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.

 

Pentagon Link To 911

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 1 2006 @ 02:23 PM
link   
PENTAGON WAS HIT AND THE WTC BUILDINGS WERE HIT. WHY WAS THE PENTAGON HIT? BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO SHOW THAT THEY WEREN'T THE CULPRITS AND PUSH THE BLAME AWAY FROM THEM BUT YOU CAN SEE THAT THEY ARE EXPOSING THEMSELVES BY EVEN HITTING THE LOCATION OF THEIR OWN BUILDING POINTING TO THEMSELVES

Mod Edit: All Caps – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 1/12/2006 by Mirthful Me]




posted on Dec, 1 2006 @ 02:25 PM
link   
Aside from the prosecution of war, you'd be surprised at how little officially goes on at the Pentagon. Officially. Although, technically, some orders originate from the building, not to mention reams of paperwork , and guys like Donald Rumsfeld do hang their hats inside, the main action is almost always happening somewhere else, be it Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, or Evil-Doer to-be-announced-later.There's a Really Good Reason why the headquarters for the most powerful military force in the world is shaped like an occult Masonic symbol. No, really!



posted on Dec, 1 2006 @ 02:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by dunkindonuts
PENTAGON WAS HIT AND THE WTC BUILDINGS WERE HIT. WHY WAS THE PENTAGON HIT? BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO SHOW THAT THEY WEREN'T THE CULPRITS AND PUSH THE BLAME AWAY FROM THEM BUT YOU CAN SEE THAT THEY ARE EXPOSING THEMSELVES BY EVEN HITTING THE LOCATION OF THEIR OWN BUILDING POINTING TO THEMSELVES

Mod Edit: All Caps – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 1/12/2006 by Mirthful Me]


Huh?

Why would hitting the Pentagon make it seem less likely itwas an inside job? The pentagon has been one of the most covered aspects of the whole conspiracy



posted on Dec, 1 2006 @ 06:50 PM
link   
It's funny how the Pentagon was laid down on Sept 11 in 1947.

On top of Bush's New World Order speech on Sept 11. 1991 it doesn't take a brain surgeon to see the developing pattern.



posted on Dec, 1 2006 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by jinsanity
It's funny how the Pentagon was laid down on Sept 11 in 1947.


I'm not sure what "laid down" means, but if your are referring to the "ground breaking" and subsequent completion, you're off by a few years.



By 30 April 1942, about eight months after ground breaking, the contractor completed the first two sections of the building and War Department personnel began to move in. The building was finished by 15 January 1943.

www.greatbuildings.com...



posted on Dec, 1 2006 @ 07:20 PM
link   
They could've done a much better job on both the execution and the coverup. The coincidences stick out like a sore thumb.

- The Pentalawn wasn't damaged in the least.
- Light poles were still standing that should've been clipped by the wings.
- No evidence of plane wreckage or crash victims.
- The damage to the Pentagon exterior and interior was not indicative of a plane crash.
- The surveillance camera shannanigans.
- The exterior wall section that was impacted got an expensive upgrade prior to 9/11.
- Crucial DoD accounting records were conveniently wiped out along with many of the civilian personnel working in that department.
- Rumsfeld had announced on 9/10 that trillions in DoD money was unaccounted for.



posted on Dec, 1 2006 @ 09:06 PM
link   
Great. Let´s start a discussion on evidence or lack therof again.


The remark was that the Pentagon was hit because IF 9/11 is indeed a conspiracy, the attack on the Pentagon would steer away the public´s attention from the real terrorists.

Could be. But I think the Pentagon attack was orchestrated to get the defense budget through the roof no questions asked, and as a bonus get the armed forces in the right frame of mind for a war in IRAQ.

I still feel it could be possible that only the Pentagon was staged, and the other attackes were known in advance and were allowed to happen. That is the most likely scenario!

Naturally the collapses were assisted to ensure the maximum effect. Buildings still standing with a couple of hundred kills is not enough to go to war over is it?

If you think my tone is harsh, how do you think the real terrorists (PNAC) sounded when they had their final briefings pre-9/11?

