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.

 

100% conclusive evidence that a plane did hit the pentagon.

page: 22
24
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by TupacShakur
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 

Alright after 20 pages of arguing, it's obvious that neither the OSers or the Truthers are going to change their mind. No matter what evidence is presented to back up our side of the story, you find some flaw in that evidence and toss it out the window. No matter what witness testimonies or photos of wreckage I see, I will also not be convinced until I see a legitimate video that provides sufficient evidence that a 757 hit the Pentagon. So we're just a bunch of stubborn fools wasting our time, however I do enjoy debating about this topic so I'll continue on with this meaningless bickering which will get us nowhere.


Excuse me, but this is the very attitude which tells me right away that you're not out to find the truth behind the 9/11 attack- you have an agenda to push out your own favorite scenario onto others regardless of what the truth of 9/11 is. You admit that photographic evidence isn't enough to sway you and you admit that eyewitness accounts aren't enough to sway you. You even had the gall to dismiss the photos of pentagon victims even though the defense lawyers for Maussoui accepted them as legitimate...and I daresay they have more incentive and reseources to determine their authenticity than you do. I could tell you they likewise recovered the black box from the craft that showed it was from flight 77, but we both know you'll come up with some ready made excuse as to why it's still not enough.

Tell me, in all honesty- what would be in any impact video that would finally convince you that it really was because from what I've seen, you've developed such an intricate assembly line of denial that there isn't anything under the sun you'd ever accept that would convince you to throw away your conspiracy claims. You people insist the impact video they did release of being fake so I know full well you're going to accuse any other impact video that might come along of being fake the same way the "moon landing was a hoax" characters insist the Apollo footage is fake. It's so crystal clear to me that this is what you're goign to do that you might as well already have done it.


Like I said, neither of us will budge so we're wasting our time here, but I'll carry on. Aircraft wreckage definitely was on the site of the crash as you pointed out, however you completely failed to address the video which I posted, which showed dozens of men unloading from a bus prior to the Pentagons collapse, each carrying a full duffle bag and heading in that direction.


I didn't think I needed to address it, because a) after the plane hit every reporter's camera within a mile of the Pentagon was covering every square inch of what was happening, so claiming people were able to plant wreckage in such a busy area in broad daylight without anyone noticing is too idiotic to even comment on b) the wreckage they were finding on the site was way too large to fit in a duffle bag, including that gigantic chunk of fuselage on the lawn in that photograph that I know you've seen, and c) you have zero proof to back up any of your accusations and you're just making that up off the top of your head anyway, so the opinion that the Pentagon was struck by a space saucer piloted by purple dinosaurs is every bit as credible as your opinion. If you require absolutely no evidence to back up your claims then neither does anyone else.



What do you think is in those duffle bags? And even if you do not believe it is aircraft wreckage, do you believe that there is absolutely no chance that those bags could have been carrying aircraft wreckage to spread around the lawn? And I will take the word of an experienced pilot, who has 6000 hours of experience flying in that exact model of plane which the terrorist supposedly crashed, over witnesses who say the impossible was made possible.


Well, I'm sorry to break this to you, but in a court of law, juries don't need to rely on 100% conclusive evidence. They rely on the preponderance of evidence leaning one way or the other, and I as a juror to this listening to the evidence and the preponderance of the evidence overwhelmingly leans toward the fact that it was flight 77 that hit the pentagon. Eyewitness evidence supports it, wreckage found supports it, and DNA from the recovered remains support it. The only thing you've offered is make believe you're conjuring up to justify your prior make believe and an expert opinion from someonewho doesn't have the first clue on what even happened at the Pentagon.

There will always be unrepentently biases jurors who'll insist a defendent is guilty of a robbery entirely because the defendent is black and he thinks black people are all criminals, or that a defenent is guilty of adultery entirely becuase the defendent is a woman and he thinks women are all whores, but the rest of the world isn't going to stop a fair trial from being fair simply to placate some irate fanatic with an ax to grind.


I'm not going to argue over this topic anymore, I told you why I don't consider those photographs as conclusive evidence that a 757 full of people crashed into the Pentagon in my last post directed towards you, and some lawyers accepting them as evidence in a trial which was a huge part of the 9/11 official story does not even come close to convincing me that they're legit.

If I believe that the government was behind the 9/11 attacks, then why would I believe that a trial which convicted one of the pilots who was potentially used a scapegoat is evidence to support the legitimacy of those photographs?


