George Washington's Thoughts on How to Respond to Pentagon Footage Airplay
I Don't Know, But ... - George Washington Blog
Now that the new videos of the impact with the Pentagon are getting airplay in all of the mainstream media, what should we do?
Well, Flight77.info, one of the groups which fought for release of the Pentagon tapes, says "we still have a second FOIA [which stands for "freedom of information act"] request active for the other 84 flight 77 recordings. We WILL get those also. They should include the Citgo [gas station] tape and the [Sheraton] hotel tape." So there will probably be more videos coming.
Dylan Avery argues that the new tapes prove that flight 77 didn't hit the Pentagon. Alex Jones argues that the new videos are setting the "no planers" up in order to discredit the entire 9/11 movement.
So who's right?
I don't know. I've always been agnostic about what hit the Pentagon, and still am.
But what I do know is how we should leverage this media focus on 9/11. This is a golden opportunity to focus on what we do know.
Whenever anyone asks me "Don't these videos prove that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon?" I'm going to respond like this:
"I don't know. But I do know that the world's mightiest military was stood down on 9/11, fighter jets flew at only a small fraction of their top speed, and planes were allowed to fly all over the country for an hour or so, according to people like the former head of the Star Wars space defense system, a retired air force colonel who flew more than 100 combat missions.
And I know that there were 5 war games that "happened" to be occurring on the morning of 9/11, including one simulating a plane crashing into a building, and that Dick Cheney was apparently in charge of the war games and all counter-terrorism activities on 9/11, and that he appears to have allowed the Pentagon to be hit, according to testimony by Secretary of Transportation Norm Minetta to the 9/11 Commission.
And I know that physicists, mechanical engineers, and other scientists have said that the world trade centers were intentionally destroyed with controlled demolition. Indeed, they point out that a third building -- world trade center 7 -- was destroyed on 9/11 even though it was never hit by a plane, had only small fires, and collapsed at the same speed as if it had no supports or walls whatsoever.
And I know that the 9/11 Commission was a political whitewash which didn't address the most important issues regarding what happened on 9/11, according to folks like the former head of the FBI.
And I know that it is well-documented that many governments around the world, including the U.S., have faked terrorist attacks against their own people and blamed it on enemies in order to justify wars against those enemies, according to very credible historians.
Wanna talk about these things?
Another great post by George Washington. On that note, I am proud to let everyone know that George has agreed to join Somebigguy and myself as a team member of 911Blogger.com. We will have more on this - and another new team member - soon.
- Login to post comments
Thanks, DZ. Glad to help
Thanks, DZ. Glad to help out.
911Blogger not only is a great source of 911 news, but it also has attracted a devoted group of people.
Way to go DZ and somebigguy and everyone else who's put in time, brains, and passion.
Welcome to GW who has been a
Welcome to GW who has been a great contributor to the site since its inception.
kudos to everyone, including
kudos to everyone, including the shills (they make us look so good sometimes)
The pinhead media whores are
The pinhead media whores are also in full regalia right now. The headlines and crawls: VIDEO SHOWS AMERICAN AIRLINES JET SLAMMING PENTAGON. CONSPIRACY THEORISTS TAKE DIRECT HIT.
I could puke. This is the first 5 Frame release with aluminum siding added.
Btw, am I the only one who's
Btw, am I the only one who's mentioned that this new video PROVES that the first ones were faked? You'll notice there's no gray tail image drawn into this video - that disappear in frame 2.
Plus, the plane it obviously well-lit in sunshine, and the dark gray tail that appears in the first group in Frame 1 is obviously a photoshop job.
You can't tell what hit the
You can't tell what hit the Pentagon from the video, how can the media make such a statement?? The video is inconclusive, any honest observer would have to make that observance as well.
An interesting investigative
An interesting investigative project would be to acquire the certified death certificates of the 9/11 callers.
The 911 phone calls:
The following shows the passengers aboard the four flights who we were told made telephone calls on 9/11/01. Only one death was reported to the Social Security Death Index. And none of the callerÂ’s families applied to the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund of 2001. Maybe the "callers" should not have wasted airtime on their "family".
