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 gunner50cal
The air defenses in that area alone would of took out any "plane" that would of been flying that low and close to the pentagon. There clearly was no evidence of the engines doing any damage to the building. It WAS a missle fired by the idiots that concocted this whole deal to murder our own people in cold blood. . This guys a real peice of work. I am no "scienentist" but i am not an idiot either. Go home Dr.
I got up to the part where they were discussing how ’conspiracy theorists’ could ‘normalize’ themselves by accepting at least some parts of the Official Conspiracy Theory in relation to the Pentagon explosion; the ‘some’ referred to being that a humungous passenger airliner actually did hit the Pentagon, leaving no recognizable trace of itself, but hardly damaging the lawn or building, and I burst out laughing and turned it off.
everyone from Canada knows it's Bull# that a so called "757" flew into the pentagon.
A missile hit the pentagon and it is proven, another cruise missile was the pennsylvania crater.
By your standard, what would video of the plane hitting the building prove? Nothing, because video can be faked. For some people, no evidence will every change their mind. And thats fine. The world does not hinge on our agreement.
[color=gold]Impossible to Prove a Falsehood True
by George Nelson
Colonel, USAF (ret.)
The precautionary principle is based on the fact that its impossible to prove a false claim to be true. Failure to prove a false premise true does not automatically make it false but caution is called for, especially in the case of a world-changing event like the alleged terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 . After five long years, our government has provided the public with no physical evidence to support its claim that the attacks were the work of Muslim terrorists, or even that the identity of the aircraft that struck their targets on September 11 was the same as those specified in the 9/11 Commission's report. As explained below, it would be a simple matter to confirm the identity of each of the four aircraft, and until such physical proof of identity is forthcoming, no conclusions can be scientifically drawn to support the official story as being accurate. This is a precaution against rushing to judgment. At this point, it could just as easily be assumed that the 911 hijackings were part of a black operation carried out with full cooperation of elements within our own government.
It has now been more than five years since the tragic events of 9/11/01 , and still the general public has seen no physical evidence that should have been collected at each of the four crash sites, (a routine requirement during mandatory investigations of each and every major aircraft crash.) The National Transportation Safety Board has announced on its website that responsibility for the investigations and reports have been assigned to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, but the FBI has refused to publicly release any copies of their mandatory investigations. The FBI response to a request for copies of their reports under the Freedom of Information Act was a refusal. The agency claimed that their investigation reports were "in a file", and that the FBI was exempt from FOIA release, "due to the sensibilities of surviving families of the crash victims".
[color=gold]F.B.I. Counsel: No Attempt Made By F.B.I. To Formally Identify 9/11 Plane Wreckage
What were your friends names???
Sphynx... So when am I going to get paid? If I am a govt. agent, I would like to get paid..
I saw the plane hit the pentagon... So did my 2 passengers, and hundreds of others traveling north that day..