Let's kill the Pentagon Missile attack once and for all., page 1
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 1 times
Topic started on 3-9-2004 @ 10:54 AM by Loki
The Real Story

Okay. So, we've all heard the stories.

It wasn't a 757.
It wasn't even a plane.
Personal opinion?

One of two scenarios. A high powered inbound ASM, or something a bit sinister...a pre-arranged bunker-buster missile, aimed and fired directly at the Pentagon for a reason.

Watch this, tell me what you think. They did a great job.


reply posted on 3-9-2004 @ 11:41 AM by Bleys
If your intent is prove or disprove whether a plane hit the Pentagon then you should present all information that's out there.

I have posted this list of witnesses who saw a plane crashing into the Pentagon before. Link The statements were made by your average joe civilian. military, and various reporters.


"I saw this very, very large passenger jet," said the architect, who had been packing for a move. "It just plowed right into the side of the Pentagon. The nose penetrated into the portico. And then it sort of disappeared, and there was fire and smoke everywhere. . . . It was very sort of surreal."



"I looked in the rearview mirror to check the traffic and saw only a plane, flying very low. I followed it in my left outside mirror. I braked, looked out my left window and saw a large commercial aircraft aiming for the Pentagon." "The aircraft, so close to the ground, was banked skillfully to the right, leveled off perpendicular to the Pentagon's southwest side, then went full throttle directly toward the building. The plane vanished, absorbed by the building, and there was a slight pause. Then a huge fireball rose into the sky."



"...it turned and came around in front of the vehicle and it clipped one of these light poles ... and slammed right into the Pentagon right there." "Now there are some people who say that it skipped and went into the Pentagon and it may have gone that way, but that’s not what I saw. What I saw was the jet went very low into the Pentagon and it went straight." "It seemed like it was a slow, graceful bank and then once it straightened out, that's when it sped up." "...you could see chunks of the wreckage on the ground, pieces of the plane.... It literally disintegrated on impact. It hit, and as it went into the side of the building it sheared off the wings."


There are dozens more accounts at the link - while everyone's account differs slightly, but they all agree that it was a plane that hit the building.


reply posted on 3-9-2004 @ 12:55 PM by piboy
There was a site that took all the eye-witness statements and analyzed exactly what they said. The site showed that often the newspapers would paraphrase some things and directly quote others. Like this:

John Doe was there. When the 757 flew over, he could hear the engines roaring. "It came in very low. I thought it would land on the road."


In this fictional example, John Doe doesn't say he saw a 757 flying low. He saw "it" flying low, but we assume that he meant a 757 because the newspaper supplied that information. (Actually he didn't even say it was flying). And the newspaper said that he heard the engines, but it is not directly quoted.

The website had a large number of witness accounts, and they showed that no one was actually quoted as saying they saw what looked like an American 757 and that they actually saw it hit the Pentagon.

Some people may have seen something that looked like a plane, another perhaps said they saw the explosion, another perhaps saw a plane going toward the Pentagon and then heard an explosion (but didn't see it), and another might have said that something buzzed their office window, but no one was directly quoted to have said that they saw a plane that looked like American Flight 77 actually hit the Pentagon.

I can't remember where that site is. There are so many flight 77 sites now that I can't find it.

So when you read eye-witness accounts, you have to read exactly what they were DIRECTLY quoted to have said they saw. Paraphrasing must be taken with a grain of salt.

Now with this approach, go to the eye-witness account pagse and re-read the accounts. Here's webfairy's:
thewebfairy.com...

Finally, what do you do when the accounts conflict? What about the accounts of the plane hitting the ground first? Creating a crater in the lawn?

Why does all this matter and why nitpick? When people are called to testify in court, they are told to say in their own words exactly what they saw. No paraphrasing. No summaries by others. No retelling the story with an assumption of what really happened.

Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^



Blue Spheres Fall from the Sky in the UK
  Posted 13 days ago with 81 member flags
Strange Sounds in Sky Explained by Scientists
  Posted 9 days ago with 59 member flags
She Dialed 911. The Cop Who Came to Help Raped Her.
  Posted 2 days ago with 48 member flags
Anonymous: Revealing The Arcane Legal Trick Behind ACTA
  Posted 10 days ago with 42 member flags
Anonymous reveals Haditha massacre emails | RT
  Posted 5 days ago with 33 member flags
Tennessee and New York in \'war\' over gun rights and common sense
  Posted 19 days ago with 28 member flags
HSD says YOU are probably a threat! YOU ... Yes, YOU!
  Posted 3 days ago with 27 member flags