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: 2
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 09:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Elieser
 


I too have seen that interview and it was very compelling. It really doesn't seem too difficult to devise a strategy and execute the falling of some lightpoles in order to sell it as evidence of a particular version of events. However, there is no available evidence to support that idea save that interview you speak of, and that guy says flat out that he was intimidated and not willing to testify as a result. What strikes me as odd is the fact that many people I've seen on this site act as if that is such a mind-boggling act of planning and precision that its virtually impossible...then those same people have no problem believing in invisible planes, etc.




posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 09:51 PM
link   
Suppose somebody tell me how the hell two jet engines wieghing several tons, were totally burned up,yet there was debris of papers and computers etc right at the edge of the hole in the wall...
The idea the office fire could be hot enough to destroy those engines is preposterous.and the bulk of the explosive flame was outside the building anyways....
the whole thing is BS as is the OS of the rest of it.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 09:56 PM
link   
I've never seen this one before, someone claiming a second Pentagon plane "a 4-propeller huge grey plane".

That would also be a good reason not to release the footage.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 01:28 AM
link   
reply to post by budaruskie
 


You don't appear to actually know much about the event. The 4 engined aircraft was the C 130 piloted by Lt. Col O'Brien :-

www.youtube.com...



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 01:45 AM
link   
reply to post by budaruskie
 


With regard to your allegation that "people literally walk out of the hole the plane put in the wall " ; the only person I am aware of claiming this is April Gallop.

The lady who sued American Airlines on account of injuries caused by their plane and then decided there wasn't a plane at all. Her last action was thrown out for being frivolous.

She is clearly lying again about walking out throught the impact area. How did she and her child walk through this ?
911review.org...



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 02:18 AM
link   
reply to post by budaruskie
 


Can't believe that you have posted that cherry-picked quote from Mike Walter about the " cruise missile with wings ". That is a notorious bit of truther quote-mining and surely can't fool anyone any more.

You must know that he talked of an American Airlines jet ( deliberately cut out from your clip ) and used " cruise missile with wings as a simile. Full interview here :-

www.youtube.com...



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 04:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596
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.


Hear hear. It's one thing desparately needing to believe a conspiracy. Quite another when it leads to the sort of pernicious bigotry of the post you're replying to.

Barefoot? Turban? It would be inflammatory if it weren't so pathetic. And so obviously of a piece with the general standard of enquiry here. If in doubt, just make stuff up.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 09:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by budaruskie
 


You don't appear to actually know much about the event. The 4 engined aircraft was the C 130 piloted by Lt. Col O'Brien :-

www.youtube.com...


Alfred, you don't have to be rude. Well, I don't come to this site to try and prove everyone wrong and show off...I'm actually trying to learn. So, in short, I was completely unaware of anyone who said they actually saw a plane hit the building nor had I ever heard that of a C-130 in the area. I watched your video and seems legit, but I can't help but notice that the pilot and the "witness" in my previous video claimed that the C-130 was in two different places. The guy on the street clearly says it was right behind the other plane and turned off, does he not?

Here is another clip I just saw for the first time. This guy claims that the plane hit short and "sprayed fire on the wall". Again, I have to ask if the plane hit short where is the big skid mark in the grass as well as the rest of the plane?


As far as April Gallop is concerned, she does claim to walk out of the hole but I'm telling you I saw video where at least one person comes out of that hole. Unfortunately, I've been unable to find it and have limited time to look right now but I will post it when I find it again. It happens in the background behind what the cameraman is actually looking at and I never even thought about looking until I heard Gallop's story, and by the way it doesn't appear to be her if I remember correctly.

Last but not least, I posted two videos with Mike Walter in order to highlight the editing in the first one. So, if you took more time actually looking at what I posted rather than jumping to conclusions and trying to insult me in such a way as to not get removed or banned, you wouldn't make an ass of yourself like you did in this instance.
edit on 2/1/2011 by budaruskie because: Mis-quoted and corrected myself



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 11:57 AM
link   
reply to post by budaruskie
 


budaruskie, if you were " completely unaware of anyone who said they actually saw a plane hit the building " and hadn't " ever heard that of a C 130 in the area " perhaps you weren't the best placed person to start a thread expressing incredulity about a Boeing 757, flight AA 77, impacting the Pentagon.

If you are genuinely seeking the truth about the Pentagon 9/11 I would recommend that you have a look at this thread :-

www.abovetopsecret.com...

This thread is not about opinion, innuendoe or suspicion but hard facts for a change. An independent researcher and computer expert in Australia has teased out the last 4 seconds from AA 77's flight data recorder. He, together with prominent truther Frank Legge, has published a paper linked to in the OP.

Please read and give me your opinion.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by kwakakev
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.


Oh please, you actually expect the debris at the Pentagon to look like a slow-speed crash? Come on.....Seriously?



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
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.


Nice strawman.


Originally posted by SphinxMontreal

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 .


Strawman.


Originally posted by SphinxMontreal

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


Do you really think that the Pentagon would have a SAM site there, considering it is less than a MILE from the end of a VERY busy runway?


Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
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!


Wow, and the logical fallacies abound!!


Originally posted by SphinxMontreal

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.


Poisoning the well much?


Originally posted by SphinxMontreal

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?


Wow, another strawman. One person described what it looked LIKE. Notice the similie?

Did you expect a cartoon cutout of a 757 in the side of a blast-resistant building?


Originally posted by SphinxMontreal

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).


Argument from incredulity.


Originally posted by SphinxMontreal

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.


Rant much? Jesus H Christ on a corndog....


Originally posted by SphinxMontreal

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.


You just LOVE the logical fallacies, don't you?


Originally posted by SphinxMontreal

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?


Huh? Now you're just not making any sense.


Originally posted by SphinxMontreal

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.


Strawman, again.

The engine looks small, because the cowling abd surrounding machinery are breakable.


Originally posted by SphinxMontreal

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.


Strawman.


Originally posted by SphinxMontreal

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.


Why not? Why couldn't he have made the call?


Originally posted by SphinxMontreal

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!



Wow, that doesn't even make any sense whatsoever.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 12:58 PM
link   
Would you believe someone who was at the Pentagon that day?

A plane crashed there. Period.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by curiousladdy
Would you believe someone who was at the Pentagon that day?

A plane crashed there. Period.


I am sure a lot of us would be interested if you care to expand on your experience.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by curiousladdy
 


While I am in total agreement that is what happened , get ready for the insults and ignorance to start rolling your way . You will be asked to provide pictures , and when you do , you will be accused of faking those . Even if you produced a piece of the plane , you will be accused of getting that from some airplane scrapyard .

This is a conspiracy-based website , so the majority of those here don't want you to disrupt their conspiracy-based view of things with something like the truth . They will be along shortly to call you a liar and accuse you of being a government shill or dis-info agent .

Good luck , but don't expect to convince anyone other than those who already agree that a plane crashed there .



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by budaruskie
 


Here is an excellent thread that details the Pentagon crash scene :

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 02:27 PM
link   
I appreciate the responses and will look at the threads provided by alfie and okbmd in order to expand my base of knowledge on the subject. As far as I know Alfred, I don't have to be an expert on any subject to ask questions or start threads on this website, if that were the case obviously you wouldn't be here either.

There is one particular aspect of the Pentegon event that I just can't wrap my mind around, and its the missing video evidence of a plane hitting the Pentagon. If your contention is that there were no cameras that recorded it, then you're a moron and shouldn't bother wasting the time to write that nonsense. Please, there were cameras at local wal-marts before 9/11, so without question the Pentagon of all places certainly had them....not to mention you can google images of the cameras on top of the walls. So what is a plausible explanation for the gov't to have evidence that supports their case, evidence that would be devestating to those who prupose that no plane or something else hit the wall, yet never show it to the public? What do they have to lose? For me, answering this question is essential in order for me to even consider the OS. So, for purely selfish reasons, I'd like to ask you OS guys and others what are the possible explanations for this?



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 03:10 PM
link   
reply to post by budaruskie
 



If your contention is that there were no cameras that recorded it, then you're a moron and shouldn't bother wasting the time to write that nonsense.


Based on the above, why are you asking questions? You have already completely made up your mind about 9/11. You firmly believe that it was a big US government plot to frighten the masses into outsourcing their liberty to some nefarious cabal.

If you cannot tolerate or entertain the notion that maybe, just maybe, the DoD and the Pentagon did not have a CCTV camera pointed in the exact angle and position to capture the last moments of Flight 77 then why are you bothering with any of the rest? Its a done deal.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 06:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by budaruskie
 



If your contention is that there were no cameras that recorded it, then you're a moron and shouldn't bother wasting the time to write that nonsense.


Based on the above, why are you asking questions? You have already completely made up your mind about 9/11. You firmly believe that it was a big US government plot to frighten the masses into outsourcing their liberty to some nefarious cabal.

If you cannot tolerate or entertain the notion that maybe, just maybe, the DoD and the Pentagon did not have a CCTV camera pointed in the exact angle and position to capture the last moments of Flight 77 then why are you bothering with any of the rest? Its a done deal.


If someone were to have come up to any person in this country including yourself prior to 9/11 and said they knew they could get away with spray-painting the outside wall of the Pentagon because there were no cameras that would see them, I'd bet my life that every single person would have laughed and thought immediately "that the **SNIP** Pentagon of course you'll be seen by cameras." Its like believing there won't be any Green Bay Packer fans or Pittsburgh Steelers fans at the Super Bowl. Why don't you answer this question, since you refuse to answer any of the others posed before, why don't they show us the tapes anyway?
I never said the gov't did anything but give us a bogus story. There could be a multitude of reasons for that, one being that they did it, but I never said that. All I continue to say is that the gov't is absolutely hiding evidence! I do not know the reason why, that is why I asked for your opinion...but you are too damn foolish to even recognize that. By the way, is that what you are saying happened?

it was a big US government plot to frighten the masses into outsourcing their liberty to some nefarious cabal.

edit on 2/1/2011 by budaruskie because: (no reason given)

edit on Tue Feb 1 2011 by DontTreadOnMe because: Mod Note: Do Not Evade the Automatic Censors – Please Review This Link.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 08:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by budaruskie

If someone were to have come up to any person in this country including yourself prior to 9/11 and said they knew they could get away with spray-painting the outside wall of the Pentagon because there were no cameras that would see them, I'd bet my life that every single person would have laughed and thought immediately "that the f-ing Pentagon of course you'll be seen by cameras."


If you could do it at about 733 fps, you most certainly could.

PS. Bad analogy. The bad guys didn't plan on fleeing.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 08:35 PM
link   
reply to post by FDNY343
 


If you want to purposefully miss the entire point of the analogy, I certainly can't stop you. Why don't you try to answer any of the questions instead?



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join