Let's kill the Pentagon Missile attack once and for all., page 14

Originally posted by TheAgentNineteen
There was more than one car with a smashed windshield. I heard some people describing fighter jets around that time, yeah I heard them. They flew right over my school, they didn't make it in time for the Pentagon hit, and they ended up escorting the remaining planes to the ground out at Dulles Airport. These Photo's don't do justice at all. When you're really there in person, like I was, you're just amazed at how gigantic the Hole really was. Also, that part of the Pentagon had not been re-inforced yet. The rest of the building was, except for that section.

Yeah it's hard to judge the size of anything in a photo (or even at a distance in person) without something recognizable beside it as a reference point.

Just like, what the heck is this?? Click it and find out...



You're mistaken about that side of the Pentagon though (no big deal)- it was one of 3 completed (it was just being finished that week) with renovation.pentagon.mil..." target="_blank" class="postlink">upgrades to the exterior - if it had been one of the 3 sides not completed the damage would have been even worse.


[edit on 9-9-2004 by CatHerder]

Originally posted by CatHerder


The saddest part?

The saddest part is that everyone here feels the need to be so god darn rantish. I am not following some 'French wacko' , I am asking the unanswered questions. Unlike many people I'm sure, I have read through every page of this thread. Most of the time people are just barking information at one another that the other person/s are unwilling to accept anyway. Whats the point. I have been trying to look at the video, because if anyone can conclusively prove/disprove what ever that obect is, bingo! You make assumptions about what theories people subscribe too.

The strange things are.

1/ white smoke, at the frame the video captures it best there is a large cloud (some mistook for a white plane object, a global hawk possibly)
It's hard to tell what part of that object the smoke is trailing from, it seems to be the back but you cannot tell.

2/ The tail shape that is captured is not definitive as it doesn't capture anything comparable to a 757 in size, colour, markins, shape.

3/ The trajectory seems inplausable at such speeds or/ without some kind of disturbance to the ground, turbulance to plane or whatever.

take another look. Can't you see why some of us want to see the other footage. Or just want to look a little harder at the days events to try and find anything that may explain.




I know there is wreckage comparable to a 757.
I know a load of people saw the plane.
I know there was a big fire.

I am just trying to fill in the other gaps. Truly kill the pentagon theories. Untill everything is covered, it will never go away. As long as people have questions then the conspiracy lives on doesn't it?

People have to look outside this line of thought and have a look at how the government has acted through all of this.

The Commission is restricted to $3 million for their investigations. By comparison, the government spent over $47 million by March of 1999 investigating Clinton's Whitewater and Monica Lewinski dealings

On the Chicago Board Options Exchange during the week before September 11th, put options were purchased on American and United Airlines, the two airlines involved in the attacks. The investors who placed these orders were gambling that in the short term the stock prices of both Airlines would plummet. Never before on the Chicago Exchange were such large amounts of United and American Airlines options traded. These investors netted a profit of at least $5 million after the September 11th attacks.

Yet these 19 young single, unemployed, "classic overstay candidates still received their visas." I am holding in my hand the applications of the terrorists who killed my husband. All of these forms are incomplete and incorrect.

But, the terrorist's luck didn't end at the ticket counter; it also accompanied them through airport security, as well. Because how else would the hijackers get specifically contraband items such as box-cutters, pepper spray or, according to one FAA executive summary, a gun on those planes?

www.disastercenter.com...

The terrorists got lucky. They were ignored by intel, allowed through the airports, allowed to stay in America and learn to fly (not take off and land just fly)

The 911 comission was severly restricted, it was a joke. Why would this happen if they had nothing to hide?

Obviously alot of people knew this was going to happen. The people who made all those illegal transactions before and during the attacks all the way down to those smiling Isrealis who were filming the thing fron Jersey, with joy. Things are being hidden, many things, and to find them out you have to go through everything. Until the questions are answered. It's not just the apparently 'crazy' theories of how a 757 didn't hit, it's about everything that surrounds it. If the government truly were telling the truth then things would have been handled differently. As usual, they are up to something.

I suppose you could say, why would they stop 9/11 when it has been so crucial to everything that this administration has wanted to do. .

