Tracking the alleged hijackers and their doubles

Even in January 2002 the FBI only published information on the 19 alleged hijackers using words as “perhaps” and “possible” over and over again. Not even basic details are without doubt. It’s beyond me why the press doesn’t insist on having a definite list of the 19 with definite information. But apparently that’s too much asked for.
So, Team8+ has to do the job.

This folder contains files about all 19 alleged hijackers. The general idea is that creating a detailed timeline and collecting all pieces of information will allow to show that what officially is considered one person is often in fact two different persons having the same identity. Patsies at work.

This is my personal opinion,

This is my personal opinion, and this isn't meant to attack anyone's research, or anyone's belief of what hit the Pentagon, however...

The 9/11 Truth Movement should drop the idea of something other than Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon like a HOT POTATO.

I have a BAD feeling about it.. a BAD feeling...

you can drop the crash scene

you can drop the crash scene if you want, but the approach credited to hanjour is freaking impossible, and very much worth questioning.

I'm not talking about the

I'm not talking about the pilots, the impossible maneuver, etc... JUST the idea that something other than Flight 77 hit the Pentagon. There are just TOO MANY witness accounts that create reasonable doubt. When people say, "Flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon" as fact, that is just wrong. It's just wrong. We have no f-ing clue what hit the Pentagon, and shouldn't be promoting something like that at every opportunity. I'm sorry, but that's my opinion.

Eyewitnesses can't be

Eyewitnesses can't be manufactured Jon?

Didn't you get this e-mail sir!

I would like to give you my input as to the events on September 11, and
why it is a physically provable fact that all of the damage done to the
Pentagon could not have occurred solely from a Boeing 757 impact, and
therefore the 9/11 Commission report is not complete and arguably a
cover up. I will not speculate about what may have been covered up, I
will only speak from my professional opinion.

I am a Mechanical Engineer who spent many years in Aerospace, including
structural design, and in the design, and use of shaped charge
explosives (like those that would be used in missile warheads).

The structural design of a large aircraft like a 757 is based around
handling the structural loads of a pressurized vessel, the cabin, to
near atmospheric conditions while at the lower pressure of cruising
altitudes, and to handle the structural and aerodynamic loads of the
wings, control surfaces, and the fuel load. It is made as light as
possible, and is certainly not made to handle impact loads of any kind.

If a 757 were to strike a reinforced concrete wall, the energy from the
speed and weight of the aircraft will be transferred, in part into the
wall, and to the structural failure of the aircraft. It is not too far
of an analogy as if you had an empty aluminum can, traveling at high
speed hitting a reinforced concrete wall. The aluminum can would
crumple (the proper engineering term is buckle) and, depending on the
structural integrity of the wall, crack, crumble or fail completely.
The wall failure would not be a neat little hole, as the energy of the
impact would be spread throughout the wall by the reinforcing steel.

This is difficult to model accurately, as any high speed, high energy,
impact of a complex structure like an aircraft, into a discontinuous
wall with windows etc is difficult. What is known is that nearly all of
the energy from this event would be dissipated in the initial impact,
and subsequent buckling of the aircraft.

We are lead to believe that not only did the 757 penetrate the outer
wall, but continued on to penetrate separate internal walls totaling 9
feet of reinforced concrete. The final breach of concrete was a nearly
perfectly cut circular hole in a reinforced concrete wall, with no
subsequent damage to the rest of the wall. If we are to believe that
some how this aluminum aircraft did in fact reach this final wall. It
is physically impossible for the wall to have failed in a neat clean cut
circle, period. When I first saw this hole, a chill went down my spine
because I knew it was not possible to have a reinforced concrete wall
fail in this manner, it should have caved in, in some fashion.

How do you create a nice clean hole in a reinforced concrete wall? with
an explosive shape charge. An explosive shape charge, or cutting charge
is used in various military warhead devices. You design the geometry of
the explosive charge so that you create a focused line of energy. You
essentially focus nearly all of the explosive energy in what is referred
to as a jet. You use this jet to cut and penetrate armor on a tank, or
the walls of a bunker. The signature is clear and unmistakable. In a
missile, the explosive charge is circular to allow the payload behind
the initial shape charge to enter what ever has been penetrated.

I do not know what happened on 911, I do not know how politics works in
this country, I can not explain why the main stream media does not
report on the problems with the 911 Commission. But I am an engineer,
and I know what happens in high speed impacts, and how shaped charges
are used to "cut" through materials.

