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.

 

9/11: Attack On The Pentagon Now Public on Google

page: 2
9
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 08:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by network dude
reply to post by jthomas
 


Not everyone fits into your classification of truther. Some folks just don't think the official STORY adds up. There are too many holes. And not enough holes in the pentagon. The video presented only shows that the official flight path as reported was wrong. That is all it has to prove. You nor I will ever know the real story untill someone releases the videos from all the CCTV cameras pointed at the pentagon wall on that day. 4 frames just don't cut it. If it was a plane as you believe, then what could the possible harm be in releasing these videos? There are no more trials to be held in this reguard. And I am pretty sure that if I asked you if you trust the Bush administration 100%, you and everyone else with a hint of a brain would say no.


Sorry, you're engaging in the age-old truther fallacies. It's really sad to see people still believe that there is some mythical "official story" that the government has to defend. That, my friend, is the biggest canard of the 9/11 Truth Movement and none of you can let go of it.

Let's be absolutely clear about the facts and reality. There is ONLY the evidence from hundreds upon hundreds of independent eyewitnesses and thousands of lines of evidence that point to a conclusion. THAT evidence forms the foundation of ANYTHING anyone discusses about the attacks of 9/11. There is nothing that refutes that evidence.

You don't get to claim that the government is either the source of that evidence or controls it. You DO NOT get to claim that anyone, much less the federal government has to defend anything. You cannot continue to deny the reality of that.

YOU, in fact, are the ones who must demonstrate that all of the evidence points to a different conclusion. The onus of proof is entirely on your shoulders. You don't get to make silly claims like we have to see any videos of AA77 hitting the Pentagon to know that the multiple lines of evidence demonstrate it conclusively. You don't get to cherry-pick what you think is suspicious and ignore all of the other evidence. You're just engaging in fallacious reasoning and wishful thinking.

I and many others have demonstrated the complete inability of amateurs like CIT and P4T to deal with the implications and consequences of their claims. Those groups and frauds and charlatans like David Ray griffin only persist with their utter nonsense because there are so many gullible Truthers who will never question their claims.

The 9/11 Truth Movement is dying from it's own fallacious reasoning. Wake up to that reality.




posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 10:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by ipsedixit
This goes to the heart of the problem. In the video it is stated that neither the NTSB nor the FBI will comment on the questions raised by Pilots for Truth or CIT.


Just for curiosity's sake, if you were a law enforcement organization and you had someone or a group come to you with the most stupefyingly idiotic questions, time and time again, about the most high-vis crime in history and one that is still ongoing, would you be keen to entertain their questions?


This reinforces the widely held view that the government is hiding something.


I'm sorry, but your "widely held view" exists in merely a handful of conspiracy minds. You can go ahead and quote whatever relevant “survey” you want stating 50 or 60 or 80 or 100% of the people think George Bush personally brought the towers down or took a chainsaw to the lamp poles, but don’t expect anyone to take them seriously.


Are you suggesting that the aviation authorities in a country like France or Germany or Japan or Sweden be brought into the problem to look at the issues? That would be a neat trick if it could be done, but realpolitik argues against anything like that happening.


It is clear you don't understand the concept here of "validation and verification" and the establishment of "credibility" in a model or simulation. These are not "subjective" determinations. You don’t’ need some organization from another country to do this. Data that comes from a specific source and is used to produce a model or simulation needs to be verified and validated by the source. I’ve been harping on that for weeks, ever since Captain Bob’s Wild Ride video came out Some people don’ tlisten..


Where are we when that kind of thing comes from the engineering department of a university and is still shot full of holes by laymen on ATS?


Are you serious? You would take the word of some layman/rube/putz on the internet over a report from the engineering department of some place like Purdue University? That statement right there is enough to make this discussion moot.


No one has any credibility anymore. That is one of the most disturbing things about 9/11.


I suppose a certain part of “credibility” is in the eyes of the beholder, and no amount of professional analysis or acumen will sway those whose minds are now concrete with the belief that the Evil Bush Family Empire is behind this.


Because there is such a crisis of credibility around these issues, the only thing that could possibly clarify things now is the release of all the video footage of the Pentagon incident.


What video footage of the Pentagon incident? You’d better hurry up and get that footage to the authorities. It has been 7 years now and I’m sure they’d like to see it.

