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.

 

What must have happened at the Pentagon on 9/11

page: 1
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 07:05 PM
link   
I've noticed that over time the 9/11 forum has seemed to primarily focus on the World Trade Center buildings at the expense of other interesting aspects of the event. This could very well be due to the overwhelming amount of evidence available, especially when there is no photos or videos of the other crashes, or as ATS readers have come to expect due to nefarious gov't agents and shills pushing an agenda. I'm not saying that there isn't in-depth analysis buried in the pages of threads, but it seems the NY events have been scrutinized to infinity. So, purely as a change of pace, what must have happened at the Pentagon on 9/11?

If I believe the official story, in short, I have to believe that an enormous passenger jet eluded all air defense in the most heavily defended city in America. Washington D.C. isn't just the capital city of the country, its also home to the most powerful, technologically-advanced, and infinitely funded military in the entire world. I must also believe that in order to do this, the plane had to take on supernatural abilities. It disappears from radar only to reappear, then exceeds all known capabilities of any plane that size. Different people see the plane in different places as it nears the Pentagon and then it somehow manages to do the impossible. In full view of 80+ functioning cameras it turns invisible and strikes the wall of the building. Clearly, if the gov't had footage of this THEY would have released it by now as it only helps to support thier case. Beyond that, I am compelled to believe without question that the plane then vaporized or disintegrated, however you want to describe it, before the wings ever struck the building leaving only a 20-30ft gap. The plane must have kept its invisibility properties, because again not a single camera shows any significant pieces of plane from the first publicly available video taken just minutes after impact to the last. People literally walk out of the hole the "plane" put in the wall in these videos, leaving many people to wonder how this is all possible.

Those people are known today simply as "truthers".




The Other Side (OS)




What do you think?




posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 07:19 PM
link   
Yep definitely a plane, you just need to wait on the conspiracy guys now claiming the government put the wreckage there during a cover up...



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 07:30 PM
link   
For the official story video with the aircraft parts on the ground, take notice of where they are in relation to the impact site. For the piece with the 'c', it somehow had to go around a corner to land up against the wall. The other pieces on the grass just look like they have been placed on the ground, not gone flying through the air a few hundred feet to scuff up and embed in the ground. Also look at the pattern of aircraft parts in relation to the impact point. Not your typical aircraft disaster with most shrapnel near the impact point and gradually fanning out. These photos are staged, like plenty of other stuff that evil day.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 07:37 PM
link   
reply to post by budaruskie
 





If I believe the official story, in short, I have to believe that an enormous passenger jet eluded all air defense in the most heavily defended city in America. Washington D.C. isn't just the capital city of the country, its also home to the most powerful, technologically-advanced, and infinitely funded military in the entire world


Umm, problem.

I am going to assume that the "official story" involves Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon. For sake of argument, I will say I "believe" that, rather than I KNOW Flight 77 hit the Pentagon.

Now, onto the paragraph I cut from your post. "Eluded all air defense in the most heavily defended city in America" One problem, prior to 9/11, we didnt have things like anti-aircraft missile sites defending our cities, we didnt have dozens of armed interceptors on alert...in other words, we basically did not have ANY defenses to speak of. For the entire continental 48 states, we had FOURTEEN armed fighter jets on alert...and those were for intercepting aircraft over the ocean, not over our own cities. One of the biggest misconceptions of the "truth" movement was that the US Air Force keeps all of its fighter aircraft loaded for war at a moments notice. We did not. It costs lots of money to do that....which brings me to the other point, the infinitely funded part. Again, another misconception on your part. In 1990-1, President George Bush, upon the fall of the Soviet Union, signed Executive Orders that decimated our Continental Air Defense. Overnight, we went from bombers and fighters loaded for war and in the air, pretty much 24/7...to 14 airplanes on alert. That money was part of the "peace dividend" taken from the military and used for whatever Congress decided to waste it on.

