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.

 

If Flight 77 didn't hit the Pentagon, what happened to the passengers?

page: 11
7
<< 8  9  10   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 10:04 AM
link   
reply to post by walman
 


I'm going to quote Lawrence Fishbern of CSI. "Everything I need to know is sitting right in front of me". Go back and look at the footage of the plane crashing into the Pentagon. Then, go back and look at it again. Okay go back and look at it again (I know this is getting boring, but it's important). Now, ask the same questions that everyone has been asking. Does this video show something that looks like a 757 jet crashing into the building?
No. If this was a jet airplane shoun't there be a debris field? Yes. Even with the Pentagon wall having been reinforced some months earlier, should'nt there be a bigger hole in the wall? Yes. Now, the problem with all Truther arguments is that they are asking ALL the wrong questions. The answer is also going to mess everyone up. One word: DERESOLUTION. Hint: what happens when something is struck with a chemical/electronic laser.
The evidence is the remaining metals (that have been shown to be melted) that still have that chemical index on it. Ask the FBI to allow you to run a chemical spectral analysis. Oooppps! That is not possible the evidence is missing.




posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 06:26 PM
link   
reply to post by SmArTbEaTz
 


WTH happened with our country? That's easy, somewhere in the last 40 years, the majority of our citizens forgot John Kennedy's charge to "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country". They started believing the crap we get now, mostly from the liberal side of the house that says "jus tell ol Uncle Sam what you want, and will take it from someone else and give it to you" Add in a healthy helping of "Why vote? It doesnt matter" and eventually you get what we have today. There are some other things I could throw in, but that pretty much covers a lot of what happened.



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 05:40 AM
link   
After contemplating this very question myself for sometime "what happen to the plane and the passengers?". Its not to much of a stretch to consider that it could have very well landed at the Ronald Regan National Airport after making the low flyby as reported by eye-witnesses. No eye witnesses have said they actually seen the plane crash into the Pentagon itself. By it landing at RRNA would get it out of the sky quickly and into a hanger where it could be repainted or disposed of... Just my thoughts.

P.S. sorry if someone has already mentioned this. I only read the first few pages of replies and not the entire thread as it is very long. I also want to say that I am neither convinced or persuaded that these attacks are true or false. Just a seeker looking for truth.



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by regadollc
After contemplating this very question myself for sometime "what happen to the plane and the passengers?". Its not to much of a stretch to consider that it could have very well landed at the Ronald Regan National Airport after making the low flyby as reported by eye-witnesses. No eye witnesses have said they actually seen the plane crash into the Pentagon itself. By it landing at RRNA would get it out of the sky quickly and into a hanger where it could be repainted or disposed of... Just my thoughts.

P.S. sorry if someone has already mentioned this. I only read the first few pages of replies and not the entire thread as it is very long. I also want to say that I am neither convinced or persuaded that these attacks are true or false. Just a seeker looking for truth.


If you are genuinely looking for truth you could research eyewitness accounts like here :-

911research.wtc7.net...

You will find, contrary to your post, that plenty of witnesses saw the plane crash into the Pentagon but not one saw a flyover.



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 12:48 PM
link   
reply to post by walman
 


You know, here in Ohio, about 10 years ago, a man named Baker (I think) was convicted of murdering his girlfriend even though the body was never found.

However, there was so much circumstantial evidence pointing to him (and other people helping) that only a fool would not have believed that he did it.

Sometimes there is no direct evidence that is "irrefutable". Does that mean when there is a mountain of circumstantial evidence pointing to something, that we should ignore it?

I guess you don't believe that OJ Simpson was guilty either.....


edit on 17-1-2011 by sezsue because: clarification of area



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 01:07 PM
link   
here are some disturbing discrepencies in the flights...apparently U.S. commercial airliner flights are too hard to locate. radio, radar, transponders, airliner id's...all with mistakes and errors...must be brand new technology


911review.org...
edit on 17-1-2011 by jimmyx because: wrong wording



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 01:47 PM
link   
reply to post by jimmyx
 


Oh, GAWD!!!! NOT "BTS" again!!!!

