It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by FlyersFan
Originally posted by mikelee
For those of you who believe in the OS or simply do not think anything other than an airliner hit the Pentagon, I respect your theory ...
It's not a theory. Eyewitness' all over the city saw the plane come in at a very rapid speed and at a very low altitude. That's not theory. That's fact. What is theory is that something else hit the pentagon when in fact all eyewitness' say otherwise.
Again .. go ask the cabbies .... or the tour guides in Arlington ... etc.
I have to hand it to the Perps on the Plane Psyop ...
In 1994, Meyssan became a staff member of the Parti Radical de Gauche, a center-left political organization....
In 1994, he founded Voltaire Network and also created Project Ornicar, associations promoting freedom of expression and thinking, of which he is currently president.
From 1996 to 1999, he worked as substitute coordinator of the National Committee of Surveillance against the extreme right, which held weekly meetings with the 45 major political parties, unions and associations belonging to the French left wing in order to draw up a common response to escalating intolerance.
Between 1999 and 2002, Meyssan replaced Emma Bonino in the leading post of the Anti-prohibitionist Radical Coordination, an international organization aiming to decriminalize drug use as a means to cut organized crime's main source of income.
Thierry Meyssan's diatribe, titled L'Effroyable Imposture (The Frightening Fraud) in the original French, purports to prove the frighteningly irrational theory that the damage to the Pentagon on September 11, 2001, could not have been caused by a Boeing 757, but was in fact the result of a carefully planned truck bombing or missile strike which was then made to look like a plane crash. The utter lacking of basis in reality of this theory should be enough to turn any reasonable person off from Meyssan.
For evidence of his theory, Meyssan presents a supposedly careful analysis of images of the damage to the Pentagon, and cites discrepancies in eyewitness accounts. Left unanswered are such questions as, if Flight 77 didn't hit the Pentagon, where is it? Where are the passengers? And, in fact the eyewitnesses basically agree on what they saw. (For a sampling of eyewitness accounts, see:www.criticalthrash.com...).
Meyssan's conspiracy theory is an insult to the families of the victims, and to all who actually witnessed the terrorist attack, including myself (I was not working at the Pentagon, but I live nearby).
Meyssan frames his denial theory in the context of a plot by right-wing elements in the United States against the world. Of course, he offers no names. One wonders, if Meyssan's theory were true, why is he still alive after supposedly revealing such a devious plot?
Meyssan's ideas are so foolish that I was tempted to just ignore him and not write this review. If you believe Meyssan, I can cut you an unbeatable deal for the Brooklyn Bridge. But ideas have consequences.
The history of the 20th century shows that absurd ideas can take destructive hold on societies, even to the point of sanctioning mass murder. Allowing the extremists who promote such ideas to go unchallenged only encourages them. Lenin, Hitler and Stalin were just like Meyssan early in their careers. If they had been challenged early on, perhaps they would have never gained power.
This one is a photo of the wreckage of a 767, carrying 223 people which plunged into the ground from 31,000 feet..much of the wreckage is present, and identifiable as what it was.
Or this easily recognisable wreckage, from a 737 that also plunged into the ground from a great altitude, this time it was 35,000 feet.
Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Originally posted by OuttaTime
reply to post by rnaa
What strikes me as completely mundane is their huge impatience to remove/cover all the evidence ASAP (done at all 3 crash sites). If there was a direct correlation with 'terrorist groups' all debris would be scrutinized in order to form a solid case in court. Their methods however, do not mesh with correct forensic protocol. The flight 93 wreckage was no passenger plane either. I just find it hard to believe that these planes vaporized leaving only a box full of structural debris.
How do you know the flight 93 wreckage wasn't from a passenger plane. Were you there?
Originally posted by mikelee
...And many also have seen the photo below showing debris flying from the still footage. The outline clearly and preciously matches the superimposition of the Global hawk's sections.
Coincidence? What are the chances that a Global Hawk's sections would just magically match the parts/debris flying around in the government provided still frame? Pretty long odds if you ask me. But thats your call here...
