Pentagon Struck By Enhanced SLCM/BGM-109A Tomahawk Missile

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 12:54 PM
link   
Greetings:

The Pentagon was struck by an enhanced SLCM/BGM-109A Tomahawk Missile on 9/11/01 at 9:38 AM. The doctored Pentagon evidence shows the nose section of a Tomahawk Missile here:

LINK

Go down to the “New Video” (Fox News) frame showing the ‘nose cone’ of the Tomahawk Missile just feet above the ground. The missile in the image is much too small to represent any class of Boeing 757 jetliner, which is over 13 feet in diameter. However, a Tomahawk missile is only about 2 feet high and 18 feet long (20 feet w/ booster).

This is what happened to the Pentagon on 9/11 = www.fas.org... .

Review this CNN Report made on 9/11 in front of the Pentagon: thewebfairy.com... .

In the background you see the aftermath of the Tomahawk Missile Attack with no sign of any Boeing 757-200 Jetliner anywhere. Go to the last diagram ( www.designation-systems.net... = “From left: AGM-109H . . .”) and realize these types of missiles are comprised of three distinct sections. 1. Thermal Guidance Section and ‘Data Link’ components. 2. Payload Section (Unitary warhead). 3. Common Section (Turbojet and booster components). Note the “unitary warhead” is positioned behind the Data link and radar seeker hardware located in the nose commonly known as the “DSMAC II” (Digital Scene Matching Area Correlation) missile guidance system.

The Tomahawk Missile punched a hole through the exterior wall of the Pentagon going about 550 mph, until the warhead detonated and propelled the nose section forward at an even higher velocity. The nose section of the missile tumbled through the Pentagon to punch another hole in the interior wall directly in the flight path of the missile. At about half way down the page ( bedoper.com... ) note the location of the “Hole in wall” in the ASCE report (diagram 3rd pic from the bottom). The columns near the exterior (original impact zone) were taken out by the initial blast of the warhead, while the two (on column line k) near the rear of the building were casualties of the impact from the nose section debris tumbling along in the aftermath of the explosion (see Fig. 6.2 below that one). The hole in the wall was created by the nose section of the missile that remained intact, which had to be removed by those instigating the cover-up. Look at the width of the Jetliner (125 feet) and compare that to the damage inside the building. The columns directly in front of the starboard (right) wing are not even touched (Fig. 6.2).

The caption below the last picture (Fig. 5.16) says, “Whatever made this hole couldn't have been a 757, or even a missile, due to the columns in front of it. Probably man-made.” That hole was not made by either a 757 or a missile, because the Tomahawk Missile exploded on the far side of the building. However, it was traveling at 550 mph at impact and exploded just inside the Pentagon wall. This damage was done by the impact of the disintegrating nose section of the missile, which gives the impression of a shotgun blast on steroids. However, even a suitcase bomb leaves trace evidence on the scene after detonation. This evidence was never examined by any Crime Scene Investigation team, but was removed by DD agents working desperately to cover-up and hide the evidence ( www.worldnewsstand.net... ).

What are these ‘military men’ carrying away in large tarped boxes? Over 100 tons of Boeing 757-200 jetliner? No sir. They are removing the scattered debris connecting this hoax to a Tomahawk missile attack that Donald Rumsfeld admitted to here ( www.the7thfire.com... ).

Was the Pentagon struck by a Jetliner or a Tomahawk Missile? GL in the debate.

Terral


[Mod Edit: to shorten long link]


[edit on 9/23/2006 by 12m8keall2c]




posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 04:50 PM
link   
Greetings:

I was hoping someone would come along and debunk my “Pentagon Struck By Enhanced SLCM/BGM-109A Tomahawk Missile” proposal by citing evidence on how this cannot be true. Since nobody here has offered anything against this explanation, then I am inclined to believe the Defense Department, Bush Administration, FBI, CIA, ETC. have been lying to us all along. The “Missile” explanations speak to the evidence of no Boeing 757-200 debris found anywhere near the Pentagon and also the mystery hole on the far side on the flight path.

Do you still believe 60 tons of aluminum simply vanished into thin air?

Terral



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 04:54 PM
link   
No one except the people that perpetrated the events knows if you are wrong or not.



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 04:57 PM
link   
you have clearly done a very good insightful piece well done and I find your theory plausible and I want you to know I am behind you on this one



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Terral
Was the Pentagon struck by a Jetliner or a Tomahawk Missile? GL in the debate.


