The PentaCON

reply to post by anoncoholic



In this video:

video.google.com...


There are no "lies" being told by Davin Coburn.

What it boiled down to, at the end, was DNA, and Coburn's ill-informed understanding that all hijacker's DNA from the ten involved at the WTC crash was identified.

The discussion grew from the long proven false BBC News report of hijackers "still alive". Remember, that all happened years ago, and was just a case of people living today whose names were the same as some of the hijackers'.

No, Coburn did not "lie", he actually was mistaken on the facts of the DNA. This interview is from 2006, remember.

If you want, you can search for yourself on the DNA topic. In terms of this thread subject, at the Pentagon it was far easier to isolate all the DNA samples, and make positive matches. In NYC, this is not the case....and the same is true for many of the innocent victims. Not every person known to have been killed there has had their body fragments found. Many family members have to deal with that fact.

In terms of the Pentagon, it is not necessary to have a comparative sample in order to positively identify, through DNA, the five hijackers' identity. They are known because they bought the tickets under their own names and personal identifications.

Furthermore, when recovering and cataloging all of the DNA, once you identify every bit that is from a known victim (and, no difficulty obtaining DNA samples from their family members, for comparisons), then the five unique DNA signatures that are left will belong to your criminals. The forensics might even have been able to track down some of their family, though that is just speculation. Doesn't really matter, DNA is not the only way to identify a person.

So, no.....there were no Popular Mechanics lies. That interview at the end turned into a bash-fest, and was typical of the types of aggressive *questions* that are framed in a way to spin the impression for the listener.

In fact, now that I think about it, there was a lie in that tape....when the radio host said he was an "agnostic" about 9/11 conspiracies. THAT sure seems to have been a lie.......

Originally posted by dillweed
Dave, witnesses are meaningless in our discussion here.

And this, folks, is why a certain portion of the truth movement is both unique and deluded amongst investigation, both mundane and conspiracy fields. They are the only "investigators" I know of that toss aside witness statements when they defy their particular delusional theory. Every other investigation takes witness accounts and statements as guideposts to point them in the right direction for answers. Whether theorists are researching/discussing UFOs, JFK, Bohemian grove, bigfoot, Lockerbie, TWA flight 800, ect, when it comes the multiple witnesses of the same event, no competant investigator would toss out witness statemenets, or see them as irrelevant in any discussion.

In fact, the irony struck me, in mentioning TWA Flight 800, and the conspiracy/cover-up there. In the TWA investigation, the NTSB, FAA, and FBI completely ignored and omitted over 400 witnesses statements attesting to a projectile striking the craft. In fact, in the final hearings, they completely closed the hearings off to the public and did not permit ground witnesses to testify.

And funny enough, the no-planers are ignoring or handwaving the thousands at the Pentagon who saw a plane hit instead of the missile, just like the FBI once ignored hundreds of ground witnesses from multiple vantage points who say they saw something missile like.

Irony indeed.

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by anoncoholic

 

In this video:

video.google.com...


There are no "lies" being told by Davin Coburn.

What it boiled down to, at the end, was DNA, and Coburn's ill-informed understanding that all hijacker's DNA from the ten involved at the WTC crash was identified.

The discussion grew from the long proven false BBC News report of hijackers "still alive". Remember, that all happened years ago, and was just a case of people living today whose names were the same as some of the hijackers'.

No, Coburn did not "lie", he actually was mistaken on the facts of the DNA. This interview is from 2006, remember.

If you want, you can search for yourself on the DNA topic. In terms of this thread subject, at the Pentagon it was far easier to isolate all the DNA samples, and make positive matches. In NYC, this is not the case....and the same is true for many of the innocent victims. Not every person known to have been killed there has had their body fragments found. Many family members have to deal with that fact.

In terms of the Pentagon, it is not necessary to have a comparative sample in order to positively identify, through DNA, the five hijackers' identity. They are known because they bought the tickets under their own names and personal identifications.

Furthermore, when recovering and cataloging all of the DNA, once you identify every bit that is from a known victim (and, no difficulty obtaining DNA samples from their family members, for comparisons), then the five unique DNA signatures that are left will belong to your criminals. The forensics might even have been able to track down some of their family, though that is just speculation. Doesn't really matter, DNA is not the only way to identify a person.

