Two More Articles on Recent Pentagon Footage

It’s the Timing, Not the Film - fromthewilderness.com

Arguing about the physical evidence not only divides and exhausts the truth movement, it also links the very question of 9/11 truth to the most vulnerable hypotheses suggested in answer. Why? Because in our War McNews culture, the public’s attention is caught by the more shocking, more absurd, more simplistic stories - no plane hit the Pentagon, no planes hit the towers, holograms, pods, King Kong - whereas only a few literate men and women will take the time to read a lengthy investigation of exactly who did what and when. Now that five years have elapsed, and the very idea of government complicity is popularly associated with the "no-plane" hypothesis, PRESTO! Here are the missing frames of film to confirm that there was no government complicity. It doesn’t matter what the frames actually show. What matters is the talk at the water cooler: "Lee Harvey Oswald Acts Alone, Pilots Boeing 747 Into Pentagon, Caught on Film."

Video of the Pentagon Attack: What is the Government Hiding? - 911research.wtc7.net

Judicial Watch's Freedom of Information Act Request, filed on December 14, 2004, is similar to another request, documented at Flight77.info, filed on October 14, 2004. Both sought to obtain all of the camera recordings of the attack, including those from other Pentagon security cameras, ones seized from the Sheraton National Hotel and Nexcomm/Citgo gas station, and those managed by the Virginia Department of Transportation. The Pentagon had refused to release its recordings before today, claiming they were "part of an ongoing investigation involving Zacarias Moussaoui."

Most people who have heard of challenges to the official account (that cells of al Qaeda operatives were solely responsible for the attack) have heard of the theory that the Pentagon was not hit by a jetliner. The theory has been in circulation since early 2002, with the Hunt the Boeing website and Thierry Meyssan's Big Lie and Le Pentagate. The no-Boeing theories, which come in small-plane, missile, and truck bomb, variants, have flourished in the vacuum of video evidence, and served as a straw man with which to smear all challenges to the official account of the attack.

The refusal of authorities to release video evidence has been cited by supporters of Pentagon no-jetliner theories as evidence that Flight 77 wasn't there. If the government has proof that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon, why doesn't it make it public? Perhaps because it serves the cover-up to keep the sideshow debate about what hit the Pentagon going. In 2004, I suggested that the question of what hit the Pentagon was a huge distraction. Analysis of physical evidence of the attack shows that what's known of the damage and debris fits the crash of Flight 77.

And with that I pray this is the last I have to hear about the Pentagon attack for at least a week. Once flight77.info gets their response on Friday we will be sure to mention it - otherwise I'd encourage others out there to write articles on other subjects - at least for now.

Its very odd that theres so

Its very odd that theres so little airplane debris at the Pentagon or at Shanksville and the curious aspects of those 2 crashes get people interested. I don't have an opinion either way but IMO its all good to have people thinking about 9/11 again and whats going to bother them after all the lies to get us into Iraq is that the 19 Arab hijackers story is so fishy. Watching that clip of Zelikow at Stanford, he doesn't believe it either. According to him, 9/11 happened because we didn't have anyone overseeing our intelligence; "we didn't have a doctor" looking at all the reports. Zelikow looked embarassed saying something so silly.

these people that say this

these people that say this 'exhausts' the truth movement

or that this is an 'assault'

they need to get a clue

Can anybody help me with

Can anybody help me with this (newbie) question: why aren't there hundreds of reliable witnesses who saw the initial approach of a 757 to the Pentagon?

I mean that it supposedly did that big loop at a few thousand feet altitude, in forbidden air space. It must have created quite a spectacle. Why then didn't *hundreds* of people notice it, and are now willing to attest to this? Am I missing something?

Such observers would have seen the plane for many seconds, and would seem far more reliable than people near the pentagon, who had only fractions of a second to see the plane screaming by at close range.