One theory that I can see more plausable than some, is that both hit. In another thread we discussed if a glare and odd attachment under the right/starboard side wing, was a munition hitting just before impact so that the plane would go in, and not bounce off, or crunch on the out side. That to me makes sence, the building was designed to withstand air attack from impacting planes, as why it was remade the way they were.

A very much unknown fact.



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 05:16 PM
link   

One theory that I can see more plausable than some, is that both hit. In another thread we discussed if a glare and odd attachment under the right/starboard side wing, was a munition hitting just before impact so that the plane would go in, and not bounce off, or crunch on the out side. That to me makes sence, the building was designed to withstand air attack from impacting planes, as why it was remade the way they were.



The only conclusion I have drawn is that it was the US Gov., Because of this I tend to read everyones theories and feel as if I have found something else out, I have heard that theory before on a Documentary.

In the Doc. it was the same for the planes that hit the towers and that jsut before impact this "missile" was armed and fired just in front of the planes.



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 06:03 PM
link   
Why missile instead of planes? If you can use planes to crash into the towers based on a Al Qaeda being responsible, then in a conspiracy a real plane makes it more better if the blame is on Islamic suicide terrorism don't you think?



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 06:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy
Why missile instead of planes?


They didn't want pieces of a 757 all over their front lawn.

If they had used a 757 it would not have done what they wanted. It would have been very difficult to hit the pentagoon with a 757 in the right spot. Also highly unlikely it would have punched a neat hole through the building, and conveniently evaporate into almost nothing. Saving them a more costly clean up job..
They didn't want to take any chances, if something went wrong they could have been caught red handed. Just my opinion....



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy
Why missile instead of planes? If you can use planes to crash into the towers based on a Al Qaeda being responsible, then in a conspiracy a real plane makes it more better if the blame is on Islamic suicide terrorism don't you think?


True..

but you couldnt risk destroying any more of the pentagon than planned.
The part hit was under renovations.. so minimal damage and fatalities..

what happesn if u over do the flight.. and land in the middle.. taking out precious and classified sections as well as people.

I still stand by my belief.

out of 4 planes in this incident.. you have only EVER been shown 2..
you were TOLD about the others... even though footage exists...

If they can show us over and over planes hitting the wtc.. they can show u a plane hitting the pentagon..

so why do they focus SO much on the planes that hit the WTC.. because its the incident that is the HARDEST to debunk...



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 03:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
out of 4 planes in this incident.. you have only EVER been shown 2..
you were TOLD about the others... even though footage exists...


Footage exists? You sound very sure about that.

In New York footage of the first plane was captured by chance due to a film crew working with firemen in the streets. The second plane was filmed by multiple sources because just about everybody with a camera in the city was watching the WTC.

So why are you so sure that footage exists of the Pentagon attack where news crews were unaware of what was coming and Flight 93 which crashed unexpectedly in the countryside?

I remember lots of people saying the Citgo footage would show Flight77 - it didn't. Anybody fancy a small wager that the Sheraton footage won't either?



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 03:45 AM
link   
Timeless test..
I will wager my membership on this board... that footage exists of something hitting the pentagon, and im pretty sure alot of people would like to win that bet...

To have no cmaera's watching isnt plausable for the worlds most secure office block.

And the government lied saying no footage existed.. but then they released graining snaps of footage, and then they released citgo footage.

And true we saw the attacks, but SINCE then after that day, more and more footage has been released....

which removes the statement '' witholding due to ongoing investigations ''

And is this the ONLY camera in citgo?
there's nothing that watches the road? the outside?
being its the only complex within pentagon grounds, it would be wise for more camera's to be there... yeah?



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 04:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Terral
Greetings:

I was hoping someone would come along and debunk my “Pentagon Struck By Enhanced SLCM/BGM-109A Tomahawk Missile” proposal by citing evidence on how this cannot be true.

The doctored Pentagon evidence shows the nose section of a Tomahawk Missile here



First of all, your first link claims this is 'overwhelming evidence'. So you or someone else is in possession of remains of a Tomahawk? Or physical evidence from the Pentagon? No? Then it's not overwhelming evidence, it's assumption based on the assumption that the bad guys are in possession of the actual "COURTROOM LEVEL" evidence, that if you're conspiracy is correct, we'll never see. I guess I'm not seeing how this proves anything, but hey that's ok.

