help keep a few folks from thinking you're a disinfo agent.

On 9/11, the three skyscrapers (towers # 1 and 2, plus building #7) all "fell down" at a speed that was 100% impossible by simple physics. (Near free-fall speed for the towers, and the building #7 fell for at least the first 2.5 seconds - over 100 feet - AT free-fall speed, or free-fall acceleration, to be more exact: 32ft per second per second.) This is 100% impossible, and could not have happened if the buildings were made of cheese or Popsicle sticks - much less steel and concrete. Anything in the way of the collapse with ANY structural integrity would have slowed the descent.

Nothing slowed the descent.

Nothing.

For this to occur, 100% of the structural members beneath the roof would need to lose 100% of their structural integrity, simultaneously.

The ONLY way that the roof line of building 7 could have fallen at free-fall acceleration speed was if every support column was simultaneously destroyed by explosives (or some esoteric device, but let's not go there right now.) Explosives residues (nanothermite) and iron spheres proving extremely high temperatures far far beyond office fires were found.

This is 100% proof that explosives, not fire, brought down the World Trade Center skyscrapers. It would take a large crew of demolitions experts at least a "man-week" (smallest estimate) to wire up any one of the skyscrapers, proving the explosives were planted before 9/11, proving it was a conspiracy and not a sequence of failures to respond. The evidence is clear, simple, and only by dumbing down Americans so that .005% have ever even taken a high school physics class, coupled with a concerted and deliberate disinformation program fed to shell-shocked US citizens by the mass media (propaganda wing of the CIA/NSA) could obscure the clear facts. The facts are so obvious that it is 100% impossible that NIST "scientists" sincerely believe what they wrote or said, they are deliberately lying as part of a grand conspiracy. The conspiracy (which may or may not include agents from other nations), absolutely MUST include US government personnel. So, 9/11 was indeed an "inside job" and the US government (or factions therein) conspired and covered-up the 9/11 event.

Agree, or disagree?

(I'm assuming that you agree with all of this, and that you are simply expressing some doubts about how the Pentagon event went down.) I would expect your agreement to allow a number of people that may wonder about your motives to see you in a new light.

Dennis

p.s. I'm not too thrilled with that smoke-covered picture with the annotations on it. Can you find another image to show what you're seeing?

[WhiteFeather]

Breathtaking Dennis. My Gratitude on this piece of work, and that is an understatement.

[modwiz]

I still find it difficult to work with a scenario where pilots in tests, traveling at the stated speed were unable to get the aircraft near the ground owing to the aerodynamics that create the upthrust to lift the jet off of the ground in the first place. If the official story demonstrated in these photos is true then the jet would have been coming in for a landing. Deceleration would have been necessary for that. The stated speed of the aircraft doesn't work. Whatever was in those few frames of video was moving a a very high rate of speed. The details provided here are not for people able to work with facts and simple deductions. They are for people used to the TV talking heads giving them predigested information. Like a mother bird feeding her chicks.

I admire what you are doing here, Dennis.

[WhiteFeather]

Agreed Modwiz, the strike from that angle by an airplane is totally impossible. A granite bunker missile makes more sense than a 757 driven by a terrorist who couldnt even throw a frisbee let alone maneuver a plane with such precise ability striking its designated target.


And This Nugget: Hijacker's Passport and a Landing Gear Fragment Alone Survive Fiery Crash

"CBS News reported, meanwhile, that a passport belonging to one of the hijackers, Satam al-Sugami, was found on the street minutes after the plane he was aboard crashed into the north tower of the World Trade Center and before the New York landmark collapsed."

Amazing stuff! This is yet another "magic passport" found in the rubble in addition to "mastermind" Mohamed Atta's discovered passport at the WTC site.

Let's see if I can get this straight:

1. The fireballs of the WTC attacks melted structural steel that was designed to withstand heat of 2000 degrees F.

2. The fireballs of the WTC attacks completely destroyed both airplanes cockpit voice-recorders (situated at front)*and* the black-box data recorders (located in the rear of the aircraft).

3. The fireballs of the WTC attacks vaporized human bone and flesh.

4. And yet those same fireballs somehow weren't strong enough to do anything to a pair of surviving passportsfound in pristine condition. No surface scratches, scuffs, abrasions or burns. Perfect.

