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: 5
3
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 6 2011 @ 10:23 PM
link   
reply to post by NWOwned
 



But there were plane 'parts' on the Pentagon lawn... hmm that might lead us to believe a plane (or some such airborne thing) did hit it. And of course all those helpful Pentagon employees all picking up plane parts to keep the lawn so pristine, I dunno. "Yep here I am on my lunch break and I'm just cleaning debris (evidence) off the Pentagon lawn - (enough to show plane 'parts' but not enough to really examine them) ho hum, oh hey Rummy, grab an end."


The people "picking up" parts are not there to make it look pretty - they are removing the debris to keep it from
being trampled by the fire apparatus responding to the fires at the initial entry hole.




posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 11:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by NWOwned


If the 'plane' made the C Ring hole, please give it your best shot at explaining how.

Peace


Strawman. The PLANE did not make that hole. A PIECE of the plane did. Most likely something very solid, like the landing gear, or an engine.



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 07:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by FDNY343

Originally posted by NWOwned


If the 'plane' made the C Ring hole, please give it your best shot at explaining how.

Peace


Strawman. The PLANE did not make that hole. A PIECE of the plane did. Most likely something very solid, like the landing gear, or an engine.


Ok, perhaps I lacked specifics on the plane and the hole phrasing. My bad.

Obviously, I am not saying, implying or endorsing that like the very nose of the whole intact plane went that far in the building and poked that hole out. Of course if a 757 hit the Pentagon it would indeed be in pieces by then.

So far I've had two responses to my question, the first simply addressed a large 'piece' of the plane like the truck or wheel assembly and yours above mentioning, as well, the landing gear and/or an engine.

But notice the hole, it is open, people can and did walk through it. You'd think that some 'piece' bulky and heavy enough to make the hole would in some way be either visible in the very hole or even slightly outside maybe in the middle etc. I find it hard to believe, you see, that a large heavy piece of machinery capable of making that hole, would not also itself appear in any photos of the hole.

You say: 'Most likely something very solid, like the landing gear, or an engine.' and you say that for two reasons perhaps, you say 'most likely' first because it's perfectly reasonable to think the heaviest pieces would, could and did, cause that particular damage to the wall.... and you say 'most likely' because you don't exactly know what caused that hole. Assuming it's one of a number of heavy pieces of a 757, without physical and/or photographic evidence of exactly what caused it.

In short, you don't really know what caused that there hole now do you?

When I said did the plane make the hole I was more or less trying to get at, how come the piece that supposedly made it ain't in the photograph? For I, looking at that hole would indeed expect it to be there.

I dunno, it could've "bounced back" or maybe the first few FFs in there picked it up and tossed it aside!

I'm just saying, I don't really see what caused that hole.

Peace



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 07:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by NWOwned
 



But there were plane 'parts' on the Pentagon lawn... hmm that might lead us to believe a plane (or some such airborne thing) did hit it. And of course all those helpful Pentagon employees all picking up plane parts to keep the lawn so pristine, I dunno. "Yep here I am on my lunch break and I'm just cleaning debris (evidence) off the Pentagon lawn - (enough to show plane 'parts' but not enough to really examine them) ho hum, oh hey Rummy, grab an end."


The people "picking up" parts are not there to make it look pretty - they are removing the debris to keep it from
being trampled by the fire apparatus responding to the fires at the initial entry hole.


You know, that could be, and of course I wasn't being serious about the neat lawn, more like, why are these guys picking up any 'plane' debris? There was so little of it. The first fire trucks on scene had little problem driving right up etc. There is in fact a lot of 'pristine' lawn left AFTER the alleged plane crash! I'd say most of it.