I also remember 'CTers' claming the Citgo footage would show the the reality of that day. So, why doesn't it? Was it doctored as you claim the Pentagon footage was doctored? Besides 1 missing frame in the first leaked video, what proof exists that footage is doctored? Oh yeah, assumption again. You guy's in a courtroom have as much of a chance in front of a judge, as a toddler does with a shark in chum tainted water.

My only thing is, with the endless resources of the gov't, don't you think they'd make sure someone did a better job with it? I mean, y'all claim NSA ect. read this site, I think even an idiot could figure out anything short of a video pimp slap from a plane in the face would be attacked, attempted to be discredited, or there'd be claims it'd be doctored. Let me just get this straight, if the video's grainy, it's doctored, if it shows a plane clear as day, I bet once again the same people will claim it's doctored.

Welcome to the endless circle of speculation, called "evidence".

Oh, let me tell you something, before you claim I'm supporting the govt's story, I suggest you examine my other 9-11 related posts. We don't need any speculation going on now do we?



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 04:12 AM
link   
Your assuming this is the ONLY citgo footage.
Being the govenrment believes they can dupe the idiots by releasing this footage with the title ' THE CITGO FOOTAGE ' was a clever attempt to make you believe, the footage they never had, they actually do have... but this time there honest when they say its the ONLY FOOTAGE.



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
Your assuming this is the ONLY citgo footage.
Being the govenrment believes they can dupe the idiots by releasing this footage with the title ' THE CITGO FOOTAGE ' was a clever attempt to make you believe, the footage they never had, they actually do have... but this time there honest when they say its the ONLY FOOTAGE.


What? LMAO, seriously what? Doesn't this tie in with my earlier statement? Let me just get this straight, if the video's grainy, it's doctored, if it shows a plane clear as day, I bet once again the same people will claim it's doctored. So if they don't release the footage, there's a conspiracy, then when they do release it, people SPECULATE that there must be more footage they're withholding hence another conspiracy.

Ehh why do I even try.



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 12:45 PM
link   
Hi SpittinCobra:


Cobra >> No one except the people that perpetrated the events knows if you are wrong or not.


Perhaps we can agree on something along those lines. However, the lazy police officer can say that about most every murder case in his file cabinet. That does not stop investigators from sifting through the ‘evidence’ to eliminate all the probabilities, until the most likely chain of events come into focus. The “Flight 77” cover story is the most unlikely answer to this case, which is understood through the missing 60 tons of Aluminum and twin Rolls Royce Jet Engines mysterious disappearing before ever impacting the Pentagon. This CNN reporter is standing directly in front of the Pentagon on the day of the attack and specifically says, ( thewebfairy.com... )


“From my close up inspection, there is NO evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the Pentagon . . .”


And yet, members here who never saw any evidence of any Boeing 757-200 Jetliner before OR after the attack are making that wild claim in direct contradiction to ALL the evidence. This reporter has no bias either way, because the ‘official’ cover story has yet to be released. He did a ‘close up inspection’ and simply reported the news precisely as he saw it on that day. Looking over his shoulder we can see what has every appearance of being a missile attack, which is verified in most every picture I have seen on this topic.

Thank you for writing,

Terral



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 01:43 PM
link   
Hi Marcopolo:


Maropolo >> “You have clearly done a very good insightful piece well done and I find your theory plausible and I want you to know I am behind you on this one .”


Thank you very much, Marco. I believe all the evidence in this case points to a Defense Department / Bush Administration / Defense Department Contractor assault and cover up with a breadcrumb trail leading straight back to the true terrorists. The group or person to solve this case has access to security data for the month prior to 9/11 (Twin Towers Area), Database information of Defense Department officials and their contractors and facial recognition software placing their employees in and around WTC 7 where this took place for no good reason whatsoever.

911research.wtc7.net...

What does the evidence say?

1. Defense Department contractors were used to beef up the only section of the Pentagon to receive damage in the missile attack.

911research.wtc7.net...


“Where the Pentagon was hit in the assault of 9/11/01 is without question: a portion of the building's west block which was undergoing an extensive renovation. Despite the interesting implications of this fact, it has been eclipsed by the ongoing controversy among skeptics of the official story by questions of what caused the damage -- controversy spawned by the lack of public evidence about the Pentagon attack, and mysteries surrounding the fate of Flight 77, the Boeing 757 that's supposed to have hit the Pentagon. Absent from the public record are photographs or videos of anything like a 757 approaching the Pentagon.”


