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.

 

Bodies strapped to seats on AA77, Pentagon?

page: 14
7
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 08:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman



So why did they find the jet engines in the wreckage?





Please, thedman, identify that plane engine. Tell me exactly what type of plane it comes from. Since it was found in such good shape, then in accordance to SOP it would have been forensically linked with the plane that was supposed to crash there to leave it. Please show us the documentaion and proof of what plane that was from.




posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by habu71
 


Thanks for a professional's assessment of this. I heard the same as well from a former EMT who did rocky mountain rescues and recoveries of skiing, car and plane accidents.
High speed impacts tear the human body apart and as this man and my friend has told me, sometimes you just find a foot or random finger.
I salute all the valiant men and women who go to these sites and do the dirty work the rest of us don't have the stomach for.



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by MorningStar8741
Please, thedman, identify that plane engine. Tell me exactly what type of plane it comes from. Since it was found in such good shape, then in accordance to SOP it would have been forensically linked with the plane that was supposed to crash there to leave it. Please show us the documentaion and proof of what plane that was from.


Here, let me help make it easy for you and use evidence that was already posted here and used for multiple debates/discussions.

LINK

Is it too much to ask for people to do some research on their own around here?



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 03:33 PM
link   

posted by MorningStar8741
Please, thedman, identify that plane engine. Tell me exactly what type of plane it comes from. Since it was found in such good shape, then in accordance to SOP it would have been forensically linked with the plane that was supposed to crash there to leave it. Please show us the documentaion and proof of what plane that was from.


posted by COOL HAND
Here, let me help make it easy for you and use evidence that was already posted here and used for multiple debates/discussions.

LINK

Is it too much to ask for people to do some research on their own around here?

What a complete waste of time reading all of that nonsense.

Nowhere are serial numbers provided to prove the identity of that alleged aircraft. Every one of those alleged pieces of evidence could have been placed at the Pentagon crime scene prior to 9-11. Nowhere is there a 'chain of evidence' documented.

The actual decoy aircraft over the Naval Annex and north of the Citgo prevents an impact through the light poles and along the internal damage path as alleged by the official 535 mph Flight 77 flight path. An impact at the Pentagon has been rendered impossible. The light poles were staged and the aircraft parts planted. Pre-planted explosives accomplished the damage and deaths.

As this bonafide US Air Force aircraft crash investigator has formally stated, "With all the evidence readily available at the Pentagon crash site, any unbiased rational investigator could only conclude that a Boeing 757 did not fly into the Pentagon as alleged"


Col. George Nelson, MBA, U.S. Air Force (ret)
Former U.S. Air Force aircraft accident investigator and airplane parts authority
"In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft -- and in most cases the precise cause of the accident. ...

The government alleges that four wide-body airliners crashed on the morning of September 11 2001, resulting in the deaths of more than 3,000 human beings, yet not one piece of hard aircraft evidence has been produced in an attempt to positively identify any of the four aircraft. On the contrary, it seems only that all potential evidence was deliberately kept hidden from public view. …

With all the evidence readily available at the Pentagon crash site, any unbiased rational investigator could only conclude that a Boeing 757 did not fly into the Pentagon as alleged. Similarly, with all the evidence available at the Pennsylvania crash site, it was most doubtful that a passenger airliner caused the obvious hole in the ground and certainly not the Boeing 757 as alleged. …

As painful and heartbreaking as was the loss of innocent lives and the lingering health problems of thousands more, a most troublesome and nightmarish probability remains that so many Americans appear to be involved in the most heinous conspiracy in our country's history."
patriotsquestion911.com...



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 03:47 PM
link   
reply to post by COOL HAND
 

Here's one of the witness reports that Cool Hand linked to, a couple of posts above.

Frank Probst, an information management specialist for the Pentagon Renovation Program, left his office trailer near the Pentagon's south
parking lot at 9:36 a.m. Sept. 11. Walking north beside Route 27, he suddenly saw a commercial airliner crest the hilltop Navy Annex. American
Airlines Flight 77 reached him so fast and flew so low that Probst dropped to the ground, fearing he'd lose his head to its right engine."