What really bothers me about the small pieces and them being picked up off the lawn are the photos taken by that guy on the on ramp looking back at the Pentagon just after the crash showing two more 'lawn cleaner types' hanging out on the roadway by a bush very near where the cab was struck by the light pole. What are they up to? As far as I am aware, no plane parts ended up there. What are they doing? They appear not even to be helping anyone let alone picking up lawn trash. There is no lawn there, no fire trucks, fire, injured people or plane parts... maybe they just wanted to get a better look because hey, face it, you can't very well see much up close with that 'generator' blowing all that smoke and the fire truck on the left side spraying a stream across the entire impact portion of the Pentagon.

Peace



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 08:32 PM
link   
reply to post by NWOwned
 


Here is that picture with a wee bit of help.....




The areas circled in red are airliner wreckage.



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 08:46 PM
link   
reply to post by NWOwned
 


Here is picture iof some of the heavy weight debris in the alley between C and B rings (know as AE Drive)

The debris has been shoved against the B Ring wall in order to clear the road for rescue personal and equipment




Among the debris is a section of landing gear assembly - probably from the nose wheel

Here is shot of the landing gear



Source article for pictures

11-settembre.blogspot.com...



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 08:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by NWOwned
 



If the 'plane' made the C Ring hole, please give it your best shot at explaining how.


Hole in C Ring wall was punched out by aircraft debris including landing gear truck - which is some of heaviest
and strongest pieces on an aircraft.

As a FF can tell you breaching a masonry wall is a brutal time consuming business - punching a hole that big
would have taken too long. Fire and rescue personal used the hole as access point into the building

Here is picture of the debris at the wall



Notice smoke staining on wall from fire

Get a copy of "FIREFIGHT" - goes into detail concerning fire and rescue operations at Pentagon. Authors
interviewed 150 of the fire/rescue people.


Thanks for eliminating one possibility with the fire fighters. I was just looking at that hole you know and was wondering what caused it. I didn't think it was firemen really but it very well could've been, you know, in the rescue attempt etc.

I do recall though seeing that hole very early on on 911 and so thought it must've been related to the "attack" itself.

But I still got problems with that hole because I see no heavy 'piece' of the alleged plane in or near it. The photos just show a hole. And not necessarily what actually caused that hole.

Now why is this so important and puzzling to me? I'll tell you.

You see, I don't think a 757 impacted the Pentagon on 911.

Now there are many threads on 911 here and I have not read them all, when I do read them it's endless back and forth, 'I cite this research' 'you cite that research' etc. etc. etc. There was one thread started in 2004 I was just looking at and it opened on every detail imaginable heaped up to show whatever, it was really really mindnumbing and boring to me, like who cares how many 757s can stretch wing tip to wing tip across one wall of the Pentagon?! (7 1/4)

I say just always try and think with and for yourself!

So, to that end, I might repeat some things and points others have mentioned and I might drone on a bit much but I'm trying to use and apply my own experience and to think originally about all of this. And like that's why I went on about the lying government girlfriend example.

I HAVE BEEN LIED TO in my own life and had to wake up, find out and realize that that was the case. I was blindsided by lying and I had to admit it, because it can happen.

And it might be therefore, happening with 911.

What I'm saying is that that kind of direct experience summed up in an anecdote and applied to 911 may in some cases be better than knowing 'the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow' (Monty Python).

How about this: Those crafty Naudet brothers, man they got the first and second hit shots on the towers... Amazing. That's quite a coincidence really, that first brother in that intersection when that first (whatever it was) came roaring in. But notice there is no comparable 'Naudet' at the Pentagon. No Joe Blow tourist to get the intersection shot of the jet hitting the light poles and the Pentagon. It was a very effective tactic where the towers were concerned. Why not have some "film maker", "tourist" "Indie Film Student" out at the Washington Monument or Arlington or wherever and 'catch' the whole thing on the corner of a grainy Zapruder grassy knoll hill film montage? It was good enough for Kennedy and the WTC! Ah, you see, that film doesn't exist, and why is that? Just like Kennedy and the WTCs, IF IT WAS REAL IT WOULD'VE BEEN FILMED! (Now, see, THAT'S original thinking!)