Caller/Death Reported to SSDI /Application to September 11th Victim Compensation Fund of 2001
Flight 11
Betty Ong NO NO
Madeline Sweeney NO NO
Flight 77
Barbara Olson NO NO
Flight 175
Peter Burton Hanson NO NO
Flight 93
Todd Beamer NO NO
Thomas E. Burnett Jr. NO NO
Mark Bingham NO NO
Jeremy Glick NO NO
Linda Gronlund NO NO
Joseph F DeLuca* YES NO
Marion Britton NO NO
Sandy Bradshaw NO NO
Edward Felt NO NO
Honor Wainio NO NO
CeeCee Lyles NO NO
Sandra Bradshaw NO NO
* Linda Gronlund was flying to San Francisco aboard
United Flight 93 with her boyfriend, Joseph F DeLuca.
Linda was a sailor, a scuba diver, A BROWN BELT IN
KARATE, a lawyer, a car mechanic, a gardener, a
photographer, a gourmet cook, a guitarist, an
emergency medical technician and a volunteer with
autistic children. Why wasn't Wonder Woman using her
skills to help stop those mean nasty Arabs?
"Joseph Deluca called his dad. His girlfriend, Linda
Gronlund, called her sister, telling her THE
COMBINATION TO HER SAFE DEPOSIT BOX and how much she
loved her." page 206 of "Let's Roll: Ordinary People,
Extraordinary Courage" by Lisa Beamer
Another book quotes Linda's call to her sister as, "I
want to let you know how much I love you; please tell
Mom and Dad", Linda said. "I don't know if I'll be
able to tell you again IN PERSON how much I love you.
I hope I will. I'M REALLY GOING TO MISS YOU." page 161
of "Among the Heroes: United Flight 93 and the
Passengers and Crew Who Fought Back" by Jere Longman.
Does this sound like a woman who is about to die? Or
does this sound like a lawyer who has to go away for a
long time and take a new identity?
BBC did a dispicable job of
BBC did a dispicable job of coverage. Here's the streaming video over at InformationClearinghouse.info:
http://informationclearinghouse.info/article13076.htm
And, here are the comments I left at the site:
This BBC report is just as bad as CNN's and FOX's coverage this afternoon. The reporter speaks as if it's all just FACT. Then, all the pulling on the heart strings talk about Barbara Olsen and the families. No discussion about how inconclusive these images are, and how there's no plane in the video. Unbelievable. Not even a suggestion that people who doubt the official story won't find this satisfactory in the least.
And, I had to laugh when the reporter stated something about the United States.... of involvement. But, it sounded like THIS:
The United States of Involvement
even though that wasn't what he intended.... it was just poorly phrased.... but, talk about a Freudian slip!
nothing new stall tactic to
nothing new
stall tactic to push thru amnesty
You can't tell what hit the
You can't tell what hit the Pentagon from the video, how can the media make such a statement?? The video is inconclusive, any honest observer would have to make that observance as well.
somebigguy
========================
That's how state propaganda works - you show something that's flimsy at best, then use your media whores to proclaim it as definitve proof of the govenment's case.
The Average Joe will see those headlines and assume the discussion is over.
will the "sunspot" also be
will the "sunspot" also be on all future releases?
somebigguy said: You can't
somebigguy said: You can't tell what hit the Pentagon from the video, how can the media make such a statement??
Answer: 2 + 2 = 5
Read 1984 -- we're living it now.
Yeah it's funny. The FOX
Yeah it's funny. The FOX story says -
"One of the tapes is from a security camera that was used to produce five still shots on that day. That video, which takes pictures in half-second increments, shows the nose cone of the plane clearly entering the picture, then a blur and then a fireball."
_____---
Cleary entering the picture? Come on. They've shot themselves in the foot, perhaps? Perhaps not. I would add to the chorus of cautioners saying:
Do not invest too heavily in "No Plane" theories. A strong potential exists that they will release further footage, real or not, as a trap to discredit us.
And, btw, I did a quick scan
And, btw, I did a quick scan of the alternative media. Nothing at AmericaBlog, nothing at Crooks & Liars, and nothing at truthout. Buzzflash had a link, that's all. InformationClearinghouse at least has the BBC report, as ridiculous as it is. Zilch at CommonDreams.org too -- not even a mention in the "headlines."
