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

reply to post by Immortalgemini527


My issue with the 9/11 Pentagon Conspiracy is quite simple....it very well couldve been a plane or it couldve been a missile or something else. But how in the world does one of the most guarded and watched places on EARTH that also has over 400 cameras pointed at it and watching its surroundings have what looks like a cut, edited, and glued together couple seconds of footage?


Because you know damn well if some crazed lunatic ran onto the lawn in front of the Pentagon with a gun or some kind of hostage situation that every single MSM outlet would have footage of it within minutes.

That is what i would like explained to me most....that and OH WAIT......


www.youtube.com...


Donald Rumsfeld admitting that they cannot trace 2.3 TRILLION DOLLARS of US Taxpayer Money the day before 9/11 happened!!!. And wouldnt you know what department of the Pentagon was hit and ultimately destroyed even down to the very computer hardware and documentation in files?!?!?!?! THE ACCOUNTING DEPARTMENT!!!!



So please explain to me that my friend.......or anyone for that matter.....I will await your replies.

Originally posted by CCLLCCLL
reply to post by jhn7537

 

I know right?! Your telling me the PENTAGON only had ONE surveillance camera that caught like ONE frame of this event?! That alone is the most huge stupid discrepancy of the whole thing. Its like when my daughter was playing with the curtains and broke them, then I come inside and she says, "it was the dog!" but the dog was outside with me when it happened. This is all just a waste of time.

The thing that amazed me the most was after the attacks on 9/11 we started seeing MULTIPLE videos of different angles of the flights that crashed into the WTC towers coming out, but still to this day, 10 years later, we havent seen one clip of a plane hitting the Pentagon. There are multiple surviellance cameras that SHOULD of caught the allegded crash (Sheraton Hotel for starters), but they refuse to show us. If anything, wouldnt it put the nations mind at ease to see what happened that day? To some degree it would be like closure to witness the events happen, verse taking someones word for it. I know for one, if I saw it happen, I would drop the whole Pentagon conspiracy movement in a heart beat....

reply to post by Immortalgemini527


Why is their a post with a letter about the Demolition at WTC, and then this video.

You for got add the slop that drops from the road to the building. I think it's another 6-8ft.

Please consider the amount of fuel that was on board as well. the left side of the building inside walls are not burnt.

Whatever you Pro- Government guys come up with as an argument, I prefer to listen to many hundreds of pilots who say that it's unbelievable that a plane hit the Pentagon.
Just release the surveillance tapes, wasn't there talk of some employees in a Hotel who supposedly saw the tapes before they were confiscated?

Well, in Grand Theft Auto, if I drove my plane into a building, it would just blow up. The building would be perfectly fine. Therefore, your cartoon theory is just as useless as my GTA theory.

The video evidence of the tail fin is so darn obvious only an idiot would miss it..... which will prove a point about conspirators.

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal

Truthers NEVER watch videos debunking their theories, because if they realized the whole time that they were SO wrong SO silly it would be an UNBEARABLE blow to the ego due to the emotional investment in the truth movement.

I beg to differ! Sorry, but my ego is already at rock bottom and cannot go any lower.

Big yourself up Sphinx, my friend.
The Spirit Is Strong In You.

Originally posted by Lyrian
Whatever you Pro- Government guys come up with as an argument, I prefer to listen to many hundreds of pilots who say that it's unbelievable that a plane hit the Pentagon.
Just release the surveillance tapes, wasn't there talk of some employees in a Hotel who supposedly saw the tapes before they were confiscated?

Apparently they couldn't land in rivers UNSCATHED either until it was done recently !!!!!!.

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
How can one honestly believe that a large commercial airliner flew into the Pentagon when:

1) There was no conclusive physical evidence (airplane parts, luggage, cargo, personal effects, seats, wiring, etc.) of such an aircraft impacting with the Pentagon.

Define "conclusive". You've seen pics of exactly these things - including on this site.

2) No conclusive photographic or video evidence of the impact has ever been released.

Nor do we (and that means you too) know any actually exists either.

3) A Top Gun Turban, who could not even fly a Cessna, performing such a complex high speed maneuver with an advanced aircraft is virtually impossible.

Unlikely - yes, impossible - well the data recorder and eyewitnesses say otherwise.

4) There is no photographic or video evidence from the airport of departure of these passengers or hijackers boarding the airplane.

Interesting...is this stuff ever recorded?

5) There were no family members awaiting the arrival of the passengers at the destination airport.

According to this list: www.usatoday.com... only 8 passengers were from California. The rest were from the DC-Metro area, one from Las Vegas and two from China.

6) 53 passengers on a transcontinental flight wouldn't even begin to cover the fuel cost for such a long distance flight.

A scheduled flight is a scheduled flight I suppose.

7) There are numerous conflicting reports by alleged witnesses.

When it comes to seeing a plane - no, not really.

8) Sections of the downed light pole(s) should have been flung half way across the state if impacted with an aircraft traveling at 450 MPH, not just knocked over.

Can't speak intelligently about physics - your "guess" is as good as anyone's I suppose.