So, no.....there were no Popular Mechanics lies. That interview at the end turned into a bash-fest, and was typical of the types of aggressive *questions* that are framed in a way to spin the impression for the listener.

In fact, now that I think about it, there was a lie in that tape....when the radio host said he was an "agnostic" about 9/11 conspiracies. THAT sure seems to have been a lie.......

edit on Thu 20 October 2011 by ProudBird because: (no reason given)

nice spin

unfortunately you misrepresent who Davin Coburn is, the senior research editor who took the first five minutes spouting credentials as to his veracity. Now you poo poo the evidence like oops, just another silly misunderstanding?

you guys are at least consistent. Point blank, none of the hijackers could have been identified that fast and even you are admitting that not all remains have even been found to date so how then do you expect anyone to believe that all 19 were identified so quickly on the one hand, and so totally on the other?


Are you going to now imply we had psychics working ground zero and they tuned in to who they were finding spread out across Manhattan in tiny little bone fragments? ... and then put a name to those remains so a comparison sample of DNA could be matched, all within the first days of the attack?

How gullible do you actually think we are?

never mind, the way you make it sound so convincing tells me all I need to know about you.




I call bs once again.

Originally posted by anoncoholic
"Debunking 911 myths" and being caught lying about the proof. Personally I find it sad that you claim to have answered yet hadn't even bothered to listen to the audio clip but instead imply there is nothing there. Had you listened to that 24 minute clip you would know truth from lies and apparently you are still unwilling to address it.

The reason I don't listen to the clip should be obvious- I know full flipping well you're only getting this conspiracy baloney from some sexy sounding garbage those damned fool conspiracy websites are shoveling out, and I want you to explain IN YOUR OWN WORDS what these "lies they were caught at". When you say "listen to the video" all you're saying is that you aren't able to put it into words in the same seductive tone that the original con artists used to sucker you. When you need to use style and gimmicks to convince someone of something, it tells me right there it's due to an utter lack of substance.

So in your own words, how did the popular mechanics people lie?

Dropped the ball? BS! They gave the ball away by intent. How else could an attack have happened at just the right time to see all our defenses down? Stand down ineffingdeed

Are you seriously suggesting that it's impossible for any aggressor to ever sneak up and destroy lots of stuff in a surprise attack without our military being able to respond instantly?

How far back did your history books go when you were in high school?

You also imply this entire 911 was a truther creation and ignore the guilt which is the basis of truth seeking in the first place, not fabrication of evidence to whitewash guilt.

Would you mind terribly rephrasing this statement? Why should I feel guilty from someone else's impropriety?

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
[mor]
And funny enough, the no-planers are ignoring or handwaving the thousands at the Pentagon who saw a plane hit instead of the missile, just like the FBI once ignored hundreds of ground witnesses from multiple vantage points who say they saw something missile like.

Irony indeed.

What blows my mind is that they'll demand that we need to "listen to the eyewitness accounts" at the WTC when the eyewitnesses said they heard explosions, and then turn around and say "eyewitnesses don't matter" when the eyewitnesses say a plane hit the pentagon. Even more so when they do this with a straight face.

Here in CT they recently found the second of a pair of home intruders guilty. These two drug adducts broke into a family's home, beat the father with a baseball bat, tied up the two daughters and forced the mother to go to the bank to withdraw $10,000 before strangling her to death, raped the two daughters before dousing them with gasoline and setting them and the house on fire and burnign them alive. They were caught as they were leaving in the family's stolen station wagon after smashing it into the police barricade. The police had so much evidence againt these animals to the point where they even know which one raped which daughter.

...and yet these truthers would still insist physical evidence is worthless, eyewitness testimony is worthless, 911 transcripts are worthless, and even recovered bodies are worthless. It's all "pics or it didn't happen". I can't be the only one here thoroughly disgusted by this unrepentent ignorance.

reply to post by anoncoholic

Point blank, none of the hijackers could have been identified that fast .....

??

"that fast"? The radio interview with Davin Coburn was in 2006. How is that "fast"?

...and even you are admitting that not all remains have even been found to date so how then do you expect anyone to believe that all 19 were identified so quickly on the one hand, and so totally on the other?

Guess you read the post too quickly, perhaps?? Names, on the airline reservations. Did you not know there are manifests of the passengers' names"

Based on the many incorrect things about American 77 you seem to have been told, you may wish to review the facts by starting here.