He saw the plane crest the Navy Annex? Isn't that what some of the North of Citgo witnesses also described, how the plane flew over the Navy Annex and North of Citgo?

Also, how did he know that the plane was Flight AA77? Did he read the tail number N644AA to identify the plane while it was in flight?

The embellishment of this witness statement, after the fact, is obvious.

Also, Cool Hand, where in that link was there a SINGLE part identified by serial numbers?



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 04:37 PM
link   

posted by tide88
These bodies were planted at the pentagon by our government and are not actual vicims that day.


posted by tezzajw
Here are two reasons that prove you did not either read the thread, or understand it.

Firstly, those pictures have already been posted within the thread.

Secondly, those pictures do not show any bodies strapped to airline seats.

Thanks for your well thought and researched contribution.

Those bodies are Pentagon personnel originally targeted and murdered by the Bush Regime 9-11 perpetrators. None of us are contesting that US citizens and military personnel were deliberately murdered by explosives inside the Pentagon.

Those bodies could have been April Gallup and her infant son. She was sitting at her desk turning on her computer only 35-45 feet away from the original explosion, but somehow by the grace of God, they escaped being murdered by the 9-11 planners. She saw no jet fuel nor aircraft parts nor seats nor baggage nor passengers nor jet engines nor wings nor tail nor landing gear.


Guns and Butter broadcast with Dave von Kleist interviewing April Gallup. There was an explosion and she crawled out from E-Ring through the hole onto the Pentagon lawn. She saw no jet fuel and nobody burned with jet fuel. She and her baby boy were about 35-45 feet from the alleged impact hole and no jet fuel was splashed on them. What happened to the huge infernos and fuel-air explosions inside which allegedly incinerated all the aircraft parts and engines and wheel hubs and baggage and seats?

Guns and Butter April Gallup - audio live testimony

External Image - External Image


Even the FAA seems to now agree that the actual flight path was over the Naval Annex and north of the Citgo, rendering the official Flight 77 flight path through the light poles and along the internal damage path impossible.



Decoy aircraft flying over Naval Annex similar to testimony by CIT and CMH interviewed eyewitnesses. COOL HAND witness Frank Probst apparently saw this too.

Light poles to the south and out of reach





[edit on 10/21/08 by SPreston]



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 06:30 PM
link   


Original diagram from official Defense Dept Pentagon 9-11 book

If the Pentagon were actually impacted by a 535 mph 124 ft 10 in wingspan 757, then how is it possible that April Gallup and her infant son officially sitting 35-45 feet from the impact hole escaped being killed and incinerated?

Of course the answer is no aircraft impacted the Pentagon. The explosives creating the impact hole and external damage spared April and her son sitting 35-45 feet away from the inside of the wall. There was no jet fuel to incinerate them. The remaining wall between April and the external explosives apparently protected them from the blast. Perhaps the explosives were in the construction trailers. Then after April and Elijah escaped the building, more explosives were set off as reported by multiple witnesses.

April and her son would have been sitting within the radius of the wings and wing tanks allegedly partially filled with jet fuel and their inertial vector through the walls and internal 1st floor damage area. Not only should they have been incinerated, but April should have seen evidence of jet fuel and she did not.

Since neither engine remained outside the wall, then one of the engines or the fuselage or landing gear should have made a smear of April and her son. How do you Official Fairy Tale supporters explain this apparent mystery?

This is how Military Industrial Complex strong supporter Purdue University describes the aircraft path through the 1st floor. Did they forget about April and little Elijah sitting in the flight path?