Kevin, it's a fair question

Kevin, it's a fair question you raise, but I've always contended that any aircraft going 500 mph would not have been clearly discernable simply because of the speed -- and it would only have been visible for a few seconds.

I know there were quite a few witnesses interviewed -- some well-known people as well who swear they saw a plane, but others who swear they saw and HEARD a missile. Whatever it was, it happened TOO FAST for the discerning mind to clearly recognize what happened, that's my hunch.

Has anyone seen a large commercial jet going 500 mph at ground level? If it had been a missile or smaller plane disguised as AA77, would the witnesses really be able to tell?

There's that.

And, then there's the questions about WHY would they use something other than AA77 (if that's what indeed happened). My answer to that is simple: they wanted a precision hit on the renovated part of the Pentagon. If it hadn't been precision, Rumsfeld might have been taken out. That's NOT what "they" wanted, in my view (especially since I expect Rummy was involved).

Hi Kevin. A great deal has

Hi Kevin. A great deal has been written about the witnesses and in my opinion the most insightful information is provided by Dave McGowan. Here:

http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr68e.html

The good stuff starts about half way through. If you can handle McGowan's humor you will save a lot of time and avoid many dead ends.

As for the article on

As for the article on FromTheWilderness.com by Jamey Hecht, I stated in a previous thread that I do respect Mike Ruppert and crew, but think they underestimate the court of public opinion. This article contends that the truth movement is being made fools of. I don't see it -- the media look ridiculously foolish by saying the new video shows a 767 when it's just as inconclusive as the images leaked out before. Do the folks at FromTheWilderness.com really think the American public is THAT stupid? If anything, the release of this latest video shows that the government is in deep doodoo.

Alex, fascinating article by

Alex, fascinating article by Dave McGowan -- wow, he really disses John Judge, and I'll have to say that after reading that, I'm very suspicious of Judge's various stories.

Why does the Flight 77 story

Why does the Flight 77 story need to be fake to support an inside job theory? Tho I agree, between Mineta's testimony...Hanjour's poor flight skills versus trajectory and skill of flight plan, and the reinforced wall thing...its very odd indeed. I just happen to think the 'Flight 77' didnt hit part is one of the big things a lot of people have wrong.

Btw, did that guy put that youtube video of the WTC survivor talking about him and firefighters being told to shut up about bombs up?

Great point Kevin. That's a

Great point Kevin. That's a lot of manuvering to do, especially through restricted airspace where people weren't used to seeing or hearing airliners. One would think there would be hundreds of witnesses.

Oh, and that is a very good article that Alex linked to above.

CK - ya, I forgot about the

CK - ya, I forgot about the John Judge stuff. McGowan has been cheerfully calling people's bluff even before it became such a popular pastime of posers and limelight seekers. He tends to backup his rebuttals rather well which keeps him out of the 'intentional divider' camp, in my mind. Interestingly his totally disses a researcher I very much admire in the very same article. Oh well.

Anyway, the reason I mentioned this article was because it provides one of the few breakdowns of the many of the 'pro-flight 77 witnesses' that delves into their backgrounds and possible motives. True there were a great many 757 witnesses - and it seems most of them were either military, or worked for some very compromised news sources. That's quite relevant. I've found the 'eye-witness testimony trumps physical evidence' crowd to be, well, bombastic on this issue... but I think it's good to always consider the source.

Oh, and be cautious. 5 years

Oh, and be cautious. 5 years is ample time to professionally doctor-up videos to convincingly show whatever they want them to show.

IMHO, it is a sign of the

IMHO, it is a sign of the misdirection of (and within) the 911 truth movement that so many 911truthers either hide, or are unaware of, the fact that the aircraft [not] seen in the Pentagon video is too small to be a 757 and thus hoists the lying government by its own petard!