That's the problem right there, and the reason for the 20 + pages of bickering over the exact same foolisness over and over- nothing under the sun is going to convince you that any evidence showing flight 77 hit the Pentagon is legitimate.



"Something unusual" is a massive understatement, renovations were being done to the area of the Pentagon and the plane happened to hit that side of the Pentagon during the renovation time frame. That is a dead giveaway that the government planned and was involved in it since those are clearly preparations being made for when and where the plane would hit.


No, it's really the case that you want to believe the gov't was behind the attack so you'll grasp any any straw you can find regardless of how desperate it is that looks like it suports the idea. What the flip difference does it matter whether they were putting up sheetrock during the attack? The building still had lots of people in it, and 184 people were still killed in the attack.


Could it just be a massive coincidence? I suppose, but there are many other massive coincidences that occured on that day which are stastically impossible, such as the five or six wargames which were going on in the days leading up to the morning of the attack which hampered the militaries ability to respond to the attacks, because they thought it was a part of the war game. Big coincidence, right? I guess it's also a coincidence that Dick Cheney ordered the military to stand down and not intercept any of those hi-jacked planes, even though prior to that it was standard operating procedure to intercept and shoot down hi-jacked planes if necessary, without the consent of any politicians.


a) these wargames are events they hold every year, long before the 9/11 attack took place and theyre still holding them now. There is no coincidence in this whatsoever as

b)There was never any stand down order. That bit came from the conspiracy mongors cherry picking Mineta's testimony, and Mineta specifically said "do the orders still stand" referred to a shoot down order.

In short, you're making accusations up off the top of your head, you're relying on people's statement who have no idea what they're taalking about, and now you're spouting factoids that aren't even true. You really have no credibility.




posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 04:18 PM
link   




Finally! I kinda hate to admit it now, but I used to be one of those 'cruise missile hit the Pentagon' people.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 05:12 PM
link   

CONGRATULATIONS, EVERYONE !!!!


Now there is more pages than flags in this thread.
22 pages and "only" 21 flags !!!
This can only prove one thing and that is that the OP's "100% conclusive evidence.." hasn't got many believing supporters.


It has been an enjoying read and I look forward to the continuing...
The "100% conclusive evidence.." theory has been absolutely hilarious reading. It's more entertaining than my favorite cartoon!!! Absolutely "100% conclusive evidence.." without any shred of doubts or holes is a winner...
There shouldn't be any need for questioning if it really was 100% conclusive evidence, so what is all this disagreement about?? Maybe denying ignorance...?
I appologize if this post seems a bit trolly, but 22 pages!!! Wowww... KEEP IT COMING!!!



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 05:57 PM
link   
The Murray St engine is intriguing, reminds me of Kebab maker sitting all upright like that. It had to be taken early on with all that smoke about too, since there are no yellow ribbons and stuff seemed to have been moved around a bit later.
Wasn't there also some controversy over the engine, or at least part of it ? Some people thought it belonged to a 747, or perhaps a tanker version of 767, but not a UA 767 airliner, I never did here the conclusion of that story.

ckpi.typepad.com...

Waypast'is pic added, taken obviously, around the same time as one of the linked pictures,

i995.photobucket.com...

Waypast'is tree hit pic is intriguing too, how the 'planes engine hit the tree and the wing missed everything else..Ah well there must be an 'explanation,

i995.photobucket.com...


edit on 23-6-2011 by smurfy because: Text.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 06:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by TupacShakur
reply to post by Immortalgemini527
 





100% conclusive evidence that what hit the pentagon was and in fact an airplane. clear as day.

100% conclusive evidence to you is a blurry, zoomed-in, pixelated grey blob? Clear as day?
That's the blurriest, most obscure piece of "100% conclusive evidence" that I've ever seen. Do you know what evidence is? Your stupidity is unbelievable, you have no common sense whatsoever, yet one of your few arguing points is that "common sense" and "reality" do not need proof. This post will probably get deleted but I cannot hold it in anymore, I've tried for several pages to rationally explain your delusional state of mind, but I've had enough.

After following this thread from the start, evidence has 100% conclusively shown me that you are a troll. You are just posting videos, then saying stupid things to make us angry. There is no way that a human being can be presented with the evidence that we have provided you, and negate that with your flawed "common sense does not need proof" argument. How can you disregard factual pieces of evidence presented by a wide variety of credible experts, by simply saying I don't need proof to back up my common sense? You actually believe that common sense trumps thousands of unbiased expert opinions and dozens of smoking-gun pieces of evidence? In your mind, that is logical and makes sense?

