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.

 

Curious Pentagon Footage , What Are These Guys Saying ?

page: 3
14
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 10:55 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


yea im curious how the airplane evaporated , just like the buildings on 9/11 if fire can bring them down why do we need demolition teams ? when we can just set up a few fires and watch 3 buildings come down ?

Then pentagon i liked your video with all the parts and the details it shows but when you look at pentagon aftermath pictures and compare that with other plane crashes you don't see a plane crash at the pentagon , but were told to see an apple when i see an orange . My eyes must not be what they used to be so i guess i'll just have to take the offical word on it




posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 11:11 AM
link   
These guys did the right thing with their piece of wreckage and handed it to a police officer. However, I have read reports that there was considerable looting of wreckage that day. Pentagon police officer Roosevelt Roberts was one of those assigned to prevent it and is on record as saying " we had a lot of people vandalizing, stealing evidence ."

Seems likely therefore that there are quite a few homes housing a bit of souvenir wreckage. Of course, if anything other than a Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon then these are all potential smoking guns. Nothing has smoked yet though.

We know specifically where one piece is because Pentagon witness Penny Elgas donated it, along with American Airlines, to the Smithsonian :-

americanhistory.si.edu...

So here is a serious project for a truther. Prove the piece comes from something other than a Boeing 757. American Airlines are apparently satisfied it is from their plane but what would they know.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 11:20 AM
link   
CC Cringle? Mystery solved folks. What really hit the Pentagon was Santa's sleigh. Move it along folks, nothing to see here. Glad it wasn't an inside job designed to get the war machine churning again and make billions for some shady corporation. Whew.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
The man read from the piece of the crash debris in his hands “[color=gold]Marine Corps sept”?
Why would a military name be on a commercial airliner?

For those of you who do not hear what this individual is saying then some of you have selective hearing and choose not to hear the remark because, it doesn’t support the governments lies.
edit on 18-1-2011 by impressme because: (no reason given)


Does the military forward old airframes to commercial airlines maybe?



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Okay , thanks for that . Just as I suspected , we can reasonably assume that this piece of wreckage landed on top of the overpass after the plane clipped the westernmost lightpost . Just one more piece of evidence that confirms the NOC theories are less than plausible .

BTW , that's the first time I have seen the memorial , thanks for posting .



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 11:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


Yea , even in the natgeo vid , you can hear one of the guys accuse the other guy of trying to steal it when he picked it up .



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 11:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


Prove the piece comes from something other than a Boeing 757...how about you prove without a shadow of a doubt, that the piece now at the smithsonian didnt come from another/different crash site of a boeing 757? Are you being paid to be here on A.T.S.? Just askin'.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 11:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Cassius666
 


The guy was not reading anything from the piece , that part has been cleared up already , in previous posts .



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by G.A.G.
reply to post by Alfie1
 


Prove the piece comes from something other than a Boeing 757...how about you prove without a shadow of a doubt, that the piece now at the smithsonian didnt come from another/different crash site of a boeing 757? Are you being paid to be here on A.T.S.? Just askin'.


So you obviously think the aircraft piece does come from a Boeing 757 but in true truther mode you immediately suggest it was from another 757 crash. Can you suggest what crash that was ?

It is also implicit in your suggestion that Penny Elgas and American Airlines are " in on it ". What happened to the idea that there was only a central core of conspirators ?

Yes, of course I get paid to be on ATS, you think I do this for fun ? ( mind you my pay is sadly in arrears ! )



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 01:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by harrytuttle
The part of the video is at 4:28 or so the guy says:


"...an airplane of some kind...a light one...that's not commercial...that's not commercial heavy metal...that's a light one..."

Assuming the commentator was near the Pentagon - he could have been some sort of expert - giving his assessment.

To me, if that guy is right, "a light one" sounds like a drone aircraft.


A lighter one. I remember seeing those agents at the Pentagon, on the Penta-Lawn, all in a line. Where they looking of small pieces of the Carbon Fiber used in making Drones? And what was under the blue tarp that the agents were carrying away? Also, even one of the reporters said it looked like a missile.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


So you obviously think the aircraft piece does come from a Boeing 757 but in true truther mode you immediately suggest it was from another 757 crash. Can you suggest what crash that was ?