BTW, go re-read my opening comment about people or groups asking “the most stupefyingly idiotic questions, time and time again”.


Can you suggest an organization that could be expected to issue a report free from pressure of any sort? I'd like to know the name of that group.


Again, you don’t understand the non-subjective aspect of verification or validation or the establishment of ”credibility” with regards to a model. Aside from reiterating that Captain Bob should submit his “simulation to the organizations from whom he received the data that he plotted for validation and verification, I’m not sure how much clearer I can put it. If Captain Bob uses someone else’s data for a model or simulation, it is not up to Captain Bob to verifiy and validate its content as accurate and credible.

Trying to explain anything more about this to someone who would take the word of an internet layman over that of a professional engineering organization would be a waste of time, so I’ll stop there.



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 10:41 AM
link   
There is a reason that airplanes are called fixed wing craft.
They can not fold their wings against their sides like a bird diving into water.
So where is the damage to the pentagon from the wings?
There is none, just a sixteen foot hole.
So flight 77 was the first fixed wing craft in history to fold it's wings against it's sides?
Sure sure, and the trade centers were the first steel frame buildings to colapse from fire too.
Great work reconstructing this but it's not needed.
It is all clearly lie upon lie.
What amazes me is that there is no public outcry.
People actually believe the official story, truly sad.



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 10:50 AM
link   

posted by pinch
In addition, I haven't seen anything anywhere that states with authority that this data is indeed the final, unambiguous and definitive data set from the AA77 FDR. PffT has provided no documentation, no official correspondence, nothing with the stamp of legitimacy regarding the data.

posted by tezzajw
Can you see the hypocrisy in this statement?

You're asking PFT to provide documentation about the data from the alleged FDR to prove that it is authentic. Yet at the same time you don't require any documented proof from the government to prove that the alleged wreckage belongs to AA77?

Did you ask the government for documented proof that the data from the alleged FDR of AA77 was final, definitive and unambiguous? Where is that proof located?

Well, hypocrisy is what one normally receives from hypocrites. At least Bill Paisley and his buddies are consistent and predictable.

Rob has now provided the full video for download to your hard drive. The IPOD version downloads as a mp4. Find a player for mp4s and install it to your computer and share it with your family and friends. However the DVD version is a much better quality and helps support more good patriotic investigation into the 9-11 Inside Job Attack On America. The mp4 version is pretty good.

9/11: ATTACK ON THE PENTAGON - Official Release



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Google Video Link




Based on flight data, physics and witness statements, we take you to Arlington on that fateful day, observing through the eyes of those who were there. We let the viewer determine if it is possible for a 757 to navigate such a region and cause the physical damage reported at the Pentagon. Many common arguments made by those who make excuse for and support the government story are also addressed.



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by pinch
Trying to explain anything more about this to someone who would take the word of an internet layman over that of a professional engineering organization would be a waste of time, so I’ll stop there.


If only this last statement were true. Somehow I doubt it.

Poor debunkers! Stretching the limits of obfuscation. It's like they're screeching at the jury trying to get Ted Bundy off and oh so exasperated because the jury ain't buyin' the baloney.



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by pinch

I'm sorry, but your "widely held view" exists in merely a handful of conspiracy minds. You can go ahead and quote whatever relevant “survey” you want stating 50 or 60 or 80 or 100% of the people think George Bush personally brought the towers down or took a chainsaw to the lamp poles, but don’t expect anyone to take them seriously.


Just out of curiosity, and since you seem to know. Just how many people do believe the conspiracy theory? What percentage of the population does believe G.W. was in on it? And please post your source. Please Pinch, since your credibility level is sooooo high so far, please enlighten us.



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by ashamedamerican
 

There is no public outcry because the sheeple, just want to live in their own little corner of the world. They don't want to even think that our own government, could murder thousands of their citizens, to aid their agenda.

Til I found this site, and others I never gave a second thought about the official "theory" I quickly found the many inconsistencies, and holes in that theory. Too many coincidences to count, for the whole theory to be true.

The video has done nothing BUT add to my belief that the government is hiding much information, sadly I doubt that I'll find out the real truth before my time is up. I'm hoping for another 35 or so years, that puts me in my mid 80's, so there's hope.



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by jthomas
Give us a reason and proof that AA77 did not hit the Pentagon and that the over 1,000 people who had access to the wreckage believe it is "alleged" wreckage.

