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.

 

9/11 Pentagon

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 09:03 PM
link   
Don't believe everything what media tells you............like they told you the plane Boeing 757 crashed into Pentagon..................

p.s. if that plane hit the Pentagon, how come there are no things that are part of plane? (wings, wheels, etc)


EDIT

damn, the link is down
there was supposed to be a flash movie

[edit on 26-8-2004 by phyto]




posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 09:08 PM
link   
See: www.abovetopsecret.com...

Same question posed, and responded to.



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 09:11 PM
link   
sorry - didn't notice, but.......

found other link

911research.wtc7.net...



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 09:41 PM
link   
Here's an interesting analysis of the Pentagon crash. I'm not sayin this guy knows what he is talking about, but he does make a compelling argument and he addresses the concerns of naysayers.



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 10:04 PM
link   
ho hum...

explain all the witnesses who watched the plane crash into the Pentagon.


Nuff Said,

Case Closed !!!!



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 10:14 PM
link   
I'm fairly certain none of those "witnesses" will sign, or have signed an affidavit stating what they saw.


SMR

posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 10:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by phyto
sorry - didn't notice, but.......

found other link

911research.wtc7.net...

I will say that the link there has some pretty good images.Some even debunk the images people have posted saying that there was evidence of luggage.Well here are those images and it is nothing more than debris of the building and the contents like desks. LINK TO IMAGES
Here is a link to many other images.The links are above each photo and have close ups of them.Pentagon Attack Photos

GradyPhilpott
I took a look at that site and though he has facts like the melting point of aluminum,he seems to think he is an expert in many fields.
I do know you stated your not saying this guy knows what he is talking about.
He has some quotes like 'The explosion was obviously a low-energy explosion such as produced by jet fuel' HUH? If it is so low energy,how does he explain the two towers?
Anyway,it is a good read if you want to see what others say.But some of his writings just dont add up even to those who may think nothing is suspect.
He says he analized the 'only' security images and says it was an internal fire and that the explosion was not an outsideone.I have not looked into that but from those same images,it is clear to me that I see a fire ball on the outside.

elevatedone
Where are all the witnesses who watched the plane crash into the Pentagon?
Im not saying you are lying here,just wondering what links I can follow to read thier comments and find out who they are and how many.Legitimate links that is.Neutral if you will.

This subject will most likely go 'round and 'round and start arguements here and there and maybe even some name calling.I just wish we could find that one thing.What that one thing is,not sure,but I would hope that it happens so we can know the truth one way or another.



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 11:57 PM
link   
911research.wtc7.net...

^^^ that's interesting too, but here is something for you, just if u haven't noticed it...



circled in red.....that may be a missile.....or some other airplane...not sure..BUT, that link, above, the very first one, i posted, that there was supposed to be a flash movie, i saw it - there it says, witnesses say that it sounded like a missile



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 12:02 AM
link   
You're right, many people have experience to tell the difference between a missle (which 99.9% have never heard) and a jet liner at full throttle 10 feet above the ground (again, which 99.99% have never heard).

I would put more faith in people who claim to have seen an airplane than those who say it sounded like a missle.

I'm not taking sides, just trying to represent logic.



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 12:30 AM
link   
yeah, mayne, i know what you're sayin'


SMR

posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 01:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by dcgolf
You're right, many people have experience to tell the difference between a missle (which 99.9% have never heard) and a jet liner at full throttle 10 feet above the ground (again, which 99.99% have never heard).

I would put more faith in people who claim to have seen an airplane than those who say it sounded like a missle.

I'm not taking sides, just trying to represent logic.

Very true.But let me try something here.
How many times have you SEEN something,but explained the sound as something totally different?
It would not be hard to understand someone saying it sounded like missle even if they have never seen nor heard one.It is more or less a statement of over exagerating the sound of something loud.Im trying to find the right word but it's not coming to me.Maybe you know what I mean.Is metefore the word Im looking for?