We have no Naudet/Zapruder film of the Pentagon "incident" and that means IT DIDN'T HAPPEN LIKE THEY ARE TELLING YOU IT DID OTHERWISE WE WOULD. Think about that.

Have we got ANY VIDEO of it? NO. Not really. That blurry 5 frame gate cam thing wasn't even officially released as for the rest of the cameras, they were not there, not on, don't show nothing or the 'frame rate' was too low! So no there is no credible video of the Pentagon hit, EITHER 'independent' (Naudet/Zapruder like) or Pentagon, hotel, or Citgo security camera like. And again, that's because it didn't happen. You follow?

Likewise, back to the hole in the wall... where is the pic or video of what caused it?

Peace



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 09:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by NWOwned
 


Here is picture iof some of the heavy weight debris in the alley between C and B rings (know as AE Drive)

The debris has been shoved against the B Ring wall in order to clear the road for rescue personal and equipment




Among the debris is a section of landing gear assembly - probably from the nose wheel

Here is shot of the landing gear



Source article for pictures

11-settembre.blogspot.com...


Hey, thanks for the pics, I never saw that one before of the stuff between C and B rings as you say. How much later were those photos taken? When they were clearing out the rubble days later or like the afternoon of 911?

You know I'm more suspicious than adamant, I may very well come to the conclusion that a 757 and even 'flight 77' actually hit the Pentagon, but, as you can tell, I ain't there yet. I'm going to first max out the whole 'I think I'm being lied to about 911' thing first.

To that end I have said I really don't think a 757 hit the Pentagon and of course photos of pieces of a 757 amidst the rubble sure don't help my suspicion any. But I'd have to say, "Well there'd have to be those parts in the rubble obviously." In fact I think it might be pointless to even check or verify that the 'pieces' are from a 757, they would necessarily have to exist and be simply based on the 'story'. The fact that they do exist still doesn't prove anything to me for even I a suspicious doubter would and do expect them to be there.

One question I could pose though is if there were 2 engines and 2 sets of wheel trucks all traveling fast through the building at once more or less, with the engines and even the wheels separate horizontally from each other why just the one hole?

Sorry, pics of plane debris next to a large hole in a wall doesn't necessarily mean the debris is/was the cause of the hole. Especially that hole.

The pieces are there no doubt, to my mind though, exactly how the pieces got there remains paramount and still in question.

Peace



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 10:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by NWOwned

Originally posted by FDNY343

Originally posted by NWOwned


If the 'plane' made the C Ring hole, please give it your best shot at explaining how.

Peace


Strawman. The PLANE did not make that hole. A PIECE of the plane did. Most likely something very solid, like the landing gear, or an engine.


Ok, perhaps I lacked specifics on the plane and the hole phrasing. My bad.

Obviously, I am not saying, implying or endorsing that like the very nose of the whole intact plane went that far in the building and poked that hole out. Of course if a 757 hit the Pentagon it would indeed be in pieces by then.

So far I've had two responses to my question, the first simply addressed a large 'piece' of the plane like the truck or wheel assembly and yours above mentioning, as well, the landing gear and/or an engine.

But notice the hole, it is open, people can and did walk through it. You'd think that some 'piece' bulky and heavy enough to make the hole would in some way be either visible in the very hole or even slightly outside maybe in the middle etc. I find it hard to believe, you see, that a large heavy piece of machinery capable of making that hole, would not also itself appear in any photos of the hole.

You say: 'Most likely something very solid, like the landing gear, or an engine.' and you say that for two reasons perhaps, you say 'most likely' first because it's perfectly reasonable to think the heaviest pieces would, could and did, cause that particular damage to the wall.... and you say 'most likely' because you don't exactly know what caused that hole. Assuming it's one of a number of heavy pieces of a 757, without physical and/or photographic evidence of exactly what caused it.

In short, you don't really know what caused that there hole now do you?