It is also implicit in your suggestion that Penny Elgas and American Airlines are " in on it ". What happened to the idea that there was only a central core of conspirators ?

Yes, of course I get paid to be on ATS, you think I do this for fun ? ( mind you my pay is sadly in arrears ! )

I am not here on ats to split hairs with people like you. I am simply attempting to remind readers about the "realm of possibilty"...thats it. I am frankly not even sure that a 757 ever even crashed before. As far as your allegations about me implicating anybody, arent the street lights on in cornwall? Isnt it past your bedtime?



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by gr82m8okdok
 


Your "education" seems, again, to consist of nothing but spoon feeding mind pablum from the "9/11 conspiracy" sites....that are run by a handful of self-deluded crackpots, frankly.


Where they looking of small pieces of the Carbon Fiber used in making Drones?


ARE YOU AWARE of the number of composite materials used in the construction of a Boeing 757??


Flight control surface:
- Ailerons
- Rudder
- Dorsal fin assembly
- Rudder tab
- Elevators
- Slat
- Flaps
- Spoiler
- Horizontal stabilizer
- Vertical stabilizer

Aircraft door & access panel:
- Cockpit door
- MLG door
- NLG door
- Others doors & panels

Aircraft structure :
- Exhaust cones
- Strut
- Exhaust nozzles
- Radome
- Fan cowls
- Tail cone
- Inlet cowl
- Thrust reverser
- Nacelle
- Wing tip
- Pressure door
- Wing to body fairing
- Pylon

Interior
- Floor panel
- Overhead bin
- Galley
- Sidewall panel
- Lavatory


www.aeromaintenancegroup.com...

Educate yourself.......



And what was under the blue tarp that the agents were carrying away?


Now, it is beyond doubt that you got THAT lie from the "9/11 conspiracy" sites.

The "blue tarp" they were carrying was being taken INTO the scene.....NOT "out" of it, in the photo those "9/11" sites lied to you about!

Educate yourself.



Also, even one of the reporters said it looked like a missile.


Oh, you mean Mike Walter? DO you understand what a "simile" is? Or an "analogy"??

Here, video for you....watch and read what he ACTUALLY said, starting @0:14:



Educate yourself.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 05:15 PM
link   
reply to post by okbmd
 


there are a lot of unanswered questions about 9-11.....I won't say it was an inside job but i wouldn't be surprised at all to find out that it was....



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 06:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Cassius666
 


Does the military forward old airframes to commercial airlines maybe?


It could be a part from a military plane, or bone yard scraps; however what bugs me is look how far the Pentagon is from the highway. We know that it is impossible for pieces of wreckage to be found that far away, especially when earlier photos taken right after the alleged impact, there was no airplane wreckage on pentagon lawn. Later photos show at same angle shot, shows wreckage, yet the debunkers completely ignore this proven fact.

Now the debunkers want us to believe either two things, that the Boeing757 hit the Pentagon and vaporized on impact leaving no wreckage but tiny scraps of nothing identifiable, no seats, no luggage, no bodies, no glass, ect… not to mention one engine with titanium parts vaporized in thin air. When one is looking at the collapse at the Pentagon one see a bible open halfway on a stool and you can clearly see the pages are not burnt. So much for the fires being to hot to make titanium engine parts vanish.

The other explanation they want us to believe is parts of the plane fell on the highway that was allegedly hitting the light poles. The man in the video clearly said these pieces of debris didn’t belong to a commercial airliner that it was to light. My question is what is the part, and who are these airplane experts holding the part?

So the debunkers do not have any real evidence that the alleged wreckage belong to said aircraft, and just because this wreckage has rivets on it, it still does not prove a thing, as far as I am concern the government did not identify or match plane wreckage to prove it belongs to said plane. Since the debunkers are on a guessing game and claiming the wreckage belongs to the alleged plane, I am “guessing” the wreckage is bone yard debris, either way no one has identify any of the wreckage to prove it belongs to the alleged plane. Four commercial airliner crashed in one day in America, and they are not investigated? First time in aviation history FAA covers up four plane crashes and are not aloud to talk about what they know.