My Question: Why doesn't Boeing design a new black-box data recorder manufactured from the same indestructible material used to produce magical Saudi passports?


http://www.rense.com/general48/secondhijackerpass.htm

And this handy paperwork found at the pentagon
http://www.rense.com/general68/pass.htm

"

[Dennis Leahy]

My Question: Why doesn't Boeing design a new black-box data recorder manufactured from the same indestructible material used to produce magical Saudi passports?
:drum: {rimshot}

hehehehehee

[WhiteFeather]

pretty sure it was a jet.
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/index.html

how come the vast majority of your posts are 9/11 rebuttals?
Where exactly do you stand on the whole thing?
Can you explain your theory on the topic please?

i second that question!

[Referee]

pretty sure it was a jet.
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/index.html

how come the vast majority of your posts are 9/11 rebuttals?
Where exactly do you stand on the whole thing?
Can you explain your theory on the topic please?

i second that question!

I Third it.

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

EWO, I think I can help keep a few folks from thinking you're a disinfo agent.

On 9/11, the three skyscrapers (towers # 1 and 2, plus building #7) all "fell down" at a speed that was 100% impossible by simple physics. (Near free-fall speed for the towers, and the building #7 fell for at least the first 2.5 seconds - over 100 feet - AT free-fall speed, or free-fall acceleration, to be more exact: 32ft per second per second.) This is 100% impossible, and could not have happened if the buildings were made of cheese or Popsicle sticks - much less steel and concrete. Anything in the way of the collapse with ANY structural integrity would have slowed the descent.

Nothing slowed the descent.

Nothing.

For this to occur, 100% of the structural members beneath the roof would need to lose 100% of their structural integrity, simultaneously.

The ONLY way that the roof line of building 7 could have fallen at free-fall acceleration speed was if every support column was simultaneously destroyed by explosives (or some esoteric device, but let's not go there right now.) Explosives residues (nanothermite) and iron spheres proving extremely high temperatures far far beyond office fires were found.

This is 100% proof that explosives, not fire, brought down the World Trade Center skyscrapers. It would take a large crew of demolitions experts at least a "man-week" (smallest estimate) to wire up any one of the skyscrapers, proving the explosives were planted before 9/11, proving it was a conspiracy and not a sequence of failures to respond. The evidence is clear, simple, and only by dumbing down Americans so that .005% have ever even taken a high school physics class, coupled with a concerted and deliberate disinformation program fed to shell-shocked US citizens by the mass media (propaganda wing of the CIA/NSA) could obscure the clear facts. The facts are so obvious that it is 100% impossible that NIST "scientists" sincerely believe what they wrote or said, they are deliberately lying as part of a grand conspiracy. The conspiracy (which may or may not include agents from other nations), absolutely MUST include US government personnel. So, 9/11 was indeed an "inside job" and the US government (or factions therein) conspired and covered-up the 9/11 event.

Agree, or disagree?

(I'm assuming that you agree with all of this, and that you are simply expressing some doubts about how the Pentagon event went down.) I would expect your agreement to allow a number of people that may wonder about your motives to see you in a new light.

Dennis





Agree 100%.


I also want to say its getting very tedious for me when



I KEEP REPEATING THE REQUEST FOR PEOPLE TO RE-READ MY POSTS IN THIS THREAD TO SEE HERE I STAND ON 9/11. If anyone actually took the time to read my others posts o 9/11, not just in this thread, they would very quickly see where I stand.

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

pretty sure it was a jet.
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/index.html

how come the vast majority of your posts are 9/11 rebuttals?
Where exactly do you stand on the whole thing?
Can you explain your theory on the topic please?

i second that question!

I Third it.

Whitefeather - your logic is poor and a perfect illustration of what I posted about before.
Just because I don't think a missile hit the pentagon, that does not mean I therefore must believe the rest of the official story.
You are making a very wrong and huge leap of logic and are too eager in your fervor to paint me as a disinfo artist to actually take in and read what I have typed.
At least have the honesty and courtesy to actually read the thread.
I have explained my reasons for posting in the 9/11 forum and this is the third time I have had to ask others to read this thread to see where I am coming from.
I will say it again Your answer is on the very first page!
Is everyone just going to ask me the same questions and repeatedly ignore my answers? This thread will just go in circles.
Whitfeather, please confirm you have read the thread so we can move on and you don't have to keep asking me why I post here in the style do. Please actually answer this.
Its a shame people cant be bothered to read a thread and would rather form incorrect judgements about me (not dennis however). I guess its easier that way right?
Its getting boring. Thanks.

Dennis, I will try and find a photo. Thanks for the fair post. I wish others were more like you. Other posters such as Modwiz could learn much from you. But modwiz does not like open dialogue which is a shame.