We were far from the invincible military you seemed to think we had on 9/11/01.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 07:52 PM
link   
reply to post by budaruskie
 


Please show a detailed diagram of the "80+" cameras that were allegedly trained on the point of impact . After that , please explain why the Pentagon would have "80+" cameras trained on that particular spot .

Also , I'd like to see these other videos you speak of , in particular , the one that shows people walking out of the hole left by the impact .

I mean , surely you don't mind posting this info for the rest of us , since you stated it as fact .



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 07:52 PM
link   
I bet after viewing ONE of like 50 cameras, I'd be able to tell ya.. unfortunately not the shady stills and far away vids they gave us with pity..

for now, for me, almost everything is speculation without proving it, for example... video..



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 07:57 PM
link   
President George Bush, upon the fall of the Soviet Union, signed Executive Orders that decimated our Continental Air Defense. Overnight, we went from bombers and fighters loaded for war and in the air, pretty much 24/7...to 14 airplanes on alert. That money was part of the "peace dividend" taken from the military and used for whatever Congress decided to waste it on.

We were far from the invincible military you seemed to think we had on 9/11/01.


Peace dividend? Your military budget is higher than all other countries combined and you call that the peace dividend? What about the reports of the many planes scrambled (as per policy on unreponsive planes off course) over the previous year?

Jason
edit on 31-1-2011 by hthjason because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 08:04 PM
link   
reply to post by kwakakev
 


So, explain the people at Arlington National Cemetary who had plane pieces land near them.......



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 08:07 PM
link   



What do you think?


Look at the piece of debris with the 'C' on it, behind the FBI agent. Then look at the 'C' on any picture of an AA 757. It appears that they are considerably different in size. Maybe my eyes are playing tricks on me. What's your impression?
edit on 31-1-2011 by blah yada because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 08:17 PM
link   
reply to post by vipertech0596
 




So, explain the people at Arlington National Cemetary who had plane pieces land near them.......


There are too many conflicting witness statements to believe any of them without supporting evidence in this big messy and ongoing case.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 08:23 PM
link   
reply to post by hthjason
 





Peace dividend? Your military budget is higher than all other countries combined and you call that the peace dividend? What about the reports of the many planes scrambled (as per policy on unreponsive planes off course) over the previous year?



Yes, Peace Dividend, that is what they called it. If you choose not to learn history, thats on you. But it involved the meat cleaver they took to the US military after the Soviet Union collapsed. And what about the reports of the many planes "scrambled"? Quite a few times, it wasnt a matter of planes scrambled as planes already in the air for training missions that were diverted. And as for aircraft in the air...09/11/01 was a Tuesday morning....a traditional night fly for the Air National Guard...which means that most Guard units did not have planes in the air or planes ready for launch.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 08:24 PM
link   
Let's see if I can save the debunkers some work:

1. The plane atomized on impact, so there isn't much evidence to see. The evidence you do see on the pristine lawn were the only pieces from the aircraft which remained. Atomization is a nasty and ugly process you know.

2. The Pentagon is just a regular office building (which just happens to be the administrative command center for the most powerful military on the planet) - no special security required there. In reality, a handful of flunky minimum wage security guards is all the security you need for such a regular office .

3. The USA is too poor to spend money on some unnecessary hi-tech air defense systems for some regular office building.

4. Why should there be security video cameras filming a wall...or better yet...the video was reviewed and there was literally nothing to see...so move along now. The five frames of garbage doctored video released should satisfy your curiosity. If not, tough cookies!

5. Top Gun Turban Pilot (who couldn't fly a Cessna) just made a basic circle and crashed into the Pentagon. Any ragtag boxcutter wielding barefoot caveman from Afghanistan could have completed such a simple maneuver at 450 MPH. Just ask our resident airline pilot.

6. The wings folded back upon impact with the Pentagon, thus the hole in the wall. What's the matter, never played with toy airplanes when you were a kid?

7. The roof collapsed 20 minutes after impact due to structural damage obviously because the heat was too intense (hmmm....where have we heard that before?). Just ask our resident fireman, who holds the highest regard for humanity (check out his thread on the Loose Change Producer getting arrested).