If you are not a troll, and you honestly believe that what you are saying is correct after thoroughly inspecting every piece of evidence presented here and reading every single post, then you are a complete s*** for brains. I am incredibly frusturated, I'm trying to get through to you and show you exactly what you are saying and how illogical and dangerously delusional your state of mind is, but your mental incapacity to examine and understand what evidence is prevents you from being able to coherently piece together logical thoughts as if you have some chemical imbalance in your brain. Your ignorance literally offends me, and I'm struggling to find the right emotion which accurately captures my feelings towards you: I want to laugh hysterically at your ignorance, I want to throw my laptop out of my window out of rage, and I want to fall to my knees and sob like a baby because I associate myself with the same country that a buffoon like yourself lives in.

You are either a troll who is getting a good laugh out of the emotional responses which you are evoking, or you are a fool of epic proportions.


It’s a bird… its plane, its…reality man.

Realitie check 1. A plane hit those lampposts and knocked them down as it was coming towards the pentagon.

Realitie check 2. If it was a missile and that missile hit a lamppost, well, if it hit several lampposts, then it would not have had the capability to still travel as it did towards the pentagon.

Realitie check 3. If the government wanted to create this just to go to war, then they could have did it 1000 other ways then to attack there own people.

Reality check 4. If it was missile, then what happened to the passengers.

Reality check 5. You can ‘black ops’ the FBI, the CIA, a regular police station, HOMELAND SECURITY, or even a fort…but you cannot>>>>….YOU …..JUST ….SIMPLY ….CANNOT….black ops the pentagon, it is highly impossible.

Realitie check 6. When the pentagon reinforced their so-called structure on the pentagon, it was made to stop, a truck bomb, a big truck bomb, a missile, possibly a train, but never a 50,000-ton aircraft coming at speeds of 400 plus miles per hour.

Reality check7. I don’t care how many educated pilots or how many flight hours a pilot has to come up with the stupid assumption that the maneuver couldn’t be done…WHY? BECAUSE THEY NEVER TRIED IT BEFORE!!!!!
‘SO THEIR HIGHLY OVER EXAGGERATED BRAIN SAYING THIS RUBBISH HOLDS NOT EVEN A REALITY DROP OF REALITY IN THE EQUATION OF LIFE IT SELF’

Reality check 8. A missile would have easily been viewed as a missile then a plane in which over hundreds of witness say they saw beyond the shadow of a doubt …an airplane.

Reality check 9.A conspirators brain holds no truth and is not capable of reality...PERIOD !

Thanks Mr reality Super Hero 'Pin Head' guy..your the best.
edit on 23-6-2011 by Immortalgemini527 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 06:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Skallagrimsson
 


Here is map of where remains were recovered from the Pentagon

Exterior (E ring) - the entry point is at the bottom


Below: location of human remains. An exhibit from the Moussaoui trial. Blue ovals show flight 77 victims; orange ovals, Pentagon workers; black ovals, unidentified (there were also fatalities on the second floor).





posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Immortalgemini527
Reality check 9.A conspirators brain holds no truth and is not capable of reality...PERIOD !

1. "Conspirators" is the ones who made this mess wether it was the Al-Quaeda caveman bunch or someone else.
2. It's not the brains that has to hold the truths. Truths is truths on their own and not dependant on who has whatever in their heads.
3. Reality has nothing to do with whom has something in their heads or their capacities. How do you really define reality?? Just asking...



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 07:01 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 

OK, thanks for the info...



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 07:26 PM
link   
If I may be allowed to step in on behalf of Immortal G and give my "interpretation" of what he was saying:

1 - Reality checks 1 & 2: - Even if a commercial aircraft did or didn't hit *all* those lamp posts per the NTSB scenario - one thing that 99% of the witnesses say (including ALL of the witnesses who eyeballed the plane all the way in) is that it was a plane.

2 - Reality check #3: - Example: Gulf of Tonkin - no Americans killed in that supposed "action".

3 - Reality check #5: - In order for this to be a deception of the highest order as is suggested by some who dispute the OS - then the FBI, National Guard, Emergency responder/recovery crews, and Pentagon personnel (both civilian and military) and ALL the eyewitnesses would have had to have been "gotten to". The likelyhood of that many people keeping a secret seems small.