I have not addressed several other major gaps in the Pentagon/757
incident. The fact that this aircraft somehow ripped several light
towers clean out of the ground without any damage to the aircraft (which
I also feel is impossible,) the fact that the two main engines were
never recovered from the wreckage, and the fact that our government has
direct video coverage of the flight path, and impact, from at least a
gas station and hotel, which they have refused to release.

You can call me a tin hat, crazy, conspiracy theory, etc, but I can say
from my expertise that the damage at the Pentagon was not caused solely
by a 757.

-Mike M. (BloggerBrig)

Either way, the pentagon

Either way, the pentagon should just release the videos.

The Professional... the

The Professional... the practice of stating "manufactured evidence" for everything that doesn't coincide with a theory, is sloppy research.

The Bin Laden tape has enough evidence of tampering, and therefore, it makes sense to promote the possibility of it being a fake.

However, we now have Karen Kwiatkowski, John Judge, Larry Johnson, and several news outlets who have reported witness accounts of a plane hitting the Pentagon.

Sometimes, a cigar is just a cigar, no matter how much we don't want it to be.

I agree, the videos should be released, but the 9/11 Truth Movement should definitely make a statement before their release just in case.


I don't know Jon. What kind

I don't know Jon.

What kind of statement are you thinking of?

I'm curious why The Movement

I'm curious why The Movement should release One Statement. Is someone In Charge of everybody else?

Something that explains why

Something that explains why the 9/11 Truth Movement has focused so much on the Missile/Pentagon theory.

Something that explains that theories are proven wrong all of the time, and that it shouldn't reflect poorly on the movement.

Something that explains the idea of "reasonable doubt".

I don't know.

"I'm curious why The

"I'm curious why The Movement should release One Statement. Is someone In Charge of everybody else?"

Um, not to my knowledge.

Jon- If Mr. Johnson really


If Mr. Johnson really has friends who saw flight 77 hit the Pentagon then ask him to produce them.

Until then I think he's lying.

All I'm saying is that I

All I'm saying is that I have never promoted the missile/pentagon theory, and I still have managed to turn on a lot of people to the movement. It's not a necessary piece of "evidence".

You are a true retard.

You are a true retard. nothing more. Bred from a family of retards - mom, bad, brother, sister - all retards.
Have a good day you paranoid retard, thank your God that YOU did not live in Germany circa 1930's, as Hitler did in fact kill retards - like you - FIRST. Then he started in on the Jews. So my little retard, press on with your below average day, try not to burn you hands on anything, or utter moronic rantings - as you have here.
-Fuck off!

BB makes a good point. We

BB makes a good point. We don't need specific leaders; everyone needs to be a leader.

And I remain adamant that the pentagon was indeed hit by a flying potato.

"Jon- If Mr. Johnson really


If Mr. Johnson really has friends who saw flight 77 hit the Pentagon then ask him to produce them.

Until then I think he's lying."

What reason would he have to lie to me?

I have to agree with Jon's

I have to agree with Jon's comments. My "theories" have been torn to shreds in the airplane newsgroups because of the "no 757" approach. There's a lot of evidence for it AND against it.

Those same people have also debunked this:

(That site is known to promote hoaxes according to one of the essays below.)

Everyone here should read these:

The first essay explains that the site uses a tinyURL to link to Why would they do this when URL is so short? Seems this is all getting too personal.

While I do not believe a 757 hit the Pentagon, promoting that theory is not necessary and is causing damage.

The evidence of WTC contolled demolitions is the best approach imo.

The Profesional: Where'd you

The Profesional:

Where'd you get that email from, may I ask??

Look, lets be holisitic. ALL

Look, lets be holisitic. ALL of 9/11 stinks. Let's not continually get caught up in this wasted debate.

CB, it was e-mailed to all

CB, it was e-mailed to all of the Blogger Brigade. If you want I can forward it to you.

I don't think this is a

I don't think this is a "wasted" debate. Believe me... I rarely take part in "wasted" debates.

It was? I must have missed

It was? I must have missed it. I'll look on the Blogger Brigade site


Look if someone wants to

Look if someone wants to discredit or "debunk" specific theories in the "truth movement", so be it. There are so many inconsistencies with the official narrative, take your pick!

Just because one wants to have their own ideas about what happened at the pentagon, he should not be credited as slowing the movement or something to that affect.