8. The witnesses who didn't see the official flight path need a guide dog and do not know what they're talking about. In fact, any witness who did not see a commercial aircraft is too busy reading those damn fool conspiracy sites. Don't believe me? Just ask our resident damn fool conspiracy site expert, who is also obsessed with alien space beam weapons.

9. Several light poles were knocked down by a commercial airliner traveling at 450 MPH, however, managed to stay in the same general vicinity because light poles are a lot heavier and offer a lot more resistance than you think. You know that and I know that. Go ahead...I double dare you to try and prove me wrong.

10. The survivors who crawled out of that hole were not human and were part of a secret robotic experiment by the Pentagon. This information is classified due to National Security, so let's try and keep it hush hush, okay?

11. The photo of the little piece of crap engine part was from the flight in question - it just looks small due camera to perspective. If you don't know anything about perspective, you need to do some homework on it.

12. There was only one engine found because the airplane only had one engine. What are you stupid? You don't know that twin engin airplanes can fly with only one engine.

13. Ted Olson is a fine gentleman who would never lie about receiving a phone call which could not have originated from Flight 77. It is completely irrelevant and rather insulting to Olson that you would mention that he helped Bush steal the 2000 election.

14. And finally, why are you blaming this on a guy who selflessly risked life and limb by slipping on banana peels to hand out life saving water bottles to Hurricane Katrina victims? This fine upstanding man was also very hard at work reading educating our nation's youth, reading an important goat story to 2nd, all this chaos was taking place.
So have some compassion, will ya?

There's your Flight 77!



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 08:28 PM
link   
reply to post by kwakakev
 


Um, no. There aren't any conflicting statements in regards to Arlington National Cemetary that day.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 08:31 PM
link   
Originally posted by vipertech0596



Umm, problem.

I am going to assume that the "official story" involves Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon. For sake of argument, I will say I "believe" that, rather than I KNOW Flight 77 hit the Pentagon.


Is there some other plane? I was under the impression that our gov't officials were the ones who first claimed, and continue to claim that flight 77 hit the Pentagon. Is there something else?



Now, onto the paragraph I cut from your post. "Eluded all air defense in the most heavily defended city in America" One problem, prior to 9/11, we didnt have things like anti-aircraft missile sites defending our cities, we didnt have dozens of armed interceptors on alert...in other words, we basically did not have ANY defenses to speak of. For the entire continental 48 states, we had FOURTEEN armed fighter jets on alert...and those were for intercepting aircraft over the ocean, not over our own cities. One of the biggest misconceptions of the "truth" movement was that the US Air Force keeps all of its fighter aircraft loaded for war at a moments notice. We did not. It costs lots of money to do that....which brings me to the other point, the infinitely funded part. Again, another misconception on your part. In 1990-1, President George Bush, upon the fall of the Soviet Union, signed Executive Orders that decimated our Continental Air Defense. Overnight, we went from bombers and fighters loaded for war and in the air, pretty much 24/7...to 14 airplanes on alert. That money was part of the "peace dividend" taken from the military and used for whatever Congress decided to waste it on.

We were far from the invincible military you seemed to think we had on 9/11/01.


Frankly, I believe that the continental U.S. only having 14 fighter jets to protect it, with not one surface to air missile, or ANY defenses to speak of is a ridiculous notion. You can believe it, I'm sure the gov't can produce records of some sort to back up their own claim, but I don't believe it. IF that were true it would a) be a complete injustice to the American public b) be absurdly negligent on the part of military commanders and congress alike and most obviously c) an open invitation to our enemies to attack. How could anyone outside our own gov't have that information if that were actually the case? How could the TRILLIONS of dollars spent on national defense over multiple generations be justified if only 14 jets were protecting us for any extended period of time, especially a decade. This is common sense talking, I mean really, you can't actually believe that, right?