When I said did the plane make the hole I was more or less trying to get at, how come the piece that supposedly made it ain't in the photograph? For I, looking at that hole would indeed expect it to be there.

I dunno, it could've "bounced back" or maybe the first few FFs in there picked it up and tossed it aside!

I'm just saying, I don't really see what caused that hole.

Peace


I understand completly what you are saying now.

And yes, I do not know EXACTLY what made that hole.

Could it have been landing gear or engine? Sure. Could it have been a piece of the fuselage? Not likely, but certainly possible.

Could it have been the debris we see in the picture? Possibly. Could whatever it was have been moved to permit access to the building for fire and resue personel? Absolutely.

Also, we don't know exactly when that picture was taken.

Here is another picture. You can see what appears to be a rim of some sort in the background.
guardian.911review.org...

Here is an earlier photo with smoke still coming from the hole.
i277.photobucket.com...

It's hard to tell what is in the pile, as at this point even, stuff could have been moved. Fire hoses do not like sharp objects.



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 10:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by FDNY343

Originally posted by NWOwned


If the 'plane' made the C Ring hole, please give it your best shot at explaining how.

Peace


Strawman. The PLANE did not make that hole. A PIECE of the plane did. Most likely something very solid, like the landing gear, or an engine.


Yet we see no landing gear or engine part there, but they do mention part of the nose cone..



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 10:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by NWOwned

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by NWOwned
 


Here is picture iof some of the heavy weight debris in the alley between C and B rings (know as AE Drive)

The debris has been shoved against the B Ring wall in order to clear the road for rescue personal and equipment




Among the debris is a section of landing gear assembly - probably from the nose wheel

Here is shot of the landing gear



Source article for pictures

11-settembre.blogspot.com...


Hey, thanks for the pics, I never saw that one before of the stuff between C and B rings as you say. How much later were those photos taken? When they were clearing out the rubble days later or like the afternoon of 911?

You know I'm more suspicious than adamant, I may very well come to the conclusion that a 757 and even 'flight 77' actually hit the Pentagon, but, as you can tell, I ain't there yet. I'm going to first max out the whole 'I think I'm being lied to about 911' thing first.

To that end I have said I really don't think a 757 hit the Pentagon and of course photos of pieces of a 757 amidst the rubble sure don't help my suspicion any. But I'd have to say, "Well there'd have to be those parts in the rubble obviously." In fact I think it might be pointless to even check or verify that the 'pieces' are from a 757, they would necessarily have to exist and be simply based on the 'story'. The fact that they do exist still doesn't prove anything to me for even I a suspicious doubter would and do expect them to be there.

One question I could pose though is if there were 2 engines and 2 sets of wheel trucks all traveling fast through the building at once more or less, with the engines and even the wheels separate horizontally from each other why just the one hole?

Sorry, pics of plane debris next to a large hole in a wall doesn't necessarily mean the debris is/was the cause of the hole. Especially that hole.

The pieces are there no doubt, to my mind though, exactly how the pieces got there remains paramount and still in question.

Peace


NWO, I got alot of respect for you. You explain why you believe what you believe. I gotta say that is unusual. You don't beat around the bush, and openly admit that you are curious about this and that. Kudos man.

Now, the one thing that I want to address is the just one hole point.

Is it possible that the other landing gear/ engines took different paths? Sure. Without a doubt. Do I know the exact paths? No, of course not.

Could the landing gear hit a pole and riccochet in another direction? Absolutely. Could it have hit a stronger section of the C ring wall? Sure. Could it have hit up against something else (filing cabinet, etc) and not penetrated? Sure.

You have to think about all the other logical explainations for something. You cannot let your mind automatically think one specific thing. (I'm being LIED to!! ) You gotta think about the rest too.

Cheers!!



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 11:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by NWOwned
 


Here is that picture with a wee bit of help.....




The areas circled in red are airliner wreckage.


