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.

 

Proper Investigations

page: 1
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 01:48 AM
link   
I am going to challenge people on here that want to believe the official story to show that proper investigations have or are being done.

Here is 1 example.

911research.wtc7.net...
It's not clear why the Pentagon BPS took eight months to publish their study (which contrasts with the World Trade Center BPS publishing promptly in May of 2002). The Report gives a vague account of the the attack plane's trajectory with unsupported quantitative details, such as the speed of the plane. It makes errors in illustrating damage, such as offsetting the C-Ring punch-out hole by about four feet.

The Pentagon BPS is the only government investigation of the crash of Flight 77 that admits to existing, but it was defined as and limited to an investigation of the performance of the building.




posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 03:48 AM
link   
There are so many threads on ATS at the moment about 9/11 it's hard to keep up with them.

On saying that, what makes yours so different?

I think 9/11 has been investigated, Scrutinised, Pull Apart, Analysed Profusely, Questioned, Blamed and whatever else you care to add.
In my opinion I have learnt all there is to know about 9/11 and I have formed my own opinions.

For the millionth time, It's an inside job. Now The official story, if anyone believes it, has been Investigated too, till the Cows come home.

I really think it's time to give the 9/11 issue a rest for while, I really do.

I'm not trying to offend you in any way, OP. It's just everytime I come to this site to see what's new, there always a new thread about 9/11.



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 04:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Damian-007
I think 9/11 has been investigated, Scrutinised, Pull Apart, Analysed Profusely, Questioned, Blamed and whatever else you care to add.
In my opinion I have learnt all there is to know about 9/11 and I have formed my own opinions.


Problem is that since most of the evidence and official reports have not been released then you have not learned all there is to know.

Also something that makes my post different is that i can post facts and evidence to support what i post most people on here cannot.




[edit on 27-3-2010 by REMISNE]



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 06:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by REMISNE
I am going to challenge people on here that want to believe the official story to show that proper investigations have or are being done.

Here is 1 example.

911research.wtc7.net...
It's not clear why the Pentagon BPS took eight months to publish their study (which contrasts with the World Trade Center BPS publishing promptly in May of 2002). The Report gives a vague account of the the attack plane's trajectory with unsupported quantitative details, such as the speed of the plane. It makes errors in illustrating damage, such as offsetting the C-Ring punch-out hole by about four feet.

The Pentagon BPS is the only government investigation of the crash of Flight 77 that admits to existing, but it was defined as and limited to an investigation of the performance of the building.



Wow! Where to start.

First it is the Pentagon Building Performance Report, not Study:
fire.nist.gov...

Second, it was published in January of 2003, 17 months, not eight, after 9/11. Third, the report was produced by the ASCE, the American Society of Civil Engineers. Fourth, it is not, by any stretch of the imagination, the only study or report on the crash of Flight 77 into the Pentagon. The FBI conducted an extensive study or investigation referred to as PENTTBOM: www.fbi.gov...

That's enough for now.



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 08:18 AM
link   
Whoever was responsible for the Pentagon attack obviously screwed up royally. It is rather obvious the roof of the Pentagon was supposed to collapse at the time of the alleged impact/explosion, in order to give the false impression that a large commercial airliner had crashed there.

Apparently, whoever rigged the roof to collapse underestimated the strength of the building. This is probably why the roof collapsed well after the initial explosion, while the firefighters were on scene battling the "inferno". Ooops!



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 08:31 AM
link   
"Problem is that since most of the evidence and official reports have not been released then you have not learned all there is to know."

Correct. You can equate this to attempting to complete a jigsaw puzzle, while you only have 50% of the pieces to work with. Sorry, but it just ain't happening.

"The FBI conducted an extensive study or investigation referred to as PENTTBOM: www.fbi.gov..."

How would you know? Since the public was not informed of, nor presented with solid evidence (such as video footage from the Pentagon), the thoroughness of the investigation completed by authorities is an unknown factor.

Claiming you did an extensive investigation and providing proof of such an extensive investigation for public scrutiny are two very different things. Unfortunately, in the real world, the former doesn't cut it.



