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.

 

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

page: 17
1
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 11 2004 @ 07:00 PM
link   
Many theorists think that the conspirators used remote controls to guide the plane with the passengers into the Atlantic Ocean. Well, why not simply guid all four planes into buildings instead of going through all this trouble?

I have also yet to see a convincing explanation as to why all but one of the passengers known to be on Flight 77 has been identified.

www.dcmilitary.com...

[edit on 11-9-2004 by maynardsthirdeye]

[edit on 11-9-2004 by maynardsthirdeye]



SMR

posted on Sep, 11 2004 @ 09:39 PM
link   
Lets go one by one here........

Originally posted by PlatinumBoy



If a missile hit it--why don't any REAL organizations (ones that have websites not blabbing that it was the Illumnati, Jews, or Aliens--which all the conspiracy ones have (one out of the three at least)) talk about it. Why not any French or Russian or other governments? Would no one have talked--no one involved, if it was our government. No one's conscience wouldn't have gotten to them?

REAL organizations,,,,,because,like we are doing,it would be looked at as THEORY.As far as we know,they didnt have a hand in it,thus would be just another conspiracy theory.
I have never seen a site say aliens had a hand in it,your just mocking it to make it seem like the theorists are crazy

As for people coming out and talking about it.Some have,watch some video's,although people like you would just say they are full of it and say it is another conspiracy theory to attack the GOV



Also, I love how so many of you and these people running the sites have no true formal science training and talk about smoke plumes and how planes hit stuff, etc. etc. Go look at Hiroshima. Buildings near the bomb were standing in some cases, yet some miles away were burned down among unharmed buildings.

No science is needed when you have the internet.You can find all this stuff on the net.And if you dont think that is enough,then all the ones trying to debunk our thoeries with thier findings about this stuff on the net is not worth a damn either.It is just the same.
Go look at Hiroshima. Buildings near the bomb were standing in some cases, yet some miles away were burned down among unharmed buildings.



posted on Sep, 11 2004 @ 09:57 PM
link   
From: "Dick Eastman"
Date: Wed Jun 5, 2002 3:37 am
Subject: CIA swallowing FBI -- all you need to know is right here


Facts:
Big oil executives and Mobil were being investigated for illegal oil dealings with Iran (illegal swaps with Kazakhstan), and the investigation was being conducted from the North Tower of the World Trade Center -- where the FBI had offices on floors officially listed as a New York State insurance plan offices. The evidence and all of the investigators perished on September 11.

The biggest names in American finance, the current President of Harvard, Alan Greenspan and the New York Federal Reserve Bank Governor were also being investigated from SEC offices in the WTC -- in a case involving the Federal Reserve selling its gold stock to the inner circle Wall Street elite (the makers of the Fed's open market securities transactions that determine the money supply in the loanable funds market) and selling the gold at far below the price obtainable through open bidding, through honest and open market transactions.

It was called a "price fixing case" officially, but the prices were fixed low by the Fed for the benefit of the select few insider buyers.

THIS WAS THE BIGGEST CRIME OF ITS KIND EVER TO BE PINNED ON THE FINANCIAL ELITES OF THE U.S.

And again the evidence, the files, the investigation itself all perished with the destruction of the WTC complex.

And it has not been resumed. And all surviving investigators and agencies have been called off the cases under orders to devote all resources to conducting the "war on terrorism" -- which is defined in such a way as to categorically exclude investigation of Establishment figures (the one group immune from being identified with "terrorism" (ironically, we know).

And now the CIA absorbs the FBI -- and the structure of American law-enforcement is permanently changed -- there is no longer constraint or discovery for finance capitalism for any economic crime it may choose to perpetrate.

So watch for more S & L scandals, more booms and bust cycles, more squeezing to the bottom of the middle class that was, -- welcome to Enron world

that is unless you -- yes you, Mr. Nobody, Mr. Igotmyownproblems, take the evidence that exists that King George the Usurper and those who back his incompetent smirking ass -- are responsible for 911, that the devout Moslems were "set-up" that the planes were crashed by remote control, and that one of the planes -- the one that hit the Pentagon -- was not an airliner at all, but an F-16 which fired a missile ahead to the target just before it crashed.