Not alot to add here tonight but wanted to give a link to a very good video with very VALID and FACTUAL points.
Let me know what you think.I am going to post this in the WTC 7 thread as well as it has EVIDENCE on both accounts.
Painful Deceptions: An Analysis of the September 11 Attack
This is a 40 minute segment of Eric Hufschmid's new video.
www.prisonplanet.com... <-- 26mb file,sorry dial up users
You can purchase the video online at
www.store.yahoo.com...

The people who claim Flight 77 hit the Pentagon have almost no supporting evidence, as this video shows.

Summary of the Video's Accusation:

Flight 77:

There is no evidence of Flight 77 or the dead passengers at the Pentagon. The Pentagon security video suggests a Global Hawk was shattered by a missile. The missile may have been launched from a defensive missile system around the Pentagon.

The World Trade Center Towers:

Explosives were placed in both towers before the attack to cause the towers to disintegrate into dust. Explosives were detonated via radio by a computer in Building 7.

Building 7: It was a 47 story, steel-framed building that disintegrated later in the day, also from explosives. The 23rd floor was the Mayor's "Emergency Command Center," which had its own air supply. This appears to be the command center for destroying the towers.

The video also includes: an explanation of turbofans, explosives, the Oklahoma City bombing, the media that Americans mistakenly refer to as our "Free Press," and why deception is the main weapon in this war to control us.

Originally posted by SMR
This is a 40 minute segment of Eric Hufschmid's new video.
www.prisonplanet.com... <-- 26mb

Things noticed instantly wrong with this video:

1.) Every frame except for one frame in the Pentagon video shows a sooty red fireball. Frame 2 (the first explosion) is clearly overexposed - check out the bright color of the grass and even the side of the entry gate AWAY from the explosion (the one facing the camera). It's far far brighter than all other frames.

2.) Plane video used is from a test crash which was testing experimental "non explosive" (wasn't supposed to burn rapidly) fuel. Test was a failure, but it was a dirty fire. This video is from the mid 80's and it's been on NOVA and a half dozen other TV shows since... it does NOT show actual jet fuel.

3.) Pentagon does not have steel beam construction. Because it was built during WWII they saved on steel (enough to build a battleship!) but using a concrete beam method and only rebar for the concrete. No steel beams, sorry, maybe next time he should do some reading of publicly available documents (in his local library even) before his next video.

4.) Building 7 sprinklers didn't work because the water was cut off (in the whole WTC complex) when the towers fell. This has been stated by officials more than once... (Same goes for Building 5 and 6) I like how he doesn't even know this... stellar research in this video so far.

5.) Fire didn't cause the buildings to fall down, it was the two tiny towers that fell down and smashed the underground supporting structures. Fire hastened it along.

6.) "Millions of Americans helped the government break the law" now that's a pretty slick statement. Talk about a coverup of incredible proportions!

7.) Since FEMA doesn't know how building 7 collapsed, they are "stupid" they are "incompetent" they are "involved in covering up a scam". WHICH IS IT? Awesome story telling here.

8.) Claims because the top floor fell "first" it's obviously a collapse - he obviously has never seen a large building fall down - if you lose the base support it falls into itself from top down. And his amzingly ignorant statement about "does a building that falls down from a fire normally produce this much dust?" is the crem de le creme of ignorant statements in the video - ALL buildings produce a ton of dust when they fall down.

9.) How did the guy film the building fall? "...decided to point his camera at building 7 as just the right moment ...who is this person?" Well, for starters they announced for about 4 hours prior that the building was unstable and going to fall, then about 10 seconds before it did fall (and a good 45 minutes after the order to leave it was given to firefighters) a loud siren was heard... and it was announced over the two way radios that it was beginning to fail (I heard this myself live on CBC Newsworld) and the building fell. Man, that cameraman must have been psychic!!

10.) "Incredible secrecy surrounding this building" (Referring to Building 7) This only 3 minutes after he said "Millions of people are lying" - wow a million people is sure a large "secret".

11.) Q: Why "only" this floor had it's own air supply? A: It was the emergency response center for the mayor and police/fire - NY was a prime target for a boilogical/chemical terrorist attack. Q: Why was it reinforced to withstand 160MPH winds? A: It was the emergency response center for the mayor and police/fire in case of a hurricane or other large disaster. (Seriously, this guy knows nothing more than how to narrate poorly, who did his research?)