CB - I just forwarded the

CB - I just forwarded the e-mail.

Right now... about 80%

Right now... about 80% (that's a guess) of the 9/11 Truth Movement promotes the Missile/Pentagon theory before anything else (except maybe controlled demolition).

There is SO MUCH MORE we can be focusing on that is EASILY proveable. All of the "hit pieces" that come out against us focus on the "Missile/Pentagon" theory as being the most easily debunked, and there's a reason for that. Because it is. As CB said, there is just too much on either side of the argument. I think it's dangerous for us to continue promoting the idea of something other than Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon... ESPECIALLY when you take into account that there is SO MUCH MORE out there...

Look, I don't know everything, but here's one thing I do know. If our Government decides to release those videos, and those videos show Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon, it will destroy this movement. It will utterly destroy it.

We've fought TOO HARD and TOO LONG for an unnecessary piece of evidence to bring us down.

That's my opinion...

Without getting into the

Without getting into the "plane or no plane" debate, I'd like to hear the government explain how/why they knew in advance where the outside security cameras were, and how/why they were able to have a crew on scene to confiscate the tapes within an hour of an event that no one supposedly had foreknowledge of.

It seems unlikely that seizing those tapes would have been a priority for the FBI under the circumstances, if the official story is true. Likewise, they could lend credibility to the official account through the release of the tapes if they don't include contradictory information.

Jon, I understand you don't

Jon, I understand you don't want to be brought down because of one theory being promoted, but I honestly don't see that happening.

It is my PERSONAL opinion that a statement speaking for the movement would be fatuous. Unless EVERYONE involved can agree it needs to be done. AND everyone involved believes beyond a shadow of a doubt that nothing suspicious went down that day.

and all I'M saying is, if

and all I'M saying is, if these "eyewitnesses" really exist then what's the problem with asking Mr. Johnson to produce them?

Professional: Thanks. It's a

Professional: Thanks. It's a very interesting email. Perhaps whoever wrote it will come forward.

imo, afa 757 or no-757, personal opinions are fine, as long as people understand that they do not represent the whole 9/11 Truth Movement.. Otherwise it definitely will cause trouble.

Also, from my own experience, those pushing easily debunkable theories are seen more as anti-bush than Truth seekers. While this may be enjoyable for all of us, it won't help our cause

There are plenty of

There are plenty of eyewitnesses who saw something other than a Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon. The ones who claim to have seen a Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon are either government employees or closely connected with the government.

But the fact that the U.S. government staged the 9/11 attacks can be proven even without any physics-based evidence (e.g., the collapse of WTC 7, what did or did not hit the Pentagon, etc.).

Conclusive proof that the U.S. government staged the 9/11 attacks can be demonstrated simply via historical inquiry, i.e., via the actions of government agents and functionaries as recorded in the historical record.

For more on that, see the below post by me:

"Documentation on Government-Staged Terrorism," September 30, 2005:

"and all I'M saying is, if

"and all I'M saying is, if these "eyewitnesses" really exist then what's the problem with asking Mr. Johnson to produce them?"

Nothing at all, but keep in mind Chander.. this is a man who went from associating me with "alien" conspiracies to encouraging me "to puruse aggressively" what I think is "right".

He has also always maintained the story that he had friends who saw the plane, going as far back as 8/25/2005.

Anyway... I could ask him if he could put me in touch with any of those people. There wouldn't be any harm in that.

In regards to the "Missile/Pentagon" theory.. I think we need a "Cover Your Ass" statement just in case Flight 77 did hit the Pentagon.

It's tricky. Jon's right

It's tricky. Jon's right insofar as the no-plane theory is deeply associated with lunacy in the collective mind. Even though I've come to believe there was indeed no 757, this sentiment exists, and it's so cemented that it might be unwise to try to breach it.

Does anyone recall what caused this, btw? Why is the no-plane theory that discredited, with all the evidence for it? Amazing how this worked out...

Anyway, 4.5 years should've been enough time to create believeable footage of almost anything hitting the Pentagon, including Santa Claus' sled. Therefore, let's just try to be prepared.

Jon, my first question is:


my first question is: why are you raising the 757/no 757 question as a comment to John Doe II's compendium of hijackers which has nothing to do with physical/technical issues in general and the Pentagon attack in particular?

Is it just because John Doe II belongs to team8plus?

Regarding your caveats, there are indeed many eyewitnesses who saw a plane hitting the Pentagon, some were even able to identify it as a Boeing 757 from AA, but others have seen a "commuter plane", or a "corporate 20 passenger jet with no markings".