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 10:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
Fourth, it is not, by any stretch of the imagination, the only study or report on the crash of Flight 77 into the Pentagon. The FBI conducted an extensive study or investigation referred to as PENTTBOM:


Sorry but PENTTBOM was also more about the building not the crash investigation.



[edit on 27-3-2010 by REMISNE]



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by REMISNE

Originally posted by hooper
Fourth, it is not, by any stretch of the imagination, the only study or report on the crash of Flight 77 into the Pentagon. The FBI conducted an extensive study or investigation referred to as PENTTBOM:


Sorry but PENTTBOM was also more about the building not the crash investigation.

[edit on 27-3-2010 by REMISNE]


From the "PENTTBOM" website:

"Our ensuing investigation of the attacks of 9/11/01—code-named “PENTTBOM”—was our largest investigation ever. At the peak of the case, more than half our agents worked to identify the hijackers and their sponsors and, with other agencies, to head off any possible future attacks. We followed more than half-a-million investigative leads, including several hundred thousand tips from the public. The attack and crash sites also represented the largest crime scenes in FBI history."

PENTTBOM was an investigation into the criminal act that led to the crash and an investigation of the crime scene. The ASCE report was about the crash and the building.



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 07:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
PENTTBOM was an investigation into the criminal act that led to the crash and an investigation of the crime scene. The ASCE report was about the crash and the building.


So where is the official reports of the investigaton of the hijacking and the investigation of the aircraft?



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 07:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Damian-007
 


"For the millionth time, It's an inside job. Now The official story, if anyone believes it, has been Investigated too, till the Cows come home. I really think it's time to give the 9/11 issue a rest for while, I really do"-


Sooo....you believe 9-11 is an inside job....and YOU want to .."let it go"..."give it a rest"....
the worst mass murder on American soil,....and we'll just ..'let them all go as if it's ok.......totally acceptable

There has NEVER been more proof available in the history of this country...where there is so much evidence AGAINST the 'official story'...to show, complicity...

which make you part of the 'other' problem...those who know and think it's ok
S&F



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 07:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper

Originally posted by REMISNE
I am going to challenge people on here that want to believe the official story to show that proper investigations have or are being done.

Here is 1 example.

911research.wtc7.net...
It's not clear why the Pentagon BPS took eight months to publish their study (which contrasts with the World Trade Center BPS publishing promptly in May of 2002). The Report gives a vague account of the the attack plane's trajectory with unsupported quantitative details, such as the speed of the plane. It makes errors in illustrating damage, such as offsetting the C-Ring punch-out hole by about four feet.

The Pentagon BPS is the only government investigation of the crash of Flight 77 that admits to existing, but it was defined as and limited to an investigation of the performance of the building.



Wow! Where to start.

First it is the Pentagon Building Performance Report, not Study:
fire.nist.gov...

Second, it was published in January of 2003, 17 months, not eight, after 9/11. Third, the report was produced by the ASCE, the American Society of Civil Engineers. Fourth, it is not, by any stretch of the imagination, the only study or report on the crash of Flight 77 into the Pentagon. The FBI conducted an extensive study or investigation referred to as PENTTBOM: www.fbi.gov...

That's enough for now.


oh....hello....

I looked and could not find...ANYWHERE, an explanation of how an airliner of that size...can fit into a 16-20 foot hole between the first and second floor, WITHOUT leaving any impact marks on the facade of the Pentagon for wings, tail, engines, or marks on the lawn in the 35 min. BEFORE it fell.....



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 07:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by hgfbob
WITHOUT leaving any impact marks on the facade of the Pentagon for wings, tail, engines, or marks on the lawn in the 35 min. BEFORE it fell.....


I have been doing lots of research for several years. I think i might have found a photo that migh show where a wing impact barely on the Pentagon.

Problem is the angle of the wing would mean the other wing would have been dragging the ground before impact and there is not evidnece of a wing dragging the ground.

i114.photobucket.com...



[edit on 28-3-2010 by REMISNE]



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 07:56 AM
link   
reply to post by REMISNE
 


well, another problem in that pic is i do not see is a large engine impact...

small wing from a global hawk that launched a bunker buster then crashed into the building after it? sure.