"But John Judge was also ideally positioned to fill another role: upholder of the official story within the so-called 'truth movement,' and denouncer of anyone who dared to question the veracity of that official story. Ever since questions first began to arise about what really happened at the Pentagon, John Judge has filled the latter role." Exactly! John Judge is one of the wolves in sheepdog's clothing who's not that difficult to spot:

...John Judge wrote a 149-page "omission report" which omitted all mention of the 9-11 Commission Report's omission of the government's own government-lie-revealing Pentagon Video Frame Evidence from its own report!

With adamant plane-hugging evidence-suppressors like John Judge and Jim Hoffman and Mike Rivero (@wrh.com) and many other self-proclaimed 911 truthers in our midst, the government proper needn't dirty its hands fending off claims that it wasn't even the claimed hijacked civilian Boeing passenger airliners which hit the buildings on 9/11 -- something it cannot afford to be seen doing, yet cannot afford to not do.
_______________________________________

Hani Hanjour being able to

Hani Hanjour being able to fly all the way back from the Ohio/Kentucky border, and then do Blue Angel stunts, & then hit the ground floor of the renovated section is way too much for me to swallow.

Funny, that FTW piece.

Funny, that FTW piece. Havn't they already told us to forget about 911? Kinda makes their plees to forget about the Pentagon attack a bit redundant, no?

Goddammit! I really don't

Goddammit!

I really don't know what to make of the pentagon any more. Watching this interview I again got the horrible feeling that we were being set up. Theres NO denying that a video release clearly showing a plane would put the 9/11 truth campaign back to square one.

Is it not possible that the people who planned 9/11 saw the eventuality that they would be found out and thus held onto this caveat? It seems likely.

That said, if there WAS a plane proper, then you really would expect to have seen more evidence of it by now. The pitures of the 'debris' are so inconclusive that it boggles the mind.

I often flirt with the idea of a very small plane packed with explosives, dressed up like a 757 but wasnt, which would account for the mini-debris as well as the eyewitnesses. But such speculation doesnt really get anyone anywhere.

I think those who advise to stay away from the pentagon have got the right idea, obviously there is so much more evidence out there it is pointless to focus on such a spurious detail. But the detail is a rather large one, and is why many people cannot resist debating about it.

I wish I knew what hit the pentagon. Where is that guy who said he knew a guy who had seen more footage?

I mean, how can it be

I mean, how can it be impossible NOT to see a large airplane flying over a large part of the city, turning and descending...?
I agree with Kevin on that one!
I have been on airshows and I did not have problem seeing F16`s coming in high speed and low altitude. And we all know the size of an F16 compared to B757.
In fact, that should have been in the final funny 9/11 report:
- No one saw it because it arrived in such high speed. But we were lucky, because someone DID see it, we got eyewitnesses you know, but they only saw it seconds before impact when the speed was real fast. Its true!!

LoL.

"Goddammit! I really don't

"Goddammit!

I really don't know what to make of the pentagon any more. Watching this interview I again got the horrible feeling that we were being set up. Theres NO denying that a video release clearly showing a plane would put the 9/11 truth campaign back to square one. "

_______________-

Matthew,

I really don't know why you'd say that. Just because Flight 77 might really have hit the Pentagon doesn't make the bastards any less guilty. For some reason, the Pentagon theories are just sexier than talking about Mohammad Atta's connections to Republican lobbyists and the like. : - )

Of course, investigating those "boring" stories are going to get us in court talking to a grand jury a hell of a lot faster than typing, "Dude, I think it was missile!" on a blog.

I've been saying this (as have many others) for a while. There's PLENTY of other stuff out there, and you're absolutely right to get nervous about the longevity of the Pentagon theories. The govt. could easily release video clearly showing that plane smacking the Pentagon. It's up to people like you and I to make sure that this movement doesn't stupidlly hinge itself on a basically irrelevant aspect of this great crime (taken in overall context, don't shoot!).

The reason people are so passionate about their favorite theories is because they really care and want to feel like they know what happened. Sometimes, however, this emotional reaction gets in the way of rational thinking and clouds their better judgement. Some will defend the theories until they die no matter what happens just because 1) some are totally bug-fuck crazy and the events of 9/11 are light the blue light of a bug zapper to a moth, and 2) many are heavily invested emotionally and don't have the mental agility to deal with multiple possibilites. Couple that with the brain's agony of NOT KNOWING something it DESPERATELY WANTS TO KNOW, and you have a recipe for a real cognitive shitstorm.

As always, my opinion.

It bothers me that when they

It bothers me that when they mention alternative theories they stick with the missile theory and never talk about A3 skywarrior theory or other smaller jet. You can see people in the audience not totally convinced flight 77 hit it yet they dismiss it when they hear about a missile hitting the pentagon because we do see some small debris. It would make a big difference if they were presented with the possibility that a smaller jet
hit the pentagon.

Does anybody agree?

YEY!! WhatsTheTruth-HowIndeed

YEY!!

WhatsTheTruth-HowIndeedDidTheTwinTowersCollapse.rmvb

http://conspiracycentral.net:6969/stats.html?info_hash=592260f04ff2d325e...

the 50meg RealPLayer file I made and released into the wild via TORRENT has achieved its ONE THOUSANDS DOWNLOAD

yey!!

Oh, and Pentagon?

Why does nobody make a study WHO WAR THE PERSONELL KILLED INSIDE THE PENTAGON??

IMHO they were perps, they knew too much.

I really don't know why

I really don't know why you'd say that. Just because Flight 77 might really have hit the Pentagon doesn't make the bastards any less guilty. For some reason, the Pentagon theories are just sexier than talking about Mohammad Atta's connections to Republican lobbyists and the like. : - )

___________________________________--

Hey Stuart,

I totally agree with your sentiment, but when I say put the 9/11 truth campaign back to square one, I mean with regards to the much larger populace that the movement has reached with the recent more emainstream coverage.

There will be many people who only know the notorious aspects of 9/11, i.e. controlled demolition, bush's reaction, and the 'no-plane at the pentagon theory'. The latter theory has unfortunately taken a centre stage.

And as I said before, it is probably no accident that the most spurious element to the lie, and the area where the government may actually have an ace up its sleeve, has always been pushed into the limelight. But maybe, as you say, its just because its the most mysterious aspect.

The only real message of my post was: for the many people who have recently strumbled upon 9/11 truth, but don't yet have experience of a substantial body of evidence, a tape released that shows a plane at the pentagon will dispel those peoples questions. It will put the movement back to square one with regards to the undecided masses, but not, of course, to those who decided long ago, and have seen the other startling evidence that exposes the inside job.

The big problem I see now is

The big problem I see now is that while impressive investigation is revealing what has truly happened and many are clamouring to have this truth recognized, obviously the instigators have got something else(real big) planned for the not so distant future. No way the instigators haven't thought this out with multiple scenarios that will raise large amounts of smoke. Attack on Iran seems to be the most obvious but could be more-has to be. Dont like to raise the pessimist flag but all this seems to be too well thought out. Hopefully we will see capable analysts writing about what the future(short term) may hold and what actions are necessary to become players in oposition rather than mere observers as in the past.

"I totally agree with your

"I totally agree with your sentiment, but when I say put the 9/11 truth campaign back to square one, I mean with regards to the much larger populace that the movement has reached with the recent more emainstream coverage."

__________

I know, it is disappointing. But look on the bright side, lots of people who had never heard anything about these issues have started waking up and educating themselves. No doubt you've noticed that whenever the media present anything about 9/11 Truth, they always talk about the Pentagon and little or nothing else. It's a technique to ridicule us and make us appear like crazy people. Of course some truthers ARE crazy people but most, thankfully, are not. What we need, is to organize a nation-wide event that incorporates a good gimmick. One that cannot be ignored. Something that identifies us as patriots, but shows extreme dissent. We should picket the media, and use the internet as a weapon.

How about a nation wide event, everybody?

We can do it.

I would be part of any

I would be part of any event, certainly.

Just to fly right back in the face of what I was saying, I just found this picture of the pentagon attack that has allegedly been sharpened/enhanced by migandi.org:

http://www.migandi.org.uk/news/pictures/pentagon_proof.jpg

The nosecone and shape of the cockpit are, for sure, the same as on the pictured A3 skywarrior.

But, yeah. Stay away from the pentagon! :embarassed hypocrite face:

your government tax dollars

your government tax dollars at work - a new top secret naval stealth fighter

http://www.halturnershow.com/NewUSFighterJet.html

I apologize for the source, but this is a frigging cool looking fighter - still considered secret.

disregard the rest of the site, its pretty racist.

"I apologize for the source,

"I apologize for the source, but this is a frigging cool looking fighter - still considered secret."

__________--

You sure those guys aren't just pulling your leg? Those photos look an awful lot like production shots from the movie "Stealth". I think you've been had.

Just so you don't think I'm

Just so you don't think I'm being a jerk.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0382992/photogallery

stuart - looked it up as

stuart - looked it up as soon as you said that movie. I never seen it. Looked my self at the pilots name and crossed-referenced it with the imdb too.

yeah, I got had. my bad. looked real enough though

My buddies worked on that

My buddies worked on that movie, that's the only reason I knew so fast.

That, and that pilot's

That, and that pilot's goofy-ass expression.

I did think for a moment

I did think for a moment that the pilot was a little young looking, and sorta hot.

then I discovered it was Jessica Biel.

I agree with CK and others,

I agree with CK and others, that on the whole, something isn't right about the Pentagon. I too, want to believe that Flight 77 hit it, but each time I approach the evidence, there is just as much to suggest it didn't. It just doesn't add up to quote Kevin Ryan.

On another topic, I think Ruppert and this 911 Research article have really, really missed what has gone on since the release of the pentagon film. It has galvanized truthers, NOT diminished them! And has increased the interest level tremendously in the WHOLE truth not just the pentagon crash.

And you guys may not realize it, but you have the Power: The fact that they are engaging truthers and responding to you shows that you have the upper hand and that they are scrambling to squelch the exponential growth of truthers. Somehow the media has been pressured (perhaps by the sheer volume of responses), so much so that you have FORCED the media out into the open, made them address 9/11 and they haven't come across well.

It has been a win, win for truthers I believe. Keep the pressure ON so that they can't run back into their holes and pretend it didn't happen. Make them deal with other parts of the issue.

Is this 100% unaltered?

Is this 100% unaltered? http://www.migandi.org.uk/news/pictures/pentagon_proof.jpg

Holy crap, why is the government inserting a A3 Skywarrior into the frame? Are they just trying to f with us?

Between the 6-8 lane highway

Between the 6-8 lane highway and the Pentagon is a hill or a knoll. As a result that magic plane had to clear that hill and then level out in a very small space in order to crawl along the ground into the Pentagon. All this is happening at 500+ mph. as per the official story remember. Folks, we're dealing with miracles of aviation here. I suggest that congress rubber stamps be dragged out there and shown that that hill and the official fable read out to them. :)

these people that say this

these people that say this 'exhausts' the truth movement

or that this is an 'assault'

they need to get a clue
RANDKILLER999 | 05.22.06 - 12:49 am | #
i agree. people are SEVERELY overstating the so called "damage" the Pentagon story is doing/going to do.

I am so tempted to go here

I am so tempted to go here next week:
http://www.conspiracycon.com/

The focus is on 9/11, the nwo, franklin coverup and police state.

there is some strange turf

there is some strange turf issues going on with From The Wilderness and Mad Cow Productions vs the "9/11 Truth Movement" as if it is some sort of monolithic group.

having said that, they are both excellent sources of reliable information in my humble opinion.

The dam is breaking. There

The dam is breaking.

There is rela desperation.

You can see it in the surreal nonsense of the mass media regarding those silly Pentagon videos. They are becoming the laughingstock of the nation. Some of those whores probably resent this and are becoming restless. Hence the very shrill threats of the Attorney General.

Attorney Gen.: Reporters Can Be Prosecuted
21 May 2006, news.yahoo.com, AP

Look it up. This is a new low for the criminals. They are in panic.

Cooperative Research

Cooperative Research Fundraising Drive

Cooperative Research is out of money and CANNOT continue without your support! We must raise $43,700 over the next 21 days to cover the 4-month period from April to July. It is absolutely necessary that we raise this amount. Please make a tax-deductible donation today.

Almost nobody is dumb enough

Almost nobody is dumb enough to believe that a 757 can hug the ground at 500+ mph ! :) Still those jokers want you to believe this. They show you exactly this. Something crawling into the Pentagon. :) I mean; this government bunk is for the birds. Of course the same goes for the towers. They want you to believe that buildings can collapse without any delay from their reinforcing structure, ie. at free fall speed. :) Wake up if you haven´t already.

u2r2h, Why does nobody make

u2r2h,

Why does nobody make a study WHO WAR THE PERSONELL KILLED INSIDE THE PENTAGON??

The only info I ever stumbled across was these two points:

1) In the "LA Grand Jury" videos, Barbara Honegger, author of "October Surprise", says:
"I watched as, what I was almost certain of, my own direct chain of command office, the Office of Navy Information and the Naval Command Center, going up in flames, and indeed, 43, uh 44 people that I knew directly or indirectly were mass-murdered on that morning...

She says this at 25:00 into the below video:
http://911busters.com/LA_GJ/WMV/GJ_05_to_09th_Clip_Panelists_Opening_Sta...
(or)
http://911busters.com/LA_GJ/MOV/GJ_05_to_09th_Clip_Panelists_Opening_Sta...

2) "Somewhere" I read that also affected in the crash was an office of civilian contractors working on the Pentagon budget, maybe even working on some aspect of the missing trillions. I think I read that somewhere at
http://whereisthemoney.org/ or it could even have been in "Crossing the Rubicon." Sorry I can't be more specific.

Big news to be announced

Big news to be announced today. VERY big news. FYI.

Jon - good or bad?

Jon - good or bad?

PHENOMENAL

PHENOMENAL

STUPENDOUS

STUPENDOUS

SPECTACULAR

SPECTACULAR

Bush's days are fucking

Bush's days are fucking numbered.

Well, now I cant work!

Well, now I cant work!

I love doing that to you

I love doing that to you folks. ;)

Between yesterday's front page news, and today's PHENOMENAL, STUPENDOUS, SPECTACULAR news...

Let's just say the 9/11 Truth Movement is kicking ass and taking names.

Delta pilot recounds flight

(sw0on) . . .

(sw0on) . . .

"(sw0on) . . ." Somebody get

"(sw0on) . . ."

Somebody get this man some water.

Below are the direct

Below are the direct download URLs for the two videos released to Judicial Watch on May 16, 2006:

Video No. 1:

http://youtube-975.vo.llnwd.net/d1/05/81/L75Gga92WO8.flv

2,853,523 bytes; MD5 checksum: 80dd6202922c58396cb8ab3592afceb5

Video No. 2:

http://youtube-507.vo.llnwd.net/d1/05/8F/TAaP4Z3zls8.flv

3,486,581 bytes; MD5 checksum: 76bc0c33da87d342df461dee8b256a29

You can also download these videos via the below webpage:

http://javimoya.com/blog/youtube_en.php

Use the below two URLs on the above webpage to download the videos:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L75Gga92WO8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAaP4Z3zls8

When is Judicial Watch going to release the bit-identical videos that they obtained? Judicial Watch Director of Investigations & Research and former military intelligence officer Chris Farrell said on the Alex Jones radio show on May 17, 2006 that the two videos were released to Judicial Watch on a CD-ROM.