[edit on 1-12-2006 by Truth4hire]



posted on Dec, 1 2006 @ 10:06 PM
link   


- The Pentalawn wasn't damaged in the least.


That you know of, really not enough definitive pictures to know, although from the damage caused by the jet on the way in, dont think it hit the lawn to begin with.



Text- Light poles were still standing that should've been clipped by the wings


And several that WERE clipped.....do you know beyond a shadow of a doubt (and I mean you have PERSONALLY gone and measured the angles, elevation etc...to KNOW that those poles should have been clipped)??




- No evidence of plane wreckage or crash victims


Not true. Plenty of pictures of the plane wreckage (what was left of it) exist. As do pictures of the crash victims. As an aside, almost EVERY passenger's remains were identified along with the unidentified remains classified as most likely belonging to Arab males.



The exterior wall section that was impacted got an expensive upgrade prior to 9/11.


The whole building is being upgraded. Thank GOD the terrorists picked that side to hit or else the death toll would be much greater.



- Rumsfeld had announced on 9/10 that trillions in DoD money was unaccounted for.


I would be careful using this as a point. For ONE trillion dollars of DoD money to be unaccounted for, would mean the ENTIRE Pentagon budget for 2+ years was missing. For "trillions of dollars" to be unaccounted for, that would take DECADES to accumulate.



posted on Dec, 1 2006 @ 11:27 PM
link   
Nice attempt to derail this thread.....

How´s the weather in Langley at the moment? Heating up I´m sure.....



posted on Dec, 2 2006 @ 12:08 AM
link   
i never thought of this before but. the fact that the pentagon didn't fall to the ground in smiterines shows that planes dont do that kinda damage.



posted on Dec, 2 2006 @ 09:01 AM
link   
Gound breaking ceremony took place on 9/11 1941 Mirth.

www.dtic.mil...



posted on Dec, 2 2006 @ 09:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by dunkindonuts
i never thought of this before but. the fact that the pentagon didn't fall to the ground in smiterines shows that planes dont do that kinda damage.


Dunkin, I dont understand what your saying. The section of the Pentagon that was hit by the plane did fall after a while. What is your point here?



posted on Dec, 2 2006 @ 09:10 AM
link   
The bigger question is is it even possible for an airliner to do that kind of damage to the Pentagon walls? Those things are strong and yet there's a blow out hole 4 or 5 rings into the centre.

Not at all possible for an airliner no matter how fast it's going. Those walls are made to withstand the pulse of a nuclear blast.



posted on Dec, 2 2006 @ 09:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by jinsanity
The bigger question is is it even possible for an airliner to do that kind of damage to the Pentagon walls? Those things are strong and yet there's a blow out hole 4 or 5 rings into the centre.

Not at all possible for an airliner no matter how fast it's going. Those walls are made to withstand the pulse of a nuclear blast.


Could you please provide me with some information that proves this? You claim that its not possible for an airliner to do what it did. There is photographic evidence that it was possible and it DID happen. The ball is in your court to prove these photographs FAKE, Doctored, or that the plane remains were "planted."



posted on Dec, 2 2006 @ 09:15 AM
link   
Jinsanity.

Can I get your take on the witness accounts of seeing a 757 and an American Airlines plane hit the Pentagon. And why has not one person said they saw something other than an airplane hit the building?

Can I also see what you have to say about the photos on the plane wreckage on site.

Thanks.



posted on Dec, 2 2006 @ 09:22 AM
link   
and I can get you witness accounts that said the plane was lear jet size. Witness accounts don't prove anything either way. It's two sides to the story and for as many people saying they saw a 757 there are as many who say they saw a lear jet size aircraft.

DO you have any idea how many video cameras are positioned around the pentagon? They have one ever 30 feet. There are at least 10 pentagon cameras that could conclusively prove one way or another of what hit the Pentagon.

And the Onus is on the government at this point because 5 years plus there aren't many people satisfied with the evidence that an airliner hit the petntagon. I agree that something did indeed happen there but think about this for a minute...