Anyway,on to the image.I saw the pages above and looked through images and it hit me.I have not noticed it since it was pointed out above circled in red.I first looked at as many as I could find to match first before I made any judgement.
If you look at the first image,the ONLY first image we get.There IS something there.You can see a trail of smoke.It is not an object as stated,but rather a smoke trail of some sort.It is in the first frame and it fades as the frames go on.It is very thin and not likely to come from a huge 757.
This is either coming from a small jet or a missle.The only problem is whatever it is,is being blocked by the tan object.

And what is the deal with these time codes.Ok,so they display wrong time and date.It's electronics,it happens.But you would think that if a liqure store can have correct time and date,than the Pentagon should.But lets just give them the electronic error.Why later are stills of the same frames given out but with NO time codes?How does this happen?The images given out later,which happen to be much clearer,are not cropped in any way?This means that the so called first images given were infact doctored.If the original first have real time codes,then how are the next ones larger and uncropped without time codes?

First images given with time codes:



Second images given uncropped and clearer but no time code?


So all this tells me was that time codes were added and do not display on film of the security cam.But why would anyone be so stupid as to put the wrong date and time?



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 01:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by SMR

Originally posted by dcgolf
You're right, many people have experience to tell the difference between a missle (which 99.9% have never heard) and a jet liner at full throttle 10 feet above the ground (again, which 99.99% have never heard).

I would put more faith in people who claim to have seen an airplane than those who say it sounded like a missle.

I'm not taking sides, just trying to represent logic.

Very true.But let me try something here.
How many times have you SEEN something,but explained the sound as something totally different?
It would not be hard to understand someone saying it sounded like missle even if they have never seen nor heard one.It is more or less a statement of over exagerating the sound of something loud.Im trying to find the right word but it's not coming to me.Maybe you know what I mean.Is metefore the word Im looking for?

Anyway,on to the image.I saw the pages above and looked through images and it hit me.I have not noticed it since it was pointed out above circled in red.I first looked at as many as I could find to match first before I made any judgement.
If you look at the first image,the ONLY first image we get.There IS something there.You can see a trail of smoke.It is not an object as stated,but rather a smoke trail of some sort.It is in the first frame and it fades as the frames go on.It is very thin and not likely to come from a huge 757.
This is either coming from a small jet or a missle.The only problem is whatever it is,is being blocked by the tan object.

And what is the deal with these time codes.Ok,so they display wrong time and date.It's electronics,it happens.But you would think that if a liqure store can have correct time and date,than the Pentagon should.But lets just give them the electronic error.Why later are stills of the same frames given out but with NO time codes?How does this happen?The images given out later,which happen to be much clearer,are not cropped in any way?This means that the so called first images given were infact doctored.If the original first have real time codes,then how are the next ones larger and uncropped without time codes?

First images given with time codes:



Second images given uncropped and clearer but no time code?


So all this tells me was that time codes were added and do not display on film of the security cam.But why would anyone be so stupid as to put the wrong date and time?


All very good points. I'm not arguing either way, although can anyone really determine what is in that one frame of video? Could it be a plane? Yes. Could it be something else? Yes.



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 01:47 AM
link   
There are numerous witness accounts of the jet flying low overhead and crashing into the Pentagon.

There are the tower reports.

There is the photo where you can see in the background a low flying jet making a very sharp turn.

There is the Pentagon photo of the explosion and the explosion type matches those at the WTC sites.

There is the scrap metal laying around outside the Pentagon including a piece that has something that looks like part of the American Airlines lettering.

Can you find me a picture of a missle explosion that produces that size of fireball. How about a missle that can hit a street light and not fly out of control. A jet certainly has the size to do that. Every bit of evidence (and there is alot) says it was an American Airlines jet.


SMR

posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 02:06 AM
link   


There is the photo where you can see in the background a low flying jet making a very sharp turn.

Where is this image?Im not calling you a lier,I would just like to see it.
If it is the one I think it is,that image could be from the WTC for all I know because all it shows is a plane in the air.No evidence or proof that it is the one that hit the Pentagon.Unless I am missing something.


