You may like this video!

Firstly, i know squat about avionics. But would an auto-pilot system accept dialing in 2ft.
I would think this would be over-ridden by the computers, unless the "plane"
was on auto-land.

Sanc'.

Originally posted by LL1
All I can say is amazing...

Would they really have done that to all those people that worked at the Pentagon?
And what about the passengers on the plane (flt 77)? What would have happened with them?

my two cents....

for your first question, probably not (to their own)... that's why they used the section of the pentagon that was under renovation and generally empty...

for your second, we'll never know as long as the autopsy reports are classified. could be they were dumped pinochet style into the atlantic.

dunno if i believe any of this. it's a lot to swallow. but i keep an open mind.

-koji K.

Originally posted by sanctum
Firstly, i know squat about avionics. But would an auto-pilot system accept dialing in 2ft.
I would think this would be over-ridden by the computers, unless the "plane"
was on auto-land.

Sanc'.

i'm sure you could disable the safeguards, if you had the training. i remember someone saying that boeings dont generally have much in the way of computer overrides. but, to be honest, i have no clue really.

-koji K.

Did the 911 Commission people get to see the footage that the FBI confiscated from the Hotel and the gas station ? Or the footage from the Traffic camera? Is there any way to find out, or to inform them or any congressmen that there was other footage??

Originally posted by cstyle226
We are in deep trouble. Who will save America?

Captain America!

seriously i didnt read the whole thing bc i have to leave in a few.
Lemme get this straight, the video claims that a misile, dressed up like a plane, hit the pentagon?

And that the US gov't was in on it? why would they do that???? im really puzzled

ty for clarifying!

Well, i just replayed the movie and went frame by frame for a few crucial areas,
with sound on and off (i run a powermac/quicktime).

All i can say is at this stage from my opinion is...

Sanc'.

Originally posted by The Hunter
Pentagon Crash

www.overclockedgaming.com...

Not bad but Painful Deceptions - An Analysis Of The 911 Attack and 911 in plane site are much better.

Originally posted by legion

Originally posted by The Hunter
Pentagon Crash

www.overclockedgaming.com...

Not bad but Painful Deceptions - An Analysis Of The 911 Attack and 911 in plane site are much better.

Yeah, but this one's free.

originaly posted by: s13guy
And that the US gov't was in on it?

Come on silly because they are part of them......you know. Don�t tell me that the incredible 'proof' offered here is not completely convincing. The government used the captured alien equipment to swoop down, throw out the tractor beam and make those planes disappear. later, they found five suicidal pilots in the air force to pilot some planes into the world trade center and others....meanwhile, surrounding the previously tractor beamed airplanes in a huge simulated flight sound stage so that the people talking to their loved ones didn't realize that they had been tractor beamed away......then in the most sacrificial blow of all the solicitor general of the united states allowed the government to execute his wife and dump her Pinochet style into the ocean. She must have ticked him off in the first year. Still need convincing��o yeah of little faith, don�t you know that as soon as the democrats are out of the presidency those baby killers in the military are completely unleashed to act like their nature directs them to, and they start and finish incredible conspiracies. They do this to ensure that they don�t have to spend four years more years pretending to be patriotic Americans, much like their future neighbors.

I don't think the video, as well as anyone who disputes the official explanation, has suggested anything like that or attempted to show evidence of that. Was that your attempt to discredit some of the commonsense assertions that were made?

You would rather taunt, than make a structured argument?

Have we really considered the alternative... a third party?

Think about this. Group X wishes to assert itself. It could be a corporation, it could be politicians, it could be anyone. The point is, they wanted to make a message very clear to someone. These people have the capacity to use all kinds of tactics in order to get what they want.

let's say that these people funded some terrorists. Easy scapegoat. Gave them two planes, and liquidated the passengers and supposed hijackers of the third. Get rid of the plane. Put a cruise missile into the pentagon. That basically says "Don't mess with us. We have the power to lay a hurting on you."

