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: 2
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 26 2009 @ 08:04 PM
link   
Aircraft have two oxygen systems a Flight crew system and a passenger system .... they could have easily changed the passenger system to a different gas possibly a sleep agent of some sort.

Get airborne then at some stage the captain says "hey we have a problem everyone on with the masks" ... knock them out turn the transponders off and divert to a secure location / military base.

The general public on the ground knew that planes were landing all over the place BUT no one would have really known at the time what plane was where ....

The Captain of the pentagon flight WAS EX Military & Ex CIA .... smell a rat anyone?

Knock out the passengers divert to a facility and then dispose of the unwanted cargo.

I have emailed the CIA detailing my extensive airline experience and I gave them a list a mile long as to why no aircraft hit the pentagon .... for some reason they declined to reply!


They must have been busy in-breeding!




posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 08:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT
 


You have hard evidence proving a deception in one of the most trgaic evnets ever to happen to our country. Yet you say it's impossible to find any evidence on what happened to the bodies? What sort of investigator are you?



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 09:14 AM
link   
reply to post by walman
 



Maybe they were willing participants. The names and careers of all the passengers could possibly match those similar too government employees.

A young African American couple was interviewed after the attacks. They lost their son on AA77 and I remeber the Father saying "he was glad that he joined the military". The mother was a bit silent and watchful of her husband. To me she seemed scared.

Fox News also had an employee on AA77. Her name was Barbara Olson. We all know how Fox News felt about the 2000 election and all the wars former President Bush started.



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 11:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aubryish
reply to post by walman
 



Maybe they were willing participants. The names and careers of all the passengers could possibly match those similar too government employees.

A young African American couple was interviewed after the attacks. They lost their son on AA77 and I remeber the Father saying "he was glad that he joined the military". The mother was a bit silent and watchful of her husband. To me she seemed scared.

Fox News also had an employee on AA77. Her name was Barbara Olson. We all know how Fox News felt about the 2000 election and all the wars former President Bush started.





I haven't ever considered that, not once.

I should say, though, what I have thought it might be. Mind you, I do not hold to any one of these more than the other, but here they are, for your viewing pleasure...

(1) They were flown to a hangar somewhere where they became unwilling participants in later experiments (Dulce-style).

(2) They were abducted, like in the film "The Forgotten" (2004). But not for the same reason. I won't get into the details of the film, but you should see it if you have not.

(3) Like in the first idea, they were flown to a hangar, but in this case they were killed on the spot.

...I should say, though, that I attribute these ideas more to an overactive imagination than anything else. Not that these are not possible, and did not happen before, but I see no evidence to suggest they happened in this case.

Nevertheless, please continue to share your ideas...



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 11:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by jpvskyfreak

Get airborne then at some stage the captain says "hey we have a problem everyone on with the masks" ... knock them out turn the transponders off and divert to a secure location / military base.


My theory is somewhat similar to this. It would involve an initial take off of the plane, then at some point incapacitating the passengers and taking them to some facility to be "disposed" of.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by xlc sil3nce

Originally posted by jpvskyfreak

Get airborne then at some stage the captain says "hey we have a problem everyone on with the masks" ... knock them out turn the transponders off and divert to a secure location / military base.


My theory is somewhat similar to this. It would involve an initial take off of the plane, then at some point incapacitating the passengers and taking them to some facility to be "disposed" of.


And then their remains carted to the Pentagon for the "attack"...and the plane itself being destroyed and taken to the Pentagon...all happening between the time the plane took off and the time the attack happened.

Wouln't it be so much easier to just crash the plane into the Pentagon?



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 05:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT
 


I personally knew a person on the aircraft. He is gone. He was not a government employee and has never returned to his family. I have read many conspiracy sites about the Pentagon and the WTC events and find no compelling evidence that there was any complex plot, sleight of hand, or murder by government. The purported evidence is heresay and cherry-picked witnesses that result in contrived, ridiculous theories.
The idea that anything struck the Pentagon other than the aircraft in question is unsupported drivel perpetrated by those who sell CD's and books promulgating their pet theories for just that purpose; selling. I have read all of their theories and have to say that they change with the wind and have the same substance.
These ghoulish profiteers should be strung up for taking advantage of their easily led and mentally deficient followers while insulting the families of the terror victims by groundless claims of Federal involvement.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 09:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT
 


I personally knew a person on the aircraft. He is gone. He was not a government employee and has never returned to his family. I have read many conspiracy sites about the Pentagon and the WTC events and find no compelling evidence that there was any complex plot, sleight of hand, or murder by government. The purported evidence is heresay and cherry-picked witnesses that result in contrived, ridiculous theories.
The idea that anything struck the Pentagon other than the aircraft in question is unsupported drivel perpetrated by those who sell CD's and books promulgating their pet theories for just that purpose; selling. I have read all of their theories and have to say that they change with the wind and have the same substance.
These ghoulish profiteers should be strung up for taking advantage of their easily led and mentally deficient followers while insulting the families of the terror victims by groundless claims of Federal involvement.