Oooops. No engines? A super tail section?
Alleged damage path of Flight 77 through 1st floor




[edit on 10/21/08 by SPreston]



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 08:05 PM
link   
reply to post by SPreston
 


No loon its called "Dumb Luck" or "being in right place, right time" -

Stanley Praimnath of Fuji Bank was in his office in the South Tower of
the World Trade Center when United 175 demolished his office and buried
him in debris. Said the wing came within 20 feet of him. So he was
even closer to the impact than April Gallup and survived with only minor
injuries. I suppose you are one of those "no planer" fruitcakes
who claim no planes hit the building....

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 08:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
I suppose you are one of those "no planer" fruitcakes
who claim no planes hit the building....

Please explain why the FAA released a flight path that flies North of Citgo?

Why does one Federal agency contradict the alleged flight path provided by other Federal agencies?

Which was the correct flight path of the alleged Flight AA77, thedman?



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 08:55 PM
link   

posted by thedman
I suppose you are one of those "no planer" fruitcakes
who claim no planes hit the building....


posted by tezzajw
Please explain why the FAA released a flight path that flies North of Citgo?

Why does one Federal agency contradict the alleged flight path provided by other Federal agencies?

Which was the correct flight path of the alleged Flight AA77, thedman?

Poor thedman is just upset because the Official Conspiracy Theory is being shredded into little bits and pieces. The official BS fairy tale is sinking into the foundation of quicksand it was built upon. Mr thedman, April would have been closer than your Stanley Praimnath of Fuji Bank because the aircraft wing and wing tank jet fuel should have passed right through April and little Elijah, but it did not. No they are not ghosts.

April Gallup and little Elijah should have been showered in burning jet fuel because they were entirely inside the wingspan of the alleged 757 which officially struck the Pentagon. But they not only were not incinerated, but April did not see any sign of jet fuel. That means she did not even smell jet fuel which has a very distinctive odor.

No jet fuel = no aircraft because jet engines run on jet fuel



Yes I have consistently stated for years that Flight 77 did not impact the Pentagon. In fact it could not have because it was not even in the state of Virginia, and the actual aircraft which was in the state of Virginia flew over the Naval Annex and north of the Citgo, and could not possibly have knocked down the five light poles nor created the damage path through the Pentagon.

Does that answer your question thedman?

FAA confirmed flight path





[edit on 10/21/08 by SPreston]



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 09:15 PM
link   

posted by thedman
I suppose you are one of those "no planer" fruitcakes
who claim no planes hit the building....

Can you imagine what 535 mph burning jet fuel would do to a woman and a little baby boy thedman? Aren't you glad they did not have to endure burning jet fuel?

No jet fuel = no aircraft because jet engines run on jet fuel



Oooops. No engines? A super tail section?
Purdue University Simulation of 535 mph jet fuel through 1st floor and April Gallup



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 05:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by SPreston


Something's off with this picture. If that circle is a 50 foot radius circle, then April should be within the circle if she was 35-45 feet from the impact. Don't you mean a 50 foot diameter circle? Thus the radius would be 25 feet.



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 07:38 AM
link   

posted by SPreston


posted by Griff
Something's off with this picture. If that circle is a 50 foot radius circle, then April should be within the circle if she was 35-45 feet from the impact. Don't you mean a 50 foot diameter circle? Thus the radius would be 25 feet.

No. April would be inside that circle. The circle is on an approximate radius of 50 feet from the center of the alleged 16 ft hole in the Pentagon wall. The circle would have a diameter of 100 feet. We do not know exactly where April's desk was inside that circle, but regardless she was officially somewhere inside that circle. My little line should have pointed to that circle, which April was inside of. I had intended to move the line after I drew it. As you can see, the circle is about 80% of the 757 wingspan.

The 124 ft 10 in wingspan of a 757 if it were to hit that wall with the fuselage nose cone centered in that alleged 16 foot hole, would encompass that 100 ft circle entirely within its breadth plus an extra 12 feet on each side. The circle April was within would be entirely encompassed by the breadth of the wing tanks also.