Now, as to this third group, I don't know. Is it possible that beyond the obvious factionary lines, there could be a less obvious power game going on? perhaps a corporation could have perpetrated it. It's the perfect scam- no witnesses, no survivors.

DE

Originally posted by DeusEx
Have we really considered the alternative... a third party?

Think about this. Group X wishes to assert itself. It could be a corporation, it could be politicians, it could be anyone. The point is, they wanted to make a message very clear to someone. These people have the capacity to use all kinds of tactics in order to get what they want.

let's say that these people funded some terrorists. Easy scapegoat. Gave them two planes, and liquidated the passengers and supposed hijackers of the third. Get rid of the plane. Put a cruise missile into the pentagon. That basically says "Don't mess with us. We have the power to lay a hurting on you."

Now, as to this third group, I don't know. Is it possible that beyond the obvious factionary lines, there could be a less obvious power game going on? perhaps a corporation could have perpetrated it. It's the perfect scam- no witnesses, no survivors.

DE

I would say that that's a very plausible explanation and possibility. It's true that it's hard to say who exactly is primarily responsible for the attacks, but all we know is that the official story doesn't really hold up at all. So people think that it's probably the government. There IS some evidence that suggests the gov was involved, but maybe not enough. A third party could also be responsible, but we'd have to see if there is any evidence of it. Until then, the gov is the most likely candidate. Now when I say gov, I should be more specific as to what I mean and say rather a faction of the gov. Our government has so many people in it, and I KNOW there are many fine people. So it could be no more than an element within our government. It seems however, that they hold key positions that call a lot of the shots with how things are done. Many of the people that may carry out the orders they give, aren't necessarily informed about the whole picture, and so they can't be blamed.

My guess is that these are people within CIA and FBI, along with the State Department, you know in branches that are long term and contain people that work for years and years without having to be voted in or out. Some congressmen could also be involved, but I would say a minority. As to the different administrations, I wouldn't doubt that some of them are also involved.

So in a sense, this faction of gov is kind of like the third party that you're speculating about.

Great video.

I dont think people would asend on Wasington like madmen. People would refuse to belive that the govnment would do such a thing.

Ooh, the dust brothers. Nice music choice for the video...

Anyways, this makes me think of one really big question:


If it was indeed a missile, what about the eye-witnesses who claim they saw the plane fly overhead?
We're they in shock, we're they told to lie?
Hope someone can answer, or at least share a theory.

[edit on 28-8-2004 by melloasjello]

original post by: SimpleTruth
I don't think the video, as well as anyone who disputes the official explanation, has suggested anything like that or attempted to show evidence of that. Was that your attempt to discredit some of the commonsense assertions that were made?

sorry if my laughing at the lack of any real �commonsense� in the sheer speculation taking place made you upset.

Go watch some pelco mpeg4 camera streams, pay special attention to those focused on traffic. You�ll see cars, traveling approximately 10 or more times slower, just flash in the middle of the screen and then disappear. So, the chance that the camera would actually capture the plane are most likely slim. Yet, you see one fuzzy 2d image that shows something at what depth you have no clue, don't even know if it's related yet you instantly jump to the absurd conclusion that untold numbers of people�. liberals, conservatives, wives, & husbands conspired to murder roughly 200 people and have been able to keep from leaking it as the conspiracy now would have had to have reached incredible numbers of people. And your logic for this�the federal government has not given a personal explanation, combined with engineering and physics data, to every loon on the net. And the sorriest of all, the solicitor general of the united states was talking to his wife as the phone as her plane went into the pentagon. It is most probable that he has seen the videos that you refer to and would have had to sign off on your conspiracy.

Further the number of people family, witnesses, etc� that would have to be in the conspiracy is ridiculous. Folks who have just lost a loved one�.the numbers of people in the conspiracy would have had to have been experts in aircraft, engineering, weapons systems, among others. Simply put, to say that commonsense would be associated with these assertions is ludicrous.

Originally posted by melloasjello

If it was indeed a missile, what about the eye-witnesses who claim they saw the plane fly overhead?
We're they in shock, we're they told to lie?