I just think it's VERY revealing about how our left media has failed us.
How do you discredit the
How do you discredit the truth?
http://www.911hoax.com/Table_Contents.asp
Amanda: why don't YOU take
Amanda:
why don't YOU take up the project of acquiring the death certs?
George Washington, those are
George Washington, those are great comments -- I agree completely, and think this is a golden opportunity to bring people into the truth movement. I do believe, however, that this is NOT what Judicial Watch wanted, and that the mainstream media jumped the gun... hoping this would be the smoking gun to prove the government's story (and, of course, their belief in the government story). I think we need to capitalize on how pathetic this information is -- and, like you said, bring up the other points which are very questionable and almost impossible for the government to wiggle out of. That's where 9/11 is SO different from the JFK assassination -- there were SO MANY MORE MISTAKES where they didn't cover their tracks.
Another great post by George
Another great post by George Washington. On that note, I am proud to let everyone know that George has agreed to join Somebigguy and myself as a team member of 911Blogger.com. We will have more on this - and another new team member - soon.
im glad to hear about the new team member!!!
i knew sbg would great here and im sure gw will be just as good...
Maybe these people could
Maybe these people could find the death certificates.
http://www.familysearch.org/
FamilySearch.org is a non-profit service sponsored by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
And of course they're not
And of course they're not talking about Norman Mineta's testimony which implicates Cheney's complicity in allowing whatever was flying towards the Pentagon to hit it.
Congratulations GW for
Congratulations GW for another excellent essay and officially joinng this 911 blog!
(GW, I am reposting this because I would like to hear your sugggestions or response,(sorry SBG,DZ for the blog manners)
why this? Why this?
I agree with GW, I think they might be setting up a straw man.
But its really an emotional straw man not a logical or rational straw man. There focus is always on the audience not the stage.
They allow the thought an inside 911 conspiracy to take hold with these lame videoes.
That horrible feeling that comes with realizing our government might be directly involved and covering it up begins to surface just a little in the audience.
We all become 911 Truthers for a moment, even the MSM.
Its a scary and insecure feeling, a mixture of rage, impotence, and doubt about their world view.
Then they relieve all of this anguish with a real, or faked, videos of a plane hitting the pentagon.
They are offered a taste of the uncertainty of revealing 911, and then they are reassured.
They will remember those feelings and project their uncomfortable rage on the 911 Truthers who continue to remind them of that horrible feeling and doubt they temporarily held.
Then they say its time to move on?
Thus WE need to take this opportuity to cram the audience with all of the other legitimate questions about 911.
(Just some thoughts)
d.douglas "by the way, am i
d.douglas
"by the way, am i the only one to say that this new video PROVES the first ones were fake----you'll notice there's no gray tail section drawn into that video--that disappear in frame 2
THAT IS AWESOME----WHAT YOU SAID PROVES THE INCONSISTENCIES...
---SMOKING GUN THAT THESE PENTAGON VIDEOS ARE FAKE
truly meeting the fake msm halfway---and then stomping them with their own logic
THIS INFORMATION MAKES THE WHOLE PSYOP FALL APART!!!
BREAKTHROUGH!!
"And I know that physicists,
"And I know that physicists, mechanical engineers, and other scientists have said that the world trade centers were intentionally destroyed with controlled demolition. Indeed, they point out that a third building -- world trade center 7 -- was destroyed on 9/11 even though it was never hit by a plane, had only small fires, and collapsed at the same speed as if it had no supports or walls whatsoever."
What blithering nonsense. Come on, GW, you don't have to lie to make a case.
Neither physicists, structural engineers, nor other scientists believe that controlled demolitions brought down the towers, nor are they surprised by the collapse of WTC 7.
You can't go around misrepresenting the facts and expect to get away with it. You're just shooting yourself in the foot and making fools of everyone here. You have to make the case with hard evidence and hard evidence only.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=aOB2zj6My5g0&refer=us
Web sites such as 911truth.org and Prisonplanet.com have promoted theories including attacks carried out by government agents or a bomb or missile being responsible for the damage to the Pentagon.
WHERE?