The wing tanks and fuselage tank should have burst and exploded upon impact with the wall at the official 535 mph, and should have showered April and Elijah with burning jet fuel, since all the Official Conspiracy Theory defenders have been clamoring that the wings and engines created a hundred foot wide hole across the wall and went through the wall and/or disintegrated, and the wings and engines are nowhere to be found outside the wall. Many of them claim the engines and/or landing gear ended up inside the Pentagon in a little room somehow.

But April and Elijah did not get incinerated with burning jet fuel. In fact April saw no sign of jet fuel nor any sign of an aircraft. In fact the building debris which filled up her area and buried her and Elijah was not even on fire. April dug her way out and then helped other people buried in the broken buiding debris from the explosion, and miraculously found Elijah buried before she left the building.

Guns and Butter April Gallup - audio live testimony

Pre-planted explosives accomplished all the destruction at the Pentagon and an aircraft did not impact the Pentagon, and as added proof; the actual decoy aircraft flew over the Naval Annex and north of the Citgo, and could not possibly have struck down the light poles and created the damage pattern within the Pentagon.

The testimony of April Gallup and the testimonies of the CIT eyewitnesses are mutually supportive. All the testimonies combined prove that no aircraft impacted the Pentagon.



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 08:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by SPreston

the alleged 16 ft hole in the Pentagon wall.



Did you happen to catch that thing flying away just now?

It was your very last shred of credibility.



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 09:17 AM
link   

posted by SPreston
the alleged 16 ft hole in the Pentagon wall.


posted by Seymour Butz
Did you happen to catch that thing flying away just now?

It was your very last shred of credibility.

Really? Like your biased opinion matters?

April Gallup and her son were directly in the destruction zone of the alleged official 757 impacting at 535 mph. The 124 ft 10 in wingspan of a 757 if it were to hit that wall with the fuselage nose cone centered in that alleged 16 foot hole, would encompass that 100 ft circle entirely within its breadth plus an extra 12 feet on each side. The circle April was within would be entirely encompassed by the breadth of the wing tanks also.



The wing tanks and fuselage tank should have burst and exploded upon impact with the wall at the official 535 mph, and should have showered April and Elijah with burning jet fuel, since all the fanatical Official Conspiracy Theory defenders have been clamoring that the wings and engines created a hundred foot wide hole across the wall and went through the wall and/or disintegrated, and the wings and engines are nowhere to be found outside the wall. Many of them claim the engines and/or landing gear ended up inside the Pentagon in a little room somehow.

April Gallup should have been burned up by the jet fuel splattering into the Pentagon from the shattered wing tanks, but obviously she was not. An aircraft did not impact the Pentagon wall at any time. It was merely a simulation of an aircraft impact with illusions and magicians' tricks and Hollywood special effects explosions.

Guns and Butter April Gallup - audio live testimony




[edit on 10/22/08 by SPreston]



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 09:29 AM
link   
reply to post by SPreston
 


Uh huh.....

So this wall you mentioned that she was protected by......

If it would protect her from the alleged explosives that allegedly blew the hole in the exterior wall....... wouldn't it also protect her from the aircraft debris?

It boggles the mind that anyone alleging these alleged explosives that allegedly still have any alleged brain cells allegedly still working wouldn't see this as a possibility....



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 09:56 AM
link   

posted by Seymour Butz
Uh huh.....

So this wall you mentioned that she was protected by......

If it would protect her from the alleged explosives that allegedly blew the hole in the exterior wall....... wouldn't it also protect her from the aircraft debris?

It boggles the mind that anyone alleging these alleged explosives that allegedly still have any alleged brain cells allegedly still working wouldn't see this as a possibility....

Yes the exterior wall which you geniuses claim the aircraft flew through at 535 mph. There were no interior walls in that area of the under construction Wedge; only columns and partitions. There was one wall to protect April and Elijah, and you fanatical defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory claim your 757 aircraft flew through that wall. If so, the jet fuel from the shattered wing tanks would have flown through the wall too, yet April and Elijah were not drenched in jet fuel nor were they burned up.