[iceni tribe]

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


EWO

were is the tail section inpact on this image and further more the image you are using is a composite photo.........more rubbish from journelof911studies.

[Axman]

So my question is was it true that where the damage was done is where all the files for the 2 billion? in lost money was. :confused:

Just wondering

The Axman

[Dennis Leahy]

EWO, I think I can help keep a few folks from thinking you're a disinfo agent.

On 9/11, the three skyscrapers (towers # 1 and 2, plus building #7) all "fell down" at a speed that was 100% impossible by simple physics. (Near free-fall speed for the towers, and the building #7 fell for at least the first 2.5 seconds - over 100 feet - AT free-fall speed, or free-fall acceleration, to be more exact: 32ft per second per second.) This is 100% impossible, and could not have happened if the buildings were made of cheese or Popsicle sticks - much less steel and concrete. Anything in the way of the collapse with ANY structural integrity would have slowed the descent.

Nothing slowed the descent.

Nothing.

For this to occur, 100% of the structural members beneath the roof would need to lose 100% of their structural integrity, simultaneously.

The ONLY way that the roof line of building 7 could have fallen at free-fall acceleration speed was if every support column was simultaneously destroyed by explosives (or some esoteric device, but let's not go there right now.) Explosives residues (nanothermite) and iron spheres proving extremely high temperatures far far beyond office fires were found.

This is 100% proof that explosives, not fire, brought down the World Trade Center skyscrapers. It would take a large crew of demolitions experts at least a "man-week" (smallest estimate) to wire up any one of the skyscrapers, proving the explosives were planted before 9/11, proving it was a conspiracy and not a sequence of failures to respond. The evidence is clear, simple, and only by dumbing down Americans so that .005% have ever even taken a high school physics class, coupled with a concerted and deliberate disinformation program fed to shell-shocked US citizens by the mass media (propaganda wing of the CIA/NSA) could obscure the clear facts. The facts are so obvious that it is 100% impossible that NIST "scientists" sincerely believe what they wrote or said, they are deliberately lying as part of a grand conspiracy. The conspiracy (which may or may not include agents from other nations), absolutely MUST include US government personnel. So, 9/11 was indeed an "inside job" and the US government (or factions therein) conspired and covered-up the 9/11 event.

Agree, or disagree?

(I'm assuming that you agree with all of this, and that you are simply expressing some doubts about how the Pentagon event went down.) I would expect your agreement to allow a number of people that may wonder about your motives to see you in a new light.

Dennis





Agree 100%.

OK, folks, I'd say EWO is no disinfo agent. I have run into situations like this before, where someone is looking at the mountain of information and disinformation that is out there, and they come to some conclusion(s) that make them appear to be deliberately pumping out disinfo.

There were 3 separate crime scenes on 9/11, and what has to be the most sophisticated disinfo operation of all time. We also have well-meaning people not involved in the planning, execution, or cover-up that are interpreting either data or false data or testimony or false testimony - often blended with emotion - that offer an analysis of part of the operation at one crime scene, and are sincere but incorrect.

Though EWO declares that the official narrative at the WTC crime scene is pure lies (from his 100% agreement with my synopsis), I think EWO is attempting to see the physics of the Pentagon crime scene the way the official story was laid out.

I'd say, take EWO at his word, he currently thinks/believes that a Boeing 757 was used in the Pentagon crime, and if you are interested in discussing this crime scene and its evidence then hop in.

Me personally, well, I'm surprised to find myself in this thread. It popped up and I popped in. I generally am not spending much time investigation 9/11 any more, because I believe that the conspiracy is so huge and so diffused through all areas of government that a new investigation would be a soul-crushing sham. I also think that the prosecutors and federal judges currently in power would simply find everyone who is guilty "not guilty", if it did come to court. Besides, we already have enough forensic evidence to know how (at least some of it) was done - the only way to know who was in on the planning and execution is to start convicting the obvious perpetrators one-by-one and getting them to turn on the rest. (I don't really want Larry Silverstein or Rudy Giuliani or Dick Cheney to be waterboarded - because I don't believe in torture - but I'll bet those cowardly weasels would start singing pretty easily.)

EWO, do you think there was an Arab hijacker flying a jet into the Pentagon, or was the jet electronically/remotely controlled? The fighter-pilot skill-level 270° turn, getting the jet's targeted area away from Rumsfeld and pals, and on-course for a direct hit on the remodeled wing where (supposedly) the investigation for the missing $Trillions Rumsfeld announced on 9/10 was taking place, was a nice touch.