Here is the solved crime that will bring down the criminal establishment. This is your last opportunity to save this (your) country -- once the FBI is swallowed by the CIA -- there will be no law to check the whims of our economic masters and the Smirk despot.

Dick Eastman Yakima, Washington Every man is responsible to every other man.

"Two world wars, shame on them. A third world war, shame on us."

Let this be our common motto, all ye wretched of the earth.

======

"Two world wars, shame on them. A third world war, shame on us."

Here is solid information about who wants World War Three and what they have done so far to get it.

1. Dave Bosankoe's summary essay on the Pentagon with the concluding Chapter of The War on Freedom: How and Why America was Attacked, September 11th, 2001 by Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed
www.bosankoe.btinternet.co.uk...

2. Larry Chin's courageous essay:
www.onlinejournal.com...


3. The Standard Sources on the 911 Frame-up and War-on-Terror" treason:

www.humanunderground.com... Fescado
www.fromthewilderness.com... Mike Ruppert
www.bosankoe.btinternet.co.uk... David Bosankoe
www.asile.org...
www.asile.org...
www.apfn.org...
www.apfn.org...
www.geoffmetcalf.com... Metcalf
www.public-action.com... Carol A. Valentine
www.copvcia.com... Michael C. Ruppert
www.emperors-clothes.com... --Jarred Israel
emperors-clothes.com...
www.tenc.net (mirror of emperors-cloths)

www.skolnicksreport.com... Sherman Skolnik
Skolnik's "The Overthrow of the American Republic" (!!!!!)
www.truthout.com... Especially for non-CFR Democrats
www.onlinejournal.com...
Chin
www.rense.com... Rense
www.infowars.com...
www.conspiracyplanet.com...


THE LIE WON'T STAND
www.fromthewilderness.com...

THE CASE FOR BUSH ADMIN FOREKNOWLEDGE OF 9-11
www.fromthewilderness.com...

OH LUCY! TIMELINE SURROUNDING SEPT 11TH
www.fromthewilderness.com...


[edit on 11-9-2004 by Sauron]



posted on Sep, 11 2004 @ 09:59 PM
link   
One reason NOT to use the real planes at the Pentagon, and perhaps the WTC is the off chance of someone surviving. If a passenger did survive they would be able to tell what actually happened on the flight. That it was not an islamic terrorist hijacking as reported.
.


SMR

posted on Sep, 11 2004 @ 10:32 PM
link   
Nice post

I will go through those links once this Mountain Dew kicks in


Slank
Good thought.I tried that one as well.But seems 'to far fetched' and 'unrealistic' to a few people.



posted on Sep, 11 2004 @ 11:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by SMR
No science is needed when you have the internet.



Thanks for the new sig line.


SMR

posted on Sep, 11 2004 @ 11:17 PM
link   
Mock all you want since you cant ever find my findings to be false.Infact,you havent been able to reply to any of my findings after shutting you down


As for that statement,I think you know what I meant when I put that.But incase you dont have the smarts to figure it out,I will help you.
By 'no need for science when you have the interent' I meant that you do not need to be a science professor (as many here are not even though they bash my findings) when all the math and science are on the pages from which the source comes from.

Now instead of being a 'witty' comic,why dont you try and faslify my findings smart guy


BTW,,,is that all you do is look for comments from people to add to your sig line rather than posting something relivent to the topic?Nice heap of self esteem you got there


[edit on 11-9-2004 by SMR]



posted on Sep, 11 2004 @ 11:59 PM
link   
Anyone that thinks 9-11 didn't happen the way Bush and the rest of the Government said it did is in serious need of a life IMO. There is no way all these theorys apply here. I understand this is a site for such debate. However this discussion is just a waste of time IMO. My first PLONK!


SMR

posted on Sep, 12 2004 @ 12:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by TexasConspiracyNut
However this discussion is just a waste of time IMO.