The eyewitness accounts are contradictory. We can't take it as a given that a 757 hit the Pentagon.

The accounts are, by the way, not just contradictive regarding the kind of the plane, but also regarding the place where it came down:

"my first question is: why

"my first question is: why are you raising the 757/no 757 question as a comment to John Doe II's compendium of hijackers which has nothing to do with physical/technical issues in general and the Pentagon attack in particular?

Is it just because John Doe II belongs to team8plus?"

1) I have too much to say to look for a thread that's "on topic", and I generally stay on topic to the best of my ability.

2) I have already seen this page on the hijackers, and I think it's a great piece of work.

3) I have no problem with any member of Team8 that I know of besides Nico.

While I do NOT believe #77

While I do NOT believe #77 hit the Pentagon, I agree with Gold that we should not invest so much time & energy debating this single issue. We have much more compelling evidence (for now) to focus on & make public, (e.g., WTC-1, 2 and especially WTC-7, etc.). Briefly though, I don't think it was #77 because:

In addition to Hanjour's impossible acrobatics, the blatant non-investigation, confiscated videos, etc., I don't think the real perpetrators wanted to RISK hitting any other section beside the renovated area. After all, there were precious Neocons in the Pentagon that morning (Rummy, I think Condi Rice, and I'm sure others too). They needed a precise, controlled strike on the targeted section--too risky to try with a lumbering airliner. (Also, a lumbering airliner coming back from Ohio makes a big target to get shot down by manned or automatic Pentagon defenses. Much safer to have a drone or missile shoot in very low & very fast from a short distance away.)

However, as you can see, this is not nearly as straightforward as the WTC evidence.

A "cover your ass statement"

A "cover your ass statement" like: I dunno. Alot of us just thought it was kinda funny that there were no luggage or seats found and that the cadaver dog was just walking around with nothing to do. And of course, that amazing maneuver and the equally amazing Pentalawn just had us scratching our heads for the longest time. If only they had released the confiscated videos sooner. Now, let's get back to Bldg. 7.

"Anyway...I could ask

"Anyway...I could ask him..."

Fair enough. And I'll retract my word, "lying". It sounds a bit harsh.
But I do think it's important to hear from witnesses first-hand and not just accept "hearsay" evidence.

every time gold.. wtf?? this

every time gold.. wtf?? this is a joke... if i see gold saying we should say that a 757 hit the pentagon one more time im going to kill myself...

its the one thing that bugs that fuck out of me in this movement... and gold yells it all the time...

gold why dont you stfu and let people look into whatever they want....

youre being no better than blimp...

the pentagon flash video got

the pentagon flash video got so many people to see the truth so how can you say its not good evidence???

you act like we would all go home and cry if they did release a plane hitting the pentagon... HAHAH!!!! youre crazy!!!

On the 9-11 Eyewitness

On the 9-11 Eyewitness documentary, a TV commentator can be heard saying "a DC police plane has been hijacked and is now in route to Washington". She stresses that this has not been confirmed yet.

Hey inside, I don't think

Hey inside, I don't think Gold says that, "we should say that a 757 hit the pentagon." He means that we should not endlessly speculate on all the possible scenarios to the point where it divides us and takes our energy away from more important issues.

jon gold ain't got the sand

jon gold ain't got the sand boys.

he's got the manufactured story hardwired.

we don't know what hit the pentagon but it sure as hell wasn't a passenger plane.

oh man. he compared you to

oh man. he compared you to blimp. thats friggin war. hahahaha,jk.

well thats not what i get

well thats not what i get out of this- The 9/11 Truth Movement should drop the idea of something other than Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon like a HOT POTATO.

that sound to me like we should say we think 77 hit the pentagn... am i wrong?? gold will chime in soon im sure...

i dont think flight 77 hit the pentagon.... when i talk to someone i dont say a missile hit the pentagon and i doubt many do... i do say that i dont think it was flight 77....

and gold you can tell 911truth to fuck off for me if they think they can talk for us all...

inside, what I say, on my

inside, what I say, on my own, DOES NOT represent you want to talk poorly, and show a lack of respect for a group of individuals who have given up their lives to hold those responsible, accountable, that's on you, and makes you look like an asshole.

If you think my motives are ANYTHING other than well intentioned, than you don't know me at all.