Here's what I'll say about the Pentagon crime scene, and then I'll probably just leave this topic behind.

I suspect all of the jets involved in 9/11 had remotely-operated nerve gas that killed everyone aboard after takeoff. (The very very sparse passenger lists included Raytheon employees that evidently needed to be silenced.)

A "gyro chip" installed in all the jets made them easy to remote control, and they all were.

My father-in-law (who was a fighter pilot in the Korean war) flew commercially, and flew 757s. I knew they were not only capable of remote flight, but that pilots were instructed/ordered to periodically allow the jets to fly themselves, in remote control mode. For example, in a flight from Chicago to Denver, the pilot would type-in ORD and DEN, sit back and watch. The jet would take-off, fly from Chicago to Denver, and land in Denver. The pilot had to just sit and watch. My father-in-law also took one look at the photos of the Pentagon and said, "that was not a 757 crash."

No maneuvers had to be done by amateur pilots, instead, experienced "drone pilots" - or a computer program - flying the jets remotely could precisely maneuver them, and they did. (I suspect that something went wrong with one jet, maybe they could not precisely control it, and for some reason they shot down the one above Shanksville - but I was trying to concentrate on the Pentagon right now.)

There is a video I can't locate right now that showed all of the flight patterns for East Coast air traffic on 9/11, and the flight 77 path was met and synced/duplicated by another jet - and after that, the paths diverged. That could have been the "switcheroo" or there may have been a flyover at the Pentagon by flight 77. Only the dozens of confiscated surveillance cameras and the perpetrators and cover-up team know for sure.

Some of the people who planned 9/11 were in the Pentagon, so the strike on that building was not left to any chance whatsoever. It makes no sense to use a 'droned' commercial jet, forcing it to maneuver (quite possibly beyond the parameters of physics) an impossibly perfect path that didn't scratch the lawn and didn't hit high enough to tumble across the building endangering Rumsfeld and other perpetrators. That, and the photos of the damage (especially compared to a 757) that appear to show a small jet or missile hit, possibly with planted explosives as insurance, make the 757 hit beyond unrealistic. I suspect that, as usual, we all tend to complicate things more than we need to.

Again, that's about it for me on that subject. For me personally, "debate" about the particulars of the 9/11 US government/US black ops/Mossad crime spree is not a good use of my time. It really wouldn't change anything if I knew for sure they did use a drone 757 or an F-16 or something else (I have no idea how many different missiles and small jets they have hidden away at air force bases.)

So, EWO, if you have some photographic evidence that is really convincing that it was indeed a 757, I would look at it, but again, at this point it would be merely a curiosity (and make me wonder why they pushed that jet beyond what many would consider the capabilities of flight physics.)

Peace, out.

Dennis

Some interesting info here:
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/JohnJudge/linkscopy/jetliners.html

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

http://i753.photobucket.com/albums/xx171/naf09_2010/pentagon_boeing_large2.jpg


EWO

were is the tail section inpact on this image and further more the image you are using is a composite photo..........

Yes, Its a composite photo. Whats the problem with that? Joining photos togther to gain an overview does not change the damage to the pentagon. It just gives a clearer picture. Not sure what your argument is here?

Reagrding the tail section and indeed wings, I can see why the lack of impressions of the plane's extremities is perhaps the strongest single piece of evidence that there was no plane. However, this is not evidence that no 757 crashed at the Pentagon. Rather it is evidence that no intact 757 crashed into the Pentagon's facade. If the extremities of a 757 were shredded just before impact, they would have failed to make impressions in the facade.
This is not as far fetched as you would imagine.
Have you ever looked into the "Bart Theory"?
Bart's theory, fits the eyewitness accounts better than any competing theory, and is potentially compatible with the photographic evidence of damage to the facade.
Despite the strong evidentiary support for Bart's theory it has received relatively little discussion, eclipsed by the attack drone and two-plane theories.

According to this theory, the jetliner was shredded by charges on the aircraft a split second before impact.
It accounts for several features in the eyewitnesses' reports (Here: http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/witnesses/crash.html - None of whom see a missile) of the moment of impact that are difficult to reconcile with the official crash account, such as of the jet exploding or disintegrating before reaching the building. Its worth looking into this scenario as it best fits ALL the evidence. Look at this for more evidence of explosives: http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/analysis/conclusions/explosion.html

I think a remote controlled 747 hit it and was detonated just before impact. The missing Pentagon fram would probably show this. A missile doe not fit the evidence and logisticly, why do it? Plus there are mnay who saw the plane. Apply Occams Razor. :)

[Oouthere]

http://i753.photobucket.com/albums/xx171/naf09_2010/pentagon_boeing_large2.jpg


EWO

were is the tail section inpact on this image and further more the image you are using is a composite photo..........