In that mass of data, the American 77 passenger manifest is included.

Here's a peek:

Are you going to now imply we had psychics working ground zero and they tuned in to who they were finding spread out across Manhattan in tiny little bone fragments?

Did you just make that up out of thin air?

There are bone fragments still being found, on rooftops in Manhattan. Check the Google machine for news articles on it.

... and then put a name to those remains so a comparison sample of DNA could be matched, all within the first days of the attack?

Within the first days, they used the information from the manifests and airlines' records. How difficult is it to spot those Arabic names? And, then compare to any of the watch lists that each intelligence agency may have had. Again, this is the kind of stuff that goes on without public scrutiny, because to reveal every detail of how they obtained the names to be on a watch list would compromise their ability to gather future info on others.

You understand the concept of espionage, infiltration, moles, etc don't you?

How gullible do you actually think we are?

When it comes to the way some swallow the baloney peddled by "conspiracy" websites, very.

But, it amounts to basic ignorance of how things happen in the real world, which leads to that gullibility. Fueled by further ignorance of many things that experts are there to provide information about.

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by anoncoholic

 

In that mass of data, the American 77 passenger manifest is included.

Here's a peek:

A quick reminder of the faces that went with the names on the passenger manifest...

reply to post by Drunkenparrot


Thank you.

And, First Officer David Charlebois was a friend of friends, in the DC area where he resided (as did I, in 2001).

The airline business can be a small world, sometimes.......

reply to post by anoncoholic


So what do you think about a plane going clean through the building and burnt up.
No, explosions were detonated to make perfect circles.
Plus the first to arrive, cause they knew of the explosion planned, sprinkled whatever
plane parts were found by way of secret crashes.

The people that died must think differently though so the conspiracy theory must look
elsewhere as to what went down. So back to the OS unless the some mind control
was used that we don't know about and is yet uncovered.

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by pshea38

 

"September Clues" has been shown to be without merit, in countless ways...and in any case, has no relevance in this thread about the Pentagon.

Peddling the "no-planes" nonsense is a bit ludicrous, and no one of any intelligence falls for that silliness. It belongs in the bin...here on ATS, best place for it is in the "Hoax" Forum.

Spamming that junk is not contributing, nor is it appreciated by people actually seeking to uncover all facts relate to these events.

Ah, proudbird. The consummate denier! I suppose we can add the Moon hoax and
JFK conspiracies to the 9/11 and chemtrails conspiracies which you so ardently refute.
One has to wonder what you are doing at a conspiracy site at all!
Widespread awareness of the extensive use of Media Fakery on 9/11 scares the
hell out of Ye, doesn't it?

Anyone who has spent even a modicum of effort studying SetemberClues and its forum
will immediately see through your disingenuous statements above.

You sure do consistently put in an awful lot of work into your debunking!
Too much, some might say! Hmmm.

reply to post by pshea38


This was a thread by the quintessential proponent of the "TV Media Fakery" nonsense.

Was Video Fakery Employed on 9/11? [HOAX]

....and, it was binned into the ATS HOAX! Forum, where it rightly belongs.

Jim Fetzer. Jim Fetzer's controversial views on 9/11

In his most recent work as a columnist for Veterans Today, "Seven Questions about 9/11" and "More Proof of 9/11 Duplicity", he has presented evidence that all four of the plane crashes on 9/11 were faked, where no planes crashed in Shanksville or at the Pentagon and one or another form of fakery was used in New York.

(highlighted to show this is tangentially on topic)

Talk about living in the land of delusions....

What is most amusing, though, is he is fighting with other so-called "Truthers" out there:

Even more strikingly, in collaboration with T. Mark Hightower, a chemical engineer, he has challenged "the myth of nanothermite" by explaining that it does not have the gas-expansion properties of explosives and, with a detonation rate of 895 m/s, cannot have destroyed the concrete or the steel in the Twin Towers, which would require rates in excess of 3,200 m/s for concrete and 6,100 m/s for steel, which has contradicted perhaps the most widely held belief within the community about how the towers were destroyed and accented his disagreements with Jones.

Originally posted by NWOwned

Originally posted by pshea38
reply to post by NWOwned

 

9/11 Video fakery has been proven over and over and over again.
You just have to look in the right places!

www.septemberclues.info
www.cluesforum.info

No planes were hijacked and crashed on the 11th September 2001, in spite of
what we were led to believe

Take out eye-witnesses with connections to the military and the media (both suspected
of complicity in events of that day), and you ain't left with much!