Show me that a missile hit the Pentagon please. I want to see a video right now of a missile hitting the Pentagon. I want to know exactly where Flight 77 was taken, and I want to know exactly what happened to the passengers onboard.

You can't because that information doesn't exist. It's ALL speculation. Speculation that's being presented AS FACT by certain individuals.

If they release this video, and it shows Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon, tell me what happens the next time you try to tell someone 9/11 was an inside job. I'd be really interested to know what happens.

Incidentally, Mr. Johnson

Incidentally, Mr. Johnson agreed to help me get in touch with his friend(s) so I can interview them. I don't know if they'll allow me to publish their info or not, but if they do, I will.

And incidentally dumb ass,

And incidentally dumb ass, DOES NOT think they speak for anyone but themselves. You keep reading what Nico Haupt, Lisa Guliani, Victor Thorne, and them keep saying, relentlessly about, and I'll keep getting the truth out. Have fun.

inside, I'm sorry for flying

inside, I'm sorry for flying off the handle, but you gotta stop looking at what constructive, active participants of the 9/11 Truth Movement say as something other than, "What the fuck do they know, who the hell are they to tell me what to think?!?!?" It clouds your judgement, and causes you to "fly off the handle" as well. I wouldn't recommend ANYTHING unless I thought it was helpful for the movement. The movement I've given up my life for. I want my fucking life back. I want to be able to go outside, and enjoy life without having to worry about whether or not my Government is planning to attack us again.

Funny you are having this

Funny you are having this discussion. Today I was at the office of Dennis Kucinich and dropped off one of the copies of Loose Change 2 that I had made. I had a nice conversation with one of the staff members and they believe it was a missile or missiles that hit the Pentagon. I hope to organize a screening of Loose Change 2 at his office here in Ohio.

Amanda, Kucinichs staff

Amanda, Kucinichs staff actually told you they thought a missile hit the Pentagon? seriously? holy shit,thats crazy.Kucinich doesnt have the balls to mention that shit in washington though.

And people wonder why 9/11

And people wonder why 9/11 truth is untouchable by the MSM.

Nice Amanda... that's

Nice Amanda... that's interesting...


MCLEAN VIRGINIA (AP) The National Automobile Dealers Association has given the prestigious Used Car Salesman of the Year Award to President George W. Bush. Speaking to a cheering audience of hundreds of used car salesmen, NADA Chairman Charley Smith said, "Although President Bush has yet to close a sale on a single used car, he has mastered nearly all of our best used car sales techniques in his effort to fool the American public. Any used car lot in the country would be proud to have President Bush join their sales associates."

Fascinating Amanda. Love to

Fascinating Amanda. Love to hear Kucinich speak up himself. Hope he watches Loose Change 2.

On this Pentagon discussion, let me say that I think Jon Gold has a good point to be concerned about the no-plane theory. Not that I think the official story is true, by any means.

It's just that I asked William Rivers Pitt (on the truthout blog last year) what his take on 9/11 was. He made only 3 points, and I remember one was specifically that he had friends in DC that morning who all swear they saw a plane, not a missile. And, THAT is what we're up against. Personally speaking, I believe it was a missile disguised as a plane -- I mean, anything going at 500 mph isn't going to be easy to identify quickly -- especially the SIZE. I think your mind would be sufficiently busy dealing with the shock of that event, that you couldn't possible know exactly what you saw.

And although I agree with others here that we shouldn't be telling people what they should and shouldn't emphasize about 9/11, we should at least talk openly about what is working and what is not. The Pentagon theory seems not to be working. And, since it's not the cornerstone argument of this being an inside job, we should de-emphasize it as much as possible.

i disagree, i say put forth

i disagree, i say put forth all evidence and theories.the more info,the better. please people. dont abandon the Pentagon.



Give me a few... I'm going

Give me a few... I'm going to write something...

I'm NOT saying we should

I'm NOT saying we should abandon the Pentagon. ANY aspect of it. I just think it's wrong to promote something as fact without knowing if it's true. I was going to write something about the Pentagon, and what I find interesting about it, but I've done it so many times already, I don't feel like it...

Let's just say the fact that it hit the Pentagon at all is suspect.

what about jack whites photo

what about jack whites photo study of the pentagone crash

pretty convincing proof of a cover up

I've heard the cover up may

I've heard the cover up may be that the defenses of the Pentagon actually were fired.