Here's another ignored
Here's another ignored Pentagon anomaly:
http://damall.com/pix/no-exit.jpg
Show me where this nose cone or fuselage of a 757 exited the inner wall of the E ring of the Pentagon?
Whatever penetrated to the C ring and made that punch out, apparently was small enough to go through a 7' square window.
I wrote this to the
I wrote this to the bloomberg story author, I suggest you let him know your thoughts as well....
Hello:
In your article at http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=aOB2zj6My5g0&refer=us
you stated:
Web sites such as 911truth.org and Prisonplanet.com have promoted theories including attacks carried out by government agents or a bomb or missile being responsible for the damage to the Pentagon.
Neither of these sites have promoted the theory of a bomb or missile at the Pentagon. They have only touched upon the skepticism due to the confuscation of all surveillance footage, which http://www.flight77.info is fighting to release (the gov't has less than 2 weeks to explain why they should still all be held).
This Pentagon issue is speculation at best, while you and many others fail to address many omissions of testimony and evidence in the 911 commission report. You are not doing your country any favors by ignoring many other issues.
Please retract your statement and take a more serious look at the events of 9/11/2001, and not just the "fringe theories".
Respectfully,
DHS
Truthout: JA
Truthout: JA
What really hit the
What really hit the Pentagon?
Based on the available evidence it's impossible to say for sure.
It would be much clearer if the government were to release the EIGHTY videos of the impact they admit to having, including nearby gas station and hotel videos.
Why do they release grainy, distorted videos that show VERY little when they have so many other images?
Perhaps the images released on Tuesday are meant to FUEL a debate that, if debunked by clear videos, would tend to discredit ALL proponents of alternative theories.
Some 911 researchers believe a 757 hit the Pentagon, other believe some other type of military aircraft hit the Pentagon.
We are clear about several things though....
The aircraft made an very tight 270 degree downward spiral, managed the aerodynamic impossibility (for a 757) of flying just above ground, and then hit the one section of the Pentagon that had been recently reinforced.
We are supposed to believe that the supposed hijackers, who were smart enough to fly their aircraft through the most heavily defended airspace in the world, could not figure out where the "prime" targets were located in the Pentagon. This is even more difficult to believe when we find out that the NORAD had over FORTY minutes of warning after the SECOND plane hit the World Trade Center.
Based on the recently released "videos," it is clear that the aircraft somehow managed to skim right above the grass without leaving ANY damage to the lawn. This is amazing, since the engines, based on the location of the largest hole, should have dragged huge trenches across the lawn.
Photographs taken just before collapse, show mostly intact windows were the two titanium engines would have hit. There are no windows that can withstand multi ton titanium engines flown into them at over 500 mph.
All of this supposedly flown by a pilot that could barely fly a Cessna in flight school.
What is clear is that a
What is clear is that a Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon.
Why keep harping on it?
how is it clear ,truthout?
how is it clear ,truthout?
truthout, if it is so clear
truthout, if it is so clear then you will have no problem providing the NTSB documents identifying the traceable parts for that 757????
If it is such a "slam dunk", then you should have no problem providing this information.
If not, then it is not CLEAR that a 757 hit the Pentagon!
PERIOD!
Truthout: Steven Jones
Truthout: Steven Jones (professor of physics BYU), Judy Woods (professor of mechanical engineering Clemson University) are just 2 of many saying the world trade center was brought down by controlled demolition.
See st911.org
Intriguing news! I was about
Intriguing news!
I was about to post this today:
*****
The no-planers are running scared, because their world is about to end. Surveillance video from the Pentagon will probably be released soon, in a matter of weeks. Since no-Pentagon-757 is the only no-plane claim with a significant following, seeing unambiguous images of an AA 757 impacting the building will effectively kill the no-plane sector of 9/11 truthseeking.
I'd be happy about this removal of bogus information if it wasn't for one thing: no-plane theories are inside the big tent. When they go, they're likely to cause wide-spread damage. This is a standard strategy, first associate the sum total of an issue with some dubious part of it, and then discredit that part.
If all the different schools of thought had been in their own tents, having a grenade rolled into one would not be so harmful to the whole encampment.
The situation, however, isn't all that bad: I think that they waited too long to use their last ace up the sleeve. By this time 9/11 Truth appears strong enough to withstand the attacks that will surely follow the release.