...Now a steel girder building has much more free space ahead of the airliners to allow for escape than the Pentagon yet they still had tremendous blow back. Yet the Pentagon with it's several feet thick facade & columns allowed all of the debris forward of the initial explosion? Makes no sense whatsoever...
Originally posted by rnaa
reply to post by mikelee
Below is a 757's engine. See any size difference?
Yes. The piece from the crash sight is WAAAY too big to be from the Global Hawk. Notice that the crash site object doesn't have the fins anymore, they've been ripped off in the crash.
The entire fan assembly with the fins on the GH is about the size of the baseball strike zone, shoulder to knees, but the central core, without the fans, is only a bit bigger than the guys head.
The entire fan assembly with the fins on the 757 is about the size of a man, but the central core, without the fans, is just a bit smaller than the strike zone, maybe shoulder to crotch.
The central core pictured from the crash sight exactly matches the one with the guys sitting in the cowling.
So, remind me, what is your point again?
Originally posted by mikelee
I have wondered since the morning of 911 why there were no immediate camera footage released to cite as evidence to back up the government's explanation that an airliner struck the Pentagon. Typically during an incident the government does provide some form of video or at least photographic proof of what it claims relating to that specific event/incident. In the case of the Pentagon, limited footage was released only after pressure placed on government and Pentagon officials by the press and the public. However what was released culminated in footage that shows nothing of an airliner as well as being proven to have been "frame spliced" or in layman terms, doctored. The question is not to argue as to why this is or was done, the question is why not release the entire collection of cameras to prove the governments position? Many speculate because there was no airliner at all and that another type of airborne device caused the explosion, death & destruction. One must assume reasonably that, the government does not wish for the public to know exactly what struck the building. Of course the public who believes every word the cowardly main stream media tells them and is led blindly into an unknown future will never know the reality of that incident on 911. In addition to being conditioned to not ask the tough questions that need asking and arguing the government's position on what caused the Pentagon destruction blindly and without an open mind.
source in photo
Above, what would prompt anyone (despite if they are FBI, NSA or whomever) to go around and pick up debris knowing full well that it is common knowledge that you do not pick up anything at a supposed crash site. Especially if you are law enforcement or any type if intelligence personnel, even the average citizen knows NOT to pick up such things. Amazingly but not surprisingly not one of the main stream media or pretty much anyone else has cited this. These two were never ID'd and why they are obviously picking up debris (or placing it) has never been looked into.
Donald Rumsfeld on September 10, 2001 at a press conference stated that the Pentagon could not account for 2 Trillion dollars, yes that is correct, 2 TRILLION dollars in transactions. earlier theorists noted this fact early in the months and following years after 911 but as usual the common skeptic lot denounced it. Now it is a verified and well known fact. And it plays to an interesting note that where the explosion at the Pentagon took place was the very locale of the accounting department that provided the records source to Rumsfeld regarding the lost funds. Coincidence? No one in his or her right mind would think so. Another little interesting note about this event of 911 is that Barbara Olsen's cell phone call to her husband Ted is now a confirmed fabrication and never happened at all. During the trail of Zacarias Moussaoui the FBI stated unequivocally that during their investigation into 911 and ZM being the 20th hijacker that they developed evidence that no phone call ever took place from Barbara Olsen to her husband. Bush's Solicitor General flat out lied to the FBI, the national press and the American people regarding his wife and that phone call. What shouldn't be forgotten is that the story of "hijackers with box cutters" as told to the media and the public was developed via this lie from Ted Olsen that Barbara told him thats what they were armed with. Now confirmed as a lie, it serves as circumstantial evidence that this lie was designed to establish the plot line for the 911 tale or at the very least the administration along with the 911 Report/Commission relied on nothing but lies and speculation to develop their story.
The Pentagon (and Flight 93) remain in my mind two of the puzzles that need to be solved in order to learn 911 truth and what really took place. Those two incidents occurred without the large witness and fore-thought given to the media outlets that had nearly instant ability to cover them right away. The cover of the Pennsylvania woods and countryside gave cover to what I firmly think was a hideous outcome unlike what we have been told happened. The Pentagon strike benefited from early morning commuters who were accustomed to seeing low flying aircraft very close to the Pentagon and would not necessarily give a second look to a speeding ?? painted up with similar company colors as depicted below.