12.) Claims they abandoned the "bunker" just when it would have been useful. Uh hey buddy? One of the largest towers in North America has fallen down and the 2nd one looks like it might come down too. Nobody knows in which direction - they're both 2.5 times as high as the building we're in and they're right across the street... maybe we should move a little further away? (Man, good thing somebody in the emergency response center was thinking!) Which, by the way, was just being finished and had never been used nor was it fully staffed at that point - ask Juliani who said so on 9.11 on every news channel on the planet before the first tower fell.

13.) He claims the flight paths went directly"over" and towards building 7 "like they were following a homing beacon" - he is wrong on both counts and REALLY should invest in a map of NY City prior to 9/11. He's out by a whole 90 degrees. Who is this clown?

14.) "This type of steel does not shatter there should be large, twisted peices of steel assemblies in this rubble." RIGHT AS the camea pans over a bunch of twisted steel beams, and twisted assemblies - all twisted up like candy canes. LOL classic

15.) He must have never seen a single video by multiple independent expert architechts and engineers explaining the process that caused the WTC towers to fall... amazing.

Then he goes on to spout and endless stream of fallacies "how did all the pieces from both the towers end up at perfect lengths so they fit on the trucks with only a few having to be cut? I watched 25,000 construction and demolition people converge on the rubble and I also watched around 500 crews constantly cutting steel, never stopping, always people cutting steel, cranes moving the parts, loading, cutting, moving, loading for SIX MONTHS. What planet did this guy live on when the WTC towers came down?

Wow, conspiracy theorists like this must make clowns like Michael Moore proud - at least he tries to be a little more up front when he blatently bends the trouth and misquotes people and takes events and statements out of context. The guy who made this video didn't pull any punches. It's just "since I don't know about this, I'll just make some crap up and people will buy it!" ...and many will - for only $24.95!

And the final bit that proves his book, and his video are real? He only wants $24.95 for a copy of the video!

Thanks for the laughs, that was a great thing to wake up to. Way better than an old rerun of the Dave Chapelle show.

[edit on 9-9-2004 by CatHerder]

1.) Every frame except for one frame in the Pentagon video shows a sooty red fireball. Frame 2 (the first explosion) is clearly overexposed - check out the bright color of the grass and even the side of the entry gate AWAY from the explosion (the one facing the camera). It's far far brighter than all other frames.

If you had paid attention,he says it could be overexposed.But that still does not dispute the fact that it was a totally different type of blast.It is science,not theory!The bright color is not going to last the whole time.It is an instant blast of color as any type of explosive.Set off a firecracker and film it.Watch it frame by frame and you will see.

2.) Plane video used is from a test crash which was testing experimental "non explosive" (wasn't supposed to burn rapidly) fuel. Test was a failure, but it was a dirty fire. This video is from the mid 80's and it's been on NOVA and a half dozen other TV shows since... it does NOT show actual jet fuel.

Does it matter if the video shows a test that failed?It is still a plane crash that erupts in flames as it should.This does not match that of what hit the Patagon.What is in that video is what should have been had a plane hit it.It doesnt matter if it is slow or fast burning.

3.) Pentagon does not have steel beam construction. Because it was built during WWII they saved on steel (enough to build a battleship!) but using a concrete beam method and only rebar for the concrete. No steel beams, sorry, maybe next time he should do some reading of publicly available documents (in his local library even) before his next video.

Really?Your sure about that?
Thats is very brave to say that since you seem to be the expert around here.
The area that the plane hit was the LAST completed phase of a renovation that took place. The portion of the Pentagon where the plane hit was probably the most heavily reinforced. In the October 3, 2001 edition of Architecture Week, B.J. Novitski wrote that the impact of the plane was in "Wedge One," which had been strengthened by recent renovation, a project that was inspired, in part, by the bombing of the Federal Building in Oklahoma City. He says that contrary to what is believed, the casualties among workers in the Pentagon were not low because of vacant offices, but because of the extraordinary structural strength of the building. Novitski says that about 80 percent of the workers in the wedge were on duty that day, but ..."the exterior walls had been reinforced with steel beams and columns, bolted where they met at each floor. Some of these reinforced walls very near the point of impact remained in place for a half hour before collapsing, allowing uncounted hundreds to escape." The hijackers chose one of the most reinforced buildings in the world to crash into.