In any case, it might be unwise to avoid an uncontrolled collapse of the big tent, imposed from outside, by making the big tent undergo a controlled demolition from within. Done this late, that would just make it seem like 9/11 theories never yield to reality, that truthers are afraid of facts.
Even so, it is useful to categorize different aspects of 9/11 truthseeking:
* no-plane (sidelined)
* bombs in the towers
* air defense standdown
* precedents and foreknowledge
* obstruction and secrecy
* What where the leaders doing?
* Qui bono?
This makes the whole issue easier to approach and comprehend, and attacks on one line of inquiry do not hurt the others. The beneficial effects on the big tent can still be retained, after all, it's not like people are working in isolation.
*****
After viewing the video+stills, my opinion hasn't changed much, these images are not yet the clear ones, although it *is* somewhat strange why they would release this video at this time.
Damn this is gonna get interesting :o
Good to have GW on this
Good to have GW on this site, at any rate.
RemoveBush, try to think.
RemoveBush, try to think. The fact that the NTSB was (illegally?) banned from the scene does not mean that AA77 didn't hit the Pentagon.
The majority of evidence clearly points to a hit by a 757 in AA colors.
Welcome to the team George,
Welcome to the team George, soon you will be asked to endorse a candidate for Congress...
Able, I beg to differ. If
Able, I beg to differ. If AA77 hit the Pentagon,
How did Hani Hanjour & the other lackeys fly it there & then do acrobatics with it?
Why does the gov't claim 63 of 64 passengers were IDed with DNA when the entire plan disintegrated?
Why aren't any clear videos released?
THE PNAC IS OFFICIALLY IN
THE PNAC IS OFFICIALLY IN BIG TROUBLE
even if they did release another video to try to make a strawman issue
the "tail issue"---
they are manipulating evidence at a murder scene_____very illegal
"you'll notice there's no grey tail image drawn into this video--that disappears in frame 2"
the most upside down thing the pnac has done so far is this psyop
These points are in favor of
These points are in favor of no-Pentagon-757:
* horiz. stabilizer appears to have left no marks
* wingtips appear to have left no marks
* exit hole has very clear edges, column next to it is damaged from the side of the hole
* very few eyewitnesses
These points are against it:
large jetliner
* vast majority of eyewitnesses
* widespread damage to the building
* large kerosine fireball
* lightpoles cut jetliner-wide
* generator trailer knocked down from its supports
* generator trailer had its roof cut
Boeing 757
* many eyewitnesses
* size of hole in building
* shape of hole in building
* 757 engine diffuser found inside
* 757 engine rotor found inside
* 757 landing gear found inside
* 757 wheel found inside
* plane debris had green Boeing primer paint
American Airlines
* some eyewitnesses (even saw the logo)
* debris in AA colors
* perpetrators would not have risked a single good pohoto of anything besides a 757 in AA colors
flight 77, N644AA
* passenger corpses and items found inside building
* What happened to the flight and the passengers otherwise?
On 2001-09-11 AA77 hit the Pentagon.
Anonymous, the plane may
Anonymous, the plane may been under remote control, but this doesn't change the basic arguments. DNA in humans doesn't necessarily disintegrate as easily as airplanes:
http://911myths.com/html/bodies_identified.html
The videos have not been released because the truth movement, such as it is, is being set up for a fall. Thus, a summary of my long first message above:
Alex Jones is right, Dylan Avery is wrong.
You'll see. It's probably too late for many of you to accept this, but you can still try.
*****
"I've always been agnostic about what hit the Pentagon, and still am."
uhhhh, GW, that's the first bizarre position I've seen you take. Either that or you don't know that 'agnostic' means: 'to believe that is is impossible to obtain knowledge'. Perhaps you meant ambivalent?
*****
A man da Recon with, you're a repulsive creep.
"Even so, it is useful to
"Even so, it is useful to categorize different aspects of 9/11 truthseeking:
* no-plane (sidelined)"
That's a misrepresentation. It's "no 757" not "no plane".
Able, I disagree. Forget
Able, I disagree.