The size of the GH is seen below. Many think this is small drone but seeing this stock Air Force photo its true size can be determined. Could early morning commuters have been fooled by this? For many it is plausible.
And many also have seen the photo below showing debris flying from the still footage. The outline clearly and preciously matches the superimposition of the Global hawk's sections.
My own stock
Coincidence? What are the chances that a Global Hawk's sections would just magically match the parts/debris flying around in the government provided still frame? Pretty long odds if you ask me. But thats your call here.
Then we have the neat front lawn minutes after impact. Notice any "skid marks" like the OS states where the engines touched the ground? No we do not see that because it is now known that no such marks can or were ever found. Another lie like the Olsen phone calls.
The photo above was taken before the collapse which was played to the hilt for maximum effect of the airliner tale. However as we all can see the impact hole is no bigger that a full sized pick up truck according to winesses. However none of them were called to testify. Wonder why? Also we do not see the engine skid marks as cited by government liars promoting the official fairy tale.
source noted in pic
Above is the confirmed entry point of ??? hit the Pentagon. No where big enough for an airliner but for a Global Hawk, it fits perfectly. This entry point was cited by the national media, FBI as where the airline entered the Pentagon. Unbelievable!
The WTC's as everyone can see in photos all over the internet had lots of blow back debris and fire yet the lawn in front of where the Pentagon was struck has hardly any. Now a steel girder building has much more free space ahead of the airliners to allow for escape than the Pentagon yet they still had tremendous blow back. Yet the Pentagon with it's several feet thick facade & columns allowed all of the debris forwardof the initial explosion? Makes no sense whatsoever. Plus it defies all known physic logic as well known forensic science where fast moving objects were impacted into buildings, ships, building during wartime. Same principle regardless if it's wartime or terrorism. Then we have the punch out hole where we have all been lied to by the government and their shills claiming the nose of the airliner did this. The nose section of airliners of the type purported to have hit the building is composed of light weight carbon and would survive this type of impact about the same as if the nose cone was made from a Coke can. Not to forget to mention that this was made after it slammed into the outer portion of the building then sliced & diced it's way thru the concrete & rebar support columns. Then it left an exit hole bigger than it was.
Say what you want or what makes you sleep best at night to the contrary but whatever did in fact hit the Pentagon was NOT an airliner and those who have said that it was, are liars. At least until proof is provided and even then it will be too little too late and must endure a harsh & very close scrutiny before we can definitively say that it either was indeed an airliner or, it was not. My money is not on the airliner story. Finally the words of Don Rumsfeld in a speech on 911.......
Source: DoD Archives/Speeches
Rumsfeld: There were lots of warnings. The intelligence information that we get, it sometimes runs into the hundreds of alerts or pieces of intelligence a week. One looks at the worldwide, it's thousands. And the task is to sort through it and see what you can find. And as you find things, the law enforcement officials who have the responsibility to deal with that type of thing -- the FBI at the federal level, and although it is not, it's an investigative service as opposed to a police force, it's not a federal police force, as you know. But the state and local law enforcement officials have the responsibility for dealing with those kinds of issues. They [find a lot] and any number of terrorist efforts have been dissuaded, deterred or stopped by good intelligence gathering and good preventive work. It is a truth that a terrorist can attack any time, any place, using any technique and it's physically impossible to defend at every time and every place against every conceivable technique. Here we're talking about plastic knives and using an American Airlines flight filed with our citizens, and the missile to damage this building and similar (inaudible) that damaged the World Trade Center. The only way to deal with this problem is by taking the battle to the terrorists, wherever they are, and dealing with them.
After he said that, he also admitted Flight 93 was shot down. As I have always said and thought it was...
But, thats another thread!edit on 12/25/2010 by mikelee because: source pic, add text & video
could you please provide a link to your source.