2. This evidence coupled with the fact that ‘time’ is required to set pyrotechnic charges in WTC 7, which MUST have taken place along with the simultaneous construction project at the Pentagon. I am very familiar with government contracting having worked on more than one military base and they tend to use the same contractors whenever possible. The number of companies qualified to pull these jobs off without a hitch can be counted on one hand; and perhaps two fingers. Their employees must have gained access to WTC 1, 2 and 7 disguised as uniformed FEMA or WTC maintenance personnel; or both. Carefully examine the information in this press release from Mayor Giuliani’s office on May 11, 2001 www.nyc.gov...


MAYOR GIULIANI AND CITY, STATE AND FEDERAL OFFICIALS TEST NEW YORK CITY'S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS DURING TABLETOP EXERCISE ON BIO-TERRORISM

NEW YORK CITY HOSTS "OPERATION RED Ex"

Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani today joined numerous City, State, Federal and private organizations in a tabletop exercise to evaluate policy and operational responses to a hypothetical bio-terrorism attack on a major U.S. city. Federal legislation adopted in 1997 requires that regular exercises be conducted between Federal, State and local authorities as part of the Domestic Preparedness Program (DPP). New York City was selected by the U.S. Department of Defense as the venue for Operation RED Ex (Recognition, Evaluation and Decision-Making Exercise) due to its size and prominence and the City's level of emergency preparedness.


How many knew the Defense Department was carry out ‘hypothetical bio-terrorism’ exercises in and around the Twin Towers in the months leading up to 9/11?? Here is the revealing part of the Press Release:


OEM Director Richard Sheirer said, "It is critical that all available resources are used to effectively coordinate the City's response to bio-terrorism. Operation RED Ex provided a proving ground and a great readiness training exercise for the many challenges the City routinely faces, such as weather events, heat emergencies, building collapses, fires, and public safety and health issues."


Even though a steel skyscraper has never collapsed due to fire in American history, three would fall on 9/11 due to ‘fire’ (they say), and the fallout from the controlled demolition of those buildings continue affecting ‘public safety and health issues’ for those exposed to the debris to this day. The big 3 of the twenty agencies involved are the Defense Department, FBI and FEMA (bottom of page). This link ( www.cooperativeresearch.org... ) includes the details that the second part of this exercise (Tripod) was due to take place on 9/12. Coincidence? I think not.

The fact is that on 9/11 the Joint Chiefs and NORAD were conducting a joint, live-fly, hijack Field Training Exercises (FXT):

www.fromthewilderness.com...


Michael Ruppert >> The wargames will tie Bush and/or Cheney and Rumsfeld directly into a complete paralysis of fighter response on 9/11. I have gone directly to many NORAD, DoD, NRO, and other sources and questioned them. I have knocked on many doors and I have even obtained some documents. I have obtained an on-the-record statement from someone in NORAD, which confirmed that on the day of 9/11 The Joint Chiefs (Myers) and NORAD were conducting a joint, live-fly, hijack Field Training Exercise (FTX) which involved at least one (and almost certainly many more) aircraft under US control that was posing as a hijacked airliner. That is just the tip of what I have uncovered.


All of my breadcrumbs in this investigation lead straight to the DoD, Bush Administration, FEMA and FBI working together to perpetrate the events of 9/11 AND working even more diligently to cover things up. Someone out there has the resources to match the faces with names from the DoD Contractors who represent the weakest link in this investigation. All we need is to match a few uniformed FEMA inspectors from the pre-9/11 WTC 7 security data to the DoD contractor information on file and everything else will fall into place.

GL,

Terral



[edit on 29-9-2006 by Terral]



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 03:38 PM
link   
Hi Advisor:

Thank you very much for writing.


Advisor >> One theory that I can see more plausible than some, is that both hit. In another thread we discussed if a glare and odd attachment under the right/starboard side wing, was a munition hitting just before impact so that the plane would go in, and not bounce off, or crunch on the out side.


The problem I see with that theory is the lack of physical evidence that any Boeing 757-200 Jetliner was ever near the Pentagon. Can you produce a single photo showing that kind of evidence? Where did the 60 tons of Aluminum go? Why are there no impact craters located in proximity to where the massive engines should have impacted outside the boundaries of the 16’x20’ hole in the wall? The CNN reporter testified that the floors fell ( thewebfairy.com... )during the fire some 45 minutes after the initial impact, which means your 155 foot long by 125 foot wide and almost fifty foot tall, 255,000 lb (at takeoff = www.abovetopsecret.com... = Catherder’s specs) Jetliner simply vanished into thin air! Please offer us a solution to this case that a nonbiased third party observer can verify from ‘your evidence.’ Read your post again in search viable ‘evidence’ that combines all the data at our disposal and offers a practical solution.


