It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Possible reason for no debris at pentagon.

page: 12
4
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 12:08 PM
link   
Came across this today, I found it interesting:





Leuren Moret: On the morning of 9/11 at five in the morning, the subway at the Pentagon was full of military personnel and guard dogs. This is not normal. When the object hit the Pentagon it impacted an area called Naval Intelligence which had just been retrofitted and we know now the object that hit the Pentagon was a cruise missile. The missile also went through the department of accounting. It killed 85 people and destroyed computers withmuch data on them. This is very important because when Dov Zakheim who is a joint Israeli and American citizen was working in the Pentagon, 3.5 trillion dollar disappeared from the Pentagon. So that cruise missile which destroyed the accounting department made it impossible to trace that money that disappeared. Dov Zakheim when he left the Pentagon went almost directly to Israel. Donald Rumseld and other people involved in 9/11 and the White House administration have ignored that 3.5 trillion dollars has disappeared. The object, the missile that hit the Pentagon left a round bullet hole through the Pentagon. That was no plane that impacted the Pentagon and it went through four layers of very, very strong walls, cement walls, before it exited the Pentagon and left a very large bullet hole or a punchout at the exit wall. Right after the object hit the Pentagon I found a medical doctor living 12 miles from the Pentagon. I told her to call the FBI and the emergency response agencies and get all of the emergency workers in full protective gear with air tanks on their backs. At that time I thought a plane hit the Pentagon and depleted uranium is used in commerical aircraft, I did not want the emergency workers to be poisoned. Depleted uranium burns and forms a radioactive poison gas. It goes everywhere and very long distances. I also told the medical doctor to take the geiger counter out of her purse, I knew she had a geiger counter in her purse to do air monitoring. Within 5 hours after the missile hit the Pentagon, she called me back and she said the radiation levels are 8 to 10 times higher then normal. 2 days after the cruise missile hit the Pentagon, the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) , called and confirmed that the Pentagon crash site was contaminated with depleted uranium. The bullet hole, the 14 foot bullet hole through the Pentagon is the signature of a kinetic energy penetrator. In other words, depleted uranium warhead in the cruise missile. In a military magazine for officers, a woman working in the floor above the hole described watching the object on television hit the Pentagon one floor below her and when it was over she and the other workers walked out of the building. They watched it on tv. They were in their office .... (clarification - internal Pentagon tv) Nobody even had a scratch because it was a bullet hole through the building. There was no other damage. It seems that the explosions in all those, fire outside the Pentagon came from a worker's hut, a temporary building right in front of the Pentagon, or perhaps a truck. It was an explosion before the object hit the Pentagon.


--Leuren Moret, of Berkeley, Calif., is an independent scientist who works on radiation and public health issues with communities around the world. She earned her B.S. in Geology at U.C. Davis in 1968, and her M.A. in Near Eastern Studies from U.C. Berkeley in 1978.

Moret is a geoscientist who became a whistleblower in 1991 at the Livermore Nuclear Weapons Lab after witnessing fraud on the Yucca Mountain Project. She now dedicates her life to revealing and understanding the actual health effects of radiation exposure. She has worked extensively on the impact of radiation on public health from nuclear power plants and atmospheric testing and how radiation moves through the environment.


Has anyone come across this before?




posted on May, 9 2012 @ 12:52 PM
link   
reply to post by WWu777
 
Wu, these 'people' you refer to can't be too intelligent, or they wouldn't have chosen to back a story that is falling apart before their very eyes. Just look at the list of debunkers that have chimed into this ridiculous OP. What a waste of space.



posted on May, 9 2012 @ 05:16 PM
link   
reply to post by homervb
 



Moret declared on March 21, 2011 that the “Japan Earthquake" and “accidents” that occurred March 11, 2011, were deliberate acts of tectonic nuclear warfare. She claimed further that the "attack" was carried out using HAARP technology by the Central Intelligence Agency, the United States Department of Energy, and British Petroleum on behalf of London banking interests.


She is a nutter, crazier than Judy Woods.......



posted on May, 9 2012 @ 07:57 PM
link   

Moret declared on March 21, 2011 that the “Japan Earthquake" and “accidents” that occurred March 11, 2011, were deliberate acts of tectonic nuclear warfare. She claimed further that the "attack" was carried out using HAARP technology by the Central Intelligence Agency, the United States Department of Energy, and British Petroleum on behalf of London banking interests...and Einstein's Bagels, Dunkin' Donuts and Party City.