Here's some logic for you, jthomas. Maybe you need the lesson.

Null hypothesis: Something happened at the Pentagon.
Alternative Hypothesis: Flight AA77 crashed into the Pentagon.

You're proposing the alternate hypothesis, by making a claim that Flight AA77 crashed into the Pentagon. Therefore, it is YOUR job to prove the alternative hypothesis.

I'll start by asking you to confirm that the alleged wreckage was identified as belonging to the alleged Flight AA77. It should be easy for you to supply me with that information, considering you believe the alternative hypothesis.

Of those 1,000 alleged people who handled the alleged wreckage - how many of them were formally able to identify it as belonging to the alleged Flight AA77? Please, show me the paper-trail which verifies their analysis.



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 03:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by ashamedamerican
There is a reason that airplanes are called fixed wing craft.
They can not fold their wings against their sides like a bird diving into water.
So where is the damage to the pentagon from the wings?
There is none, just a sixteen foot hole.



Originally posted by Pinch
Just for curiosity's sake, if you were a law enforcement organization and you had someone or a group come to you with the most stupefyingly idiotic questions, time and time again, about the most high-vis crime in history and one that is still ongoing, would you be keen to entertain their questions?


Once again, I rest my case.

[edit on 13-10-2008 by pinch]



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 04:26 PM
link   
reply to post by pinch
 


I guess I can take that to mean that you really have no numbers and are just guessing as well?



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by saturnsrings
There is no public outcry because the sheeple, just want to live in their own little corner of the world. They don't want to even think that our own government, could murder thousands of their citizens, to aid their agenda.

Couldn't have said it better myself. People are too comfortable and until the misery of living under these sadists outweighs the comfort they receive in return nothing will be done.

Originally posted by saturnsrings
Til I found this site, and others I never gave a second thought about the official "theory" I quickly found the many inconsistencies, and holes in that theory. Too many coincidences to count, for the whole theory to be true.

I didn't really start to put the pieces together until a little later, but on the morning of 9-11 while watching the towers fall I had a very distinct feeling that this was a demolition.
I had seen many demolitions and this looked exactly like one.
Not to mention the fact that you could hear the explosions being set off.

Originally posted by saturnsrings
The video has done nothing BUT add to my belief that the government is hiding much information, sadly I doubt that I'll find out the real truth before my time is up. I'm hoping for another 35 or so years, that puts me in my mid 80's, so there's hope.

Unless we remove this government we will never find out the truth.
We are still being lied to about roswell, which happened in 1947...

Stop for one minute and try to imagine what the victims of 9-11 must think looking down on us now.
Remember the way you felt watching those poor people jump to their deaths.
Embrace that sense of outrage, and just plain rage, because that is the only thing that will help us stop them.
People need to get really godamn mad, they need to say im not going to take this anymore, I'm a human being godamnit and my life has value.

[edit on 13-10-2008 by ashamedamerican]



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by ashamedamerican
 

Couldn't agree more. Eventually debunkernation will get something through it's head. This problem is not going away. We want a thorough airing of the 9/11 issues. People like me who are convinced that the Bush administration is culpable in 9/11 want the hides of the people responsible nailed to the wall, but we'll settle for incarceration.

I can't tell you the rage that goes through my mind every time I see a picture of the quivering face of some Iraqi child cowering under the gun of a member of the US armed forces. I know some servicemen are doing wonders with the civilians, especially the children in Iraq, and God bless them for it, they've saved themselves spiritually, but the administration that perpetrated this awful crime is not going to be let off the hook.

I have to add one thing more. I'm a child of WW2 era parents. My father fought in the Royal Canadian Air Force, bombing the crap out of Germany to get rid of a detestable regime that murdered millions and would have murdered millions more if it wasn't stopped. We used to think of the American military as liberators of humanity. Now they are wearing Nazi style helmets and crushing the innocent. Shame, shame, shame, shame. What have you done to yourselves?



[edit on 13-10-2008 by ipsedixit]



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 08:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by MorningStar8741
Just out of curiosity, and since you seem to know. Just how many people do believe the conspiracy theory? What percentage of the population does believe G.W. was in on it? And please post your source. Please Pinch, since your credibility level is sooooo high so far, please enlighten us.


I have no idea. What I can mention, though, is there is tons of anecdotal evidence from rallies and gatherings and "protests" and occasions where Troofers get together and broadcast their lies to each other - and the numbers are counted in the tens and twenties.

