pentagon

Joint Statement on the Pentagon: David Chandler and Jon Cole

Overwhelming Evidence of Insider Complicity on 9/11

If you watch our videos and read the links on our site (http://www.911speakout.org) you will understand why we assert that the weight of the evidence points to the fact that 9/11 was orchestrated by insiders…

* with access to high tech military-grade nano-energetic materials (aka nano-thermite)
* with access to the infrastructure of some of the most highly secure buildings in New York over an extended period of time
* with the expertise to accomplish the most difficult demolitions in history
* with the ability to manage public perception of the event despite numerous contrary contemporaneous eyewitness reports
* with the ability to coordinate the take-downs of the twin towers with the airplane flights
* with the ability to coordinate with the military to not intercept the airplane flights
* with the ability to stage a highly coordinated cover-up, starting on the day of 9/11 itself
* with the ability to prevent ANY investigation for many months

T. Carter - Flight 77 Attendant (COPA Conference 2002)

T. Carter (COPA Conference 2002)

T. CARTER, flight attendant, was scheduled to fly on her regular flight, AA 77, on Sept. 11, 2001, but she instead opted out of duty that day, and her friend and fellow flight attendant, Rene, took the plane, replacing her.

Rene boarded AA 77 in Washington DC and on this regularly scheduled route, proceeded to Dallas. Over Ohio, Rene called her mother on her cell phone and told her to call American Airlines Operations and report that the plane had been hijacked. Rene said there were 6 hijackers. Press releases since then have only reported 5 hijackers, but that is a separate subject due to its size and scope. There were no sounds of struggle when Rene phoned her mother and Rene did not call her again.

In an affidavit, T. Carter states that she went to the crash site within 48 hours after the 757 hit the Pentagon, with her mother, to give support to the crews retrieving bodies and wreckage. Her visit could have been late in the day Sept. 11, or on Sept. 12. At the pentagon, she recognized the tail section of AA 77 that she had flown on many times, as she walked past it. The tail was on the grass,

Al Jazeera: Hollywood and the war machine - 12/23/10

Empire examines the symbiotic relationship between the movie industry and the military-industrial complex. Featuring interviews with Oliver Stone, Michael Moore, and Chris Hedges.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v66HM5ILiwk

9-11 Pentagon Episode: Conspiracy Theory With Jesse Ventura

 Conspiracy Theory With Jesse Ventura
World911Truth.org | Dec. 21, 2010

In this powerful episode, Jesse Ventura leads an investigation that will bring him to visit the Pentagon, meet with a 9-11 commissioner, pilots, a Pentagon whistleblower and other witnesses and will show that the very section of the building that was destroyed was where the evidence of the loss of 2.3 trillion dollars by the same Pentagon was sitting. The 2.3 trillion dollars of tax payers money was lost forever.

The idea that a missile or explosives—not a hijacked jetliner—damaged the Pentagon on September 11, 2001 seems the most unlikely of 9-11 theories. That is, until you look at all the factors, which include eyewitness testimony, crime scene video, expert analysis and the question why, with 85 cameras trained on the building, have only five frames of crash footage have ever been released? Jesse Ventura leads a serious investigation into a tangled web of clues that some say are too sacred to even touch.

Why have the 9-11 Pentagon tapes been scealed and why did the U.S. government never release any credible footage clearly showing that an airplane actually hit the Pentagon? We call on the Obama administration to release the 9-11 Pentagon tapes now.

Obama, Mullen, Gates Hold War-Justification-Ceremony at Pentagon for 9/11 Victims Family Members & Country on 11th of the Month

To my knowledge, this is the first time a 9/11 memorial by the highest officials has happened on an 11th other than September.

As covered by the Navy Times:

President Obama, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen on Saturday (the 11th) remembered the victims of the terrorist attack on the Pentagon in a ceremony at the Pentagon Memorial.

I can optimistically think that this is in direct response to:

The Repeatedly Delayed Responses of the Pentagon Command Center on 9/11


The National Military Command Center (NMCC) is the most secure part of the Pentagon and, at the time of the 9/11 attacks, was "the focal point within [the] Department of Defense for providing assistance" to law enforcement efforts in response to aircraft hijackings in U.S. airspace, according to military instructions. [1] In response to the attacks on New York and Washington, the job of the NMCC, according to the 9/11 Commission, was "to gather the relevant parties and establish the chain of command between the National Command Authority--the president and the secretary of defense--and those who need to carry out their orders." [2]

Up a crooked creek: Censorship and civility in the truth movement

By Kevin Ryan

http://visibility911.com/kevinryan/2010/10/up-a-crooked-creek-censorship-and-civility-in-the-truth-movement/ 

I’ve been censored many times.  When I am completely honest with myself, however, I realize that some of those instances were not actually censorship but were forms of editorial discretion.   Other instances were simply attempts by propagandists to downplay the truth. 

Examples:

Editorial Discretion:  When CommonDreams.org failed to respond to my article from 2003, it was making a decision that what I had to say was, for them, more of a nightmare than a shared dream.  CommonDreams.org had published other articles that could be seen as related to 9/11 truth, but my approach was not to the editor’s liking.  In response, I did not begin a public campaign against them but instead found many other sites to publish my articles.