There. I fixed that for ya.



posted on May, 10 2012 @ 08:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by homervb
 



Moret declared on March 21, 2011 that the “Japan Earthquake" and “accidents” that occurred March 11, 2011, were deliberate acts of tectonic nuclear warfare. She claimed further that the "attack" was carried out using HAARP technology by the Central Intelligence Agency, the United States Department of Energy, and British Petroleum on behalf of London banking interests.


She is a nutter, crazier than Judy Woods.......


lol my baddd



posted on May, 14 2012 @ 05:03 PM
link   
Where's the debris from the high speed impact of this jumbo jet?

www.hurriyetdailynews.com...



posted on Jun, 4 2012 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyingFox
Where's the debris from the high speed impact of this jumbo jet?

www.hurriyetdailynews.com...


Hahaha! Retired & injured soldiers, retired and injured policement, and trainees alike, probably based in India to keep the costs down!

On a serious note, the Lagos Plane crash from Dana airport that has just happened was a fairly small plane

www.bbc.co.uk...

en.wikipedia.org...

And the size of the engine remains is still a lot bigger than the ones supposedly from 9/11, although I believe they were just old random parts at 9/11, fradulent staged photos to make everyone believe they were commercial planes!



Engines on the planes from 9/11 would have been huge, and we only saw objects that were really small. Take this picture from the Lagos crash that just happened...



As you can see, quite large, and these are way smaller than the planes that supposedly hit the twin towers!?!

Pull the other one!



posted on Jun, 4 2012 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by homervb
 


She is a nutter, crazier than Judy Woods.......


Any credible witness is a nutter to you 'debunkers', they go against your OS theories that you uphold!
edit on 4-6-2012 by kidtwist because: added quotations



posted on Jun, 4 2012 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by kidtwist

Any credible witness is a nutter to you 'debunkers',


She is not a witness, Just another nutter in the Witch Hunt.



posted on Jun, 4 2012 @ 04:22 PM
link   
reply to post by kidtwist
 


Anyone who believes the tripe that 3.5 trillion dollars disappeared is a damned fool. And her statement shows that she is ignorant of the facts. She debunks herself.



posted on Jun, 4 2012 @ 06:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by kidtwist
 


Anyone who believes the tripe that 3.5 trillion dollars disappeared is a damned fool. And her statement shows that she is ignorant of the facts. She debunks herself.


Wasn't it Rumsfeld that first commented about the trillions? You support the government, so are you debunking yourself to?!



posted on Jun, 4 2012 @ 09:19 PM
link   
reply to post by kidtwist
 


See, the thing is, nutters and truthers fail to actually research the story. Rumsfeld was not talking about missing cash. Nor was it a secret. Nor was it forgotten about. What he was talking about was a GAO audit that had been done that there were 2.3 trillion in adjustments made in the books that did not have enough documentation to support them. It was a world wide attempt at an audit, every bullet, every gun, every aircraft, every ship, et cetera. And the information was on approximately a dozen different computer systems located throughout the Pentagon, most of which were not compatible with the other systems. And adjustments had to be made to make the numbers match. Adjustments that just did not have enough documentation to suit the accountants. It doesn't mean anything was missing, just that they did not know where the errors were. AP was posting stories about the audit in 1999, Rumsfeld was being asked about it during his confirmation hearings in early 2001, and throughout the summer and on September, 10, 2001, he gave a speech outlining the problems (in regards to the hodgepodge of outdated computers and other items) and how he was determined to fix them.

The next day, Flight 77 slammed into the Pentagon, and ever since, we have had to deal with fools that think somehow Rumsfeld took 2.3 trillion dollars in cash out of the Pentagon Piggy bank and then blew it up the next day. And those same fools are too stupid to research the issue and find out that they were STILL working on finding the errors in the books for years after 2001.
edit on 4-6-2012 by vipertech0596 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 09:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by LoneGunMan
I just cant except the fact that the wing spars and tail section are not on the lawn. Why would anyone think that a 757 flown by someone that cant land a cessna could get that far into ground effect at that kind of speed anyway? How can you believe wings can vaporize or "get sucked into the hole". Where in the heck is the tail section?