Advisor >> That to me makes sense, the building was designed to withstand air attack from impacting planes, as why it was remade the way they were.


The building was what?? The walls of the Pentagon are still made from brick and mortar and over 100 tons of Jetliner going 500 miles per hour generates a terrific amount of force and should have created MUCH more damage to the Pentagon than we see in the evidence. Maybe ATS mathematician and tell us just how much force this creates. All of the renovation data points directly to a premeditated conspiracy: 911research.wtc7.net... (see diagram)


911Analysis >> The renovation was being undertaken on Wedge One, one of five radial sections of the building and was five days from completion when the attack occurred.

Targeting of Wedge One Saves Thousands

Because of the renovation, the stricken portion of the building was sparsely occupied. According to the Los Angeles Times:
It was the only area of the Pentagon with a sprinkler system, and it had been reconstructed with a web of steel columns and bars [and blast-resistant windows] to withstand bomb blasts.... While perhaps 4,500 people normally would have been working in the hardest-hit areas, because of the renovation work only about 800 were there.


The renovation of the Pentagon ensured the damage would be localized to the West Wedge only. If the missile had impacted on the far side of the Pentagon by “Corridor 9,” the fire itself could have spread across the cafeteria into the Navy Dept. and through the Air Force area to “Corridor 8” in areas with no sprinkler systems at all. Even so, all the renovation in the world does not cause over 100 tons of Jetliner to simply disappear.

Thanks again for writing,

GL,

Terral



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 04:04 PM
link   
Hi Deltaboy:


Delta >> Why missile instead of planes? If you can use planes to crash into the towers based on a Al Qaeda being responsible, then in a conspiracy a real plane makes it more better if the blame is on Islamic suicide terrorism don't you think?


Planes? Towers? My “Tomahawk Missile” proposal is for the “Pentagon” Attack Only. This conclusion is based upon the evidence presented in the Opening Post, along with the availability of this type of Tomahawk Missile. If you are going to carry out a covert attack on your own Pentagon, then do not use a prototype weapon only available to the US Military. That would lead any trace evidence straight back to the DoD and the Bush Administration. The weapon of choice for our unnamed terrorists is the SLCM (Sea-Launched Cruise Missile), BGM-109A, because it can be preprogrammed to follow a detailed predetermined flight path. www.designation-systems.net...


“The Tomahawk is guided to its target by a system called TAINS (TERCOM Assisted Inertial Navigation System) using a McDonnell-Douglas AN/DPW-23 TERCOM (Terrain Contour Matching) system. In TERCOM, altitude information obtained by a radar altimeter is continuously matched to a preprogrammed radar map of the area below the missile, so that the Tomahawk can effectively follow a detailed predetermined flight path. This path can include several waypoints to change altitude and direction, e.g. for flying around hills to be concealed from detection by point-defenses around the target for as long as possible..”


Nobody knows the location of our ground based radar stations and the altitudes they cover than the same Defense Department terrorists who cooked up this entire 911 scheme in the first place. The facts of the cover story simply do not match the evidence connected to this case. These guys have depended heavily upon the ‘opinion molding’ campaigns of the Bush Administration and the Media to sell their “Flight 77” cover story, which explains why so many Americans have bought their fiction in the first place.

GL,

Terral



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 04:24 PM
link   
The conspiracies will never end. As long as people and too much freedom in this country and too much time on there hand, nothing is good enough unless they witness it themselves.

THis is what democracy does, it creates conspiracy finantics. lol I love this country, but there are a lot of lonnies. There are a lot of more important things in this world to worry about for example global warming or the poor countries that can't feed themselves than blaming the US for not being perfect.

As long as I live a bettter life than 90% of the rest of the world I have no complaint. Many of you should be grateful that u live in the states rather than the third world countries.



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 04:45 PM
link   
Hi WithoutEqual:


Without >> First of all, your first link claims this is 'overwhelming evidence'. So you or someone else is in possession of remains of a Tomahawk?