4.) Building 7 sprinklers didn't work because the water was cut off (in the whole WTC complex) when the towers fell. This has been stated by officials more than once... (Same goes for Building 5 and 6) I like how he doesn't even know this... stellar research in this video so far.

Im not posative on this,but I dont think at the time those small fires where happening that any tower had fallen yet.I will need to find out when the building was noticed on fire or started,and when the towers fell.But I dont think any tower fell when those small fires started.So the sprinklers should have turned on.

5.) Fire didn't cause the buildings to fall down, it was the two tiny towers that fell down and smashed the underground supporting structures. Fire hastened it along.

You should be working for FEMA.

6.) "Millions of Americans helped the government break the law" now that's a pretty slick statement. Talk about a coverup of incredible proportions!

Do you know what he is talking about?Maybe a small statement other than sarcasm could enlighten us as to why you think that is a 'slick statement'

7.) Since FEMA doesn't know how building 7 collapsed, they are "stupid" they are "incompetent" they are "involved in covering up a scam". WHICH IS IT? Awesome story telling here.

All of the above.Hence why you should work for them since you know how the building fell and they dont.

8.) Claims because the top floor fell "first" it's obviously a collapse - he obviously has never seen a large building fall down - if you lose the base support it falls into itself from top down. And his amzingly ignorant statement about "does a building that falls down from a fire normally produce this much dust?" is the crem de le creme of ignorant statements in the video - ALL buildings produce a ton of dust when they fall down.

I myself have seen a demo in person in Vegas and it does produce a mass amount of dust.But wait,,,,,they are taken down by what?....EXPLOSIVES!!
When a building falls on its own,at that size of building 7,it is most likely to tilt and fall thus not having as much dust spew out.There are films on this,go look.They fall on thier own at an odd angle,not straight down.

9.) How did the guy film the building fall? "...decided to point his camera at building 7 as just the right moment ...who is this person?" Well, for starters they announced for about 4 hours prior that the building was unstable and going to fall, then about 10 seconds before it did fall (and a good 45 minutes after the order to leave it was given to firefighters) a loud siren was heard... and it was announced over the two way radios that it was beginning to fail (I heard this myself live on CBC Newsworld) and the building fell. Man, that cameraman must have been psychic!!

I will say luck of the draw on that one.Sorta like someone getting a snap of a UFO if you will.Any way to be suspicious about this is to see the persons full video of what he was taping.Maybe just taping and looking around and caught it.

10.) "Incredible secrecy surrounding this building" (Referring to Building 7) This only 3 minutes after he said "Millions of people are lying" - wow a million people is sure a large "secret".

I think you know what he means.I dont even feel like explaining this one.Just a lazy,sarcastic attempt on your part.

11.) Q: Why "only" this floor had it's own air supply? A: It was the emergency response center for the mayor and police/fire - NY was a prime target for a boilogical/chemical terrorist attack. Q: Why was it reinforced to withstand 160MPH winds? A: It was the emergency response center for the mayor and police/fire in case of a hurricane or other large disaster. (Seriously, this guy knows nothing more than how to narrate poorly, who did his research?)

I would agree there.But not on your small comment at the end.

12.) Claims they abandoned the "bunker" just when it would have been useful. Uh hey buddy? One of the largest towers in North America has fallen down and the 2nd one looks like it might come down too. Nobody knows in which direction - they're both 2.5 times as high as the building we're in and they're right across the street... maybe we should move a little further away? (Man, good thing somebody in the emergency response center was thinking!) Which, by the way, was just being finished and had never been used nor was it fully staffed at that point - ask Juliani who said so on 9.11 on every news channel on the planet before the first tower fell.

Uh hey buddy?Look at the post you made before this.
Also,you need to know something.
Before either of the twin towers collapsed, Mayor Rudolph Giuliani and his associates were told to leave the headquarters they had set up within Building 7."We were operating out of there when we were told that the World Trade Center was gonna collapse," Rudolph Giuliani told Peter Jennings of ABC News that morning, "and it did collapse before we could get out of the building." Despite this, Giuliani fled WTC 7 at least eight hours before it collapsed. How did he know that the twin towers were going to collapse if it was such an unprecedented occurance? Why didn't the firefighters on the ground get the same warning?