Even at 500 mph the tail section has what 155 feet after the nose impacts to slow down. Are you gonna say that physics do not apply on 9/11? That is 155 feet of fuselage crumpling slowing that tail section down.

You really think it would vaporize when it hit? Is this Buck Rogers or something? The tail would slow down enough to be mostly intact, at least leaving some big parts on the lawn.


My beef is that all these hijackers that went to flight school apparently didn't care to learn the art of landing, but the plane that hit the Pentagon was essentially landing into the Pentagon. SMH



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 09:51 AM
link   
Oh, good GOD won't this "no plane hit the Pentagon" internet hoax ever die?



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 10:01 AM
link   
Wasnt there photographic evidence of derbies? I admit it is curious that no debries can be seen on the first pictures taken, right after impact, among other things, but there is photografic evidence of debrie.

What kind of behaviour is to be expected by a high velocity impact?



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666
Wasnt there photographic evidence of derbies? I admit it is curious that no debries can be seen on the first pictures taken, right after impact, among other things, but there is photografic evidence of debrie.

What kind of behaviour is to be expected by a high velocity impact?


I can understand the confusion. The problem here is that a) the wreckage from the aircraft was picked up almost immediately since they obviously didn't want it to be damaged/destroyed any further, as well as b) people were continuously taking photos throughout the entire event, and so c) there are "before they picked up the wreckage" photos, "while they're still picking up the wreckage" photos and "after they picked up the wreckage" photos. Those damned fool conspiracy websites are specifically trying to sucker people into swallowing these "no plane hit the Pentagon" conspiracy hoaxes so they show you the "no wreckage" photos first and then they use them to get people to believe the "before the wreckage was picked up" and the "while they were being picked up" photos were fake/staged.

Is this a case of "revealing the truth" or it is a case of "taking information out of context to make it look like it's saying something it really isn't"? To me, it's a case of "those damned fool conspiracy web sites are specifically tryign to sucker people into believing these conspiracy hoaxes".



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666
Wasnt there photographic evidence of derbies? I admit it is curious that no debries can be seen on the first pictures taken, right after impact, among other things, but there is photografic evidence of debrie.

What kind of behaviour is to be expected by a high velocity impact?


Well if there's no debris shown in the first photos after impact then how exactly did all the debris appear on the lawn later on? Were there multiple explosions post-crash that caused the debris to eject from the Pentagon? I really need to read that Fire Fight book someone brought up. Do they say where they found the seats and the luggage?



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by Cassius666
Wasnt there photographic evidence of derbies? I admit it is curious that no debries can be seen on the first pictures taken, right after impact, among other things, but there is photografic evidence of debrie.

What kind of behaviour is to be expected by a high velocity impact?


I can understand the confusion. The problem here is that a) the wreckage from the aircraft was picked up almost immediately since they obviously didn't want it to be damaged/destroyed any further


I am talking right after the impact, like before the wall collapsed. Would a high velocity impact cause whatever did not end up inside the pentagon to shatter into tyiny debries, so that the wings and any such are scattered over a wide area and can not be identified as such in the immediate impact area?



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666
I am talking right after the impact, like before the wall collapsed. Would a high velocity impact cause whatever did not end up inside the pentagon to shatter into tyiny debries, so that the wings and any such are scattered over a wide area and can not be identified as such in the immediate impact area?


Yes it would. Here's a video that has been posted countless times before of such a test- once upon a time there was concern of what would happen if a place crashed into a nuclear plant so they ran a test to find out. The high speed cameras show the plane was all but vaporised by the heavy concrete wall. This is because the wall is solid and the plane is hollow, so physics ain't on the plane's side.



Granted, the walls of the Pentagon weren't this thick and heavy, but it's also obvious that a plane crashing into the Pentagon can't be remotely compared to a crash site where the plane landed on its belly in an open field either.



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 11:38 AM
link   
This may be indicative in the quality of the OPs assertion.

239 replies to this thread and only 1 flag and zero stars.

Is that a record of some sort?
edit on 5-6-2012 by UltimateSkeptic1 because:




new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join