The Hollywood special effects explosives and possible additional explosives which were likely in the construction trailers outside the wall, probably blew the small hole in the exterior wall, and caused the additional damage outside, and blew the building debris and ceiling material down on top of April and Elijah. But a portion of that same exterior wall protected the two of them from the direct effects of the blasts, even though they were only 35-45 feet from the small hole.

What are you denying? April was officially there in that area and April officially survived. Where did your jet fuel go? If it all burned away outside the wall, then why did the building burn for days? Did somebody keep resetting the fires? What burned up the people further inside the rings and up on the 2nd floor and in the basement, if the jet fuel did not even reach April 35-45 feet inside the wall? More explosives? Fuel-air bombs?

The green area is the structural damage and the red area is the fire damage for the 1st floor


Original diagram from official Defense Dept Pentagon 9-11 book

Alleged structure damage and fire damage for the 2nd floor



[edit on 10/22/08 by SPreston]



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 10:05 AM
link   
reply to post by SPreston
 


Yes or no -

Would any wall strong enough to protect her from the massive overpressure from any alleged explosives strong enough to breach the reinforced wall be strong enough to protect her from aircraft debris?

We're not discussing whether or not there was a plane. Let's limit the discussion to this single point for now.

Obfuscation on your part proves that you lose your argument....



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 10:15 AM
link   

posted by Seymour Butz
Yes or no -

Would any wall strong enough to protect her from the massive overpressure from any alleged explosives strong enough to breach the reinforced wall be strong enough to protect her from aircraft debris?

We're not discussing whether or not there was a plane. Let's limit the discussion to this single point for now.

Obfuscation on your part proves that you lose your argument....

So now you wish to pretend that liquid jet fuel is not a factor, and you will lump it all in with 'aircraft debris'?

Have fun.



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 10:22 AM
link   
I like how they will only believe serial numbers (as the only confirming proof and give themselves massive amount of conjecture used as proof) when massive amounts of solid proof surround, id est the LINK provided up the page. and yet they add new ideas to be proven like Hollywood involvement and explosives.

What's going to come out next? Someone smelled cordite? which means: high powered explosion (no)!!!! These CT folks see ANY inconsistency in a story (as usually there is in most historical and chaotic situations) and suddenly they are allowed to assume that explosives were planted (because they feel, without proof, that that lady and child couldn't survive a fluid-like plane entering the building. They don't understand fluid dynamics, I don't either.

I'll thus go with the experts on this one. The lady somehow survived). It's like the whole moon thing, just because someone doesn't understand a picture or a video or what someone says does not mean they are free to make up whatever they like about it (like secret hangers where flight 77 was dropped off, decoy planes, planted explosives, etc.)

I also like the hearsay eyewitness reports being lapped up if it favors conspiracy (in the CT opinion) but shot down as illegitimate if something supporting the official story is involved. If what this lady is saying is to be taken serious, per some posters standards, please, CTrs, present the court documents when she testified this under oath and a signed record. If she was never in court and this is the only standard you will allow for eyewitnesses, then we will also throw out all other witnesses who never testified as proof.

I mean, come on. If they are supporting the official story, they could have been mistaken in what they saw. And those who saw something that didn't make sense of them that might support CT statements are probably also unsure of what they saw. Silly way to go about things.

Also, prove there was a decoy plane. You won't? Why not? You use the idea that the explosion confusion might have masked a plane going off. Pure conjecture. If you'd like to actually use eyewitnesses, none of those we have looked at on these forums lines up with a flyaway. Why do I believe there was no flyover? Because the official story is a more compelling argument. However what the CT will do is dodge and weave just as they always do and then they will say that because I cannot convince them of everything they don't understand or disagree with about the official story, I cannot talk and there must have been some sort of cover up.

So much of what I see here is pure CONJECTURE. Don't even try to use a tu quoque argument; defend YOURSELF. Then I will rip apart what you say because it will be full of conjecture.




top topics



 
7
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join