13.) He claims the flight paths went directly"over" and towards building 7 "like they were following a homing beacon" - he is wrong on both counts and REALLY should invest in a map of NY City prior to 9/11. He's out by a whole 90 degrees. Who is this clown?

HUH?Prior to 9/11 - Did the building locations move on the day of the attacks
Maybe this image will work for you WTC

14.) "This type of steel does not shatter there should be large, twisted peices of steel assemblies in this rubble." RIGHT AS the camea pans over a bunch of twisted steel beams, and twisted assemblies - all twisted up like candy canes. LOL classic

If you look closely,MOST of the steel beams are NOT twisted.You saw twisted metal and a few small beams.Most of the steel beams are shattered into smaller pieces than they were in original size.

15.) He must have never seen a single video by multiple independent expert architechts and engineers explaining the process that caused the WTC towers to fall... amazing.

Im sure he has and I am sure if they were asked if fire could weaken these mighty towers and make them fall as they did,they would say NO.
NO building of that construction or similar has fallen like that due to fires.And the fires were NOT BIG ONES.Maybe you noticed the PEOPLE standing at the edge where the planes hit!

Then he goes on to spout and endless stream of fallacies "how did all the pieces from both the towers end up at perfect lengths so they fit on the trucks with only a few having to be cut? I watched 25,000 construction and demolition people converge on the rubble and I also watched around 500 crews constantly cutting steel, never stopping, always people cutting steel, cranes moving the parts, loading, cutting, moving, loading for SIX MONTHS. What planet did this guy live on when the WTC towers came down?

So the images of the rubble that CLEARLY show beams that are in small lengths BEFORE any cutting,hauling,whatever,are fakes?Im am not doubting you saw these events.But I too saw the horror on TV and in images.I saw and can provide video and images of what he is takling about PRIOR to any clean up work that took place.

Wow, conspiracy theorists like this must make clowns like Michael Moore proud - at least he tries to be a little more up front when he blatently bends the trouth and misquotes people and takes events and statements out of context. The guy who made this video didn't pull any punches. It's just "since I don't know about this, I'll just make some crap up and people will buy it!" ...and many will - for only $24.95!
And the final bit that proves his book, and his video are real? He only wants $24.95 for a copy of the video!
Thanks for the laughs, that was a great thing to wake up to. Way better than an old rerun of the Dave Chapelle show.

Do you have ANY evidence to debunk any of this?All I see from you is hear-say from YOUR so called experience and knowledge.Are you a 'jack of all trades' because you seem to have all the answers to that of a professional.Show me evidence of what you say.Dont TELL me what you seem to know.Show me how and where you get this info from.All us 'conspiracy theorists' have shown many pieces of evidence from video to images and even FACT reports and FILES realeased to the public.You show nothing but your own words.
I am glad you got a laugh out of it.Now make me laugh.

Ok this thread is about the so called terrorist attack not the WTC 7 or other things so please stop kidnaping the thread.

ok Ill be more specific see this picture


As you can see this piece IS NOT FROM AN AMERICAN AIRLINES PLANE LET ALONE A 757 and the grass is intact a plane that weight 90 tonnes flying at 320 knots has t o make a wake turbulence equal to this weight to support itself. Please APPLY this weight to you grass or to your car and COME HERE WITH THE REPORT, bottom line cars would have been swept away (WHY DO YOU THINK AIRPORTS HAVE BARRIERS TURNED UPWARDS called deflectors) TO AVOID BLASTING A CRA OR A PERSON.

second one


See the 3 barriers (LAYERS IN THE BUILING) and the no park sign (CAN CARS PARK HERE???) no sign of the radome of the 757 that is made of composite kevlar and carbon fiber so where it is? ah it vanished just after it puntured the carboard wall!!!!




The so calles landing gear rim is not from a 757, BEFORE YOU RETOR WITH SOME FOOLISH ANSWERS SEE IT FOR A MINUTE, the space for the holes is simetrical in the "accident" the 757 is asimetrical, and there is more space beetween the center hole (the trunnion hole) than the one of the "accident" also it doesnt have a lip for containing the punctured flat tire EXPLAIN THAT, also the brake of the 757 is carbon brakes to withstand high temps WHERE IS IT...ok if you say oh it blew away or it was burned down in the fire EXPLAIN THE PRISTINE aluminium WITHOUT ANY SMOKE of the Wheel.....