How about a missle that can hit a street light and not fly out of control.

That is why I point out the 'smoke trail' It seems a bit wavy and this would explain an out of control missle.But that would be an unlikely chance,but could happen.
Then if not a missle,how about a smaller plane.It could have been some sort of plane we have not seen before from the Air Force.
I am just having a hard time believing that such a large jet hit that place and left what it did.It just does not leave what one would think.
Im willing to be proven wrong.But with what we have,it is not adding up.
We hear that this person said this and that person said that,but where are these documents?
Why so little footage of this event.That place is crawling with video cameras.You can not tell me that there was not one other camera that caught the plane hitting.That is a total lie and I wont buy it.When you see a bank robbery,they show like 4 different angles from other cameras.



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 04:55 AM
link   
yes, guys, great job on makin points, but I think i've got another my own point...

it's that if the big plane, american airlines boeing 757, hit the pentagon, there should left big, i mean, big parts of a plane (wings, wheels, etc) showing, but there don't show any, does it?

so, get this

Then if not a missle,how about a smaller plane.It could have been some sort of plane we have not seen before from the Air Force. - by SMR


yes, it could have been a smaller plane, and if it was, there should be really, really small pieces of things that are part of small plane. But they may be there, maybe you didn't see them because a lot of walls/windows, things that are part of pentagon covered them? ANd it made them to be hidden? I don't know......i'm just tellin my thoughts, u know.

[Edited on 27-8-2004 by phyto]



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 05:04 AM
link   
Have any of you checked out the following site? I'll post my usual couple of quotes.

"Warning: While viewing this movie, it is impossible to avoid the stark comparison with the events leading up to the coming war with Iraq."

The same can be said about another crisis or so...

"The Pentagon Papers is the true story of Daniel Ellsberg,
a high-ranking Pentagon official whose greatest act of Patriotism was an act of Treason."


This link, provides a look at the patterns left and repeated by a government.



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 05:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Indy
There is the Pentagon photo of the explosion and the explosion type matches those at the WTC sites.
Can you find me a picture of a missle explosion that produces that size of fireball. How about a missle that can hit a street light and not fly out of control. A jet certainly has the size to do that. Every bit of evidence (and there is alot) says it was an American Airlines jet.


I agree. Missile explosions have a small fireball from thier primary explosives and unles secondaries go off thats it. Somebody would have seen the missile shot as most leave a trail as well. a FAE bomb gives a big fireball, but that clearly was jet fuel being ignited. If the plane had not struck the ground and began to break up before hitting the building, there would have been many more casulties.



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 05:17 AM
link   



First images given with time codes:



Second images given uncropped and clearer but no time code?


So all this tells me was that time codes were added and do not display on film of the security cam.But why would anyone be so stupid as to put the wrong date and time?


Hey....I've noticed something.......

the first image, it's the original one, and 2nd it's been edited - look at that...

i put the black line - it's been cut off from top of black line to bottom, then resized the image....that's how the editor did it

just look closely on bottom - the red circle, i circled, that white box, on left side, it's still there on 2nd image, know what i be sayin'?



[Edited on 27-8-2004 by phyto]



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 05:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by ADVISOR
Have any of you checked out the following site? I'll post my usual couple of quotes.

"Warning: While viewing this movie, it is impossible to avoid the stark comparison with the events leading up to the coming war with Iraq."

The same can be said about another crisis or so...

"The Pentagon Papers is the true story of Daniel Ellsberg,
a high-ranking Pentagon official whose greatest act of Patriotism was an act of Treason."


This link, provides a look at the patterns left and repeated by a government.


props, man, thanx for info



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 07:43 AM
link   
SMR... I posted the pic on this site. Its in the topic about "911 In Plane Site". Not sure what the link is. It was active recently.

Edit:

Here it is. About half way down the page. It isn't the best quality pic but its the only one circulating that I have seen.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 8/27/2004 by Indy]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join