I watched September Clues years ago and have forgotten much of it, probably have to review it again.

One part of it I recall though is the whole "nose out" portion. In it, if I recall, please correct me if I'm wrong if you are more in depth on it, but wasn't that about the overlay overshooting the building edge looking like the shot went on too long and then had to fade out because it was an obvious mistake to extend the frame out that far?

Also showing what appeared to be the incoming nose of the plane extending out too far?

Is that a fair description? I haven't seen it in a long while and this is just my recollection of it, it's hazy.

So though, is what SC is saying is that the plane was a video overlay that went too far and was then cut short and changed cameras or cut out some seconds of time as a result? Right? Am I recalling that correctly?

A fake video plane overlay hit that went too far past the edge of the building line?

Because if that's what you mean by video fakery then I think that's a mistake etc.

By that I mean, I don't think that's a fake overlay extended into the building too far.


Cheers

I think a refresher on exactly what septemberclues is claiming is definitely in order.
Most of the footage released (including the tower collapses) is deemed computer
generated and Fake!



Do yourself a favour and digest All that is written here at www.cluesforum.info
I look forward to hearing about your new outlook on the world in about 2 weeks!
The extents of Media Fakery and its incorporation into major world events is mind-boggling.

Originally posted by Drunkenparrot

A quick reminder of the faces that went with the names on the passenger manifest...

Do you happen to have the names that go with these photos?

reply to post by pshea38


Make no mistake, I think there is something definitely up with 9/11.

The trick is to figure out exactly what.

Because of my background (photography/film) I am confident in my ability to detect apparent 'staging'. Only one example of this is the smoking generator which I've mentioned. When I talk about staging I mean both standard staging (the smoking generator, parts placed to look natural) and subtle staging (the 'look' of some photos, especially containing people, and especially containing groups who know they're being photographed and know it's all a ruse) in addition to what you would reasonably expect seen in/by the conspicuous lack of it (Why views so far away? Obscured by equipment/fire hoses laterally across whole scene? Or why not many many more photos? Was there a shortage of film?!)

Something that bothers me beyond what you would reasonably expect is the utter lack of WTC7 photo damage and base of building images when there was plenty of time and opportunity to shoot it up seeing how it was on fire and was the last to fall.

Basically I feel the photographers really dropped the ball on 9/11.

It's like there were a dozen or so of them in a few life rafts during the sinking of the Titanic and we end up with 10 pictures, one of the iceberg hole and two of the stern sticking up in the air and one of the band still playing on. It's ridiculous. It's the Titanic disaster for crying out loud! It's not a time to point and shoot and run away. It's not a time to be conserving film or being all artsy.

It's like the Hindenburg.

"OMG did you get a shot of that?!! Keep shooting!!" If there ever was a Kodak moment 9/11 was it.

Look at all those flag raising war, cover of Time pics, everyone wants to get it when they do that, later they'll turn it into a bronze statue but on 9/11 we get 50 photos and 20 video clips repeated endlessly.

Everyone knows about JFK the more pics and video the better we all like it. So what the hell happened?

Get with the program I say, there's a real lack of video and photo evidence of 9/11.

Had I been on the highway with a plane hitting the Pentagon carrying a camera that I never leave home without all you people's eyes would be bleeding from looking at all the many and varied pics from that day. They would've had to arrest me and confiscate my film to get me to give it up. I not only would've taken many many photos, of the ones we did get from the Pentagon lawn that day you'd have seen me in 78% of them clicking away. But do we see that? Is there one Pentagon photo even of another photographer even taking a picture?

NATO (led by Charles Bouchard, a Canadian, who, coincidentally, was directing NORAD strategic war games on 9/11 from Tyndall Air Force Base, jus sayin) just killed Gadaffi, look on youtube, everyone got their cameras out filming it. There are videos of MULTIPLE PEOPLE taking pics and videos!! That's what I'm talking about. But on 9/11 I defy anyone to show me that. It's always one shooter with no other shooter or shooters in any frame.

Show me multiple shooters.

JFK had multiple shooters even in 1963! Everybody knows that. I swear, there were more cameras in Dallas in 1963 than in all of the 9/11 sites on 9/11 in 2001!