The case against the George

The case against the George W. Bush administration story about 9/11 is, as David Ray Griffin says, a cumulative argument based on the collective weight of the evidence.

Emphasizing this adds strength to individual arguments and protects the overall truth.

why is it nobody mentions

why is it nobody mentions israel, and the series of wars they benfitted from, and did not participate in

all stemming from 9-11

homeland security is a fraud

patriot act is irrelavant

all fruits of the criminal enterprise of 9-11

I also donÂ’t think

I also don’t think “what hit the Pentagon” should be abandoned, but it shouldn’t be the cornerstone of the movement either. There just isn’t enough available data (thanks to the gov’t) to specify what hit the Pentagon with much certainty.

Of course many people understand that NOTHING should have gotten near the Pentagon that morning, especially 45 minutes after the WTC was attacked. However, deducing that a hoax was perpetrated, and that #77 probably didnÂ’t hit the Pentagon, is much different from being certain as to what exactly did hit the Pentagon.

Furthermore, truthers may assume that revealing something other than #77 hitting the Pentagon would instantly debunk the entire official story. Not necessarily. The Bushies no doubt have layers & layers of contingency excuses ready for a jam like this. For example, lets say video surfaces showing a drone or missile hitting the Pentagon. The Bushites could say that it was a drone or missile WE launched to protect the Pentagon, but something went terribly awry, and we needed to withhold this top-secret defect in our artillery (or some other such b.s.)

So proving exaclty what did hit the Pentagon is not like finding the Holy Grail for the truth movement.

It's not just 9/11,

It's not just 9/11, stupid.

It's before, and especially after, that matters as well.

Everyone else is in on this

Everyone else is in on this so why not me? I think the best arguments for the Pentagon issue is stateing there is absolutely no available evidence supporting the Pentagon being hit by an airplane (well there isnt), why was the Pentagon not defended?, why were civilians working on renovations not evacuated long before any plane could have killed them?, why the immediate removal of evidence from the crime scene?, what a coincedence they hit the part being renovated, etc. We dont need to say it wasnt hit by an airplane at all to adress these most important questions. I know the controlled demolition is the crux issue so if you can get folks to see that the Pentagon issue is really just added mysteries of 911. If you prove the controlled demolitions all it means is the Pentagon plane was part of the inside job just as with the towers (if there ever is a video released showing a plane hitting the Pentagon).

It only takes one

It only takes one counter-example to disprove a theory so, technically, it really doesn't matter if 1 or 19 is still alive when it comes to asking the question, "Why does the media keep showing us the same 19 faces and names as if there is no doubt?". (A: because it's a con game, and once doubt leads to questions, it all falls apart.)

But, hey, the Pentagon already *DID* release, on March 7, 2002 -- the same day Meyssan's book came out, video evidence of what supposedly hit the Pentagon!

And the visual evidence contradicts, rather than corroborates, the government's impossible 9/11 tale of what hit the Pentagon.

That evidence, whether you believe it or not, hoists the lying government by its own petard! Coming and going!!! So it is no wonder that the 9-11 Commission could not afford to include them in its "complete and final" report (critique) -- there was simply no way to explain them away without demolishing the government's credibility.

So what reason would John Judge have for failing to mention what is very probably the most glaring omission of all -- omitting the government's own evidence from the government's own report -- when he rambled on for 149 pages supposedly detailing the government's omissions?

I don't know his motive, but he apparently has loyalties to something other than competence and truth and logic; his lengthy report serves to help keep the glaring omission hidden, and the coverup (and the lying government's credibility) intact.

<sarcasm>Thanks a lot, John.</sarcasm>

I think everyone should

I think everyone should concentrate on Dr Jones' paper. According to his website, it has been peer reviewed and will be published this spring:

Scheduled for publication in The Hidden History of 9-11-2001, Research in Political Economy, Volume 23, P. Zarembka, editor, Amsterdam: Elsevier, forthcoming in Spring 2006.

Also, just in case anyone's keeping track, his paper is now version 5.1!

I am a strong supporter and

I am a strong supporter and vocal proponent of 9/11 Truth, but I feel that a lot of speakers and sites(even people within the movement) can;t seem to address a few things.