Yes, Its a composite photo. Whats the problem with that? Joining photos togther to gain an overview does not change the damage to the pentagon. It just gives a clearer picture. Not sure what your argument is here?

Reagrding the tail section and indeed wings, I can see why the lack of impressions of the plane's extremities is perhaps the strongest single piece of evidence that there was no plane. However, this is not evidence that no 757 crashed at the Pentagon. Rather it is evidence that no intact 757 crashed into the Pentagon's facade. If the extremities of a 757 were shredded just before impact, they would have failed to make impressions in the facade.
This is not as far fetched as you would imagine.
Have you ever looked into the "Bart Theory"?
Bart's theory, fits the eyewitness accounts better than any competing theory, and is potentially compatible with the photographic evidence of damage to the facade.
Despite the strong evidentiary support for Bart's theory it has received relatively little discussion, eclipsed by the attack drone and two-plane theories.

According to this theory, the jetliner was shredded by charges on the aircraft a split second before impact.
It accounts for several features in the eyewitnesses' reports (Here: http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/witnesses/crash.html - None of whom see a missile) of the moment of impact that are difficult to reconcile with the official crash account, such as of the jet exploding or disintegrating before reaching the building. Its worth looking into this scenario as it best fits ALL the evidence. Look at this for more evidence of explosives: http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/analysis/conclusions/explosion.html

I think a remote controlled 747 hit it and was detonated just before impact. The missing Pentagon fram would probably show this. A missile doe not fit the evidence and logisticly, why do it? Plus there are mnay who saw the plane. Apply Occams Razor. :)

Don't forget that Pentagon Police Officer Roosevelt Roberts saw an airliner overflying the parking lot directly after the explosion, remember only one plane was seen, and finally the flight path did not fit the destruction path.

Rich

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

Thanks for your reply. I am pretty sure you got your information from C.I.T who made the pentacon video. They are liars IMO. I am glad Richard Gage and others have PUBLICLY withdrawn their support of them.

Reagrding Police Officer Roosevelt Roberts, please watch this:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31LTIqcoTUg&feature=player_embedded

It points out how CIT change date to fit their needs. I recommend watching parts 1, 3 and 4 as well.

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

Also watch the wings at the 2:10 mark: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWL1hwPQFoo
They are almost compleatly shredded.

[Oouthere]

Ok, I watched the above CIT Deception video....that is not what was stated by Roberts on the full phone call and getting times incorrect is not that uncommon (9/11/2001 for me was about 72 hours long it seemed). The only way you can make such assumptions in that video is trying to prove he does not know how to communicate. IMO you are doing exactly what CIT is accused of. And Boger's verbal testimony is not what is typed on the report. So who are we to believe, the first hand witness verbal testimony or something typed on a paper that cannot be verified?

I don't remember the pilot's name, but he stated he saw the plane fly into the pentagon stating he saw the windows, passengers, etc. CIT did an excellent job by going to his location and proving it was impossible for him to have seen this without having a high speed camera since his view was only about a plane length long....at 530mph (almost a mile in 7 seconds) that would be difficult. Sometimes people lie and when it is proven it should be brought forward. Do I believe the taxis was staged....no. Do I believe the light poles were staged....no.

Also, the black box data showing the radar altimeter's last record at less than 1 second out is 273' but the one video shows the aircraft almost dragging the ground? The black box data shows the cockpit door was never opened after take-off, so Muslims with Allah's blessings had them walk through the closed doors? The video also shows a fireball rolling over the Pentagon, a direct hit and the Purdue University's impact simulation shows the fuel would have entered the building....but yet April Gallop is not burned nor smells jet fuel? I know the rotor and diffuser section in the pentagon photos are from a RB-211 engine....I've counted the turbines and looked at the parts breakdown. The simplest solution is that a 757 did hit the pentagon, but so many other facts weight against it.

I do not agree with CIT on a major part, something(s) did impact the pentagon (the generator proves this). Just like Susan McElwain's mysterious cruise type missile, perhaps there is technology not made readily available to the general military or Jane's.

