9/11 Pentagon: The Mystery of the Moved Taxi

a reply to: Salander

And of course, since there apparently WAS a fighter in the air over the Pentagon pre the explosion, even though nobody reported seeing a missile ( although I am very curious about DE WITT ROSEBOROUGH's testimony; he heard a "lion's roar" over his head when he was walking in the south parking lot just before he saw and heard the approaching plane, and then saw the fireball come from over the Pentagon ...) well then, this plane could very possibly have launched something that approached on a south-to-north path, to cause the facade damage with the bowed columns. Not saying I have investigated this at all, but it bears thinking about.

a reply to: RubyGray

Again.

Care to actually address my statement?

Except it wasn’t a fighter. It doesn’t explain the pentagon damage. What maneuver exactly couldn’t be made by flight 77? The radar data tracks flight 77 all the way from take off. How many people witnessed a large passenger jet hitting the pentagon vs a fighter. How did the crew and passengers of flight 77 end up dead at the pentagon?

Or, because your rants have no credibility, you just going to character assassinate like the main stream media, or a political machine? And not debate actual facts?

originally posted by: RubyGray

I have cross-referenced them and identified events occurring in different videos from opposing viewpoints.

This is a photo taken by Steve Riskus just minuets after AA77 crossed the bridge and struck the pentagon.




These photos have been pointed out to us many times by you.


So the question is... If your bizarro 911 theory of Rumsfeld's pole is true, why is this trailer sitting here and not attached to the back of a black tow truck.



Please explain.

originally posted by: waypastvne

originally posted by: RubyGray

I have cross-referenced them and identified events occurring in different videos from opposing viewpoints.

This is a photo taken by Steve Riskus just minuets after AA77 crossed the bridge and struck the pentagon.

These photos have been pointed out to us many times by you.


So the question is... If your bizarro 911 theory of Rumsfeld's pole is true, why is this trailer sitting here and not attached to the back of a black tow truck.

Please explain.

I just spent hours composing a reply to your specious taunt.

It failed to load, and this site logged me out, and lost all my work.

I have already addressed this topic on my thread way back in January this year, although I have since found more evidence confirming what I wrote.

You will just have to wait another day or so until I can re-do my response on a grown-up computer.

Meanwhile, you can read my earlier work here:

letsrollforums.com...

a reply to: RubyGray

In short. Your drafting another fictional crap storm when a simple three of four sentence post would suffice?

So your still crafting a fictional mythology concerning the property damage to a single light pole? And your still ignoring the radar data, flight recorder data, all the fight path damage, the bulk of eyewitness accounts, the actual damage at the pentagon, the flight 77 wreckage, and what killed the personal in the pentagon, how the flight crew and passengers of flight 77 ended u dead at the pentagon, the DNA testing, the coroner reports and issued death certificates, and the remains released to the families of those that died on flight 77.

Is your post going to be like your past delusional “evidence”?

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: neutronflux

You are intellectually bankrupt NF. The quality of your questions reveal that mate.

Perspicacious!

originally posted by: RubyGray

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: neutronflux

You are intellectually bankrupt NF. The quality of your questions reveal that mate.

Perspicacious!

Really? Me?

Please do tell where the passengers and crew of flight 77 met their demise? And what remains were released to families who had relation aboard flight 77?

a reply to: RubyGray

Still waiting on you or Salander to answer to:

Except it wasn’t a fighter. It doesn’t explain the pentagon damage. What maneuver exactly couldn’t be made by flight 77? The radar data tracks flight 77 all the way from take off. How many people witnessed a large passenger jet hitting the pentagon vs a fighter. How did the crew and passengers of flight 77 end up dead at the pentagon?

a reply to: neutronflux

SALANDER said:
You are intellectually bankrupt NF. The quality of your questions reveal that mate.

RUBYGRAY said:
Perspicacious!

NF said:
Really? Me?

Well obviously not. It is Salander's observation which is perspicacious.

Not everything is about you.

a reply to: RubyGray

I think this was about what killed the personal in the pentagon. And how the passengers and flight crew of flight 77 ended up dead at the pentagon with their murders.