1. How would outside intelligences around the world be able to warn the US of an imminent attack/why are people so strong to suggest the US had "prior knowlege of al Qaeda" IF as people assert, it was an inside job? Which brings me to #2:

2. Why is there such a strong feeling that no Arabs were involved, or that they were merely patsies? I think based on a lot of research, Mohammed Atta actually enjoyed the mission he was on. Security footage showing alot of the hijackers setting off metal detectors right before they boarded the fated flights, shows that at least a few of the alleged 19 hijackers were on board. FAA control tapes show some sort of Arab guy was speaking to the controllers/passengers.

3. Why has the movement slowly fractured into "Total Inside Job vs. Disinfo"? You can't even argue the near over the top statements of pentagon missles, pods, and faked cellphone calls with some folks.
LIHOP is 100% provable, and WTC7 and some other things paint a sinister picture that indicates some sort of inside job. But this blanketed "BUSH ORDERED 9/11" position I see some people take I think may turn off a significant portion of people. Bush to me seems like the last person the neocons would want in on 9/11 be it LIHOP or MIHOP.

4. I also would not be surprised if the Pentagon footage is finally released this year. I don't neccesarily find a conspiracy in everything, and am willing to believe it would be undoctered footage. To me WTC7 should be the one provable peak amidst Dick Cheney's standown orders and anomalies with the hijackers(even Able Danger) that should be focused on. Show people clips of WTC7 from all angles, show Norman Mineta's damnign testimony about Cheney, and show total foreknowlege.

5. I think one of th ebest arguments to those who say there is no 9/11 coverup; tell em about the doctored EPA reports, NORAD war games, Cheney orders, Able Danger, General Ahmed, etc. These are all backed by mainstream news outlets...and if they still don't buy it, ask if they buy the reasons we went into Iraq. It's brazenly sad how many people believe they lied about Iraq, are are solemnly telling the truth on 9/11.

When someone asks you what

When someone asks you what hit the Pentagon, tell them this:

"I don't know, but I can PROVE the buildings were demolished", send them this link:

Congratulate them on learning the truth and move on. Endless debate at this level benefits nobody but the perpetrators.

"It's not just 9/11,

"It's not just 9/11, stupid.

It's before, and especially after, that matters as well."
DHS | Homepage | 03.01.06 - 12:49 am | #

WTF are you talking about?

All the above rationale for

All the above rationale for why 9/11 was an inside job is good for 9/11 researchers. But the general public get their news in 30-second sound bites on CNN. They've believed the official story since 9/11 afternoon, and have been further brainwashed every day since then. It is very difficult to break through this mindset.

The best way to broach the 9/11 coverup is with a concise, hard-hitting video, (or at least a booklet) presenting the best/strongest evidence/arguments first.

If the sneak attack on the

If the sneak attack on the Pentagon comes up, I refer to it as the Sneak Attack On The Pentagon, hand them a DVD and as somebigguy once said, move on. We can get quite a few people extremely curious in the time we can spend butting heads with one.

- Ridicule the official story
- Take back the media!
- Keep moving...

Seize back the future (music)

pocky, i dont know why you

pocky, i dont know why you find it so hard to believe that the arab hijackers were patsies.clearly they flight skills, they were being followed by MOSSAD and CIA,many of them turned up alive, etc. instead of 1 patsy,like Oswald, for this operation they needed mulitiple not someone who says the hijackers were not on the planes that day, i just dont think there were 19 of them. most likely only a couple,so that they could show up on the security footage and make it look good.

When someone asks you what

When someone asks you what hit the Pentagon, tell them this:

"I don't know, but I can PROVE the buildings were demolished", send them this link:

Congratulate them on learning the truth and move on. Endless debate at this level benefits nobody but the perpetrators.


Physical evidence trumps

Physical evidence trumps eye-witness testimony. We humans have a habit of "filling in the blanks".

The first report from the pentagon the morning of 9/11 by a CNN reporter states that there was no evidence of a plane striking the pentagon.

There a lots of pictures and video footage but no sign of a really big plane.

Its at least worth a second look considering the crazy bible nazis are using these events as a catalyst for their beloved rapture.

Or as Grocho Marx used to say, "Who are you going to believe, me or your own two eyes."

He also said, "Television is very educational, everytime someone turns one on, I go into a different room and read a book."

the first report on 911 was

the first report on 911 was that a truck bomb went off outside of the pentagon...

gold, you know i dont follow those people you named.. i dont even know who they are... i think one is from wing tv which is a place i have never been...

the funny thing is that i never talk about the pentagon but you do all the time, telling people to stop telling people what they think about it...
that is what i hate... if you dont want to talk about it, dont!!

that is what i dont like or trust about these big groups, they try to steer everyones focus to what they think is the best evidence... and then tell everyone what to stay away from...

how would anyone know if the cia was running 911truth??? we wouldnt and couldnt...

i do think that the pentagon is a huge smoking gun!!! thats why i have a problem when people say its not...