I'm going to have to agree, for the most part.

I see no evidence at all, that cannot be refuted by evidence to the contrary, to support the idea that anything other than Flight 77 hit the Pentagon on 9/11.

In the spirit of heresay, though
, if there was a conspiracy perpetrated by any element of the government (official or unofficial) around any of the events that occurred that day, one of the best things that the conspirators could do to turn people away from the idea of a conspiracy would be to very carefully and selectively release real evidence on part of the story, where it gives the conspiracy theorists just enough room to doubt the story and come up with outlandish theories that in turn drive independent observers away from the general idea of a conspiracy around any part of the event. So if, say, building 7 coming down was a conspiracy, but a plane actually hit the Pentagon, then they release evidence on the latter case that would cause the conspiracy theorists to doubt that it was a plane, and say that it was a missile or a hologram or whatever, which would cause those who hear their theories to be turned away from all they allege on account of their specious reasoning on part of the case. In other words, misdirection through misinformation. Or I could be wrong, who knows.

But in regard to the matter of the passengers of Flight 77, it's quite a bold step to deny the veracity of the testimony of someone who claims they personally knew one of them. Either you, sir, are a liar, or the conspiracy theorists who claim that the passengers were in collusion are wrong - which, again, if my theory is correct, causes many others to doubt the idea of any government conspiracy on 9/11.

[edit on 28-1-2009 by walman]



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 09:18 PM
link   
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



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 09:25 PM
link   
In theory, anything could have happened. It wouldn't have been difficult for the gov't to order the plane to land at an AFB somewhere where the passengers were taken care of - be it killed, brainwashed, etc... - and the plane decommissioned, repainted, or destroyed.



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 09:27 PM
link   
I heard, that they were taken to a small military airfield in Pennsylvania and all executed.



posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 04:18 AM
link   

posted by Anonymous ATS
reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT
 


I personally knew a person on the aircraft. He is gone. He was not a government employee and has never returned to his family.


An anonymous person writing anonymously on ATS expects us to believe he knew a person on the aircraft who is gone. Just trust his word; he would never deliberately lie.

No thanks buster. Your anonymous word is worthless.



posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 05:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by walman
I see no evidence at all, that cannot be refuted by evidence to the contrary, to support the idea that anything other than Flight 77 hit the Pentagon on 9/11.


I guess you haven't looked very hard. There's actually very little if any evidence that Flight 77 impacted the Pentagon.

Here's the U.S. government's 1962 "Operation Northwoods" false-flag terrorism plan.

The passengers on Flight 77 probably ended up in a similar situation:


Among the most elaborate schemes was to "create an incident which will demonstrate convincingly that a Cuban aircraft has attacked and shot down a chartered civil airliner en route from the United States to Jamaica, Guatemala, Panama or Venezuela. The destination would be chosen only to cause the flight plan route to cross Cuba. The passengers could be a group of college students off on a holiday or any grouping of persons with a common interest to support chartering a non-scheduled flight."

Lemnitzer and the Joint Chiefs worked out a complex deception:

An aircraft at Elgin AFB would be painted and numbered as an exact duplicate for a civil registered aircraft belonging to a CJA proprietary organization in the Miami area. At a designated time the duplicate would be substituted for the actual civil aircraft and would be loaded with the selected passengers, all boarded under carefully prepared aliases. The actual registered aircraft would be converted to a drone [a remotely controlled unmanned aircraft]. Take off times of the drone aircraft and the actual aircraft will be scheduled to allow a rendezvous south of Florida.

From the rendezvous point the passenger-carrying aircraft will descend to minimum altitude and go directly into an auxiliary field at Elgin AFB where arrangements will have been made to evacuate the passengers and return the aircraft to its original status. The drone aircraft meanwhile will continue to fly the filed flight plan. When over Cuba the drone will be transmitting on the international distress frequency a "May Day" message stating he is under attack by Cuban MiG aircraft. The transmission will be interrupted by destruction of the aircraft, which will be triggered by radio signal. This will allow ICAO [International Civil Aviation Organization] radio stations in the Western Hemisphere to tell the U.S. what has happened to the aircraft instead of the U.S. trying to "sell" the incident.