Here you are

All even add ore things:

The 757 has 187 Seats why we cant see ANY OF THEM they are made from a base of aluminium and a fire retardant material, if the 757 crashed al least one in the tail should have jumped out of the plane >>NOT A SINGLE FREAKING SEAT.
When I went to the wreckage of Mexicana 930 there were seat destroyed even with parts of bodies still attached.....mmmm
Nopart of the engines that have the fan blades made of titanium......OPs the disapeared !!!

I hope someone votes me way above cause man those guys who believe anything they tell them have all the Darn points.

[edit on 9-9-2004 by kix]

Originally posted by kix
Ok this thread is about the so called terrorist attack not the WTC 7 or other things so please stop kidnaping the thread.

ok Ill be more specific see this picture


As you can see this piece IS NOT FROM AN AMERICAN AIRLINES PLANE LET ALONE A 757

Nope. Not even close. First of all it you look at the piece of debris on the ground, you will note that it is curved, bent into a U shape from the impact. The photograph is a 2 dimensional image of a 3 dimensional object, thus you get distortion. What looks like a curved line only looks that way because the piece of aluminum it is on is curved.

Secondly, The AA logo on the plane stretches across both the fin and the rudder. Are you an airframe mechanic certified in 757s? If not, then I will not accept your claim that there are no rivet holes in the rudder assembly. The same thing goes for the wheel. Any given series of aircraft has numerous variations. Unless you can unequivocally prove that the picture of the intact landing gear is the exact same assembly that was on the plane that crashed into the Pentagon, then your comparison has no validity.

second one


See the 3 barriers (LAYERS IN THE BUILING) and the no park sign (CAN CARS PARK HERE???) no sign of the radome of the 757 that is made of composite kevlar and carbon fiber so where it is? ah it vanished just after it puntured the carboard wall!!!!

You are so far off base on this one it is laughable.


Lets look at the pictures of the outermost exterior wall of the building.

edit: linked so as not to blow the margins.

www.geoffmetcalf.com...


Notice the large squares of stone? That is your Indiana limestone facade. Each panel appears to be about 16" x 24."



Now look again at the close up of the punch out of the exterior wall in the inner ring.




look closely at the outer wall. As you can see it is a single layer of face brick. It is a glazed, light collored brick to match the exterior limestone, but it is not limestone. In fact, if you look carefully at the top of the hole, you can see how the bricks flaked apart from the impact.

Behind that is a double wythe of common brick.

Finally, what you are calling reinforced concrete is not that at all. that is just a plaster wall of the type commonly built up until 30 years ago. The metal bars are a black iron framework that has a metal mesh attached to it. You can see the metal mesh on the left side of the hole. The plaster is applied to this mesh. You can see where the plaster still remains on the side of the hole.

What is interesting is that the pipe (which is covered with asbestos insulation BTW) that is on the left side of the hole and the plaster and mesh are visible in such a way that sugests that when the wall broke open from the impact, it made a bigger hole on the outside then it did on the inside. Notice the straight line of bricks along the left side of the hole. That and the presence of the pipe suggests that there was a pipe chase hidden behind the wall at this location. The chase was probably set into the exterior brick wall in such a way as to weaken it significantly at this point.


As for the "no parking sign," I don't know why it is there. My first guess is that there is a fresh air intake for the building nearby.





[edit on 9-9-2004 by HowardRoark]

[edit on 9-9-2004 by HowardRoark]

Alaska: Samantha Koenig Kidnapped last week.
  Posted 4 days ago with 111 member flags

Blue Spheres Fall from the Sky in the UK
  Posted 17 days ago with 81 member flags

The Chinese have seen the dragon in the sky !!
  Posted 4 days ago with 70 member flags

Strange Sounds in Sky Explained by Scientists
  Posted 13 days ago with 60 member flags

She Dialed 911. The Cop Who Came to Help Raped Her.
  Posted 6 days ago with 49 member flags

Anonymous: Revealing The Arcane Legal Trick Behind ACTA
  Posted 13 days ago with 42 member flags

NDAA Nullification: Tennessee Bills Propose Kidnapping Charges for Federal Agents
  Posted 4 days ago with 38 member flags

Anonymous reveals Haditha massacre emails | RT
  Posted 9 days ago with 33 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: