Now please be quiet about the "no 757 at the Pentagon" nonsense. A 757 hit the Pentagon on 9/11; most surely Flight 77.
- Ø®£Z - | 07.04.06 - 5:49 pm | #

______________________________________________________________________--

Except that the F4 hit a wall that was reinforced to survive a nuclear blast, if I recall correctly. Now, how far away that blast might be such that the wall would be expected to survive, IÂ’m not sure.

But it is not likely that any wall would survive such a powerful detonation as a nuclear bomb exploding within a mile or so.

And if one wanted to test such a wall against a bomb blast, then the way to do it would be with said bombs. So the F4 test looks a bit suspect as being evidence, etc. In fact it might be the type of phony plant that we should be looking for.

Has anybody compared the kinetic energy, etc. of the F4 against the energy released in a nuclear bomb explosion?

Take a look at the web sites in Japan at Hiroshima and Nagasaki to see what such an event as a nuclear bomb explosion looks like in the aftermath.

My attitude with regard to the Pentagon is that it would likely be revealed on discovery, either on the release of evidence and/or in an investigation. In other words, IÂ’m not committing one way or the other on that one, because I believe there is more than enough evidence on other aspects of 9/11 to move forward, etc.

how can some people so stupid as to ignore the fact that the C-Ring had a perfect cirlce that was about the size of a missile?

"the people who think Flight 77 hit the Pentagon can never explain the perfect missile sized circle in the C ring. do you Flight 77 believers HONESTLY believe a nose cone did that? honestly?
Chris | Homepage | 07.04.06 - 10:29 am | # "

Obviously it wasn't the nosecone, man; the nosecone was obliterated upon impact with the Pentagon facade.

The bottom 2/5 of a 757 (lengthwise) is made of more solid material (steel) than the top 2/5 of pretty much thin aluminum. Part of the bottom 2/5 of steel support structure is what smashed through the Pentagon, with a piece of landing gear being found inside the open-air space just outside the C ring punch-out hole. Most surely a piece of rear landing gear which wasn't obliterated with the facade impact because of its location near the mid-rear of the 757.

To see a quick example of a plane that is slightly larger than a 757 during scraping, you can see what the support structure of the bottom 2/5 would closely resemble > http://img127.imageshack.us/img127/2118/25supportstructureplane8nv.png

To learn about the 757's obliteration upon impact with the Pentagon facade, please watch the following video in its entirety -- there are many different camera angles and recording speeds > http://www.sandia.gov/videos2005/F4-crash.asx

Now compare the extremely minimal amount of wreckage and debris from that F4 impact, with what is visible after the Pentagon attack. You should understand why the 757 flying at almost the exact same speed as the F4 jet is travelling in that video, was almost completely obliterated upon impact with the outer facade of the Pentagon -- having only part of the bottom 2/5 structure of the 757 entering and smashing through the inside of the Pentagon. Same thing goes for the 757's engines. Of course they didn't evaporate or incinerate from the fire, they were practically entirely obliterated upon impact with the outer facade of the Pentagon.

Also. The C ring -- as I have thus far seen absolutely ZERO evidence of it being reinforced with anything, feel free to provide some! -- wouldn't have taken much force to have a hole punched through it by any wreckage of Flight 77 that was steel structure/landing gear/non-light-weight aluminum.

The same goes for every other internal ring of the Pentagon that part of the bottom 2/5 of the 757 smashed through on its way into the inner rings of the Pentagon; I have seen absolutely ZERO evidence whatsoever that any of the internal rings of the Pentagon were reinforced with anything. Please. feel free to provide any!

Shit. Do you even know what the reinforcement in the outer facade of the Pentagon looked like? I do. Take a look around and find it; I did. It isn't even some kind of super-serious reinforcement. I challenge you, go find what it looks like. I did.

How can some people be so stupid and not understand such simplistic explanations as these that make perfect sense?

Now please be quiet about the "no 757 at the Pentagon" nonsense. A 757 hit the Pentagon on 9/11; most surely Flight 77.

Herr Pi | 07.04.06 - 10:28 am | #-

(Former student of demographics, minor in human nature, here)

Yes, you would be referring to Ann Coulter, etc., and on down. The VERY worst examples of lunatic behavior are remarkably culpable to either political or Media positions. I simply can't believe the brazen events, like Wellstone, and the appointment of Kean and his mistress-monster, Christine Todd Whitman at the EPA. Not only has she single-handedly destroyed ALL of the progress from 20 years of good science, she ALSO had left the State of New Jersey with a (currently) $4.5B -shortfall.

Soon, I'm just going to have to say "enough to all of you." -What is it the friggin water?

Richard Clarke States That Osama Might Be In Iran
Jon Gold
.............................
Anyone in that prominent a light who is allowed to speak regularly is always under suspicion, particularly if they spew "negatives" about the administration that neatly conform to the LIHOP story, the lesser charge approach.

9/11 was not designed to stay underground, and it will be used to psy-op us into accepting LIHOP as "the best we can hope for" if we're not careful. Perhaps even if we are careful. Those who cling to MIHOP may simply be minimalized forever. But that's still where I'm hangin' my hat.

I'd make an educated guess that Hufschmid could be an agent of the bankers, simply because he continues to put forth these obviously anti-Semitic views. The shills always attack their own agents - there's no easier way to give them added credibility.
Herr Pi | 07.04.06 - 11:37 am | #
___________________________________
Here is something to investigate with regard to the Hufschmid connections:

http://forums.therandirhodesshow.com/index.php?act=ST&f=127&t=89780&hl=&...

On the surface it certainly looks like Hufschmid is bad news.

^ HAHAHAHAHA classical! "Terrence" your an unclef*cker, go squeeze out some musical farts with Philip you first class professional joker, who gets 99% of traffic for his website from 911blogger as people go to laugh at how wack it is, true words LOL! Keep up the good work, we need some light relief, and having a willing court jester such as yourself is great, youÂ’re a real asset for Truth Movement Philip, sry I mean Terrence, a real asset!

Yo everyone, listen to Terrence Â’s comic genius right here;
http://www.moviesounds.com/sp/comeup.wav

Stop responding to Truth deniers. They're just here to engage you in endless argument, sometimes over disinfo their own team has planted for just that purpose.

They most likely get paid by the response. Starve them, and they'll get fired by Rendon. : )

Do you really think a self-serving psychopath like Cheney would let a run-away airliner come barreling through the Pentagon???

Barrie is right but with people like Terrence around why worry? All that really matters is that we get people to question what happened on 9/11. They will come up with their own conclusions. Like Mike Malloy says I don't really know what happened that day although I do have my own theories but the day I believe the "Official Government Conspiracy Theory"-you know, the one about the evil Osama in his bat cave giving orders to 19 crazed terrorists- is the day they start serving drinks of ice water in hell.

Barrie Zwicker – Speaking on infiltrators.
You canÂ’t believe how sneaky they are. ItÂ’s not a question of whether our movement is infiltrated. It absolutely isÂ….
There are so many of them and that is what we need to learn in our movement. Not that we be paranoid, not that we become name-callers, not that we donÂ’t speak up.
But just to be realistic, that of course if they were going to infiltrate labor movements, human rights movements, the peace movement, itÂ’s all on the record that they have, why wouldnÂ’t they infiltrate our movement? What would they be thinking if they werenÂ’t?...
So the only question is who are the people, how do they operate, and how do we deal with them?
We deal with them by being open, by being honest, by not name-calling, not being paranoid, and not being afraid. ThatÂ’s how we deal with them.

Jim HoffmanÂ’s site has some information about his opinion about some of these issues:
http://911review.com/disinfo/index.html
http://911review.com/disinfo/sites.html

I think that anybody who is serious about 9/11 truth should read about these issues and think about them.

*yawn*

Hey you guys who "work for" www.911blogger.com... GW, reprehensor, SBG, and dz... Michael Wolsey has asked for a brief script describing Blogger, or whatever so he can make a commercial for the show...

Get to it.

"Gold, you had your ass handed to you on a plate from S. King, Reno, Lonesome Dave and others. After your spanking, you slipped off to the cloistered blogs where you can ban voices other than your own."

"Lies are all you have left."

Sounds like the unhappy words of another 9/11 smackdown loser...

http://911conspiracysmasher.blogspot.com/

Gold, you had your ass handed to you on a plate from S. King, Reno, Lonesome Dave and others. After your spanking, you slipped off to the cloistered blogs where you can ban voices other than your own.
Terrence | Homepage | 07.04.06 - 9:36 am | #

________________________________________________________________________________

^ HAHAHAHA, keep dancing for us you professional joker!!

Hey Chris- Thanks for reminding me of
Thomas R. Olmsted, M.D and his great articles on the lack of Arabs on the Flight 77 flight list.

Here are links to the other flight lists (still no arab names):

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/AA11.victims.html

AA 77 (Pentagon crash)
3.2 http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/AA77.victims.html

UAL 175 (2nd WTC crash)
3.3 http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/ua175.victims.html

UAL 93 (Pennsylvania crash)
3.4 http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/ua93.victims.html

STILL No Arabs On Flight 77 By Thomas R. Olmsted, MD
3.4a http://www.rense.com/general38/77.htm

As an article I read said:

If the hijackers are alleged to have been using non-Arabic aliases (19 obviously Arabic men got on board using non-Arabic ID, with 100% success rate?), why did the FBI claim that they were traced through the use of credit cards to buy tickets in their own names?

That's a good point you bring up regarding the clock being off a "few minutes". Christ... how many clocks in my apartment are off? All of them.

This is what Loose Change will promote for the 9/11 Truth Movement - Barbara Honegger's theory????

Might as well be Barbara Olsen. Or did they already cover that?

Graphics don't really mean much when the content is meaningless.

"Barbara Honegger says the shoebomber, Richard Reid, is actually Osama. She also says Iran did 9/11."

Do you have a source for that?

>>Now, on to the "controversial" issues. Barbara Honneger, who I'm not familiar with

Barbara Honegger says the shoebomber, Richard Reid, is actually Osama. She also says Iran did 9/11. She was a member of the 1980 Reagan-Bush campaign team and was a Reagan White House policy analyst and now works for the military. Her theory on the Pentagon - that multiple bombs went off inside the building, some in advance of the impact - is based on a clock which may have simply been off by a few minutes before the impact.

Richard Clarke States That Osama Might Be In Iran

"Gold, you had your ass handed to you on a plate from S. King, Reno, Lonesome Dave and others. After your spanking, you slipped off to the cloistered blogs where you can ban voices other than your own."

Lies are all you have left.

Vesa, they should have merely lit some scattered fires in that building^. It worked for WTC-7.

The problem with Hufschmid is that he's very close to reality, but no cigar. He associates the money and power behind the 9/11 Obfuscation Movement (the opposite of the Truth Movement), but he points his bony finger at ISREAL, instead of where it belongs - international bankers, most of whom are simply supporters of Isreal.

Any time you direct guilt at Isreal, you give a free pass to the bankers to dishonestly associate themselves with holocaust victims, and claim anti-Semitism. It's a long-standing psy-op, so they can wrap themselves in the protective sleeve of "victim." Who would dare to criticize a member of the holocaust victims? No one, but no Rothschild ever spent a minute being persecuted.

9/11 is a symptom, not and end game. And now it's being managed to direct any revelations that may leak out as a totally-compartmentalised gov't op, by "a few rotten eggs in gov't, military and the intel." Anything the media establishment can twist into a bigoted attack on Israel itself is not only wrong and silly, it will doom the movement, and I think most of us know that.

Pay close attention to who is attacking whom - the easiest way to obfuscate your guilt is create an easily dismissable attack (we all know what a false-flag attack is, don't we?). I'd make an educated guess that Hufschmid could be an agent of the bankers, simply because he continues to put forth these obviously anti-Semitic views. The shills always attack their own agents - there's no easier way to give them added credibility.

Anon - good suggestion. The name calling stuff is definetely a waste of time.

Have you seen this?

http://media.putfile.com/stillstanding

We all know what happens when a floor or two collapse in a highrise and the falling upper section begins to exert its unstoppable force...

Aren't any of you people doing web searches to locate prominent people such as professors, journalists & anti-war groups & then sending them 9/11 truth e-mail & engaging them in truth discussions?

It is free you know.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1375208054676470714

this is for the Flight 77 huggers.(you know who you are, just watch it.)

Vesa, note also that is the narrow west side of WTC-7 showing (if that is truly a real photo.)

There's a reason I'm asking someone to try and grab that video of Ron Paul...

When Rep. Weldon cancelled his meeting with me, I sent a thank you to Professor Jones for at least being willing to participate in the call... he sent me an email back that said, "Keep in mind congressman Walter Jones of NC". I just remembered that someone told me this video is of a "tag-team" effort between Ron Paul and Walter Jones, and supposedly, Ron Paul refers to Walter Jones as a "Truth Seeker", and Jones supposedly says that a General said we wouldn't have gone into Iraq without 9/11.

As I've told the webmaster before, I like the site. Personally, I don't discuss Pentagon stuff, since I'm still waiting for the rest of the videos to be released (see Flight77.info to see why only some tapes were released by the government, and a bunch more will probably be released later).
GeorgeWashington | Homepage | 07.03.06 - 9:13 pm | #

GW, you may be waiting many decades for those videos to be released.

"I don't care what the so-called eye witnesses say."

And that's why you evil clowns have no credibility.Continue marching along in obscurity in your tiny corner of the world, immune to facts, logic and common sense.

Anyone manage to grab this video?

http://www.house.gov/paul/

"And that's why you evil clowns have no credibility. Continue marching along in obscurity in your tiny corner of the world, immune to facts, logic and common sense."

Debunking The Debunkers

Gold, you had your ass handed to you on a plate from S. King, Reno, Lonesome Dave and others. After your spanking, you slipped off to the cloistered blogs where you can ban voices other than your own.

An interesting note on the truth911.net site:

"The fact that AA 11 and UA 175 crossed paths at the same time is too improbable to be regarded as a coincidence, implying that this was necessary for the attack. Further research needs to be done on this topic to determine what happened to AA 11 and UA 175 over Stewart AFB in New Windsor, N.Y. at 8:36am when AA 11 began a rapid decent. What happened at 8:36am on 9/11/01?"

Has anyone else identified this anomaly? Any ideas?
simuvac | 07.03.06 - 11:50 pm | #

I believe the commercial airliners may have landed at Stewart, and drones struck the towers as per Operation Northwoods.

I've always thought this picture looks somehow "unreal":

http://www.flatplanet.net/truth911/June2004WTC7_Page_16_cropped.jpg

Could the corner damage part of the picture have been Photoshopped? The area of the corner damage is not shown in any other released picture or video.

Also, the North Tower was 350 feet away from WTC 7. Could heavy steel debris from it have been ejected that far? The debris would have to have been very heavy to cause that kind of damage. According to FEMA, no heavy debris from either tower landed on WTC 7.

The vanishing 757 at the Pentagon is like the 'JFK magic bullet': theoretically possible (see http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2006/010706casestudy.htm), but highly improbable.

Up until now I have never commented on the Pentagon strike but after watching this video http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1375208054676470714 I am convince that a 757 did not hit the Pentagon. I don't care what the so-called eye witnesses say. It was probably hit by a small military plane and explosives were probably planted in the building at the point of impact. This is pure speculation on my part but the official account doesn't hold water. Also, the new site is excellent. I have already started passing it around.

I see some bright flashes toward the bottom of the wtc7 clip here:
http://www.knowordie.co.uk/WTC7.avi

Oh yeah, so Rodriguez saw one of the alleged hijackers. AND? We know the hijackers were in America, brainwashed by Atta to case places. Atta was a double agent. Also, why they casing the bathrooms if they are planning a plane suicide?

Also, the crossing paths of planes over millitary bases...does this theory support the plane swap idea?

Again, I maintain if you believe CD in WTC 1 and 2, you have to entertain remote control of real flights or swapped flights.

MaxResolution,

could you explain all that... somehow... in another way? I can't really say I understand what you are saying, although I read your text twice.

The Anonymous non-understander above was me. Sorry.

Sorry, I can't spell because I'm semi-dyslexic. Kean deserves a regular brutal edit! The problem is that you have to log-in to be Anyonomous. Anonmolus? Anti-tomulous! :) Later, you will be banned, so don't assume the editors will pardon your cute comments. There are plenty of rude ones someone could add.

Hey, I just checked and edited Christine's 'bio' at Wiki. Now, there's a "Keane"- resource, if you get my drift!

TS Gordon | 07.04.06 - 5:04 am | #
___________________________________

I noticed on the Kean wiki page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Kean) the passage: "The commission is widely considered the most important independent government commission since the Warren Commission."

Independent?

There is clearly enough evidence to have that word stricken and still maintain the NPV required at wiki, no?

In fact that word does not appear to satisfy NPV given the well documented history.

Anyway, maybe it is not worth the time and effort.

Vesa, you appear as someone from afar, so I will explain to you what the others will not hear, as I stood atop this towering structure on the day it was supposedly 'topped-out.' The usual meaning of which is that it shall require no additional steel. The two cranes were to be removed.

But a very different history belies this building, just a few links further down the food-chain. Again, they will not listen, even these who profess to understand the math. I cannot say that I suspected 'thermite' was at play in those days, but it was certainly in the works. What happened is that the crew was fired, but not the General. That never happens. Then the "new construction Chief," who was actually the Old chief allowed me and my subsequent boss to access the building one final time, for $100. bribe. We took pictures of a couple of dames for the cover of a novel, I believe on Vantage-Young Adult series. We saw things I was not supposed to see. Each 'hard-hat' now had an FBI-like guy as his partner. New steel was being added to reinforce some, but not by any means all of the main posts, particularly noticable were those to the West, where they installed an artifical, 12-story barrier to shield it from view. Behind this wall, were new colors to the lower two or three floor's steel. I remember Teal, or Green, and some -X- braces of yellow. I think they finally covered these with asbestos-blanket sleeves, or something. You could see through the barrier at the street, but I was one of maybe 10 who knew it was weird, besides the whole lower-downtown architectural community, everyone knew there were really fishy money-deals going on. The Construction guy would have let us spend the day, but as soon as we got started, the Black suits came to observe. "Point your cameras that way, they pointed East." It made me mad because we only had one camera. I didn't look like an assistant, and the FBI knew what I looked like. It was uncanny because they shooed us away after about 18 frames or so. Devistating for a fashion shooter.

Anyway, New Yorkers aren't real bright. All this is in the local building records if only they were smart enough to tip the librarians for their help to find it. No way #7 was Not a 'CDI' -project.

For those who haven't viewed this yet, this is by far the best WTC 7 collapse video:

http://www.knowordie.co.uk/WTC7.avi

However, if you know of other *high-resolution* videos of WTC 7, please post any links here.

There IS a "soft underbelly" of the official story, and it is WTC 7. Everyone *please* forget the no plane at Pentagon theory. That has not led, and will not lead, anywhere.

WTC 7 should be focused on for the following reasons:

It is STILL officially unexplained, at least until November, when NIST is supposed to publish its final report. FEMA said in May 2002 that its fire collapse scenario "has a low degree of probability".

NIST has no parts of the building which to examine. That is ridiculous by itself, considering that they are examining a SKYSCRAPER collapse, for God's sake!

Its symmetrical speedy collapse produces the visual "Wow!" factor.

Watching it collapsing should make any structural engineer with at least half a brain active at least uncomfortable.

The media hate it.

The media especially detest showing a video of it collapsing.

It collapsed at very nearly the speed of free fall, making it extremely difficult (and probably impossible) to explain its collapse as a purely gravitational phenomenon. See my analysis at

http://11syyskuu.blogspot.com/2006/02/destruction-of-wtc-7.html

However -- and this is important -- WTC 7 should always be discussed firmly in the context of the three WTC skyscrapers. It should be presented as the CLEAREST EXAMPLE of the controlled demolition of the three skyscrapers, not as an anomaly. I'm sure you understand why without my going into the details.

I wish you U.S. people a great independence day -- despite all this.

http://www.flatplanet.net/truth911/paperflightpath.html

"Since ATC could not track AA 77 with PSR like they had done with the other three hijacked planes when their transponders were turned off, ATC assumed it crashed. This reasonable assumption allowed AA 77 to hit the pentagon at 9:37 without being intercepted by the military."

You forget both Mineta's and FAA's testimonies to the 9/11 Commission. Both indicate that flight 77 was monitored in real time while it was approaching Washington. It must have been fairly easy for the military radar systems to do that.

The meeting of the AA 11 and UAL 175 above an air force base is interesting. And what about flight 175 and 93 almost meeting near the Allentown air force base?

Also, right before AA 11 was hijacked, it met with MD80. Has this MD80 been investigated?

It's almost as if something was passed on between the planes... a hijacker virus? ;-)

Hey, I just checked and edited Christine's 'bio' at Wiki. Now, there's a "Keane"- resource, if you get my drift! (...This bitch is going-down!)

I assume we have to be sly, so I was careful not to say too much: "Gee Grandma, my what sharp teeth you have!" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christine_Todd_Whitman

Please research this: At the time Bush took-off, he fired the existing EPA director,- when, and who?

(They knew)

Millionaire Christine Todd Whitman, the Bush appointee who used to head the Environmental Protection Agency, said exactly one week after the collapse of the Twin Towers, “I’m glad to reassure the people of New York that their air is safe to breathe.

Later, Bush relieved this person too, but they were there for One solitary rerason: Cover-up!

See, you may have missed the connection, but WTC was full of Asbestos. I think it was supplied by Kaiser, International, who had the office where #1 hit. They were bought with Milken-bonds taken from the S&L scam in Texas, -enter Neil Bush, anyway, they were 'pardoned' of about $400M in potentialy pending legal cases for BOTH, 9.11 and other existing industry-wide claims.

Today, there is another Bush liar at the EPA. I believe they ALL need to be receiving a visit from the Truth community!

"Wtf happened to the massive B-757 engines & 235 airliner seats at the Pentagon?
Anonymous | 07.05.06 - 5:29 am | #"

@ one of 911Bloggers' many Anonymous posters

If you take a few minutes to think about it a little more indepth than just stupidly saying to yourself "the engines were on the plane, so the engines would have to be there at the Pentagon after the attack"; you'll likely figure it out.

But just in case your IQ isn't high enough, I'll offer a hint -- 757 Engines are not one piece of solid steel or other metal; they're put together using many pieces; pieces that with force break apart.

Here's the additional related clue -- A nearly 500/mph impact with the Pentagon outer facade = both engines smashing into the outer facade and being virtually obliterated into small pieces upon impact.

See if you can figure out the simplistic obviousness of the hint and the additional related clue. It isn't difficult, if you actually think about it.

But then again, Mr. Anonymous -- whichever Anonymous that you are -- you could be a purposeful disinfo peddler trying to continue the distraction about the Pentagon.

Good luck with that, by the way.

As for the seats, I would surmise that they were also for the most part obliterated upon impact, since they were in the upper 3/5 of the 757, basically only protected by the thin aluminum shell.

And of whatever seats that weren't obliterated upon impact, the massive fireball explosion and interior of the Pentagon probably did a pretty good job of incinerating and shredding them into virtually unrecognizable debris.

Afterall, what do you think a 757's seats are made of? inflammable solid stainless steel? lol

Go back to fairytale non-evidence/non-logical/non-critical thought land®. It's part of the related boring amusement inside Pentagon Hoaxville™

Significant evidence clearly supports 9/11 as being an inside job.

But the Pentagon was hit by a 757. Falling for the missile/drone/smaller military craft is to be tricked with misleading misinfo and/or disinfo.

But feel free to continue trying to peddle it Anonymous.

I, however, am not taking the bait.

Wtf happened to the massive B-757 engines & 235 airliner seats at the Pentagon? (Answer: drones & missiles don't have massive engines nor seats.)

Oh, no "cartoons" at the Pentagon? I get it. Only at the WTC, where there were thousands of eyewitnesses, videos, photos, etc. You must think we are fools.

The Pentagon is a huge smoking gun. A drone or a missile struck it. Don't let these disinfo agents tell you otherwise.

>>>I believe 9/11 was an inside job. But a case can't be won by using non-evidence as "evidence".

The lies about the Pentagon are non-evidence.

"How come the 9/11 theory "debunkers" never attempt to debunk the ISI connection? Or Sibel Edminds? Or the FBI Whistleblowers? Or the 9/11 families speaking out?

The fact is if Terrence and others were paid enough, they could try and convince us Enron did nothing wrong.
pockybot | 07.05.06 - 1:32 am | # "

I don't know if that is in response to anything that I have written about the Pentagon in this comment page.

But I am not Terrance or any of the other official story promoters.

I believe 9/11 was an inside job. But a case can't be won by using non-evidence as "evidence".

The lies about the Pentagon are non-evidence.

How come the 9/11 theory "debunkers" never attempt to debunk the ISI connection? Or Sibel Edminds? Or the FBI Whistleblowers? Or the 9/11 families speaking out?

The fact is if Terrence and others were paid enough, they could try and convince us Enron did nothing wrong.

Here is why the Pentagon discussion is a futile one.

Whatever "evidence" exists in the public domain right now is clearly inconclusive. Reasonable people entertain three different main theories (missle, military fighter, or 757). While I strongly believe the most plausible explanation is the 757 hitting the building, I can understand why others might believe something else happened.

So what hope is there of settling this?

The conclusive evidence that could settle the matter is in the possession of the Pentagon and in the hands of the FBI, procuring security tapes from a gas station and a hotel in the area.

If the evidence definitively proves that something other than a 757 hit the Pentagon, it will never be released, and more likely has already been destroyed... The public will therefore be left to draw conclusions based only upon the material already in the public domain- and no consensus view will emerge in the 9/11 Truth community.

If the evidence definitively proves that a 757 DID hit the Pentagon, we WILL one day see it. It's release will have enormous power to counteract the momentum of the Truth movement- particularly if visible figures like Dr. Fetzer continue to give the subject primacy in mainstream media discussions.

Hence the futility of Pentagon speculation. We long for some kind of specific resolution on the matter- yet we know that, if it ever is to come, it will only come in the form of a definitive refutation of the conspiratorial accounts. There is no other allowable outcome. In short, nothing good will come of Pentagon musings, so let us put them aside and focus on the real smoking guns.

A 757 hit the Pentagon. Most surely Flight 77.

Anyone saying otherwise is either

a) a purposely lying agent and/or purposeful disinfo dispensor
b) uninformed
c) misiniformed and/or disinformed
d) stubborn and doesn't want to admit that they've been tricked into believing that "no 757 hit the Pentagon" because they were misiniformed and/or disinformed with one sided "evidence" that "supports" "no 757 hit the Pentagon"

"what do you think caused that perfect circle? (you have to admit the circle is pretty damn clean and cylindrical.)
Chris | Homepage | 07.04.06 - 7:34 pm | # "

Plane debris of some sort. Something heavy from part of the bottom 2/5 of the plane, most likely from the mid-rear section that wasn't either obliterated upon impact with the outer facade of the Pentagon, or that wasn't severly demolished, shredded into significantly small sized pieces and slowed down from the impact of the front-mid section of the plane that hit the Pentagon before the mid-rear section.

There was landing gear found outside the punch-out hole of the C ring. So, something that was part of that would be my best guess.

And yes the hole is very circular. But so what. The wall was bricks. The bricks were smashed out by a chunk of aircraft debris hitting them. So, what would make sense is the debris hitting where the center area of the punch-out hole is - whatever width the debris was with respect to the center of teh punch-out hole -- and the bricks smashed out in uniform with the center impact of the debris hitting the wall.

A missile doesn't make sense. Especially more so when thinking of it as a missile having hit the outer facade of the Pentagon, which then travelled through the building and the rings without exploding to only then explode againt the innermost wall of the C ring interior and punch-out the circular hole.

A missile doesn't make sense. Especially more so when there is the huge explosion fireball all too similar to the WTC jet fuel explosions, when the 757 impacts with the outer facade of the Pentagon.

So how does a missile makes sense then?

Is it a magic missile that explodes when it impacts the outer facade of the Pentagon, then magically travels through the Pentagon and explodes again, punching out a relatively small sized hole -- as far as missile explosions go?

Especially since, when looking at photographs of the C ring wall at the punch-out hole, it appears to only be two layers of brick, some plywood and then whatever plaster wall interior or whatever the interior wall was made of that is a normal kind of interior wall for a building. It would be safe to assume that that kind of stuff wouldn't offer much strength for stopping a heavy chunk of aircraft debris, still travelling with significant force.

So how does a smaller plane like a military plane firing a missile make sense then? Is it a magic missile and military plane that impacts the outer facade of the Pentagon, creating a huge explosion, obliterating the aircraft but somehow allowing the missile which is still intact to pass through two rings of the Pentagon, and then finally explode out of the C ring creating the relatively small sized punch-out hole?

Please tell me how any of those missile and/or smaller military aircraft scenarios make any logical, feasable, rational sense whatsoever. Please.

As far as I see it -- and I have looked at this from both sides -- a missile theory is laughably ridiculous.

A smaller military aircraft theory would have some strength as being a possiblilty, IF the damage in the run up to the Pentagon [lightpoles], right in front of the Pentagon [Generator], and the outer facade [left & right wing and engine impact damage. And fuselage impact damage] weren't exactly proportionate and consistent with the size of a 757.

Not to mention the scores of eyewitness testimonies by people who were on the busy freeways that run directly beside the Pentagon on both sides that the 757 made its descent toward/parallel with, who said that it was a large commercial passeneger jet that hit the Pentagon.

Now please, and I write this in a completely non-belittling fashion.

1) What photographic comparison evidence of missiles either entering buildings and travelling through them, then exploding small sized circular punch-out holes, can you provide that supports a missile having caused the circular punch-out hole in the C ring?

or

2) What photographic comparison evidence of missiles impacting a building and exploding small sized circular holes, can you provide that supports a missile having caused the circular punch-out hole in the C ring?

*And what is the weight of using "perfect circle" with regard to the hole as being caused by a "missile"?

Was baking cookies and obviously was more focused on the cookies than the spelling when original writing that line lol

what do you think caused that perfect circle? (you have to admit the circle is pretty damn clean and cylindrical.)

And I apologize for the "stupid people" comment directed at you.

But the Pentagon was hit by a 757, more probable than not, Flight 77. So since people are still wasting time on promoting "no 757", it angers me.

*So since people who don't appear to be any kind of agent/purposeful disinfo peddlers

And if you're not convinced of it you should not call yourself a member of the 911 Truth movement.
Andrew Lowe Watson | Homepage | 07.04.06 - 6:39 pm | #
and you are the president of the 9/11 truth movement i presume? you would have to be to make an absolutest statement like that.
Chris | Homepage | 07.04.06 - 6:42 pm | #

No. It is just my opinion. I state it with conviction . Sorry if it looks like arrogance.

* in an attempt to hide the fact

Whether "obliterated" or "disintegrated", they did NOT get samples to ID the passengers!