Every civilian airliner has ever piece, every nut and bolt with a serial number on it to ID the aircraft in even the worst cases of disaster and with little or no pieces to go on.

The government could prove once and for all what happened wiht the pentagon through these two aspects alone. And they are under durress everyday to release videos through the Freedom of Info act and yet they choose to show the grainyest and most inconclusive ones.

What does that tell you? When the government can't actually prove what happened at the pent.



posted on Dec, 2 2006 @ 09:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by jinsanity
and I can get you witness accounts that said the plane was lear jet size. Witness accounts don't prove anything either way. It's two sides to the story and for as many people saying they saw a 757 there are as many who say they saw a lear jet size aircraft.


For a self-proclaimed truth seeker you tend to lie a lot don't you? When are you going to start backing yourself up with sources?

There is ONE report from a guy 2 miles away who said it was a small plane. Find me another one.

There aren't "just as many". That's just a downright lie.

Hundreds, if not thousands of people saw the Pentagon attack. Why isn't anyone speaking out?



DO you have any idea how many video cameras are positioned around the pentagon? They have one ever 30 feet. There are at least 10 pentagon cameras that could conclusively prove one way or another of what hit the Pentagon.


Ok here's the deal. The Pentagon is a military installation. You put in an FOIA request for the camera footage for any one of those cameras for any random day of the year and see how you do. I'll bet you $50 they won't give you anything.

Why? Because you have no right to get your hands on it.



And the Onus is on the government at this point because 5 years plus there aren't many people satisfied with the evidence that an airliner hit the petntagon. I agree that something did indeed happen there but think about this for a minute...

Every civilian airliner has ever piece, every nut and bolt with a serial number on it to ID the aircraft in even the worst cases of disaster and with little or no pieces to go on.


So how do you explain all the pictures of airplane rubble? I asked you that before and you've failed to answer it.



posted on Dec, 2 2006 @ 09:59 AM
link   
I realize there is airplane pieces in the rubble fungi but only Hades knows what type of plane it really is.

Did you ever see the first report from CNN on scene? IN the words of the anchor he said something happened here but clearly there isn't enough wreckage to indicate it was a plane.

This played on cnn the day off and disappeared after about five minutes. same with all the reports of bombs in the WTC.

Fire Fighter "There's a BOMB in the building. Start clearing out..." DId you ever check out that 9/11 proof page fungi? The one that has proven conclusively that there were bombs in the building?

[edit on 2-12-2006 by jinsanity]



posted on Dec, 2 2006 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by jinsanity
I realize there is airplane pieces in the rubble fungi but only Hades knows what type of plane it really is.


Do your research. The landing gear and engines match those of a 757. Not to mention the American Airlines logo on one of the pieces.



Did you ever see the first report from CNN on scene? IN the words of the anchor he said something happened here but clearly there isn't enough wreckage to indicate it was a plane.


His name was Jamie McIntyre.



MCINTYRE: The Web sites often take statements out of context, such as this exchange from CNN in which I -- myself -- appear to be questioning whether a plane really hit the building.

[Original Quote Removed]

In fact, I was answering a question based on a eyewitness account who thought the American Airlines plane landed short of the Pentagon. I was indicated there was no crash site near the pentagon only at the Pentagon

www.cnn.com...




This played on cnn the day off and disappeared after about five minutes. same with all the reports of bombs in the WTC.


It obviously didn't if the addressed the issue 5 years later.



Fire Fighter "There's a BOMB in the building. Start clearing out..." DId you ever check out that 9/11 proof page fungi? The one that has proven conclusively that there were bombs in the building?


I'm not talking about WTC bombs in this thread. Save it for another one. Keep it on topic.

[edit on 2/12/2006 by doctorfungi]



posted on Dec, 2 2006 @ 10:29 AM
link   


Nice attempt to derail this thread.....
How´s the weather in Langley at the moment? Heating up I´m sure


I really wish I had a dime for every time someone accused me of working at Langley......sorry, dont work there, havent worked there, most likely never will work there. Although I will admit that my uncle is one of the stars on the wall in the lobby.




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join