So why did you put forth the effort to waste your time


Some people's children



posted on Sep, 12 2004 @ 12:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by SMR


As for the bodies and DNA
If you read about the damage,NOTHING is said to be left of the crash the Pentagon but a few small findings.The explosion and fire is said to make the plane 'disappear' and this is why not alot is found,yet you can believe that they have DNA from all the people?Does that really sound possible?
As for them having names,,,,,,ummmm,,,,,dont they take names of people when they fly?Plane tickets
If you take a flight,are you saying there is no record of you on that flight?Maybe they all snuck on the plane!


What I find hard to believe is that alot of people think that in no way our GOV would ever do this,yet you have documented PROOF of things such as Pearl Harbor


"Many of the casualties were badly burned and difficult to identify, an official said. Of the 189 killed, 125 worked at the Pentagon and 64 were passengers on American Airlines Flight 77. Only one of those who died made it to the hospital. The rest were killed on site, and for some, only pieces of tissue could be found."

A piece of tissue. Clearly, there would have been enough for positive identification.

www.dcmilitary.com...



[edit on 12-9-2004 by maynardsthirdeye]


SMR

posted on Sep, 12 2004 @ 12:47 AM
link   
I do not doubt that DNA can be recovered from a small piece of skin,,I mean a drop of spit can give you DNA.
But come on,,,,


only pieces of tissue could be found

Talk about Where's Waldo
With all that damage,a plane that they say vaporized,almost nothing left of metal,yet small pieces of people are found?And not whole pieces,but skin tissue?
Im having trouble with that one.But will give benifit of the doubt right now until I can get some numbers here.
Going to need to see some numbers of those who needed to be indentified by these 'pieces'

[edit on 12-9-2004 by SMR]



posted on Sep, 12 2004 @ 03:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by SMR
I do not doubt that DNA can be recovered from a small piece of skin,,I mean a drop of spit can give you DNA.
But come on,,,,


only pieces of tissue could be found

Talk about Where's Waldo
With all that damage,a plane that they say vaporized,almost nothing left of metal,yet small pieces of people are found?And not whole pieces,but skin tissue?
Im having trouble with that one.But will give benifit of the doubt right now until I can get some numbers here.
Going to need to see some numbers of those who needed to be indentified by these 'pieces'

[edit on 12-9-2004 by SMR]



Why do you, and so many people like you, choose to IGNORE the photos, the evidence of thousands of pieces of the aircraft, the tons of metal from the airframe, the peices of the engines, the "black boxes" from the aircraft, the seats from the aircraft, the liggage from the aircraft, etc., and simply state "the plane vapourized" ??

I love how you deny everything that is fact so you can safely remain in your cacoon sheltered from reality. Keep up the good work.

A 757 hit the Pentagon - maybe if your efforts in proving a conspiracy were redirected in the proper place you'd have a more plausible conspiracy theory to support and prove. Such as: why couldn't the "government" have helped (and trained) the Al Kyda operatives to hijack and fly the planes into the buildings at both WTC and Pentagon sites? I mean, they didn't scramble fighters to check out the aircraft as is usual procedure - all 4 aircraft turned their transponders off and ceases radio communications within aproximately 10 minutes of each other (when other aircraft stray from their flight course there is at least 2 F16's scrambled to check out the situation within 30 minutes - in all 4 cases on 9-11 no fighters were scrambled in the first 45 minutes...).

The 4th plane over PA was most likely shot down by an F16 (one of the plane's engines fell off at altitude and landed miles away from the main crash site) - it was known that the passengers were attempting to overtake the terrorists through phone calls to 911. IF (and I stress if) the planes were all part of a greater conspiracy, one which aided and abbetted the terrorists in some "greater plan" to remove freedoms from the American public, and give the government more freedoms and powers over it, it would certainly make sense to blow that last plane out of the sky. Otherwise, perhaps a terrorist on the 4th plane could/would have been captured and told his tale of how he was trained by US agents...

I should stress that I firmly believe the above two paragraphs to be another tale spun in deluded fantasy - but there are thousands and thousands of people, and hundreds of organizations who will tell you the above is true. If it were true - then of course they'd simply fly the aircraft into the buildings, why would they further complicate matters by using anything other than the original 4 aircraft to hit the buildings with? Eyewitnesses on the ground would further support the story that it was a terrorist attack if people SAW the planes hit - this would be the final piece in completing the proof of a terrorist attack and would remove all thought from the public that it was anything but a terrorist attack. If it were missiles or military aircraft hitting the buildings surely hundreds of witnesses would have been all over the news saying "What in the hell is going on here?! I saw a missile hit that building!!"