Forget the eyewitnesses--very unreliable + many could've been planted shills. And who could really determine what was flying along the ground at 530 mph.
Many sites show pictures indicating the 757 parts you listed above were too small to be from a 757, just as the hole was too small.
If someone by chance took a photo or a video, it would have been confiscated on the spot or confiscated when turned into authorities or the media, so they didn't really have to worry about that.
Reports of corpses & DNA IDs of 63 of the 64 passengers seems to be total bullshit. Nothing was truly found.
I'd have to say AA77 did not hit the Pentagon.
if there is any difference
if there is any difference in the first released video frames---and these new ones
then that is tampering with evidence at a murder scene
____________________----
it doesnt matter if they pull the shill event of the century here in a couple of weeks----
_________________________---
they are still caught red handed tampering with evidence---and that implicates guilt
it's a smoking gun
too fucking easy
I can't see there being any
I can't see there being any corpses or body parts remaining after slamming the Pentagon at 530 mph. The plane basically disintegrated.
Not to be ghoulish, but I would think everybody was pulverized & splattered all over the walls, at best.
Speaking of ghoulish , did
Speaking of ghoulish , did anyone see Rumsfeld's hideous souvenir of what he claims is flight77?A twisted , foot long scrap of indiscernable metal."Isn't it wonderful" he asks.
We are probably best to
We are probably best to steer clear of the Pentagon and concentrate on the known facts. Alex Jones could be right - he does tend to be.
Speaking for myself, however, I can barely believe that a jumbo could skim that low across th lawn and not leave one trace.
My head says beware a trap, but my instinct says we've got them on the ropes.
no way.... theres only a 16
no way....
theres only a 16 ft hole in the pentagon from a jumbo jet with barely any wreckage
no matter what kind of "digital magic" they might pull----it aint gonna get rid of that fact
alex jones was kind of acting like a pussy on coast to coast---he didnt mention wtc7 one time---and thats an audience of 5-10 million
_________________________----
we've got the momentum--the fake msm can conform to us ---fuck them
RANDKILLER999, this hole is
RANDKILLER999,
this hole is a lot bigger than 16ft across:
http://911review.com/errors/pentagon/imgs/blue6g.jpg
you don't have to agree, but there are plenty of us who question 9/11, but still think 77 hit the pentagon - but not from hanjour's piloting 'skills'.
personally i dont give a
personally i dont give a crap about the pentagon plane/no plane argument
but ive seen that hole and its pretty small---
i'm listening to this coast
i'm listening to this coast to coast open caller---hell yeah
you know all theyd have to do to blow the 911hoax revelation wide open is do a two hour show only on wtc7
simple to the point
Awesome George Washington
Awesome George Washington article!
I agree, this release has an unintended consequence: It has turned on MILLIONS of people to the fact there is an alternate side of 9/11. I agree 100% with Alex Jones: They know the truth movement is growing, and they want to setup a strawman and get people away from the provable stuff.
And yes...very very very telling all the top leftgatekeeper liberal media sites were totally mum about this.
YET, the right wing blogs and news sites were talking about it.
Very interesting.
Btw, anyone seen the trailer to Oliver Stone's World Trade Center? The trailer promotes "fuel hit the bottom of the towers" theory.
this guy on coast to coast
this guy on coast to coast just blah blah blah----
there is a fake 911truth movement that wont talk about wtc7----
coast to coast is a bunch of shills
they will only talk about the "disputable" evidence
then alex jones would say there are over 500 smoking guns
but he wouldnt say any of them---
he just whined like a little bitch that "the 911truth movement is being assaulted" by this pentagon shill video
theyre trying to persuade everyone into victimhood based off this psyop
THEY ARE PART OF THIS----THEY RELEASED THE VIDEO AND HAD ALEX JONES TELL EVERYONE THAT IT "ASSAULTED" THE TRUTH MOVEMENT
THEY ARE STUPID
alex jones is a damn shill
george noory is a shill---he keeps saying "there are no answers"
THEYRE ALL BLACK OP
RANDKILLER999, alex jones
RANDKILLER999,
alex jones has done more for the 9/11 truth movement than you could in your life.
if you really feel that way then maybe you should stop your constant attacking and do something useful yourself. then see how quickly you are attacked by people like you obsessed with attacking someone/anyone instead of the real people you should be focused on.