You know, I did see this pic of the hole in my search travels and even then at first thought I was thinking there was no way that little bit of debris caused that most impressive, large, circularish hole. It was like 'Weak Evidence' to me.

Weak evidence like the small plane parts found on the Pentagon lawn. Weak evidence like the light pole in the cab windshield without a mark on the hood. Weak evidence like finding a red bandana or a passport at a plane or building wreckage site. Weak evidence like cell phone calls couldn't possibly have been made. And on and on etc.

Look at that photo again. You telling me that that debris caused that hole? Really? Or are you just indicating there are Boeing type parts in the foyer of the hole? In terms of evidence on what made that hole that pic with those circled plane bits is WEAK.

Why is there one circularish hole at the center apex of the trajectory? Probably then not caused by either engine...

Really though I wouldn't expect such a circularish impact hole caused by any heavy part of a 757 that by the time it got that far, and even before, was not at all circular in shape, giving the expected impact effect and shape like say that you WOULD expect and get from something like a missile.

It looks like a missile hole to me.

Think about it, the plane is coming in fast and low, parallel to the ground, first and second floor impact by official account, (just like a missile) it's got walls and columns and three buildings to get through, it breaks, it ricochets, it rolls and thrusts, the odd shaped parts are oddly shaped and take and give a hell of a beating, I say it's possible some heavy parts can get that far but when they do they're not all neat and tidy, (unlike a missile) they could puncture and embed themselves weirdly in a wall (observe how damaged and broken up even the heavy pieces are) but they ain't gonna make a hole looking like a missile hole would look because of its (the missile's) design.

Also, like why or how could a missile even get that far in? It's 3 buildings, there's walls and columns and all kinds of stuff in the way... or so you suppose. But, what if like reports of bombs in the WTCs prior to the plane hits there was a bomb or bombs in the Pentagon prior to the missile strike, that way it could get all the way in unhindered and make a neat little exit hole in the outer (though inner) wall.

Now why would that be necessary you may ask?

Simple.

If there was no tail on the lawn because it was a bomb pretending to be a plane, the bomb could make the plane hole and the missile could make the trajectory track in line with the light poles. You have to have an exit hole you see? Otherwise people might just think a bomb went off and not even notice the light poles. It's like a golf swing, the missile hit and subsequent missile hole is the 'follow through'. I bet the light poles were not hit by the 'plane' but taken down PRIOR so that the 'missile' wouldn't accidently hit one of them on its way in because that would look pretty strange and be awkward to explain.

Why is there one circularish hole at the center apex of the trajectory? Gimme an 'M', gimme an 'I', gimme an 'S'... you know the rest.


Peace



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 12:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by FDNY343


I understand completly what you are saying now.

And yes, I do not know EXACTLY what made that hole.

Could it have been landing gear or engine? Sure. Could it have been a piece of the fuselage? Not likely, but certainly possible.

Could it have been the debris we see in the picture? Possibly. Could whatever it was have been moved to permit access to the building for fire and resue personel? Absolutely.

Also, we don't know exactly when that picture was taken.

Here is another picture. You can see what appears to be a rim of some sort in the background.
guardian.911review.org...

Here is an earlier photo with smoke still coming from the hole.
i277.photobucket.com...

It's hard to tell what is in the pile, as at this point even, stuff could have been moved. Fire hoses do not like sharp objects.




Could it have been a missile? Absolutely.

Btw, that smoking photo seems early and 'still smoking!' but I don't see any big piece of anything really, should I?

Shouldn't I? (Though like you mention something could've been moved to permit access.)

Would I if the circularish hole was caused by a missile? (Umm, no I don't think I would.)

So what I'm saying is there's an early pic of a smoking circularish hole at the very apex of the trajectory with no big piece of debris in it and you're looking at it too and you're thinking that it was most probably a large heavy 'plane' piece that in some chaotic way made it?

I think it looks way more like a missile hole.

Peace



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join