[color=gold]F.B.I. Counsel: No Records Available Revealing ID Process Of Recovered 9/11 Plane Wreckage

911blogger.com...
edit on 19-1-2011 by impressme because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 08:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by gr82m8okdok
 


Your "education" seems, again, to consist of nothing but spoon feeding mind pablum from the "9/11 conspiracy" sites....that are run by a handful of self-deluded crackpots, frankly.


Where they looking of small pieces of the Carbon Fiber used in making Drones?


ARE YOU AWARE of the number of composite materials used in the construction of a Boeing 757??


Flight control surface:
- Ailerons
- Rudder
- Dorsal fin assembly
- Rudder tab
- Elevators
- Slat
- Flaps
- Spoiler
- Horizontal stabilizer
- Vertical stabilizer

Aircraft door & access panel:
- Cockpit door
- MLG door
- NLG door
- Others doors & panels

Aircraft structure :
- Exhaust cones
- Strut
- Exhaust nozzles
- Radome
- Fan cowls
- Tail cone
- Inlet cowl
- Thrust reverser
- Nacelle
- Wing tip
- Pressure door
- Wing to body fairing
- Pylon

Interior
- Floor panel
- Overhead bin
- Galley
- Sidewall panel
- Lavatory


www.aeromaintenancegroup.com...

Educate yourself.......



And what was under the blue tarp that the agents were carrying away?


Now, it is beyond doubt that you got THAT lie from the "9/11 conspiracy" sites.

The "blue tarp" they were carrying was being taken INTO the scene.....NOT "out" of it, in the photo those "9/11" sites lied to you about!

Educate yourself.



Also, even one of the reporters said it looked like a missile.


Oh, you mean Mike Walter? DO you understand what a "simile" is? Or an "analogy"??

Here, video for you....watch and read what he ACTUALLY said, starting @0:14:



Educate yourself.






Thank-you Weed man, for the education. That's an impressive list of all the materials that those bad boys are equipped with! And it ALL evaporated?! Like dust in the wind, now there's a simile for ya.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 



We know that it is impossible for pieces of wreckage to be found that far away,


You seem to be the only one who believes that .


especially when earlier photos taken right after the alleged impact, there was no airplane wreckage on pentagon lawn. Later photos show at same angle shot, shows wreckage, yet the debunkers completely ignore this proven fact.


And still , you refuse to provide these alleged photos , although I have personally asked you to , several times .


Now the debunkers want us to believe either two things, that the Boeing757 hit the Pentagon and vaporized


Wrong again , no one has asked you to believe that anything vaporized or dustified , those words belong to you guys , not us .

leaving no wreckage but tiny scraps of nothing identifiable


Wrong again , there was plenty of evidence , of ample size , that was identifiable as having come from an American passenger plane .


no seats,


One more lie , seats were recovered , with bodies still strapped in them .


no bodies,


Again , not true , see above . Is anyone else starting to see a pattern here ?


not to mention one engine with titanium parts vaporized in thin air.


So , are you admitting that the other engine was found ? Doesn't this , in itself , destroy your entire trail of lies that I have posted above ? Sure it does .


The other explanation they want us to believe is parts of the plane fell on the highway that was allegedly hitting the light poles.


Which is a logical explanation .


The man in the video clearly said these pieces of debris didn’t belong to a commercial airliner that it was to light.


Just because he said it , doesn't make it so . Sounds to me like it was his OPINION . Oh my GOD , there is that dreaded word again . Anyone who has been here for any time at all , knows how much you loathe and detest any opinions that don't compliment yours , while holding in reverance and awe , all of those that do .


My question is what is the part,


By all indications , it is most likely part of the wing that clipped the lightpole .


and who are these airplane experts holding the part?


You're killing me , now these guys are airplane experts simply because you choose to label them as such , while having absolutely nothing , other than your deceitful tactics , to back this up .

You are a real piece of work , impressme . Why oh why , can't we have the ignore option back ...

edit on 19-1-2011 by okbmd because: eta



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 10:09 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


Do you just ignore everything that doesn't fit the "truther" website fantasy?


.. that the Boeing757 hit the Pentagon and vaporized on impact leaving no wreckage...


NO! Never said "vaporized"!
It is the delusion of "truthers" who use those words, and put them in others' mouths, in order to continue in their delusion...by using the false tactic of "ridicule" and "derision".