Seriously, I think you're supporting a really misguided conspiracy theory, and I also think you're ignoring all the proof when it comes to evidence on the ground at the Pentagon. A missile did not hit the Pentagon. A 757 hit the Pentagon.



posted on Sep, 12 2004 @ 03:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by slank
One reason NOT to use the real planes at the Pentagon, and perhaps the WTC is the off chance of someone surviving. If a passenger did survive they would be able to tell what actually happened on the flight. That it was not an islamic terrorist hijacking as reported.
.


There is absolutely no way anyone can survive a commercial airliner crashing directly into a wall, mountainside, or other solid object. In the history of airplane crashes, any aircraft impacting such an object has resulted in 100% fatalities. In all airplane crashes where there are survivors, there has been a concerted effort by the flight crew to avoid a crash or to attempt a crash landing (slow down, try to land normally and slide on the belly).

If the US government was conspiring on 9-11 to attack it's own population in the hopes of generating a mass simpathy and outrage - and thus grant the government more controls over its own people though restrictions of freedoms and issuances of new laws - they would not have taken the chance that anything but the original aircraft and the people on those aircraft could be found as evidence on the ground.



[edit on 12-9-2004 by CatHerder]



posted on Sep, 12 2004 @ 03:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by CatHerder

The 4th plane over PA was most likely shot down by an F16 (one of the plane's engines fell off at altitude and landed miles away from the main crash site) - it was known that the passengers were attempting to overtake the terrorists through phone calls to 911.



I thought I was the only one that thought the fourth plane might have been shot down. People should put some effort into that. I believe from the time the second plane hit the WTC to the time the fourth plane went down was more then enough time to scramble planes. Dick Cheney even gave the order to shoot down planes but it is said that his order never got threw
Also just the fact that it landed in a empty field is alittle shady. If you had orders to shoot down a civillian plane would most likey do it over the most empty area you could find.



posted on Sep, 12 2004 @ 03:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by CatHerder

Originally posted by slank
One reason NOT to use the real planes at the Pentagon, and perhaps the WTC is the off chance of someone surviving. If a passenger did survive they would be able to tell what actually happened on the flight. That it was not an islamic terrorist hijacking as reported.
.


There is absolutely no way anyone can survice a commercial airliner crashing directly into a wall, mountainside, or other solid object. In the history of airplane crashes, any aircraft impacting such an object has resulted in 100% fatalities. In all airplane crashes where there are survivors, there has been a concerted effort by the flight crew to avoid a crash or to attempt a crash landing (slow down, try to land normally and slide on the belly).




www.airdisaster.com...
There was at least one survivor on this flight, and believe me the pilot did not have time to try and do crap. I was at this accident scene, don't know how even the one little girl lived through it. The plane slid under an overpass, missed the tank farm by about 100 feet, and even took out cars on middlebelt road.



posted on Sep, 12 2004 @ 03:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5

Originally posted by CatHerder

Originally posted by slank
One reason NOT to use the real planes at the Pentagon, and perhaps the WTC is the off chance of someone surviving. If a passenger did survive they would be able to tell what actually happened on the flight. That it was not an islamic terrorist hijacking as reported.
.


There is absolutely no way anyone can survice a commercial airliner crashing directly into a wall, mountainside, or other solid object. In the history of airplane crashes, any aircraft impacting such an object has resulted in 100% fatalities. In all airplane crashes where there are survivors, there has been a concerted effort by the flight crew to avoid a crash or to attempt a crash landing (slow down, try to land normally and slide on the belly).





www.airdisaster.com...=N312RC&airline=Northwest+Airlines
There was at least one survivor on this flight, and believe me the pilot did not have time to try and do crap. I was at this accident scene, don't know how even the one little girl lived through it. The plane slid under an overpass, missed the tank farm by about 100 feet, and even took out cars on middlebelt road.


If that plane had crashed on takeoff I dont think its speed would be close to that of the plane that crashed in the pentagon. Perhaps the reduced speed can account for the survivor?