It was 9/11! It never happened BEFORE it hasn't happened SINCE - Come on! This was even before Deepwater Horizon where they'd arrest you for taking pics of sand on a beach!! So there was no penalty really or, in my view - Excuse.

Sorry to get off reply topic but you see people in like New Jersey with their own naked eyeballs seen planes on 9/11 right? I mean I'm assuming we could dig a few hundred up etc. So we have to account for that. We have to account for people "seeing planes", even though, the early Pentagon photos don't show any 757 plane wreckage really. People "saw planes" even though no black boxes were recovered from NYC etc. People "saw planes" even though there's a hole and no plane at Shanksville. Even the pilot in the cargo plane "seen a plane" cross him in the sky near the Pentagon. You think that guy is lying? No, really, I'm asking you.

It's too risky to involve too much media or to get too many people to lie. Far better to get them to honestly say what they seen that a smaller group places before them.

As for "nose out", there's this theory that the hijackers may themselves have been hijacked, I fancy a theory that the video fakery is itself 'faked'. Video fakery may in fact exist, even I have found a small example of it, but you think the perps wouldn't realize everyone wouldn't firstly just jump to that conclusion? Isn't that plausible? Didn't people just jump? You think 9/11 planning is simple or complex? One layer or a multi-layer rabbit hole? Exactly.

You sure you not just been taken in by what the perps expected everyone to first jump to?


Cheers

reply to post by Skadi_the_Evil_ElfOK, I'll explain it for you. Witnesses can lie, witnesses can be deceived, so for the moment we can safely remove 'eyewitness' testimony from the discussion and still proceed. What remains is the physical evidence, which is so lacking that it's laughable. So, you can pontificate all you want, but it wont change the fact that the physical evidence does not support the conclusion. Period. So, the next time one of you repeats 'hundreds of witnesses' save your breath, because they are not the issue. What is the issue today, is the fact that a group of posters here completely IGNORE the lack of physical evidence, and that is criminal.

reply to post by dillweed

You mean the physical evidence which has been pointed out to you, repeatedly. And which usually ends up being handwaved away as having been planted, in broad daylight, right next to busy highway. Or from the back of a C130, depending on who you ask

reply to post by dillweed

If witnesses are going to lie - wouldn't they lie according to the OS? However, as has been pointed out to you on several occassions now - that didn't happen. Do you have a way to explain away *those* witrnesses?

reply to post by dillweed


Really? So thousands of witnesses were lying or being decieved? Wow, you must live in a pretty paranoid reality, if that is your belief.

Perhaps in the reality you live in, over half the population are secret plants or spooks. For those of us living in this reality, however, when thousands of people, from different vantage points and walks of life, are saying similar things, those witnesses statements do not get thrown out, because a competant investigator who was actually looking for truth would not do so. I shall take eyewitnesses accounts, plus the physical evidence and work of REAL investogators, as far more credible than the musings and speculations of armchair theorists who were not at the scene, nor partook in any investigation of the the crime scene.

The "evidence" the no 757 theorists tout is that the pictures "don't look right". Or look like what they personally think a proper plane crash shopuld look like. Even though time and time again real evidence, experts, and professionals have shot the no-plane bunk out of the water over and over.

reply to post by roboe
Obviously, I failed to make myself clear. A few pieces of aluminum does not an airplane make. That, coupled with the obvious lack of destruction on the face of the pentagon has convinced me that we were lied to. If you believe it, fine. But, until I see a picture of an airliner crashing into the building, I will remain a skeptic. Face it, the primary reason that no photographic evidence of an airplane crashing into the pentagon was released is because, no airplane DID crash into the pentagon. So post until you turn blue, I want proof and not a few bags of trash.

Originally posted by dillweed
reply to post by roboe

 

Obviously, I failed to make myself clear. A few pieces of aluminum does not an airplane make. That, coupled with the obvious lack of destruction on the face of the pentagon has convinced me that we were lied to. If you believe it, fine. But, until I see a picture of an airliner crashing into the building, I will remain a skeptic. Face it, the primary reason that no photographic evidence of an airplane crashing into the pentagon was released is because, no airplane DID crash into the pentagon. So post until you turn blue, I want proof and not a few bags of trash.

Until you can show pictures of a missile hitting the Pentagon or pictures of the demoliton team firing the charges, an airplane, whose parts were found at the scene, must have hit the Pentagon.