Then why you making it about you when you could answer the below.

Except it wasn’t a fighter. It doesn’t explain the pentagon damage. What maneuver exactly couldn’t be made by flight 77? The radar data tracks flight 77 all the way from take off. How many people witnessed a large passenger jet hitting the pentagon vs a fighter. How did the crew and passengers of flight 77 end up dead at the pentagon?

Please do tell where the passengers and crew of flight 77 met their demise? And what remains were released to families who had relation aboard flight 77?

originally posted by: RubyGray

Perspicacious!

Definition. A word you used that describes a perception you don't possess.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: RubyGray

I think this was about what killed the personal in the pentagon. And how the passengers and flight crew of flight 77 ended up dead at the pentagon with their murders.

Then why you making it about you ...

NO, THIS is about the MOVED TAXI.

As always, you are off-topic.

originally posted by: RubyGray

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: RubyGray

I think this was about what killed the personal in the pentagon. And how the passengers and flight crew of flight 77 ended up dead at the pentagon with their murders.

Then why you making it about you ...

NO, THIS is about the MOVED TAXI.

As always, you are off-topic.

The death and destruction at the pentagon is about your unhealthy obsession with what you project as Rumsfeld’s pole?

Really?

a reply to: neutronflux

You are unable to prove that UA77 was present at all, much less that it was loaded with passengers. Your claims are unfounded, pretty much like the entire false narrative offered by government and media.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: neutronflux

You are unable to prove that UA77 was present at all, much less that it was loaded with passengers. Your claims are unfounded, pretty much like the entire false narrative offered by government and media.

Then it should be easy for you to give a more credible cause of damage at the pentagon?

Again....

Except it wasn’t a fighter. It doesn’t explain the pentagon damage. What maneuver exactly couldn’t be made by flight 77? The radar data tracks flight 77 all the way from take off. How many people witnessed a large passenger jet hitting the pentagon vs a fighter. How did the crew and passengers of flight 77 end up dead at the pentagon?

Please do tell where the passengers and crew of flight 77 met their demise? And what remains were released to families who had relation aboard flight 77?

911 was committed most likely by the Pentagon and the military architects as part of the transition of the military into a new phase and so as to update earth's global computer systems, and to bring about the NSA's first real generation of high level cyber surveillance represented by such things as the PRISM surveillance program, you have to be into computer science to see the truth.

a reply to: neutronflux

The cause of damage at the pentagon, as reported by most of the military personnel who had to walk out through the damaged building, was from High Explosives. Many noted the odor of cordite. None saw and sign of airliner or passenger.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: neutronflux

The cause of damage at the pentagon, as reported by most of the military personnel who had to walk out through the damaged building, was from High Explosives. Many noted the odor of cordite. None saw and sign of airliner or passenger.

Provide that actual quotes from most of the pentagon personnel. Then what does that have to do with you claims concerning a fighter jet?

The Bombs (Pre-planted Explosives) Hypothesis
Those who hypothesize that there was no plane impact attribute all damage and deaths to pre-planted explosives or bombs. These researchers include Barbara Honegger in her “Behind the Smoke Curtain” presentation and the Citizen Investigation Team (CIT). Their assumption is that the approaching plane seen by many flew over the Pentagon. Honegger has modified her hypothesis in the last several years to postulate that a white plane was destroyed with some sort of explosives outside the Pentagon near the Heliport area without any debris hitting the Pentagon wall. For these “no plane impact” hypotheses, the next step in the scientific method, Test with an Experiment, raises immediate problems.

The first major problem is the scores of eyewitnesses who saw the plane impact the Pentagon west wall. To solve this problem, many critics simply ignore or attempt to discredit the witnesses, claiming they are lying, incoherent, or manipulated by insiders to tell a false story. These criticisms fail for lack of proof. The witnesses cannot be explained away in any credible fashion.