[edit on 30-1-2009 by GoldenFleece]



posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 05:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by xynephadyn
I heard, that they were taken to a small military airfield in Pennsylvania and all executed.


you heard from who ?



posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 05:59 AM
link   
reply to post by GoldenFleece
 


Holy ****! Is this for real?

And people think their Government wouldn't do the exact same thing these days?

As for the passengers, if they weren't in on it, dead or alive they surely would never see the light of day again. If so, it would prove it was all a scam.

So my guess is either executed, or worse, subjects in some covert experiments in an underground facility.



posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 06:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by NuclearPaul
reply to post by GoldenFleece
 


Holy ****! Is this for real?

And people think their Government wouldn't do the exact same thing these days?


It's very real. And they most certainly would.

From Wikipedia:


Operation Northwoods, or Northwoods, was a false-flag conspiracy plan, proposed within the United States government in 1962. The plan called for CIA or other operatives to commit apparent acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Castro-led Cuba. One plan was to "develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington".



posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
I guess you haven't looked very hard. There's actually very little if any evidence that Flight 77 impacted the Pentagon.

Here's the U.S. government's 1962 "Operation Northwoods" false-flag terrorism plan.

The passengers on Flight 77 probably ended up in a similar situation:

[edit on 30-1-2009 by GoldenFleece]


So you're telling me that it happened because of a combination of lack of remaining physical evidence, and because a plan that was proposed in the 60's "probably" happened in '01? Are you kidding me?

Also, why say "very little...evidence"? If there is even a shred of real evidence then it proves the story. You seem to only be saying that your far-out theory must be true because the official story cannot be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. That's very weak, and supports my own theory that I stated above.

Stick with building 7, or find some real evidence to support your Flight 77 claims.



posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by NuclearPaul
reply to post by GoldenFleece
 


Holy ****! Is this for real?



Are you seriously asking that question?

Is this a "Truther" propaganda technique? Pretend you're an unbiased researcher who just stumbled about this information and found it so convincing? All are sheep but you, right?

Please, don't insult us and pretend this is the first time you heard of this despite commenting in dozens of other 9/11 conspiracy threads.



posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 11:47 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.


Diagrams presented by the American Society of Civil Engineers, in its report entitled The Pentagon Building Performance Report, show the relative positions of passenger remains found within the damaged structure of the Pentagon.


Originally posted by xlc sil3nceAnd also, sometimes ease and simplicity must be sacrificed in order to cause large scale belief and devistation


What additional "belief and devastation" would result by them crashing something OTHER than the plane into the Pentagon, and subsequently planting the parts of the plane, human remains, etc afterwards?


Originally posted by xynephadyn
I heard, that they were taken to a small military airfield in Pennsylvania and all executed.


...and their remains brought back to the Pentagon prior to the attack? That doesn't leave much time. Wouldn't it just be easier to fly them into the Pentagon?



posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 11:52 AM
link   
Let me state clearly...

I am not opposed to the truth, whatever it may be. But I don't see any convincing evidence for a plane not hitting the Pentagon. Everything that has so far been proposed has been remote and unsupported.

Building 7, on the other hand, raises a flag for me. Based on the video tape evidence, I don't see how I can conclude anything other than the use of explosives. Mind you, that can still be justified - perhaps there was enough important information in there that explosives were put in place as a contingency plan to take the building down should it fall into the wrong hands, and perhaps the small fire(s) that were set in the building that morning accidentally set the explosives off, or maybe (as other evidence suggests) they pulled it because they didn't want anyone inspecting that building. Any number of theories can be proposed for that, but I don't think the reason for suspicion can be refuted.

With Flight 77 and the Pentagon, however, there is far less direct evidence: (a) video tape that is of poor quality and does not clearly show a plane, which theorists use to claim that it was a missile; and (b) witness testimony that they saw what looked like a missile or a small plane hit the Pentagon, not a 757, though other witnesses state, to the contrary, that they did see a 757. And then there is the indirect evidence: (a) the "Operation Northwoods" plan, which theorists seem to remotely connect with no basis other than that it makes sense to their imagination; (b) the lack of high quality footage, on account of the feds confiscating video tapes from almost every camera that was pointing at that part of the Pentagon, which theorists again remotely claim substantiates their theory simply because it was suspicious on the part of the feds; and (c) the lack of physical plane (757) parts, though theorists seem to suggest that the parts that were there either did not belong to the plane or were carted in. I'm sure there are things that I am leaving out, but my point is that none of this is hard irrefutable evidence.

Please, show me something irrefutable.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join