Or maybe that girl was unbreakable


[edit on 12-9-2004 by ShadowXIX]



posted on Sep, 12 2004 @ 03:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5
www.airdisaster.com...=N312RC&airline=Northwest+Airlines
There was at least one survivor on this flight, and believe me the pilot did not have time to try and do crap. I was at this accident scene, don't know how even the one little girl lived through it. The plane slid under an overpass, missed the tank farm by about 100 feet, and even took out cars on middlebelt road.


"Slid under an overpass" I dont see it ramming into a solid object at full speed...

What I see in the accident report is this: "The aircraft crashed on takeoff from Detroit after the crew forgot to set their flaps. The aircraft climb to approximately 50 feet, stalled, hit several light posts, grazed a rental car building, and came to rest on the airport access road. A 4 year old girl was the sole survivor of the accident."

(Photo links to original page)


Wow, after grazing off a building (losing speed), ramming through lightpoles, bouncing across a flat field, and finally coming to rest on an airport access road it still managed to kill 154 in the plane and 2 people on the ground? Amazing! Imagine if it had hit the side of a building while going over 300MPH, I bet it would be in even worse condition than the photo above!

You're not looking at the whole picture - you're comparing a flat ground crash to an impact with a reinforced concrete building. However, the photo above shows what happens even in a flat ground crash... not much plane left!



posted on Sep, 12 2004 @ 03:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
I thought I was the only one that thought the fourth plane might have been shot down. People should put some effort into that. I believe from the time the second plane hit the WTC to the time the fourth plane went down was more then enough time to scramble planes. Dick Cheney even gave the order to shoot down planes but it is said that his order never got threw
Also just the fact that it landed in a empty field is alittle shady. If you had orders to shoot down a civillian plane would most likey do it over the most empty area you could find.



In all honesty, I think they probably did shoot down the 4th plane and choose not to freely admit that for the sake of the families of the people onboard. If it were up to me, if it were my call, I wouldn't have hesitated to shoot down that plane.



posted on Sep, 12 2004 @ 04:00 AM
link   


Jee, hows about those solid objects in picture number 2, the bridge piling, and the train tussle?

By the way when a plane first takes off, especially when leaving a hub where it's maxed out on its load, it's going to be going full throttle. The reason that they stalled is without their flaps down they still did not have enough power to lift them. At this point the pilot is either going to press more throttle if available, or he has to drop the nose.

By the way there is not a field to be see anywhere in that general vicinity. The plane was obviously going fast enough to make it from middlebelt and wick through the bridges, probably a good mile from initial impact.

[edit on 9/12/2004 by defcon5]

[edit on 9/12/2004 by defcon5]

[edit on 9/12/2004 by defcon5]


SMR

posted on Sep, 12 2004 @ 04:26 AM
link   
CatHerder
You ask me how or why to questions and answers that have already been talked about and been done with.But again,you do not read and or come in late.

Now here you are trying to gain the upper hand,put in what YOU think is fact


There is absolutely no way anyone can survive a commercial airliner crashing directly into a wall, mountainside, or other solid object.
only to get shot down,,,,AGAIN!

Dude.I dont even feel like wasting time defending my opinions to you anymore.You think you know it all,you put your comments in,they get shot down,and you skip to another topic.

Im not going to put you on ignore though I should.Instead I want to see your opinions.After all,they are opinions and everyone is entitled right or wrong.

A quick reply from you though,,,,,,



Why do you, and so many people like you, choose to IGNORE the photos, the evidence of thousands of pieces of the aircraft, the tons of metal from the airframe, the peices of the engines, the "black boxes" from the aircraft, the seats from the aircraft, the liggage from the aircraft, etc., and simply state "the plane vapourized" ??

I never IGNORED the images.I simply do not believe them to be that of a 757.And as far as all the pieces.Some of those so called 'pieces' look so tore up,you cant tell if it is 757 or something RESEMBLING a 757.
You are going on what they are telling you it is by it being labled that.In one image,they say there is a tire that has the same tread.If you look at that crappy image,you cant even see that is infact a tire at all let alone the tread markings.

See you next time



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join