by the way, somebigguy posted this thread of yours here yesterday, i'm surprised you would still show your face:
http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=consp_911&Number=294...
so, what have you done useful? show it to us so we can attack it.
now they got the official
now they got the official conspiracy nut on there---doing a smear
starting off with disputable 911hoax info---and now he's talking mystical mumbo jumbo
theyre trying to make 911 hoax fit in with their faggity ufo/secret society smear demographic idiocy
I can't believe how many
I can't believe how many people in this thread are convinced, based on doctored video footage and junk science, that something other than a 757 hit the Pentagon.
A couple of hundred military and civilian eyewitnesses- including the press- said that they saw a jumbo jet impact the Pentagon. To those of you who say that all 200+ of them are shills, let me ask you this: are the hundreds of eyewitnesses who said they heard explosions at the WTC, also shills? I'll let you answer that one...
To those of you who think that it was impossible for Hani Hanjour to perform such a complex maneuver... you're right! He didn't. Three of his flight instructors have confirmed that in major media reports. But it's not far fetched to speculate that the plane was being remotely piloted. The technology definitely exists and it's been implemented on Boeing airliners before. Please see the links below for more info.
To those of you who think that a 757 can't technically perform such a maneuver, you're wrong. Please see the links below, which show why. But again- it would take a person with test pilot-like skills to perform such a maneuver, which is why remote control is the only plausible explanation at this point in time.
As for others saying that the 757 should have made larger impact holes, marked up the lawn, or had its massive engines do a lot of damage to the Pentagon, you're either going on "evidence" in the video footage, or trying to rationalize what happened due to the complete lack of any evidence.
These are legitimate questions, but one piece of speculation would account for all the anomalies: the 757 exploded right before it hit the facade of the Pentagon. Eyewitnesses wouldn't have been able to differentiate between an explosion right before impact, or the actual impact causing an explosion. In addition, in such an explosion, the plane would've been completely shredded right before the disintegrating airborne debris impacted the Pentagon. The debris, of course, would have caused those anomalies.
Now, this is completely speculative, but it's not very far fetched considering the kind of planning that would've gone into the controlled demolition of three, separate skyscrapers. Just one well-placed bomb on this plane could've done it. Very, very simple from the conspirators' perspective.
But we just don't know. That is, until an independent, serious, scientific investigation is finally allowed to take place. We'll never know the truth until that happens. Even if the real video footage is released...
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911_pentagon_757_plane_evidence.html
[Evidence That A Boeing 757 Really Did Impact the Pentagon on 9/11]
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagontrap.html
[The Pentagon No-757-Crash Theory:
Booby Trap for 9/11 Skeptics]
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/analysis/videoframes.html
[Released video frames show evidence of tampering]
http://911review.com/errors/pentagon/witnesses.html
[Hundreds of witnesses- both military and civilian- saw a 757 hit the Pentagon]
"Truthout: Steven Jones
"Truthout: Steven Jones (professor of physics BYU), Judy Woods (professor of mechanical engineering Clemson University) are just 2 of many saying the world trade center was brought down by controlled demolition."
We don't care what they say. What we care for is hard evidence. Neither one of them is a structural engineer. Jones says it's just a "hypothesis" and wants another investigation; Judy Woods got here physics wrong rendering here "billiard ball" theory invalid.
In the meantime no structrual engineers have come forward supporting the demolition theory with evidence or calculations. Why is that, do you think?
this guy on coast to coast
this guy on coast to coast is playing the cliche "conspiracy theorist" to the hilt
sad that these "heroes" of the 911truth movement are really just falling apart on this show
oh well----theres still a few innocent people out there
pentagon attack is being
pentagon attack is being used as a psyop---that has exposed once and for all that alex jones is a whiney shill
wtc7 is the only truth
you can defeat any shill attack with it----alex jones is disinfo
The photo of the landing
The photo of the landing gear wheel hub at the Pentagon shows 757 wheel remains with the 8-hole style rim. 757s used both 8-hole and 10-hole rim configurations, and a photo of N644AA a month before shows that Flight 77 was outfitted with 8-hole rims.