4 - Reality check #6: - We'll leave the trains out of the equation since there aren't any tracks nearby. However, the upgrade to the fascade was primarily around the windows so that they could defeat an RPG or 50 cal round, and likely the concussive blast associated with a truck bomb.

5 - Reality check #7: - He actually makes a good point that I think gets overlooked sometimes. Experienced pilots are constantly viewing the plane's flight path and maneuvers from a survival standpoint. It's just human nature after all. When a pilot looks at the data and path, his thoughts are most likely - "Could I pull that off and survive? - Probably no." However, there was no concern for survival on the hijackers part so to them there was no real risk in the attempt. And again, based on the eyewitness reports - it would seem that they were lucky enough to pull it off.

6 - Reality check #8: - Another good point - there is little confidence to suggest that of all the witnesses to the event, they would be unable to distinguish between a missile and a commercial airliner. As an example, a Global Hawk is probably the closest drone to an aircraft in appearance, yet is only 44' long. A 757 by contrast is 154' long.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 08:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skallagrimsson

Originally posted by Immortalgemini527
Reality check 9.A conspirators brain holds no truth and is not capable of reality...PERIOD !

1. "Conspirators" is the ones who made this mess wether it was the Al-Quaeda caveman bunch or someone else.
2. It's not the brains that has to hold the truths. Truths is truths on their own and not dependant on who has whatever in their heads.
3. Reality has nothing to do with whom has something in their heads or their capacities. How do you really define reality?? Just asking...


Have to agree with that, no matter what. If I said a large airliner hit The Pentagon, I could be 'proven' wrong, no doubt about that. If I said a missile hit The Pentagon, I could be proven wrong about that too. If I said a small 'plane hit The Pentagon, again, I could be proven wrong, all because nothing seems to fit with too many anomalies. But the thing is, I could only be proved wrong in a very singular fashion in each case.

In the case of a large airliner, the initial breaching, (before the collapse) of the facade is way too small, the debris seen in photographs is far too pristine, I'll add to that no release of at least three HQ surveillance cameras from that facade and one from the heliport control tower, to make for ambiguity.
The missile theory would have to have been schizophrenic, or similar in nature as there were more than one exit wounds, perhaps three, in the "C" wing.

A small 'plane? sounds well and good, especially when in the only video released of the impact at The Pentagon site seems to show what looks like a tailplane flying over the roof on impact, except that it was just that, it's too small to be from a craft that would cause the required amount of damage.
That's about as far as I have got so far, except that whatever hit, it was as low as possible to the ground, a transformer was side swiped, cable spools were missed and very, very close vehicles were burnt or hardly damaged.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 08:14 PM
link   
reply to post by userid1
 

Thanks a bunch userid1, your reality is impeccable beyond reason.

If I may be allowed to step in on behalf of Immortal G and give my "interpretation" of what he was saying:

1 - Reality checks 1 & 2: - Even if a commercial aircraft did or didn't hit *all* those lamp posts per the NTSB scenario - one thing that 99% of the witnesses say (including ALL of the witnesses who eyeballed the plane all the way in) is that it was a plane.

2 - Reality check #3: - Example: Gulf of Tonkin - no Americans killed in that supposed "action".

3 - Reality check #5: - In order for this to be a deception of the highest order as is suggested by some who dispute the OS - then the FBI, National Guard, Emergency responder/recovery crews, and Pentagon personnel (both civilian and military) and ALL the eyewitnesses would have had to have been "gotten to". The likelyhood of that many people keeping a secret seems small.

4 - Reality check #6: - We'll leave the trains out of the equation since there aren't any tracks nearby. However, the upgrade to the fascade was primarily around the windows so that they could defeat an RPG or 50 cal round, and likely the concussive blast associated with a truck bomb.

5 - Reality check #7: - He actually makes a good point that I think gets overlooked sometimes. Experienced pilots are constantly viewing the plane's flight path and maneuvers from a survival standpoint. It's just human nature after all. When a pilot looks at the data and path, his thoughts are most likely - "Could I pull that off and survive? - Probably no." However, there was no concern for survival on the hijackers part so to them there was no real risk in the attempt. And again, based on the eyewitness reports - it would seem that they were lucky enough to pull it off.