2 large titanium engine's that would not evaporate away... not touching the sides of the impact area ... hmmm.. nope..

Never have i bought into the idea that a jet flew into that little hole loony tunes style sucking its wings onto its back lol..

some of us were watching live that day..



great thread. I've always made that point that the so called investigations were half assed side show cover ups at best... and apparently so do people on the 911 commission ..

** remembers employee's of the hotel across the street "horrified" at the videos that were taken away by the FBI & sworn to secrecy for national security...



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 08:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by reeferman
well, another problem in that pic is i do not see is a large engine impact...


Yes, but from the pic i do not think you would see the engine impact area anyway.

The engines on a 757 are 40 feet apart from the center of each engine. That pic shows the outer part of what could be a wing.


2 large titanium engine's that would not evaporate away... not touching the sides of the impact area ... hmmm.. nope..


Well supposidly one engine was found outside the Pentagon, the one that hit the construction trailer before the plane impacted the building.


great thread. I've always made that point that the so called investigations were half assed side show cover ups at best... and apparently so do people on the 911 commission ..


Thanks !!!!!!!!



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 08:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by REMISNE

Originally posted by hgfbob
WITHOUT leaving any impact marks on the facade of the Pentagon for wings, tail, engines, or marks on the lawn in the 35 min. BEFORE it fell.....

I have been doing lots of research for several years. I think i might have found a photo that might show where a wing impact barely on the Pentagon.

Problem is the angle of the wing would mean the other wing would have been dragging the ground before impact and there is not evidence of a wing dragging the ground.

i114.photobucket.com...
[edit on 28-3-2010 by REMISNE]


along with the engines hanging lower than the wings....no marks on the lawn...never could find an explanation as to why the tail left NO marks on the facade what so ever...there are intact windows...right above the hole...right where the tail would have hit

....and no one seems to have a problem with this?



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 08:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by REMISNE

Originally posted by hooper
PENTTBOM was an investigation into the criminal act that led to the crash and an investigation of the crime scene. The ASCE report was about the crash and the building.


So where is the official reports of the investigaton of the hijacking and the investigation of the aircraft?

I don't know what you mean, "investigation of the aircraft", and the reports are in the custody of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. And you're are not probably ever going to see them.








posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 09:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
I don't know what you mean, "investigation of the aircraft", and the reports are in the custody of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. And you're are not probably ever going to see them.


So again we have no evidnece of a proper investigation being done.

The FBI will show other information exept for the real information that is needed to show a proper investigation.



[edit on 28-3-2010 by REMISNE]



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 09:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by hgfbob
along with the engines hanging lower than the wings....no marks on the lawn...never could find an explanation as to why the tail left NO marks on the facade what so ever...there are intact windows...right above the hole...right where the tail would have hit

....and no one seems to have a problem with this?


Well there was one report from a military witness near the Pentagon that the back of the plane (behind the wings) did not make it into the building.

There was an explosion from inside the building that destroyed the back of the plane.



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 09:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by REMISNE

Originally posted by hgfbob
along with the engines hanging lower than the wings....no marks on the lawn...never could find an explanation as to why the tail left NO marks on the facade what so ever...there are intact windows...right above the hole...right where the tail would have hit

....and no one seems to have a problem with this?


Well there was one report from a military witness near the Pentagon that the back of the plane (behind the wings) did not make it into the building.

There was an explosion from inside the building that destroyed the back of the plane.



Could you please quote that witness. And also, this is thread about Flight 93. Not the Pentagon.



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 10:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
Could you please quote that witness.


www.defense.gov...
Sepulveda said the wings disintegrated, and then disappeared. "For a brief second, you could see the fuselage sticking out of the side of the Pentagon," Sepulveda recalls. "Then, all of a sudden, this ball of fire comes out from inside. It looked like it was just coming from inside the building, engulfing the fuselage. And then the fuselage was all gone."


And also, this is thread about Flight 93. Not the Pentagon.


NO this thread is about proper investigations.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join