...but tiny scraps of nothing identifiable....


Why repeat the common "truther" lie, despite real evidence? Over and over again, the proof has been shown, in photos.


... no seats, no luggage, no bodies, no glass....


INSIDE the Pentagon!! It's not difficult to understand? And, WHO said there was "no glass"??


...not to mention one engine with titanium parts vaporized in thin air.


AGAIN? With the "vaporization"?? Why keep repeating the "truther" website lies?



When one is looking at the collapse at the Pentagon one see a bible open halfway on a stool and you can clearly see the pages are not burnt.


SO? You don't realize that on the edges of the inferno, things can be virtually untouched??



The man in the video clearly said these pieces of debris didn’t belong to a commercial airliner that it was to light.


Again, ignoring what's been shown as evidence, mentioned in many threads, easy to research... Why??


My question is what is the part, and who are these airplane experts holding the part?


face/palm! THAT is the point! That dude was NO "airplane expert"!!


So the debunkers do not have any real evidence that the alleged wreckage belong to said aircraft...


"truther" lie, copied from which website this time? The FDR is undeniable! THAT ties everything else to the scene! Understand this basic logic?

And, this is a laugh!:


Four commercial airliner crashed in one day in America, and they are not investigated?


"not investigated"???
Oh, boy....

Another lie, from yet more of the same, as before:


First time in aviation history FAA covers up four plane crashes and are not aloud to talk about what they know.


Lies. Lies. Lies. (Or, severe self delusion??)


Reporter (at the scene): "There was debris all over the place....":










There are a lot more....and the lies are getting weaker and harder to sustain.....and to defend.

I'd like to see these "truthers" who hide behind their websites actually come HERE to Arlington, and visit all the people who worked on the crash scene...they're still around...some may have moved by now, but WHY not actually speak to them? I'm sure they'd "welcome" the things said by the "truth movement". /sarcasm/


edit on 19 January 2011 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 10:55 PM
link   
reply to post by gr82m8okdok
 



That's an impressive list of all the materials that those bad boys are equipped with! And it ALL evaporated?!


Odd.

That one could see, and read....but be so blind.

Refer to the post above, that replied to [color=gold]impressme....



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 10:56 PM
link   
Nice videos weedwhacker. I guess the conspiracy theorists have overlooked a fair few things. I'm curious as to why you're being so condescending while you're pointing this stuff out though ? I'm new here, but is it like a joke between people to be really rude to eachother ? I'm not saying it's just you weedwhacker, but I don't get it.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 11:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Superjamez
 


I get exasperated....and I need to curb that. My tone isn't meant to be condescending, but alas, it may come through subliminally...you should see the screen, as I am composing!!!


I self-edit a lot....sometimes I want to bang my head through the monitor....so, it's then time to step away, and wait a while.


You know, too...there are a handful of "The Usual Suspects", so more rancor can seep in, despite best efforts. Also, sometimes the words as written, seem much more harsh than intended....matter of interpretation....

As you may see, in the long post above...tried to keep it impersonal to the specific member, and direct it to the overall "group" who continue to promote deceit and distortions, and will not address the solid, undeniable evidence head on. Referring to hide behind the bias and skewed opinions, formed and entrenched for whatever reason, is beyond me....I prefer logic and reason, and a clear understanding of ALL facts, not just the selected ones that feed my personal viewpoint.

It helps to have a full range of life experiences, too, to draw upon. Many of the main drivers who steer those "truther" websites and blogs merely copy one another, repeating the same already hashed items, and thus perpetuating the same lies. Lies that have been clearly revealed as such, years ago.

The Internet is weird....stuff never seems to go away, it lingers forever.....so, bad, bad, and wrong so-called "info" remains. Just once, would be a great accomplishment, if ONE of those "truther" webmasters had an epiphany, and actually adjusted their websites....I think that is the only way to remove the false "info"...even though, what was once up would have already been copied, and remain elsewhere....

...look at Wikipedia. "anyone" can post, add to articles....BUT, they had better have sources, and their facts correct, because MANY eyes are checking, constantly. AND, the bogus stuff gets amended. More sites should run that way....at least, that's how I understand the process at Wiki....
edit on 19 January 2011 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join