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.

 

U.S. Government admits nose cone of Flight 77 SURVIVED Pentagon crash!

page: 1
51
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+26 more 
posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 02:26 AM
link   
According to trusted sources within the U.S. Government the nose cone of American Airlines flight 77 survived crashing into the Pentagon on 9-11-01!

I'm a little shocked by this since the nose cone hit first and survived, yet most of the rest of the plane disappeared! Here's the proof from America.gov (An official government website)



Plane Debris Found at Pentagon Crash Site

People who went to the Pentagon crash site reported seeing parts of an airplane, including the nose cone, landing gear, an airplane tire, the fuselage, an intact cockpit seat, and the tail number of the airplane, as reported in an e-mail to a conspiracy theory Web site that debunks the conspiracy theory claims


Did you read that!? I mean really read that. Check the source that our trusted never-tell-a-lie American government used for this, "as reported in an e-mail to a conspiracy theory Web site that debunks the conspiracy theory claims"

It's an email TO a conspiracy debunking website!!! Not even an email from... it's an email TO a conspiracy debunk site... UN-BE-LIEVABLE!!!

I'm speechless... really, this is the big one Elizabeth!! *holds hand to chest*

Some jerk is getting paid with my HARD-EARNED tax money to write this junk!


Just as a small point of reference - here's what happens to a Boeing nose cone when a bird hits it.


Must have been one steel-enforced, highly fortified bird!!


[edit on 4-6-2010 by Thermo Klein]




posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 02:28 AM
link   
Just by the way - NO AIRPLANE hit the Pentagon that day. Please see my Absolute proof: A Pentagon picture montage from start to finish ATS thread if you think otherwise.



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 02:38 AM
link   
Great thread, S&F Boy oh Boy
I have to laugh this is the most outrages un-believeable of mother of all lies.

Well folks, here is the PROOF I have been waiting for. For you OS believers read this and learn something. Our government tells lies its that simple. they lie all the time and they are really despreat to come up with this garbage. I believe the heat is on, the false flag criminals are worried.

[edit on 4-6-2010 by impressme]



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 02:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Thermo Klein
 


Dear Thermo Klein

I can’t get the page you listed as a link to the government site??

However do you think the # is about to hit the fan, Obama has canceled a few trips.

I want to see Bush in the Chair and see him fry



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 02:56 AM
link   
You all may be interested in that link if you haven't heard about it yet :

www.rense.com...

This is an "official" compilation of pictures showing the remains of the plane in the building.



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 03:01 AM
link   
reply to post by MAC269
 


I double checked it and it works fine for me. Here's the whole link in case you wanna copy-n-paste it in.

www.america.gov...

ttp://www.america.gov/st/pubs-english/2005/June/20050628163417atlahtnevel0.1261103.html
(Add an "h" in front to make it complete "http"


[edit on 4-6-2010 by Thermo Klein]



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 03:30 AM
link   
I submitted this story and the link to the new (pathetic) government website to the San Francisco Examiner. I hope other people do the same - we owe it to the future of this country to stand up MAD against this slop.

Send it to TV stations, newspapers, your representatives, Facebook, email, whatever - BE THE MEDIA!!



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 03:34 AM
link   
I've honestly been in the middle on whether I believe the government did this or not, but I mean if they say they found the nose cone then I'm going to have to say BS. Everything in the official pictures are shreds of metal, yet the nose is still identifiable?

[edit on 4-6-2010 by Good Intentions]



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 03:42 AM
link   
S & F for sure


What a load of bologna. I reckon that particular plane's nose section was made of the stuff they make the black boxes out of uh!? Guess some worker at the plant that day thought it'd be funny to do that just in case that particular plane........HIT THE PENTAGON OR SOMETHING?



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 03:51 AM
link   
So why no scares on the outside od the petagaon from where the engines should had hit the building before the walls colapsed and we get 3 days to put a fire out with the world resources at hand.

Wings don't fold back on impact as the plane tries to go through a small hole and plane parts could had been scattered around during any stage.

Show me the footage from the 100's of CCTV's around the petagaon and footage seized from the petrol station from across the road.



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 03:53 AM
link   
From the source...


ARFF Captain Michael Defina said: "The only way you could tell that an aircraft was inside was that we saw pieces of the nose gear."



Lt. Kevin Schaeffer from the Navy Command Center recalled that "on a service road that circled the Pentagon between the B and C rings, a chunk of the 757's nose cone and front landing gear lay on the pavement a few feet away, resting against the B Ring wall."