Even if you do, why don't they show a video of the plane hitting? There are several cameras on top of that wall of the Pentagon, all you have to do is Google it and you will see them. Besides, am I expected to believe that in addition to having no fighter jets to scramble, no surface to air missiles, basically no defenses at all, we also had no functioning cameras...anywhere? That is harder to believe than the hijackers had secret technology that made the plane invisible to the camera eye, but not the naked eye...as the evidence shows must be the case, right


8. The witnesses who didn't see the official flight path need a guide dog and do not know what they're talking about. In fact, any witness who did not see a commercial aircraft is too busy reading those damn fool conspiracy sites. Don't believe me? Just ask our resident damn fool conspiracy site expert, who is also obsessed with alien space beam weapons.
oh G.O.D. no!
edit on 1/31/2011 by budaruskie because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 08:34 PM
link   


One of the biggest misconceptions of the "truth" movement was that the US Air Force keeps all of its fighter aircraft loaded for war at a moments notice. We did not. It costs lots of money to do that....


Spot on! Don't you know that the USA only has trillions of dollars to throw around when they are fighting illegal wars and bailing out corporate criminals. Sorry Bud, but for frivolous and unimportant stuff like National Defense, they're broke. So when 19 other caveman decide to launch another all out attack with boxcutters, I'm sorry to say that all 350 million of you are on your own.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 08:39 PM
link   
reply to post by SphinxMontreal
 



Well, if any of your points were even remotely close to reality, you might be on to something. But, since they arent......not so much.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 08:46 PM
link   
I had my doubts about it for a while but what convinced me that something was wrong with the OS was the Taxi driver, the photos of his taxi on the bridge and later on on the street with a hole on the windshield and a light pole laying near it. Supposedly a "mysterious man" helped him remove the pole from the car, but after looking at the photos of the car, there were no scratches nor any glass on the hood of the car. The comments made in an interview where he thought that he was not being recorded and he said many things that someone who has been intimidated or threatened would say.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 08:47 PM
link   
reply to post by budaruskie
 





Frankly, I believe that the continental U.S. only having 14 fighter jets to protect it, with not one surface to air missile, or ANY defenses to speak of is a ridiculous notion. You can believe it, I'm sure the gov't can produce records of some sort to back up their own claim, but I don't believe it. IF that were true it would a) be a complete injustice to the American public b) be absurdly negligent on the part of military commanders and congress alike and most obviously c) an open invitation to our enemies to attack. How could anyone outside our own gov't have that information if that were actually the case? How could the TRILLIONS of dollars spent on national defense over multiple generations be justified if only 14 jets were protecting us for any extended period of time, especially a decade. This is common sense talking, I mean really, you can't actually believe that, right?


Common sense and the US government........

Quite frankly, I dont care if you think it is a ridiculous notion. Its called reality. Since World War II, our military has been trained and geared to fighting on the other guy's piece of land. Save for the Strategic Air Command, we did not realistically plan for an attack on our own soil. And when we stood down in the early 90s.........

Negligent on the part of our politicians? Certainly. I've been beating that drum since 9/11. As for the trillions of dollars spent....When Reagan decreed he wanted a 600 ship US Navy....what do you think the Navy's mission was going to be? Patrol Cheaspeake Bay? No. Our military was built to fight wars overseas. That is the reality, and it bit us HARD that day.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 08:58 PM
link   
...the only evidence i need to know that this was orchestrated was donald rumsfeld laughing as he and several other men were carrying a fairly small piece of fuselage across the pentagon lawn... rumsfeld laughing and having a good ol time - says it all, imo...



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by SphinxMontreal
 


A prime example of the ignorance among truthers. Its also a prime example of the type of arrogance so many people in the United States Government have. Cavemen? College educated cavemen you mean? Licensed pilot cavemen you mean?

We emasculated our defensive capabilities in the 90s because of the mistaken belief that the bad guys were gone and, no one would DARE attack us on our own soil......and you are a shining example of that type of thinking.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join