Censorship:  A leading alternative news site that regularly publishes 9/11 truth stories rejected one of my articles in late 2008, despite the fact that I had published there before.  The editor responded very emotionally to the article, and suggested that it “attacked solid progressives.”  The editor’s response was itself a great demonstration of what the article conveyed — that people have built-in mechanisms which keep them from seeing truth.  In any case, I did not start a public campaign against the site and would never have thought of wasting my time and energies doing so.  That’s because my goal is to reveal and communicate the truth.

Propaganda:  When, in 2007, Wikipedia promoted highly dubious sources like “Mark Roberts” in an attempt to smear me, yet on the exact same subjects openly ignored sources like The New York Times and Underwriters Laboratories, that was not censorship, it was propaganda.  But again, I did not start a campaign against Wikipedia nor did I try to strike back at the site despite the fact that it was intentionally working to defeat the truth.

I’ve found that, in nearly all cases, when faced with editorial discretion, censorship or propaganda, people will find other venues to share their information when they are not successful at one site.  Again, that is because they seek to reveal the truth, not simply to commandeer one particular venue.  Others, however, are curiously vindictive.

CIT is useless

UPDATE 8/15/10: Added a segment about closing statements.

Originally posted: http://arcterus911.blogspot.com/2010/08/cit-is-useless.html

Some time ago I wrote an article about the importance of not wasting time on CIT. Most of their followers are impossible to convince and consequently the endless debates with them are entirely fruitless, resulting in nothing more than distraction. But that's not to say we should ignore them completely. Just because we ignore them doesn't mean they won't be zipping around spouting their flawed testimony, their aggressive behavior, anything that discredits those of us who are careful and have realistic standards of evidence.

There's an issue I just don't see talked about often enough in regards to CIT. People are ready to talk about the things I mentioned above and more. The contradicting testimony, the over-zealous nature of their followers, the fact that the testimony contradicts physical evidence, all these things that relate to debunking them. What I don't see talked about is how this all plays into the legal implications of what CIT is proposing.

Version 7 of "What hit the Pentagon? Misinformation and its Effect on Credibilty...." is at the Journal of 9/11 Studies

In this version an additional photograph of debris has been included, wing loading on the spiral descent of flight AA77 has been calculated and the description of the position of CIT has been enlarged. Version 5 included a table showing that a range of flight paths exist which would enable a Boeing 757 to hit the light poles and the Pentagon without experiencing excessive g-force. As some researchers have stated that this is impossible the issue of misinformation arises and is examined in a postscript. The calculations involved are explained in the attached spreadsheet.

http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2009/WhatHitPentagonDrLeggeAug.pdf

Summary and Analysis of "National Security Alert" by Chris Sarns

12-31-09 revised 7-12-10

Summary and Analysis of "National Security Alert" by Chris Sarns

Like many others I was impressed with the Citizen Investigation Team (CIT) video "National Security Alert" (NSA) when I saw it for the first time. I thought that the unanimous testimony of the witnesses confirmed the north flight path of American Airlines flight 77, but I could not see how that in any way proved their "flyover theory". I did not give the "flyover" theory much thought because it seemed to be a minor point. As it turns out, the strong evidence for the north flight path was just the "hook", and "flyover" was actually their main point.

THE SOUTH PATH IMPACT: DOCUMENTED by Adam Larson

visit original for hyperlinks and graphics - loose nuke

http://frustratingfraud.blogspot.com/2008/08/south-path-impact-documented.html
THE SOUTH PATH IMPACT: DOCUMENTED

Adam Larson / Caustic Logic
The Frustrating Fraud
first posted August 12 2008
last update 10/11

NOTE: The full post isn’t done – I’ll be adding some details and graphics for a couple days. I've opted to simplify the process by not citing and linking to all my sources. Dig around if you have any doubts. Props to Mangoose at JREF for a couple of these leads.

“We Tried…”

New PENTTBOM.com videos as of February 1st, 2009

from http://penttbom.com/

NE418: Pentagon witness saying he saw a plane land into the Pentagon, followed by another plane (C130).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcat-y0p9zo

more at http://penttbom.com/

In reference to our FOIA request, the FBI has sent us 13 additional PENTTBOM videos. This is the second round release (not counting the CCTV Pentagon, CITGO, and Doubltree video releases). Each DVD contains 1 video from the 'menu' list. Here is a summary of what was sent:

NE515: WTC ground scenes. Begins 5 minutes after first impact. Witness says he saw the first plane.
K3074: Footage of the second plane impacting the WTC. The video also captures the collapses.

911 Pentagon Eye Witnesses

These witnesses make a hard case to refute that there was a jet liner that crashed into the pentagon. But why didn't they find the plane?
Nancy...

http://www.geocities.com/someguyyoudontknow33/witnesses.htm

http://web.archive.org/web/20040510201518/http://www.geocities.com/someguyyoudontknow33/witnesses.htm

Pentagon Attack Witness Steve Chaconas

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5D2K19Y-aI

In this 10 minute presentation we feature highlights from our interview with a critical witness to the Pentagon attack jet on 9/11. The testimony of Steve Chaconas exposes how the true flight path of the plane proves the official black box and radar data fraudulent.