I don't talk about it "all

I don't talk about it "all the time". In fact, it's one of my least favorite topics. Regardless, based on what Mr. Johnson said, and the fact that Judicial Watch, and have teamed up for the release of the videos, I thought it prudent to warn people to stop promoting what didn't hit the Pentagon as fact, and to come up with a "Cover Your Ass" article of some kind just in case Flight 77 did, in fact, hit the Pentagon. That's all... just trying to be helpful. This had NOTHING to do with I did it all on my own.

Hey Jon, your initial

Hey Jon, your initial statement was:

"The 9/11 Truth Movement should drop the idea of something other than Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon"

which is different than warning people that they should create a "cover your ass" article as you mention above.

I agree, a simple "I don't know" is best when asked about the Pentagon. However, the only reason anyone thinks 77 hit the Pentagon is because the government told us so. Why would anyone believe anything the government says?

The fact that since 77 disappeared from radar about an hour away from the Pentagon suggests that 77 did NOT hit.

Unfortunately we don't know, which is why the tapes that ST911 are trying to get released are so important. Lets get these damn tapes so we can decide for ourselves.

77 did not hit the

77 did not hit the sbg said, it fell off of the radar for a reason.but thats just one mans opinion.i suspect most rational people who go over all of the evidence relating to the Pentagon would most likely come to the same conclusion.

i tend to agree with Loose

i tend to agree with Loose Change 2, in that it was most likely a small military aircraft(painted like AA) that shot a missile just as it was plowing into the Pentagon.


I AM NOW SPEAKING FOR THE ENTIRE 911 TRUTH MOVEMENT (kidding). The controlled demolition is the crux issue. Once anyone learns that its only common sense that WHATEVER happened at the Pentagon was also part of the scam. Period.

Honestly I'm a bit surprised

Honestly I'm a bit surprised that this posting has no less than 84 responses so far and not a single writes only one word about the topic of the posting. Sure, I find the Pentagon hole and the Pentlawn pretty interesting (still I believe that it is much simpler to show that no plane crashed in Shanksville but anyway).
It would be great if you can leave the discussion about the Pentagon just for ten seconds. Use these ten seconds and just take it for granted that the physical existence of two Attas prior to 911 can be proven in the case of many other alleged hijackers be strongly inidicated. (Btw the Atta proof is extremely simple and can be explained to ANYBODY in a few seconds.
What does it imply?
How can al Qaeda send TWO Attas to the US (even one was basically impossible as he was already surveilled in Hamburg by several intelligence services)? Why should al Qaeda run this risk? Why would the US not use the presence of two Attas as a nice sorry pretext to explain the famous confusion? Why would they cover the doubles?
The only logical answer of for whom it made sense to use doubles and who had the power to do so and the power to cover it up is some high ranking US people.
In other words: Something that can be proven extremely easily proves that there was a cover up but especially it strongly implies that 911 was an inside job.
So, please check out the URL, read the summary of all findings and the summary of Atta et al

The USA rulers will not

The USA rulers will not permit
sanity when directed AGAINST THEM.

I think you all SHOULD discuss
what hit the pentagon.

My opinion:

3 shaped charges between tree and wall, synchro-fired with impact.

the motive: to kill the remote-controllers inside.

PLEASE phone the relatives of the victims and their colleagues.
There should be a dozen dead
electronics-technicians .. all
specialists in remote control airplanes and hands-on coordination.

On March 7, 2002, the

On March 7, 2002, the Pentagon released visual evidence of what supposedly hit the Pentagon.

That evidence refutes, rather than supports, the lying government's contention that a 757 is what hit!

So the lying government has been caught lying to us all! The government's 9-11 Commission was thus forced to ignore/omit the government's own evidence from its "complete and final report"!!! That's a clear indication of guilty behavior (ie, a coverup) on the part of our lying government.

So when self-proclaimed 'leading' 911 truthers ignore that evidence, and act as if we're still waiting (or should hold back and wait) for video evidence, and thus behave irrationally/illogically, one has to wonder what their true mission is...

Don't you think the geeks at

Don't you think the geeks at the
Pentagon have had plenty of time
to alter the tapes?