It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Why do you think that aircraft, both military and civilian come with “No Step” written all over them, hm?
this aircraft skidded off during the landing at runway 25R
Originally posted by ANOK
which I know for a FACT cannot be easily damaged. Engine cases are pretty damn heavy and tough and IMO there should be obvious signs of their existance left somewhere on the lawn of the pentagoon.
[edit on 31/1/2006 by ANOK]
given that the airplane went through the noise abatement fence, the perimeter fence, across the street and into a gas station, the engine doesnt look too bad
The Pentagon attack: the "no plane" theories discredit 9/11 skepticism and distract from proven evidence of complicity
- the fake debate between no plane and no complicity gets the Bush regime off the hook
- there is zero evidence for any of the "no plane" claims - hundreds of people saw the plane, none saw a cruise missile, Global Hawk robot plane, smaller plane or flying saucer piloted by giant lizards
- the physical evidence shows that a large twin engine jet hit the nearly empty part of the Pentagon, the "Black Boxes" were found, cleanup crews found remains of the passengers, the "hole was too small" claim was a hoax
- making 9/11 complicity dependent on the no-plane claim was a brilliant tactic to discredit the real evidence for people inside the Beltway, both for the majority who vote against Bush and the political / military elites (especially the military officers who saw the plane crash or the plane debris)
- the material on this page and all of the websites that are linked here should finally extinguish the "no plane" hoax -- except for those who have staked their credibility on these claims and cannot admit a mistake, and those who intentionally promote the hoax. Every claim for the "no plane" hoaxes is refuted here or at a page linked from this page
Families of victims and others who work at the airlines, as well as many witnesses I have spoken to, are offended and shocked by these unfounded speculations. Those willing to do a modicum of investigative work here in DC will be quickly disabused of this disinformation.
It took me a while, but it's now easy to see/understand. There *are* 757 plane parts in the photos, and the fire/impact area of the photos *is* the size of a 757. The reason there aren't any large, obvious pieces of 757 in the photos: planes flying that fast into large buildings get pretty shredded. (Nonetheless, there are clearly visible 757 parts in the photos.) - Emanuel Sferios,
My quick analysis on how this is happening right now would be to point out two red herrings: The Pentagon Theory and the accusations of anti-Semitism. Paul Thompson of the 9/11 Timeline was on the Morning Sedition show and host Mark Marin dismissed the entire 9/11 Truth website by saying, "Oh, it’s one of those sites that say no plane hit the Pentagon." We're being judged by our weakest link. And it is pretty weak.
You had rush hour traffic on I-395 that saw the plane hit, you have 100 eyewitnesses compiled in the pamphlet published by Penny Schoner. Where the hell did this theory come from? Thierry Meyssan’s book "The Horrible Fraud" was the original source. Meyssan wrote his book from Paris, he didn't travel over here. The book is highly imaginative, and in the middle of a trauma, people are searching for answers. A lot of people in the 9/11 truth movement glommed onto this one and I think it’s hurt our credibility over all. You have to wonder if that was by design. For instance, all the right-wing magazines (e.g. National Review) have had a field day.
There is no question that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon. Remaining agnostic on this point also gives ammunition to the perpetrators of the stand-down and serves to discredit the other good work that continues to be done about the reality of what happened that day. It is my feeling that this thesis was actually part of an intentional disinformation campaign that spreads red herrings to discredit the real findings. "These conspiracy theorists will believe anything" say our detractors. Let's discover and present the hard facts and force the coincidence theorists to come up with plausible explanations instead of spewing out speculations we cannot back up and leaving ourselves on the defensive.
The game is an old one, to plant bogus and easily disproved claims in any inquiry into what the government is doing, in order to ridicule those asking questions. In the old days it worked, because the media was under government control and could be counted on to withhold exposure of the fraud until it could most damage those who asked questions. These days, in the age of the internet, such planted hoaxes do not survive because the questions the media should ask but refuse to do so ARE asked and answered.
For example, the claim is that the 9-11 masterminds used a missile on the Pentagon to simulate the impact of the aircraft then spirited away the actual plane and killed the crew and passengers. Why would anyone bother? If the end result is the death of the occupants, why not go ahead and carry the crash out?
Most of the sites promoting untruths about 9/11 under the guise of exposing official complicity are probably well-meaning efforts. The most effective covert operations are when the plotters are able to get outside forces (in this case, some of the 9/11 skeptics) to do their work for them without realizing that they are helping the covert operation.
If you look at who is peddling the "no plane" stuff the hardest, it is generally those who are also pushing the most demented stuff -- pods, missiles at WTC, the Moon Landing was faked, and Holocaust Denial. There is one site praising holocaust denial crap that doesn't buy the no plane crap, but otherwise, all of those pushing the silliest stuff promote no planes.
I find it deeply unfortunate and potentially disastrous that the Pentagon "missile" is becoming something of a wedge issue for 9/11 skeptics.
Funny things did happen at the Pentagon that morning, but in my estimation the missile theory doesn't rise above the folkloric. There is simply too much to counter the fantastic claim for the 9/11 truth movement to be squandering its integrity on such speculation. Here, and from what the general public would call "conspiracy" sites, is a compilation of evidence for Flight 77 striking the Pentagon, here are photos of the plane's wreckage, and here's a refutation of the missile theory by respected Washington-based researcher John Judge.
Something to consider: when an anomalous event occurs, like a jet striking the Pentagon, we ought to make allowance for anomalous evidence. Yes, the hole looks too small, but with what do we have to compare the event? The walls of the structure - particularly the virtually empty side the plane went 270 degrees out of its way to hit, which had been hardened against attack - are much stronger than those of the WTC. So what's it supposed to look like?
I am deeply disturbed by the level of hostility and invective towards pro-757 views that seems to have become quite widely accepted in some circles. That in itself has played a major role over time in undermining my previous confidence in the no-757 side. We are in the midst of a global political crisis, where the consequences of missteps are enormous, and something like the no-757-crash has to be absolutely incontestible in order for it to help the cause. That, it isn't -- but egos and agendas seem to be conspiring to prevent acknowledgement of this. My instincts lead me to agree very strongly with Hoffman's warnings about the furor of publicity over this theory ultimately threatening to do more harm than good.
Similarly, the 9/11 Truth Movement bears the seeds of its own destruction. At times, the serious questions seem threatened to be drowned by the theories about “pods” being attached to the bottom of the planes, “napalm” being planted in the World Trade Center explosions, or the real ringer, “Flight 77 didn’t hit the Pentagon at all.”
This reporter attended the movement’s first national conference in San Francisco in late March. Anyone who still believed that Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon was instantly labeled an agent of “limited hangout.” In the movement, this term (coined by President Nixon while trying to limit disclosure on Watergate) is always pronounced with a sneer.
Originally posted by Zaphod58
So that's normal damage, but a plane flying into a concrete building at high speed would leave huge chunks of engine laying around?
You have voted Grimm for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.
Originally posted by Grimm
There are more indications of a deep-seated dissatisfaction with the "no-757" theory within the so-called "truth movement". All of these websites are often and/or regularly sourced as part of the "truth movement", yet clearly feel the "no-757" theory is at it's least bunk, or more likely, organized misinformation