6 - Reality check #8: - Another good point - there is little confidence to suggest that of all the witnesses to the event, they would be unable to distinguish between a missile and a commercial airliner. As an example, a Global Hawk is probably the closest drone to an aircraft in appearance, yet is only 44' long. A 757 by contrast is 154' long.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by userid1
3 - Reality check #5: - In order for this to be a deception of the highest order as is suggested by some who dispute the OS - then the FBI, National Guard, Emergency responder/recovery crews, and Pentagon personnel (both civilian and military) and ALL the eyewitnesses would have had to have been "gotten to". The likelyhood of that many people keeping a secret seems small.

Not necessarily. The psycology of the big lie and how it is presented can influence the individuals involved and how they perceive any situation. Remember that it was allmost immediately defined beyond all doubt that it was bin Laden and Al Quaeda that was behind this event. The event was also of such a traumatic and emotional levels that it was difficult to possibly question the official story in the timeframe close to the event. It was either believe the official story and be patriotic or if you had any doubths you had to be the enemy of every victim and even the very model of democracy. "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists..." sounds familiar???

The big lie is the notion that the people you trust the most can really be your worst enemy that is either behind the event or in any way is obstructing the very truth behind it all to come out and reach the public at large.

"The individual is handicapped by coming face-to-face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists."
- J. Edgar Hoover

It was only later that questions were becoming to the surface. The psychology to this could be deiberately designed to get even the least likely to comply to something they normally wouldn't. Also remember that there was a large scale drill ongoing that day that had the scope similiar to what went on in reality. This is also the same effect as being the magicians assistant. In a system you are only fed the bits and pieces you need to do your job and therefore you doesn't see the big picture, and are therefore not capable of fitting together all the bits and pieces. It's just the magician that have all the pieces and knowledge behind the illusion and therefore can keep the workings of his illusion secret even if each assistant knows a piece of the trick.

The psy-ops trick is to implant a official story into the minds at a early stage as possibly in order to have the majority of minds as controlled colored as possible. When the questions and doubths arrive much later, many will not speak out of fear of being alone deviating from the truth perceived by the majority, and those that do will most likely receive ridicule and debunking even if they are right or not.

There are many ways to construct and control the masses. There are vast numbers of brilliant people fully employed with the single purpose of controlling and manipulating others through different psy-ops programs. They have all the necessary tecknology, know-how and a long list of dirty tricks necessary to do the impossible and unthinkable in their toolchest. It would be downright stupid to think that they all have the best of mankind in their minds at all time.....

Technologically the Mk-Ultra mind control technology is "stone age" technology now. I don't believe there is no limit to what can be accomplished with the human mind in this year of 2011.

I'm not saying conclusively who was or might be behind the 911 event, or how it all was accomplished, but I do have some questions that still remains unanswered. I really want to believe that the truth is simple and our leaders only has the best of humanity in mind, but as long as there is unanswered questions still remaining I will continue my search for answers.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 09:43 PM
link   
Understood - AND I would never attempt to hamper your attempts to satisfy your curiousity/skepticism. I only wish to follow the mantra of the site and "Deny Ignorance". I'm pretty confident you - yourself, have seen conspiracy scenarios presented on this subject that just leave you shaking your head in wonder. It's those items that have no basis in fact that I wish to address so that they don't go viral as we've seen so often in the past on this, and many other subjects.

Is it possible that this was all part of a Gov't "recipe" to achieve a desired outcome? How can I possibly say it was 'impossible". It becomes a matter of "likelyhood" - which to me, is defined primarily by evidence and logic.

For instance: long before the Gov't began to mention AQ, we still had eyewitnesses interviewed on the day of the event who spoke (presumably) without influence on what they saw. Even though many of their accounts do not precisely match aspects of the OS, they pretty much all agree - this rings as true to me. "Who" the guilty party was, was irrelevant at that moment - the recall of the event was of paramount importance. So, to me, there was no opportunity for any psy-ops influence to either be presented, or take any effect.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that the OS is without doubt 100% accurate down to every last detail and therefore beyond reproach. However, I do believe that it is "essentially" correct according to the evidence available - and any possible outstanding issues in my mind do not jeopardize the "essential" realities presented.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 09:48 PM
link   
Well it's pretty clear that on either side of the debate that the event has been discussed so long and debated for so long that we all have indoctrinated ourselves to our own beliefs.

We can go on and on forever showing evidence each way, but that's the thing imo, there shouldn't be evidence to the contrary of the official story.