9) The Pentagon lawn appears to be in absolutely pristine condition after the impact when there should have been debris all over the place.

Again, you've seen pics that suggest otherwise, and you've read/heard the eyewitness reports (CNN reporter) who also said otherwise.

10) There is absolutely no conclusive visual evidence of the jet engines impacting with the exterior wall of the Pentagon.

Using this link as reference, how can you tell what hit where? www.oilempire.us...

All this doubt, however, we are asked to believe that an airliner crashed at the Pentagon because of some flight data info (which can easily be made up) and alleged DNA evidence. I can tell you I have the DNA of Jesus Christ. Without providing any additional proof, would you believe me?

Well, it might be a *little* more complex than that:
- Flight Data Recorder info
- DNA tests
- Eyewitnesses
- Pics of debris outside the building
- Pics of debris inside the building
- Eyewitness accounts of emergency personnel of finding airplane victims
- Victim's relatives never seeing their loved ones alive again.
- In flight calls from passengers telling their families they've been hijacked
- Lost radar coverage of flight after transponder was turned off (do pilots do that a lot?)
- No record of the plane landing anywhere

Now, let's see what would have to happen to make your premise true that a plane didn't hit the Pentagon.

-Flight data recorder was faked by NTSB
-DNA tests faked by military mortuary HQ in Dover, DE.
-Eyewitnesses (over 100) were bought off or "gotten to"
-Pics of debris inside/outside were either photoshopped or from another crash, *and* those that saw the debris had to be "gotten" to including civilians outside, and FBI, National Guard, and emergency responders inside
-Victims relatives are either lying about never seeing their loved ones again or, their loved ones didn't love them and chose to never come home, or they were all "disappeared" by the Gov't
- In flight calls received by loved ones were lies told by the loved ones for: (insert whatever reason here)
- Transponder either broke or was purposefully shut off by the pilot for: (insert whatever reason here)
- Plane had to land at cordoned off private or military airfield - and then be destroyed. Of couse, then there are those pesky passengers...

You understand that ALL of these thing HAD to occur in order to make your premise of "no plane" true. If you were a gambling man and I just told you that story about a completely unrelated incident - what odds would you give me?

There are alot more cameras at the pentagon release those videos along with all the ones the CIA got from local cameras and maybe then I decide

Originally posted by MonkeyWrench30
reply to post by Immortalgemini527

 

Donald Rumsfeld admitting that they cannot trace 2.3 TRILLION DOLLARS of US Taxpayer Money the day before 9/11 happened!!!. And wouldnt you know what department of the Pentagon was hit and ultimately destroyed even down to the very computer hardware and documentation in files?!?!?!?! THE ACCOUNTING DEPARTMENT!!!!

Sigh...again with this fallacy...
1 - Why do this AFTER Rumsfeld's admission? Wouldn't *before* have been just a little better timing?
2 - These were DOD funds. The office hit in the Pentagon was part of the ARMY Budget Office - NOT the DOD accounting office. Army does not control nor have oversight of all DOD funds. So what's the point of just hitting the Army?
3 - The records were eventually reconstructed.

So my question to every one. How many time was the Pentagon hit? I say this because of this account. I was stationed at Ft. Hood, TX and I turned on the TV at 0800 central time(0900 eastern time). On the TV was a split screen showing the Twin Towers on the right and the Pentagon on the left. Both buildings showing smoke. My then mother-in-law called the house at roughly the same time though she did not know I was home. I had a day off due to the fact I would re enlist on the 12th of Sept. She tells me that a plane or something crashed into one of the Towers and that possibly a small plane or helicopter crashed into the Pentagon or even a truck bomb exploded there. Then at 0802 central time I see the second plane fly into the second Tower. I know the "official" time line for the Pentagon attack being after 0900 eastern time and nothing about the Pentagon being hit before 0900 eastern time.

The Damage was about 60ft wide correct?

how wide was the plane? 125 ft i believe

so the damage was about half on the plane, regardless if the wings 'Folded' upon contact, it still would have caused damage, the same plane sliced into the 'Towers' like butter, yet the Pentagon Folded in? even if the structure was made different, there still would be some kind of Damage

reply to post by Immortalgemini527


Old factually incorrect video is old.

This has been torn to pieces here already.... Not 100%, not conclusive.

People don't seem to know what 100% conclusive evidence is. Had you have posted a video of the real plane smacking into the side of the pentagon, maybe you'd have something, as it is... all you did was post a CG animated version of the official story.

I can make up a story about landing on mars and make a cg video to prove it too... cept, it doesn't prove anything other than my video was tailored to that story.

Sorry bud, you got nothing.

reply to post by SphinxMontreal


Bugger...you got there before I did.

Yep, I think we should now leave it to beaver!

Exhibit F: Apparently the plane sped up to mach 5 at the very last second, allowing it to travel too fast to be seen by the one and only camera in the whole area that happened to record anything, and disintegrate to the point where not one shred was found inside the building. Yet, it was somehow able to shower the lawn with parts, such as an engine, from a much smaller plane.

reply to post by userid1

1) I'd love if you posted some pictures of the Pentagon aircraft debris which matches that of other airline crashes. Just type in Airplane Crash images, and compare that to the Pentagon plane crash site, and you'll notice how dramatically different the sites look. Actually I'll be a nice fella and post them for you: Pentagon debris. Thailand debris.
More airplane debris.
More.
Please sir, can I have some more?