[edit on 28-8-2004 by melloasjello]

Look at that modded cruise missile. With a glance at it while it's flying, do you think your average american civillian could say with any certainty what they saw?

DE

I�ve thought about it some more, and seeing as how some captains of industry and the wife of the (R) solicitor general were involved maybe you guys are right......maybe the democratic national committee saw a way to silence some critics and shake up the country. hmmm what say you?

I have seen many videos and images and I myself have not yet come to any conclusions.Though I must say that things just dont add up.We have been lied to,will continue to be lied to no matter what the situation is.Be 9/11 or whatever,we are never told the truth the first time around.
If being lied to once and one more time after that,why would anyone look at this case and say it happened just as they say.
I will pick apart any video,any image to find that one single flaw they forgot.

If there were 100% proof showing the non involvment in these acts of terrorism,I will gladly say I was wrong.
As of right now,I do not believe that a 757 hit the Pentagon.I know that I am no expert.But the fact that I have seen many images,videos,TV news video,of plane crashes,explosions,this crash does not fit.

The fact that we only have ONE video/image source is ridiculous.Someone commented on the video frames per second.That is ONE camera.There were reports that there were 5 different ones from other places around the area.You can not say thay all have the same frame rate.And even if they did,they would not be simultaneous.They could be,but I highly doubt it.
I can understand why they would be taken.Thats a given.But why have they not been released for us to see?

As for the peole who saw.Does anyone have any video or statements from these people?

The plane parts we see seem to be very out of place.
So this huge 757 crashes into the building and pretty much vaporizes except a wheel,what looks to be a drive train,and a small scrap of metal.Where is the rest of the plane?
I have pointed out in the first frame image,that there seems to be a 'trail' of smoke or vapor.It continues but at the same time,gets harder to see,almost like that of a rocket or missle.

Again,im not expert,but flying a 757 a few feet off the ground does not sound like an easy task.Maybe it was on its way into the building like a landing.Ok,I buy that.But didnt they say,as well as MANY people here,that it hit from above?Now which is it?Straight on or from above?

Something smells and I dont like like it.

I did some internet research on the Pentagon crash. It is amazing how much you find regarding the incident is just a rehashing of the same old conspiracy stuff.

I have not tried to give a balanced view, as the conspiracy theories are well represented. This will not be an easy read, but I believe that the truth is to be found among these sites.

www.snopes.com...

urbanlegends.about.com...

www.usatoday.com...

www.usatoday.com...

www.cs.purdue.edu...

www.cnn.com...

www.rense.com...

paulboutin.weblogger.com...

www.scienceblog.com...

news.uns.purdue.edu...

www.fredericksburg.com...

www.apfn.org...

www.whatreallyhappened.com...

www.cbsnews.com...

www.construction.com...

www.chicagotribune.com...


www.post-gazette.com...

www.dod.gov...

www.azcentral.com...

www.herald-dispatch.com...

www.faqs.org...

www.afrc.af.mil...

Rummy said it was a missile

Secretary Rumsfeld Interview with Parade Magazine, Friday, Oct. 12, 2001
www.the7thfire.com...

To sum up Rumsfeld's explanation:

1) The warnings were there;
2) the Defense Department and the intelligence community couldn't figure them out; but anyway
3) it was up to the FBI, state law enforcement, and local police to uncover and prevent the worst terrorist attack in US history.
And here's something to kick around. Still answering this question,

Rumsfeld goes on to make a strange statement:

"It is a truth that a terrorist can attack any time, any place, using any technique and it's physically impossible to defend at every time and every place against every conceivable technique.

Here we're talking about plastic knives and using an American Airlines flight filled with our citizens, and the missile to damage this building and similar (inaudible) that damaged the World Trade Center.

The only way to deal with this problem is by taking the battle to the terrorists, wherever they are, and dealing with them."
"Missile"? What missile would that be? Did he let something slip? Or was this just a gaffe? A bad choice of words? A transcription error? Until we know for sure, it deserves scrutiny.