The first use of the term “overwhelming” on this thread is from you. I clicked the first “Link” and found that word not used there either. Of course there are no remains of the Tomahawk Missile, the cleanup crew hauled everything away. Remember my theory says the Defense Department is responsible along with the Bush Administration.

www.worldnewsstand.net...

There they go hauling away the evidence . . .


Without >> Or physical evidence from the Pentagon? No? Then it's not overwhelming evidence, it's assumption based on the assumption that the bad guys are in possession of the actual "COURTROOM LEVEL" evidence, that if you're conspiracy is correct, we'll never see. I guess I'm not seeing how this proves anything, but hey that's ok.


Heh . . . What you are not seeing is over 100 tons of Boeing 757-200 Jetliner anywhere in any tray of evidence. Thank you for helping me make one of the primary points in this thread that exposes the “Flight 77” cover story as a BOGUS LIE. I fully expected one of my debating opponents to drum up the “Where is the Missile?” defense. What do you suppose did all the damage at the Pentagon? Are you giving the “Flight 77 Did It” gang an earful of “Where is 100 tons of Jetliner?”

Removing the exploded carcass of a Tomahawk Missile is NOTHING when compared to making 60 tons of aluminum vanish into thin air. My missile would leave a single hole in the Pentagon about the size of the one created on 9/11 ( www.fas.org... ). Go ahead and click the link and see for yourself. My proposal in the OP is a thousand times more probable than any 757-200 Jetliner theory. What I am looking for is your ‘evidence’ that proves my proposal from the OP is very much as impossible as the cover story. GL.


Without >> I also remember 'CTers' claming the Citgo footage would show the the reality of that day. So, why doesn't it? Was it doctored as you claim the Pentagon footage was doctored? Besides 1 missing frame in the first leaked video, what proof exists that footage is doctored? Oh yeah, assumption again. You guy's in a courtroom have as much of a chance in front of a judge, as a toddler does with a shark in chum tainted water.


Stop being foolish. Crime Scene Investigators base their investigations every day upon the best theory derived from all the evidence currently at hand. They go to court sometimes months or years down the road, when the investigation is complete. Your “Citgo” citations are just more evidence for a cover up. The Defense Department has no reason to release any evidence that will certainly incriminate THEM and the Bush Administration Bullies. Anyone with a lick of common sense can tell in about three seconds that the DoD is hiding something big . . .


Without >> My only thing is, with the endless resources of the gov't, don't you think they'd make sure someone did a better job with it? I mean, y'all claim NSA ect. read this site, I think even an idiot could figure out anything short of a video pimp slap from a plane in the face would be attacked, attempted to be discredited, or there'd be claims it'd be doctored.


You lost me . . . Are we talking about a Tomahawk Missile striking the Pentagon or some video? I included the five frames of DoD data to show the ‘size’ of what they called the nosecone of a Boeing 757-200 Jetliner, which shows the fuzzy image to be far too small. An fifty foot tall Jetliner that low to the ground would have deafened everyone within a quarter mile and left marks on the pristine lawn in front of the Pentagon. What they did show you was a single frame with the nose section of a Tomahawk Missile THEY thought would make the conspiracy theorists go away. All they did was solidify my Tomahawk Missile case . . .


Let me just get this straight, if the video's grainy, it's doctored, if it shows a plane clear as day, I bet once again the same people will claim it's doctored.


No sir. The ‘doctored’ part has to do with the missing frames that must appear with these five. The Boeing 757-200 Jetliner is 155 feet long they had every opportunity here to give America the whole story. Heh . . . Someone is handing out bits and pieces of information, instead of showing us everything. That is what defines a ‘cover up.’


Without >> Welcome to the endless circle of speculation, called "evidence". Oh, let me tell you something, before you claim I'm supporting the govt's story, I suggest you examine my other 9-11 related posts. We don't need any speculation going on now do we?


Every topic has its own “Doubting Thomas,” which gives DoD cover story operatives plenty of room to play “hide and seek” in these forums. Personally I could not care less what you have written on this or any topic. What I would love to see from you is a hypothetical solution that matches the ‘evidence’ in this case 100 percent like mine. Do you have anything like that? No. Then, why do you go on the record making statements about “COURTROOM LEVEL EVIDENCE,” saying, “We don’t need any speculation going on . . .”. If I were Mulder and Scully (our X-files heros), then I would have somebody following a guy like you around to see what he is hiding. : 0 ) J/K. Heh . . . But your attitude makes a guy like me wonder . . .

GL in the debates,

Terral





top topics
 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join