That means the videos hosted on YouTube are transcoded into the FLV (Flash Video 1) format, as I doubt that Judicial Watch obtained the videos in this format. And unless they were transcoded into a lossless format (I'm not sure if Flash Video supports a lossless format), that means that the image fidelity is degraded.

So again I ask: when is Judicial Watch going to release the bit-identical videos that Chris Farrell said they obtained on CD-ROM? If they are concerned about server overload on their own website, they can put an hourly maximum download rate on the files, or send the files to someone who would be willing to host them unaltered. Judicial watch should also publish the MD5 checksums for these two video files as they exist in the same bit-identical state on the CD-ROM they obtained.

Below is the unaltered frame from from the YouTube video No. 1 which shows the nose cone of the object that hit the Pentagon, extracted with the GIMP animation package and saved in the PNG format (i.e., lossless):

http://img133.imageshack.us/img133/6806/judicialwatchvideo1nosecone9yp.png

Below are some image details from the above frame:

Size: 320 x 239 pixels
Number of unique colors: 26122

FromTheWilderness still has

FromTheWilderness still has good info on geopolitical issues. That said, this latest piece (where they virtually SIDE with the government in claiming the truth movement is being embarassed by this latest video) is just way off the mark, and shows that they are on the defense when it comes to having abandoned the 9/11 truth movement -- too much ego and arrogance for me. I'm still reading what Ruppert has to say, but not taking his warning as seriously as I did before.

Wasn´t Office of Naval

Wasn´t Office of Naval Intelligence mostly wiped out at the Pentagon. It's one of the more interesting of scores of intelligence entities.

Stock market began tanking

Stock market began tanking two days before those ridiculous videos were revealed and has been collapsing since. Think there might be a connection? Stock traders are pretty smart people. They're likely to draw logical conclusions from the fact that the Pentagon can´t produce a video showing a 757 hit the Pentagon. :)

"it bothers me that when

"it bothers me that when they mention alternative theories they stick with the missile theory and never talk about A3 skywarrior theory or other smaller jet. You can see people in the audience not totally convinced flight 77 hit it yet they dismiss it when they hear about a missile hitting the pentagon because we do see some small debris. It would make a big difference if they were presented with the possibility that a smaller jet
hit the pentagon.
Does anybody agree?
kirk | 05.22.06 - 6:01 am | #

"

Totally agree! CNN is especially guilty of wrongfully implying that truthers believe that NO plane of any sort struck the Pentagon. In fact, a smaller plane or drone fits the evidence very well!

Just to be more precise, the

Just to be more precise, the above frame I posted above at "05.22.06 - 10:57 am" is frame 2604 as extracted with the GIMP Animation Package.

Pentagate? The peoblem with

Pentagate?

The peoblem with the pentagon is that it totally complicates the whole conspiracy by a factor of 10. Without the no plane theories, I see less than a dozen loose ends of the conspiracy.

-The flight schools
-the people who gave the orders to leave the hijackers alone (theyre part of a highly classified strictly-need-too-know-basis anti-terror exercise)
-the people who planted the bombs in the buildings
-the people who orchestrated the wargame cover exercises

It didn't take many people to do this and there aren't many loose ends. It's all covered under an elaborate compartmentalization scheme.

But with the pentagon... in order for the no plane theory to be possible you'd need a truly massive cover up with literally hundreds of loose ends that could unravel the whole conspiracy:
-the witnesses
-the medical examiners
-the people who planted the evidence
-the people who planted the bomb in the pentagon
-the people who staged the broken light poles... (this is bizarre to say the least)

Isn't it simpler to believe that the plane was piloted by remote control, with razor sharp precison, into it's target? That eliminates one of the key arguments of the no plane theories... that it wasnt possible for an amateur to pilot that plane.