It has been explained, repeatedly. BTS gets its data FROM THE AIRLINES that submit it.

Each company has different ways to record their flight information....at American since flights 11 and 77 did not complete, then NONE of the info was transmitted to BTS.

United handled it differently....because THEIR system was likely slighlty different, in how it recorded the data and submitted it to BTS later.....UAL incuded the OUT and OFF times for flights 93 and 175.

AAL did not. and THAT is what happened, with that information.

BTW....I see that this guy you linked to MOSTLY is confused by the airplane that was UAL 93, and its history. He makes a lot of incorrect claims, based likely on his lack of understanding of how airlines actually operate.

Am back-tracking to find all of his mistakes.....

.....Ah! First mistake, and indicating his over-all ignorance:


...important point being that it left DTW at 11:12 and arrived ORD at 10:58

594 departed Detroit at 11:12 to ORD as 1581
594 arrived in chicago from DTW at 10:58 as 1581


Apparently, the "dude" doesn't understand about TIMEZONES!!! (And that the BTS times are local, as presented in the data charts).

DETROIT is on Eastern Time (On 10 September, would have been EDT). CHICAGO is one hour earlier, on Central Time (CDT).

Adding up the numbers (and this is what HE screen-shot, and I just checked, they are still posted the sam eway at BTS).....The flight from DTW to ORD left the GATE in Detroit at 10:27 EDT (this would, of course, be 9:27 in Chicago!). Long taxi delay, took off at 11:12. (10:12 CDT). LANDED in Chicago, at THEIR LOCAL TIME of 10:58 CDT. A Flight Time (airborne) of 46 minutes. Adding up the taxi out in DTW (45 minutes), to the 46 airborne and the (from BTS) :05 minutes from touchdown to gate block-in = 96 minutes. Which is EXACTLY what BTS has in their records!!!

GATE in DTW --- 1027 (EDT) --- LOCAL ---(0927 CDT)
GATE in ORD --- 1103 (CDT) --- LOCAL ---(1203 EDT)

What WE do is use GMT (UTC) or "Zulu" time, in order to reduce confusion. (Except, of course, for passenger PAs and such). During Daylight Savings, it is minus FOUR hours from UTC for EDT, and minus FIVE hours for CDT. SO, adding+4 and +5 as appropriate:

Gate departure DTW = 1427Z (+4 hours)
Gate arrival ORD = 1603Z (+5 hours)

Subtract time of 14:27 from 16:03 (a trick, for mental gymansitcs that I use....take away 60 minutes from the 16 there, and add it to the minutes column): 15:63 minus 14:27 = 1:36. OR, 96 minutes!!!!



BTW....that time for a flight between Detroit/Chicago? About typical, for a jet. From 16 January (yesterday), UAL 365 history:


Departure (Sked) --07:42AM EST (Actual) --07:47AM EST
Arrival (Sked) --08:00AM CST (Actual) --07:36AM CST

Duration: 49 minutes


flightaware.com...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Of course, you will never, never see any of the crap "9/11 conspiracy" websites update what they spew on their pages, NOR attempt to search for "truth". ALL they want to display is the same biased garbage to support their "pet" theories.
edit on 17 January 2011 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 10:38 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 

nahhhh

it was a plane



posted on Feb, 6 2011 @ 03:24 PM
link   
reply to post by secretagent woooman
 


Do you have links to videos showing them in the airports? I've heard quite a few people claim there's video, but I've never seen any actual video



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 09:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by xlc sil3nce
reply to post by adam_zapple
 



There was no evidence of passenger remains or belongings found at the pentagon. So that claim proves irrelevant. And also, sometimes ease and simplicity must be sacrificed in order to cause large scale belief and devistation


I am simply presenting this to you from another thread I saw it posted in. I just want your opinion on the pictures of the human remains towards the bottom of the page.

911research.wtc7.net...



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 8  9  10   >>

log in

join