Sure, there are no doubt bigger Tree Forts out there, but it is a small movement and one that in no way, shape or form has a) consensus on what happened nor b) any sort of path forward in a coherent fashion nor c) anything worth going forward with that matters.

We have Judy Woods' space-based laser destructo beams, Spooky's nuclear detonations, Captain Bob's cartoon, Craig's leading questions to people who saw the aircraft hit the Pentagon, Morgan Reynolds' idiocy, Griffin's engineering expertise, that absolute complete and total lunatic Cynthia McKinney (did you see her latest? She claims the Department of Defense executed 5,000 prisoners with one bullet to the head and then dumped their bodies in a Louisiana swamp during Hurricane Katrina. I swear...you can't make things up!) etc, so on and so forth. Nice group you guys have there!

In fact, aside from however many Internet web sites (6? a dozen?), this thing doesn't have any more traction than a set of bald-assed tires on a 4-cylinder jalopy playing ice hockey.

You can go ahead and claim legions stretching to the horizons of supporters, but if you did you'd have such an overwhelming tsunami of public opinion that you could get ANYTHING you wanted. The fact that nobody in your "movement" can do nor will do anything is really the heart of this matter.



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 08:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw

I'll start by asking you to confirm that the alleged wreckage was identified as belonging to the alleged Flight AA77. It should be easy for you to supply me with that information, considering you believe the alternative hypothesis.

Of those 1,000 alleged people who handled the alleged wreckage - how many of them were formally able to identify it as belonging to the alleged Flight AA77? Please, show me the paper-trail which verifies their analysis.


I'll take this and throw it back in your court.

Prove that the wreckage was not identified by serial numbers or aircraft part numbers and that the FBI and NTSB and other organizations do not have documents and/or evidence that positively identify the aircraft as the Boeing 757-200, registration: N644AA.

Then explain why, in an ongoing investigation, the FBI should release said documentation and evidence to a bunch of self-proclaimed Internet sleuths who won't believe it anyway?



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 09:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by pinch
We have Judy Woods' space-based laser destructo beams, Spooky's nuclear detonations, Captain Bob's cartoon, Craig's leading questions to people who saw the aircraft hit the Pentagon, Morgan Reynolds' idiocy, Griffin's engineering expertise, that absolute complete and total lunatic Cynthia McKinney (did you see her latest? She claims the Department of Defense executed 5,000 prisoners with one bullet to the head and then dumped their bodies in a Louisiana swamp during Hurricane Katrina. I swear...you can't make things up!) etc, so on and so forth. Nice group you guys have there!


The above is the funhouse mirrors version of what various people in the 9/11 truth movement are about. In politics it would be called negative spin. In court it would amount to messing with the jury member's minds, sowing confusion in a complex case. "If the gloves don't fit, you must aquit." Hardly.

I have to admit though, pinch has drawn my attention to something I didn't know. The Cynthia McKinney story. I looked into it and it appears that she is not actually making those allegations about executions, she is reporting them. There is a distinction.

peacetalk.newsvine.com...


Candidate McKinney made the announcement at a conference in Oakland, Ca, for the Critical Resistance 10 on Sunday. While speaking she informed the audience that she has received information from a sources that were involved in the clean-up and disposal of the thousands of bodies. According to the source; who wishes to remain nameless at this time, he was charged by the Department of Defense with the task of processing the personal information into DOD computers and then dumping the bodies into a Louisiana swamp. McKinney also claims she has spoken to unnamed members of the Red Cross that this event did in fact take place.


I have to admit that my own inclination would be to hold fire until I had solid evidence, before making a public announcement about the matter, but she is on the spot, she is an ex-congresswoman, she's not stupid. I'm giving her the benefit of the doubt, until I learn more about the matter.

[edit on 13-10-2008 by ipsedixit]



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 09:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by pinch
I'll take this and throw it back in your court.

No, pinch, you can't throw it back. You have the job of identifying the alleged wreckage, not me. I don't claim it to be anything other than 'scrap metal' that may or may not be from an airplane.



Prove that the wreckage was not identified by serial numbers or aircraft part numbers and that the FBI and NTSB and other organizations do not have documents and/or evidence that positively identify the aircraft as the Boeing 757-200, registration: N644AA.