The OPs video only presents a hypothesis presented by Integrated Consultants, Inc using SolidWorks software, why they feel they have the experience to weigh in, I have no idea, nor do I really care.

We can recreate all manner of things in a software program, that of course does not make it real, I know this might shock some but really those are not REAL dinosaurs in Jurassic Park.

So we have people that have debated this for years and years and we still have people that are new to the idea that there are still questions, questions that even the 9/11 Commission were not able to explore and that still remain.

So we can believe the OS laid out by our government and trust that what they say is true, but we still have a problem when we try that option, for the very same government contradict themselves on the story, example from the OP.



Well how are we supposed to believe anything when the POTUS at the time can't keep it straight?

We all saw where he was on TV, how the hell can he not remember where he was, doesn't everyone remember where they were or what they were doing that day? And if you don't wouldn't you remember if it was documented on video?

So if it makes you feel safe and secure to believe what the guy that can't even remember what he was doing at the time says, then fine, I think that speaks more to your mental capacity then it does someone who does not buy Bush's word on the subject.

Me, I will trust the opinions and research by 220+ Senior Military, Intelligence Service, Law Enforcement, and Government Officials; 1,400+ Engineers and Architects; 250+ Pilots and Aviation Professionals; 400+ Professors Question 9/11; 300+ 9/11 Survivors and Family Members; 200+ Artists, Entertainers, and Media Professionals; and 400+ Medical Professionals, people like Major General Stubblebine:


Major General Albert Stubblebine, U.S. Army (ret) – Former Commanding General of U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command, 1981 - 1984, commanding 15,000 intelligence and security personnel. Also commanded the U.S. Army’s Electronic Research and Development Command and the U.S. Army’s Intelligence School and Center. Former head of Imagery Interpretation for Scientific and Technical Intelligence. 32-year Army career
PatriotsQuestion911.com


Or people like Richard Gage, AIA, founder of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth:


I will take the words of the professionals over the opinions of arm chair researchers and their warped version of what they believe reality means any day of the week.

I will side with Connor, I think it's unlikely that Luke was able to take down the Death Star with a little X-Wing fighter without help, I think the Emperor was in on it, it was an inside job, in order to justify the taking of Hoth.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 10:10 PM
link   
Just a clarification on an earlier statement - I'm not sure that the upgraded windows themselves were intended to defeat the RPGs that were available at that time - but the areas immediately surrounding the windows were I believe, as they had Kevlar matting extending out from the window in all directions.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 10:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hijaqd

We can go on and on forever showing evidence each way, but that's the thing imo, there shouldn't be evidence to the contrary of the official story.


Well, here's the thing...This is a best effort reconstruction of events. The only way I can think of that we'd get a truly accurate recounting would be for someone with the proper flight and engineering experience to have been on the flight, survived, and have taken scrupulous notes. Short of that, this is all a best guess at reconstruction based on available evidence. I'm quite sure that police accident reconstruction analysis gets things wrong when there's no witnesses alive to help - but they work with what they've got to figure out the event as best as can be done. I don't feel it's entirely fair to say that based on a reconstruction - as opposed to expert recollection, all things should be expected to be absolutely perfect.

The problem with this situation, like a police accident reconstruction, is that it's too easy to armchair quarterback it afterwards.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 10:53 PM
link   
I have to admit first that I did not read through all 22 pages of this post. I did watch the op's video and I did read several pages before I wanted to post. So I just want to address these few points.

1. In the video, the plane seems to be flying for an awful long time, very even and parallel to the ground. Would this even be possible given the speed the aircraft was traveling? I hate to bring up the experience of the supposed pilot, but to me that seems like an awful hard thing to pull off. Granted, I'm only a VFR pilot myself so I can NOT speak of flying behind the controls of a real jet.

2. The plane supposedly struck not one, but 5 light posts doing something like 400+ mph? The first strike itself would have altered the attitude of the plane, yet this one kept going no problem? 2, 3, 4... 5... no issues.. no adjustments? I would like to post this link as a reference of another aircraft hitting a light posts. Granted this was a RAF Jaguar, but he was doing 600mph when he clipped the light and had to "wrestle for control" of the aircraft. Now I understand these light poles were "break away" posts and thus they wouldn't cause as much damage.. but still.

3. If a 757-223 did in fact crash into the Pentagon.. why wasn't the damage instantaneous? The walls didn't collapse right away. In fact, looking at the walls, it looks more as if a bomb blew up in front of it. Now please note, I am NOT stating I believe it was a bomb. I'm just stating my observation. Please look at the below image to see what I am talking about.