The second major problem is how to explain the plane debris seen by witnesses and in photographs. No credible explanation has been offered as to how the large volume of plane debris was planted and distributed outside the Pentagon, inside the Pentagon, and in the AE Drive, except by a plane crash. Honegger’s “white plane destroyed” hypothesis appears to be an attempt to explain the plane debris near the Heliport, but it does not explain the plane debris found inside the Pentagon building or in the AE Drive.

The third major problem is a failure to explain, using bombs, the observed damage. This damage includes the clipped tree, the five downed light poles, the generator-trailer that was damaged and rotated toward the Pentagon, the gouge in the low concrete wall, the shape and nature of the façade damage, the internal bowed and abraded columns, the sudden appearance of internal plane debris, the C ring hole and the debris strewn in the AE Drive.

There is no credible evidence for Honegger’s “white plane.” The plane’s supposed destruction without its fragmented parts hitting the Pentagon west wall violates laws of physics, specifically the law of the conservation of momentum. The center of gravity of the combined fragments would still be moving toward the wall at the plane’s pre-explosion speed. There is nowhere near enough plane debris outside the wall near the heliport to account for an entire plane.

The bombs-only hypothesis fails the test of the scientific method in major ways, and the analysis shows the hypothesis is false. However, although the evidence is scant or nonexistent, it is still possible that there were some internal bombs timed to explode at the same time as large plane impact.

www.foreignpolicyjournal.com...

a reply to: neutronflux
"The first major problem is the scores of eyewitnesses who saw the plane impact the Pentagon west wall. To solve this problem, many critics simply ignore or attempt to discredit the witnesses, claiming they are lying, incoherent, or manipulated by insiders to tell a false story. These criticisms fail for lack of proof. The witnesses cannot be explained away in any credible fashion." 

YOUR major problem is that NOBODY saw the plane fly across the bridge.

Scores of eyewitnesses saw the plane flying on the North-of-Citgo flightpath.

YOU simply ignore or attempt to discredit the witnesses, claiming they are lying, incoherent, or manipulated to tell a false story. These criticisms fail for lack of proof. The NORTH-OF-CITGO witnesses cannot be explained away in any credible fashion.

a reply to: RubyGray

You

YOUR major problem is that NOBODY saw the plane fly across the bridge.

Based on what physical evidence vs the large entrance hole in the pentagon, and all the flight path damage?

Scores of eyewitnesses saw the plane flying on the North-of-Citgo flightpath.

Supported by what physical evidence?
Then by all means quote them. Please include the ones that stated they saw a large passenger jet hit the pentagon.

YOU simply ignore or attempt to discredit the witnesses

They have no context with the pentagon damage.

You

claiming they are lying,

Then quote from my posts which CITGO witnesses I said are lying

incoherent

Their accounts are contradicted by a majority of other witnesses, all flight path damage, radar data, flight recorder data, the pentagon damage, and the crew and passengers of flight 77 ended up dead at the pentagon.


You

or manipulated to tell a false story.

I did cite sources how CIT manipulates witnesses and ignores and attacks contradictory evidence. CIT ignores scientific principles.

You

The NORTH-OF-CITGO witnesses cannot be explained away in any credible fashion.

How many of those witness accounts end with a large jet hitting the pentagon? And supported by actual physical evidence?

Category 3: The CIT group of witnesses (about 12) is those whose testimony appears to suggest a plane flight path north of the CITGO station. Such a path, if impact were to follow, could not reasonably create the observed damage trail and could not avoid creating damage inside the Pentagon in its direction of travel. Consequently, the proponents of this theory claim the plane flew over the Pentagon. Drawbacks to this theory include: (a) There is thus far only one questionable witness to a plane flying away. (b) The CIT witnesses appear in some instances to have been led by their interviewer (for example, the interview23 of Albert Hemphill by Craig
24 Ranke).(c)ManyCITwitnessesalsotestifytoplaneimpact .Thetheoryalsosuffersfromthedifficultyin
assessing the position of the plane by witnesses not immediately underneath, for example those at the cemetery,
and the fact that flyover is inferred rather than observed. Legge and Chandler have further pointed out that the
proposed deviation from the established approach path would require a strikingly large plane bank angle, which no witness reported

www.scientistsfor911truth.com...