When LTC Victor Correa went back inside the Pentagon, "he found out what caused the horrific attack he survived earlier that morning; he saw the nose cone and the landing gear of the airliner."


Also...


As other witnesses related, debris lying outside the C-ring punchout hole in A-E Drive included a chunk of nose fuselage or nose cone, a landing gear, and an aircraft tire tread.The following photo (by Fort Belvoir photographers) shows two pieces of fuselage debris (note the green primer) lying in front of the hole. Note a ring of 8 small holes on the larger piece. A similar ring of 8 holes may be found on a 757 nose (with an attaching piece), just below the cockpit windows -- but it is far from clear whether the configuration is a match. This larger piece of debris may be the fragment of "nose cone" referred to by Lt. Kevin Shaeffer and Victor Correa.





posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 04:00 AM
link   
Where are the photos of the nose cone? Where is the evidence?


Here are some photoes, look here are some pitures taken in a bone yard. Really are these photes really proof? who took them, when, where, what day, and so on... where is the change of custody?

[edit on 4-6-2010 by impressme]



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 04:18 AM
link   
Maybe I set a bad precedent by linking my beliefs about if an airplane hit or not.

The idea of this thread is to discuss what's being sold in U.S. Government websites as a legitimate source - it's pathetic! Quoting from an email sent to a website lol



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 04:23 AM
link   
Yeah and...?

Does the "Official Version" require the radome(sorry guys, I'm a stickler from proper terminology) to be intact for the conspiracy to hold up? Of course not. So someone mistakingly referred to a piece of mangled debris as the "nose cone", and that is supposed to be proof of what exactly? That someone made a mistake? Stop the presses!! Obviously, there ain't no way in hell the radome could survive that type of crash. How is this deserving of a discussion?



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 05:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by 767doctor
How is this deserving of a discussion?


Well the United States government is making a claim about something related to national security based on an email sent outbound to an anti-conspiracy website - if you don't think that's worthy of discussion then leave the thread.

I personally think the government should be held to at least the standards of say, ANYONE IN THE WORLD, when they use a citation. Using that as a source is NOT a source, it's a lie.



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 05:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Thermo Klein

Originally posted by 767doctor
How is this deserving of a discussion?


Well the United States government is making a claim about something related to national security based on an email sent outbound to an anti-conspiracy website - if you don't think that's worthy of discussion then leave the thread.

I personally think the government should be held to at least the standards of say, ANYONE IN THE WORLD, when they use a citation. Using that as a source is NOT a source, it's a lie.


No, its a mistake, not a lie. And you didn't respond to my central point...does the conspiracy depend on an intact "nose cone" at the Pentagon? Why would they lie about it? What purpose does this lie serve? It's an unimportant detail that you've latched onto because you're an anomaly hunter. I'm just trying to get you to escape the minutae and look at the bigger picture. Nose cone intact? ZOMG INSIDE JORB ELEVENTY111!!1 Sheesh.



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 06:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Thermo Klein
According to trusted sources within the U.S. Government....



I STOPPED READING RIGHT THERE.

There is no such thing as trusted sources within the U.S. Government, unless you are trusting them to dish out more propaganda and disinformation.

Every one of the so-called “trusted sources” graduated from spook school where they were taught things like this:

www.benfrank.net...



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 06:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by mikelee
S & F for sure


What a load of bologna. I reckon that particular plane's nose section was made of the stuff they make the black boxes out of uh!? Guess some worker at the plant that day thought it'd be funny to do that just in case that particular plane........HIT THE PENTAGON OR SOMETHING?


Either that or it was made of the stuff the magic passports and bandana were made from.

Oh well, better to have evil fools running things than to have evil geniuses in control.



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 06:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Thermo Klein
 



This site delivers information about current U.S. foreign policy and about American life and culture. It is produced by the U.S. Department of State's Bureau of International Information Programs. Links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views contained therein.


Just thought you may want to point out this little note on the America.gov website homepage.



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 07:08 AM
link   
on the www.america.gov... page, there are two links to the side, one is linked towards snopes.com and the other is linked towards debunking911.com.

I just can't believe that this website is an official government website, but I'm glad, very glad, because now we have an official mouthpiece of disinformation to debunk when it comes to conspiracy facts

[edit on 4-6-2010 by filosophia]

[edit on 4-6-2010 by filosophia]




top topics



 
51
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join