If they really planted all that 757 debris inside the Pentagon, they sure did their research beforehand...
Now lets speculate on what Charles Burlingame's role would have been in various versions of this plot. An American kamikaze, perhaps? He certainly had the piloting skills to pull off such a maneuver - maybe the Pentagon strike was too delicate to entrust to a remote control system...
It's truly amazing how some
It's truly amazing how some smart people here can still be in denial.
Wake up. It's impossible to fly a 757 at 530 mph feet off the ground. Besides there is no evidence that such a plane hit the building.
They can´t produce a video showing this event because it did not happen.
It's the same story everywhere you look at the official 9/11 fairy tale, be it the towers, Pentagon or Shanksville - this is designed for excessively gullible Americans and retarded people elsewhere in the world.
"how is it clear
"how is it clear ,truthout?"
How is it NOT clear?
" truthout, if it is so
" truthout, if it is so clear then you will have no problem providing the NTSB documents identifying the traceable parts for that 757????"
The NTSB is not in charge of this investigation. The FBI is. Try to get your facts right.
"Forget the
"Forget the eyewitnesses--very unreliable + many could've been planted shills."
Show us which ones are unreliable or shills and eaxctly why:
A list of witness at or near to the Pentagon
"Many sites show pictures indicating the 757 parts you listed above were too small to be from a 757."
Many sites show parts that are from 757s including engines and an APU.
"Reports of corpses & DNA IDs of 63 of the 64 passengers seems to be total bullshit. Nothing was truly found."
How would YOU know that for sure?
See:Human Identification
Bodies and body parts were found were found.
"Wake up. It's impossible to
"Wake up. It's impossible to fly a 757 at 530 mph feet off the ground."
You mean 350 mph. Nonetheless AA 77 hit the Pentagon.
the 9/11 commission report
the 9/11 commission report said 530 mph, not 350 mph. but hey, what do they know.
truthout--"Show us which
truthout--"Show us which ones are unreliable or shills and eaxctly why"
The ones who work for the gov't & wish to keep their jobs.
Any you, truthout, are a very annoying shill yourself.
"Bodies and body parts were
"Bodies and body parts were found were found." Why do you studder?
Any bodies & body parts were those of the victims in the Pentagon, not any passengers.
Show me the 757 in the video
Show me the 757 in the video released yesterday? Looks like a missile or drone to me.
The Pentagon strike is used
The Pentagon strike is used as a way to divide the 9/11 truth movement I believe. But by no means I'm saying it shouldn't be investigated.
It's just weird that the media would want to focus on that, but not the insider trading, Dr Jones's paper, ISI head/Goss/Graham meeting, etc.
"If they really planted all
"If they really planted all that 757 debris inside the Pentagon, they sure did their research beforehand..."
What if it were inside the drone?
The "nerve center" of the
The "nerve center" of the U.S. military/industrial complex is surveilled by a couple of K-mart web cams on poles? GTFOOH.
"The NTSB is not in charge
"The NTSB is not in charge of this investigation. The FBI is. Try to get your facts right.
truthout | 05.17.06 - 8:16 am | # "
That's my point!!!!
It is not the FBI's place to investigate aircraft crashes. Please name one time when the NTSB did not investigate a crash from an airline? JUST ON!
Now go do some more research!
It is not the FBI's place to
It is not the FBI's place to investigate aircraft crashes. Please name one time when the NTSB did not investigate a crash from an airline? JUST ON!
Now go do some more research!
RemoveBush | 05.17.06 - 10:34 am | #
the Paul Wellstone case. of course that too was clearly an inside job, so i guess your point still stands.
Re: FBI and NTSB... If you
Re: FBI and NTSB...
If you go to the NTSB web site, it notes the enabling legislation which clearly notes that the Atty Gen'l may step in, in cases where criminal activity is suspected, to ask the FBI to investigate AS WELL AS the NTSB... and it clearly also states that such an FBI role DOES NOT RELIEVE THE NTSB FROM ALSO INVESTIGATING AND PRODUCING A REPORT.
my comment stands. when
my comment stands. when Wellstone was murdered, the FBI was the first on the scene to clean up. Wellstone was murdered by the same apparatus that did 9/11.