* this is a large image *


4. The plane was traveling so fast when it impacted the Pentagon that barely any debris were found correct? And yet bodies of the passengers were (supposedly). So human flesh is tougher than aircraft grade aluminium and titanium? That seems a bit off.

5. The flight path of Flight 77 shows that the pilot chose to circle around and come back at the Pentagon. Why? I know this can't really be answered because no one knows but the person in control. But it makes no sense. Why not nose dive into the building? Why come around in a hard turn to line up and mysteriously hit the ONE SIDE that was re-enforced?

6. Is it absolutely impossible that a jet DID fly over the Pentagon, yet a missile hit it instead? The witnesses saw a jet. I don't deny what a witness saw. But weren't there other aircraft in the space near the Pentagon? I'm not talking about Regan traffic.

The reason "I" am skeptical is for a few reasons. Many amazing things happened on September 11th. For one, in NY, not one, but THREE buildings fell completely at free-fall speed from fire damage. The ONLY three buildings ever to collapse from this. In Shanksville, PA Flight 93 managed to basically disappear. There are many many comments about how nothing was found there almost immediately after the "crash". How did the engines manage to end up so far away? (Or 'an' engine). How is it that the plane was obliterated, yet they claim to have identified via DNA all but one passenger? And in DC, a 757 controlled by an inexperienced pilot, managed to pull amazing maneuvers and strike a specific side of the Pentagon, yet avoid being captured on over 100+ security cameras. There are so many things that make people skeptical. The stand down orders. The diversion of intercept aircraft off shore. The NORAD blunders. The exercises held on the EXACT day that the real event happens. Etc etc etc.

I am a skeptic. I don't claim to believe one way or another. I only state this, the United States Government's "proof" has not made me a believer. I lean towards the position that something else went down and we are not being given the full truth.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 11:03 PM
link   
reply to post by userid1
 



Short of that, this is all a best guess at reconstruction based on available evidence. I'm quite sure that police accident reconstruction analysis gets things wrong when there's no witnesses alive to help - but they work with what they've got to figure out the event as best as can be done. I don't feel it's entirely fair to say that based on a reconstruction - as opposed to expert recollection, all things should be expected to be absolutely perfect.


I don't disagree with that, and THAT is the thing, why isn't the reconstruction analysis done based on the witnesses that were available?

TupacShakur already provided the discrepancy in Lloyde England's account (the taxi driver of the taxi that the first lightpole allegedly struck):


We also have Sgt Lagasse and Sgt Brooks' account which totally contradicts the flight path, therefore making Integrated Consultants, Inc's animation, the OS's account, and the OP's premise faulty, the flight path of the plane is critical to understanding how this was pulled off (again, IMO)


Or the first hand account of April Gallop:


To be fair, the first 2 video's and an endorsement from April is from The PentaCon

So my stance will remain, highly skeptical of the official version, as there are far too many discrepancies in what we are told to believe and what eyewitnesses state or what expert opinion and research done by professionals in their fields provide.

What hit the Pentagon, I do not pretend to know, I do know that the official story's explanation does not fit and that a great number of professionals with a vast amount more experience then most "debunkers" provide excellent cases that also contradict the official story, including members of the 9/11 Commission (That in of itself should be the red flag for anyone, again IMO)
edit on 23-6-2011 by Hijaqd because: plane not plan, doh



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 11:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Hijaqd
 

Whooops, General Stubblebine is questioning the OS on this. His name has come up on a lot of topics I have been digging into. If he, of all, are questioning this, the whole event has definately some unanswered questions that's hughe even within the very core of the system. What is really going on here??? He has probably the best clearance possible to all available inside data and he questions the official story? He would never have come near a camera to express his questions if he didn't know that there was something beyond fishy about the official story. You bet that he knows more than he says and he seems really po'd about this. Something is about to enter the surface. I think the truth will come forth sooner than later. If he officially questions the key points in this story others will come forward with more. If the military/intelligence community was working together in unison in the aftermath of this tragic event, such powerful insiders wouldn't have questioned the event in public. He is not Joe Average. Even as retired he is possibly one of the insiders with the highest clearance....

Thanks for bringing that up, Hijaqd.
Much appreciated!!!



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 12:54 AM
link   
There was a doomsday plane spotted at the pentagon around the impact as well very interesting



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join