I don't need to prove that. I'm working the null hypothesis that something happened at the Pentagon. I'm waiting for you to actually prove the alternative hypothesis that you claim is true. I'm still waiting...



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 10:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw
No, pinch, you can't throw it back. You have the job of identifying the alleged wreckage, not me. I don't claim it to be anything other than 'scrap metal' that may or may not be from an airplane.

This is not the null hypothesis, therefore you need to provide evidence for this, you would also need to explain eyewitness, DNA evidence etc.

Since you claim to be working from the null hypothesis, here is some evidence we can add to the situation, you can then add your own evidence and we can list it quite easily

Evidence in favour of AA77 being the source of wreckage inside The Pentagon:
  • Hijacking by part of an organised group of terrorists also responsible for 3 other aircraft crashes
  • RADAR tracking indicating the path and final trajectory of the aircraft
  • Eyewitness accounts identifying a large transport aircraft with American Airlines insignia
  • Wreckage analysis supporting a positive match with AA77s aircraft type
  • DNA analysis supporting a positive match between DNA at The Pentagon and passengers aboard AA77
  • Large scale FBI and NTSB investigation based on an FDR recovered at the scene
  • Eyewitness accounts of recovery efforts including plane passenger corpses still strapped into seats
  • Eyewitness accounts of extensive debris recovery
  • CCTV camera frames which are a potential match with modelled scenarios


If you can now make a list of points of evidence you are aware of for any alternate hypotheses, we can make a simple list and show where the body of evidence points. If you feel that this is not enough evidence, then we can identify what sort of evidence you require, and how it might be attained.



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 10:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by exponent
This is not the null hypothesis, therefore you need to provide evidence for this, you would also need to explain eyewitness, DNA evidence etc.

The null hypothesis is that something happened at the Pentagon. We can all agree that there was some type of explosion and damage to the structure.

Anything that attempts to explain this event is an alternate hypothesis that needs proving.


Hijacking by part of an organised group of terrorists also responsible for 3 other aircraft crashes

Prove that those three other alleged crashes were the work of terrorists.



RADAR tracking indicating the path and final trajectory of the aircraft

Which alleged aircraft? At what point does radar data confirm that a plane crashed into a building?



Eyewitness accounts identifying a large transport aircraft with American Airlines insignia

How many of those eyewitnesses saw the tail registration and could make a positive ID of the alleged plane? Where did they state this on record?



Wreckage analysis supporting a positive match with AA77s aircraft type

Nicely worded. I see that you're not claiming that any alleged wreckage was from THE alleged Flight AA77. Why not?



DNA analysis supporting a positive match between DNA at The Pentagon and passengers aboard AA77

How does that identify the alleged plane?



Large scale FBI and NTSB investigation based on an FDR recovered at the scene

Well, of course we all expect an investigation, something happened at the Pentagon!



Eyewitness accounts of recovery efforts including plane passenger corpses still strapped into seats

Could I please see a coroner's report that states which bodies were strapped into the seats and the subsequent forensic analysis that determined the cause of death?



Eyewitness accounts of extensive debris recovery

So what? What does that prove. Of course there was lots of debris - remember that there was some type of explosion at the building!



CCTV camera frames which are a potential match with modelled scenarios

Only a potential match? If it's not a proven match, then the images are inconclusive.

It's so much fun playing with believers. Try a little harder, as you're still not supporting your alternative hypothesis with proof.



posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 02:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw
No, pinch, you can't throw it back. You have the job of identifying the alleged wreckage, not me. I don't claim it to be anything other than 'scrap metal' that may or may not be from an airplane.


I can't? Of course I can. I just did. If you do nothing then we have the status quo, which is N644AA crashed into the Pentagon.


I don't need to prove that. I'm working the null hypothesis that something happened at the Pentagon. I'm waiting for you to actually prove the alternative hypothesis that you claim is true. I'm still waiting...


Fine. Sit on the ground and hold your breath till you turn blue, for all I care. I don't have to prove a damn thing. Its already proven. The FBI had/have the piece-parts to the aircraft, including all the various serial numbers for N644AA and are not releasing the evidence as per standard ongoing-investigation procedures.

You must think this is a game. "Alternate hypotheses"? Its obviously "alternate" in YOUR mind but to most of the rest of the world, its the real thing.

[edit on 14-10-2008 by pinch]



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join