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.

 

Is it possible for the Pentagon attack jet to fly north of the citgo and still hit the Pentagon?

page: 5
5
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 9 2008 @ 05:22 AM
link   
reply to post by jthomas
 


we're not saying it, it's apparently the truth.

wouldn't you love to know




posted on Dec, 14 2008 @ 10:57 PM
link   
This was the OP's question:
"" Is it possible for the Pentagon attack jet to fly north of the Citgo and still hit the Pentagon? ""

My answer :

"" Yes, but then the physical damage-path inside the Pentagon does not fit the approach path.
Thus, there MUST be other possible scenarios. ""


May I suggest a few.

Scenario Nr 1.
The 9/11 perpetrators did not opt for substitute planes. They really murdered all passengers by destroying the planes at the targets, either by hitting them, or by blowing them up close to impact point.
In the Pentagon scenario, the option that will cover most of the observed events will be a massive blow-up of the plane just in front of a heavily improved and fortified new part of the outside wall, combined with inside explosives going off triggered by pressure sensitive devices placed on the west wall at the point of "impact".
The plane explosion must have been calculated to be more destructive forcing inwards, than the partly outward force of the planted explosives, thus resulting in an remaining overall inward force, which gave the impression of a physical impact of a plane on the west wall.
The heaviest plane parts will have followed the initial impact trajectory and penetrated the wall section, all light parts will have shattered instantly and ricocheted from the building wall, to be found all over the lawn.
This scenario fits the (in my opinion from the day they published the internal damage diagrams) perpendicular damage patterns line to be observed in those diagrams, which do not fit the 52° impact damage path proposed by the publishers.

Scenario Nr 2.
The same as above, but instead of planted explosives, a few Mach 3 or even faster, bunker-busters were send in at a 52° angle, launched from airplanes or ships outside US air- and sea-space.
The obvious difficult coordination of the impacts of plane and missiles could be explained by the strange wide loop of the attack plane before targeting.
That would give time to decelerate and accelerate for all flying objects to clock both plane and missile impacts at the same second in time.
It would also explain the damage pattern, alike caused by military depleted uranium plasma streams, causing all the stripping of the concrete and columns inside in that 52° pattern.


Scenario Nr 3.
The CIT scenario of a fly-over.
This would have been based on the fact that all witnesses were deceived by the huge explosion cloud of the planted explosives, the flash and the sound, which will force the witnesses to keep their eyes fixed on that event for several seconds, and caused them all to loose trail of the low fly-over of the decoy plane.
In fact we are only talking about 2 or 3 seconds the most, before the plane would be on a normal Reagan Airport landing or leaving approach path, following the Potomac river approach or leave path.
My guess would be a turn to the north, where less eyewitnesses would be.

The problem with this last scenario nr 3 are all the potential eyewitnesses in all the higher apartment and office buildings around the scene, and on the far away roads, they would have a much broader view of the fly-over and not easily been fooled by the explosion flashes, as the nearby witnesses surely would be.

That's why I strongly suggest to concentrate on one of the above other possible scenarios.
Or come up with any others, but not alike the officially proposed one which is based on a south approach under an angle of 52° and combined with the downed light poles.
The CIT witnesses proved that one false.



posted on Dec, 17 2008 @ 12:16 AM
link   
This is the diagram I base my Scenario nr 1 on, supposing the plane was blown up just before it hit the west wall, its 2 heavy weight engines would enter the building on 2 places, causing all the Pentagon personnel deaths on their double trajectory paths (red dots), and it explains the lack of airplane passenger remains (green dots) in those damage paths.
I do mean the two perpendicular to the wall paths, right where you see the two texts "CL14 CL11".

Source: i277.photobucket.com...





Remember, this is all based on the 13 CIT witnesses, which make a very strong case for a North of Citgo gas station flight path, which makes a 52° angle entrance trajectory impossible to believe, and thus the broken light poles a staged event added to implicate additional strong evidence for that 52° angle trajectory.

Therefor, in light of the 13 CIT witnesses reports, the areas, on, and especially at the end of the 52° trajectory, where most of the passengers DNA was "found", is also highly suspicious, and now makes a strong case for planted materials.

See also this post from SPreston:
Barbara Olsen remains in Pentagon thread:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
and this one:
Were High Explosive Charges Used At The Pentagon?:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

And this is a birds-eye view of the DNA remains spots at the Pentagon:
Big picture:
911research.wtc7.net...



You see what I mean with the two perpendicular military personnel victim trajectories beyond the words "Collapsed Area" in the right bottom of the diagram.
They aimed at the Navy Operations Center with the ONI office, and the Accounting offices which were investigating the circa 2.6 trillion dollar missing from the past years in the Pentagon budgets.
I posted about this already for many years, just use the ATS search function with the word "ONI".
They used the 3 occasions when they pushed everyone out and away for a few hundred meters on 9/11 and 9/12 to plant all the "evidence". Especially the first one, shortly after the collapse, it lasted half an hour.

[edit on 17/12/08 by LaBTop]



 
5
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join