2) We definitely know that there is other video evidence. There is no way that the only video camera which was facing the Pentagon is that one which gives us a measly, grainy three frames. There are many other buildings around it, not to mention it's the Pentagon.

3) The data-recorder flight path is a lie according to many eyewitness testimonies who claimed that the flight path given to the public in the OS does not match what they saw. Check out the video posted a while back, is has several credible witnesses, such as police officers and aviation experts, who saw the exact path of the plane towards the Pentagon and agree that the path is different from that which was told to the public. On top of these unbiased testimonies, pilots agree that such a manuever is incapable in that airplane. It's obvious that a rookie pilot could not pull of such a precise manuever with such little flying experience, he only had a few prior lessons in a single engine plane. Scale that up to flying a Boeing 747 just a few feet above the ground after doing a nearly 360* turn, and you've got one bad-ass rookie pilot who really came in the clutch and got the hang of flying techniques that experienced pilots say are impossible very quickly.

Another smoking gun in that video was an interview with the taxidriver who claimed to have been struck by one of the poles from the plane which he claimed traveled according to the path of the OS. He revealed to the interviewer that his wife works for the FBI. Then when presented with undeniable photographic evidence which proved that his testimony was a lie, he started to act EXTREMELY sketched out, I mean you can read him like a book. Then when they drive by where he claimed to have been struck by the pole, he is unaware that the camera is still on in the backseat, and he straight up admits that his story is a lie, he did not get struck by the pole where he claimed to but instead staged the event, and that "rich people" were behind the 9/11 attacks and that he is involved against his will even though it's not his battle.

8) Dude you don't have to be a Physics major to understand that a 900,000 pound hunk of metal traveling at 450mph would do a little more than knock over a pole which a SmartCar could knock over.

9) Mainstream media outlets are the absolute last people I would trust to give honest coverage over such an event, especially considering the recent media distractions and cover-ups with all of the crazy things going on lately.

The flight data recorder info could easily have been manipulated, in fact several eyewitness testimonies suggest that. The eyewitnesses contradict the OS. The pictures of debris outside and inside of the building look absolutely nothing like any other airplane crash. Did we have the technology to make in-flight calls in 2001? If the plane did land somewhere else, that could have been covered up since the flight data recorded info is false and has been manipulated. Plus if the government was going to kill a couple thousand people in the attacks and fake the flight data, I'm sure they'd have no problem taking some people to an airport, maybe telling them that there have been some terrorist attacks in the area and they need to land safely, and then killing them there. I without a doubt believe that 9/11 was planned and executed under supervision and order of our own government, and they did whatever they saw necessary to hide the truth from the people.

reply to post by syrinx high priest

so all the funerals were part of the cover up ?

Show us evidence of "all the funerals" you think took place.

Better yet, show us footage of these passengers boarding the planes.

reply to post by Immortalgemini527


All you need now was the coyote on an ACME rocket nice one, maybe a cartoon of the moon landings next

Originally posted by TupacShakur
reply to post by userid1

 

1) I'd love if you posted some pictures of the Pentagon aircraft debris which matches that of other airline crashes. Just type in Airplane Crash images, and compare that to the Pentagon plane crash site, and you'll notice how dramatically different the sites look.

All the vids you provided were outside crashes - none into anything remotely resembling a building - much less one as solid as the pentagon. I'm sorry that's no valid comparison.

2) We definitely know that there is other video evidence. There is no way that the only video camera which was facing the Pentagon is that one which gives us a measly, grainy three frames. There are many other buildings around it, not to mention it's the Pentagon.

No, you *assume* there is other video evidence. You don't actually have that proof. Here's what was obtained from a FOIA request and released in '06 or '07, of the much talked about gas station and hotel videos and they show us precisely - nothing. www.judicialwatch.org...

3) The data-recorder flight path is a lie according to many eyewitness testimonies who claimed that the flight path given to the public in the OS does not match what they saw.

I don't believe the path and the speed/altitude are exactly the same things. I only spoke to the speed/altitude. However, did any of these eyewitnesses dispute that it was a plane? Did they dispute that it hit the pentagon? They really help my case more than they do yours when you think about it.

Scale that up to flying a Boeing 747 just a few feet above the ground (snip)

I'm sure it was a typo but, you meant 757 - yes?

Another smoking gun in that video was an interview with the taxidriver (snip)

I've seen the interview, and all I see is a very confused old man. He doesn't know where his car was and although he says it was planned, he also says he wasn't supposed to be there. So how does he know it was planned? One old confused guy of over 100 witnesses. This is no smoking gun to me - sorry.

Did we have the technology to make in-flight calls in 2001?

Yes, they were called "air phones" and resided in the backside of the headrest portion of the seat in front of you - just like they do now. We also had personal cell phones back then as well.