Rich

[Oouthere]

I'll just throw this out there.....what would make sense imo is a pair of cruise missiles were mounted under the wings of the fly over aircraft, being released a few miles out from the pentagon. If they are painted about the same as the sky then it would be difficult to see. That would account for the light pole and generator damage but still leaves the turbine parts issue.

There was also one witness that stated he saw a craft shadowing the C-130....can't remember his name though. This is such a mess....lol

Rich

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

Ok, I watched the above CIT Deception video....that is not what was stated by Roberts on the full phone call and getting times incorrect is not that uncommon (9/11/2001 for me was about 72 hours long it seemed). The only way you can make such assumptions in that video is trying to prove he does not know how to communicate. IMO you are doing exactly what CIT is accused of. And Boger's verbal testimony is not what is typed on the report. So who are we to believe, the first hand witness verbal testimony or something typed on a paper that cannot be verified?

I don't remember the pilot's name, but he stated he saw the plane fly into the pentagon stating he saw the windows, passengers, etc. CIT did an excellent job by going to his location and proving it was impossible for him to have seen this without having a high speed camera since his view was only about a plane length long....at 530mph (almost a mile in 7 seconds) that would be difficult. Sometimes people lie and when it is proven it should be brought forward. Do I believe the taxis was staged....no. Do I believe the light poles were staged....no.

Also, the black box data showing the radar altimeter's last record at less than 1 second out is 273' but the one video shows the aircraft almost dragging the ground? The black box data shows the cockpit door was never opened after take-off, so Muslims with Allah's blessings had them walk through the closed doors? The video also shows a fireball rolling over the Pentagon, a direct hit and the Purdue University's impact simulation shows the fuel would have entered the building....but yet April Gallop is not burned nor smells jet fuel? I know the rotor and diffuser section in the pentagon photos are from a RB-211 engine....I've counted the turbines and looked at the parts breakdown. The simplest solution is that a 757 did hit the pentagon, but so many other facts weight against it.

I do not agree with CIT on a major part, something(s) did impact the pentagon (the generator proves this). Just like Susan McElwain's mysterious cruise type missile, perhaps there is technology not made readily available to the general military or Jane's.

Rich

This is one of the best posts in the thread. Open and honest and free of bias and paranoia.

For me, I don't trust CIT because of their attacks on others.
There is no need for it.
They should not need to do this.
They also manipulate and ignore evidence.
If anyone wants examples, I can provide them but I don't want this thread to become a slagging off match.
I would much rather it continue in the vain of the excellent post above.

¤=[Post Update]=¤


I'll just throw this out there.....what would make sense imo is a pair of cruise missiles were mounted under the wings of the fly over aircraft, being released a few miles out from the pentagon. If they are painted about the same as the sky then it would be difficult to see. That would account for the light pole and generator damage but still leaves the turbine parts issue.

There was also one witness that stated he saw a craft shadowing the C-130....can't remember his name though. This is such a mess....lol

Rich

We also have Henry deacon saying it was a small Navy jet. So many contradictions. That is why I believe it is way more productive to concentrate on the fact that something was allowed to hit the Pentagon rather than what hit.

[iceni tribe]

EWO

have you considered the plane parts from the pentagon crash site , could be from here........

American Airlines Flight 965, a Boeing 757 registered N651AA, was a scheduled flight from Miami International Airport in Miami, Florida to Alfonso Bonilla Aragón International Airport in Cali, Colombia, which crashed into a mountain in Buga, Colombia on December 20, 1995, killing 151 passengers and 8 crew members.

Aftermath

Scavengers took engine thrust reversers, cockpit avionics, and other components from the crashed 757. The scavengers used Colombian military and private helicopters to go to and from the crash site. Many of the stolen unapproved aircraft parts re-appeared on the black market in Greater Miami parts brokers.[9] In a response, the airline published a 14 page list stating all of the parts missing from the crashed aircraft. The list included the serial numbers of all of the parts

speculation of coarse but is it not possible to have crashed 757 parts in what ever hit the pentagons pay load.
also is it true ,only one engine was ever recovered.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_965

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

Interesting idea. No way to prove it either way however.

[iceni tribe]

hi EWO

here is the link to Dennis Cimino and his verdict on the FDR interpretation as you asked , 5 pages and well worth the read .

Flight Data Expert Confirmation: No Evidence Linking FDR Data to American 77
FDR Data Exceeds Capabilities Of A 757, Does Not Support Impact With Pentagon

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=20999&st=0&start=0