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.
"Approximately 10 steps out from between Wings 4 and 5, I was making a gentle right turn towards the security check-in building just above Wing 4 when I became aware of something unusual. I started to hear an increasingly loud rumbling behind me and to my left. As I turned to my left, I immediately realized the noise was bouncing off the 4-story structure that was Wing 5. One to two seconds later the airliner came into my field of view. The aircraft was essentially right over the top of me and the outer portion of the FOB (flight path parallel the outer edge of the FOB) I estimate that the aircraft was no more than 100 feet above me (30 to 50 feet above the FOB) in a slight nose down attitude. The plane had a silver body with red and blue stripes down the fuselage. I believed at the time that it belonged to American Airlines, but I couldn’t be sure. Within seconds the plane cleared the 8th Wing of BMDO and was heading directly towards the Pentagon. Engines were at a steady high-pitched whine, indicating to me that the throttles were steady and full. I estimated the aircraft speed at between 350 and 400 knots. The flight path appeared to be deliberate, smooth, and controlled. As the aircraft approached the Pentagon, I saw a minor flash (later found out that the aircraft had sheared off a portion of a highway light pole down on Hwy 110). As the aircraft flew ever lower I started to lose sight of the actual airframe as a row of trees to the Northeast of the FOB blocked my view. I could now only see the tail of the aircraft. I believe I saw the tail dip slightly to the right indicating a minor turn in that direction. The tail was barely visible when I saw the flash and subsequent fireball rise approximately 200 feet above the Pentagon.”
At the Navy Annex, “peering out of the window looking at the Pentagon.... the large silver cylinder of an aircraft appeared in my window, coming over my right shoulder as I faced the Westside of the Pentagon directly towards the heliport. The aircraft, looking to be either a 757 or Airbus, seemed to come directly over the annex, as if it had been following Columbia Pike[..]He was slightly left wing down as he appeared in my line of sight […] As he crossed Route 110 he appeared to level his wings […] as he impacted low on the Westside of the building
As you know by now, I do not like him at all, since our confrontation in my only allowed personal thread there, up till the moment that that megalomaniac closed it and banned me.
Because I gave too many hints and facts that AA 77 did certainly not fly over the Pentagon.
Originally posted by LaBTop
To Reheat : your signature link its text is a piece of hogwash, and you know it.
Originally posted by LaBTop
You feed on the gullible.
Originally posted by LaBTop
And I showed you in many posts that a downward attack angle from over the center of the ANNEX roofs, leading north of the CITGO gas station, in a very normal and low 23° bank angle and then after passing north of CITGO, a slight right turn by AA 77, a hundred meters or so before it would continue to fly straight over the 4 ANC workers standing between their maintenance buildings compound on the south rim of the Arlington National Cemetery grounds, continuing in its very low slightly downwards banking turn to cross over the Washington Boulevard (Route 27) and slam into the west wall. Some say it made a slight left banking correction when over the Pentagon lawn.
Originally posted by LaBTop
You keep insulting me, and about everybody else, without any form of moderator warning, so from now on I take it as fact that you must be a main shareholder in ATS, or even its secret owner, since I get punished at even the slightest ATS rules infringement, and you can go on untouched for years.
Originally posted by LaBTop
It's getting so stupid to react on your posts, that I should not react anymore on any of you, my usual "fan club" members. So, bye bye fans.
I'm pretty much convinced the Pentagon scene was "staged".
Originally posted by NWOwned
The smoking generator is a smoking gun.
Originally posted by NWOwned
I've mentioned this before in another thread but I'll recap it here.
Originally posted by NWOwned
I have reason to believe that the Pentagon scene was "staged".
Originally posted by NWOwned
That being so,
Originally posted by NWOwned
why would any such thing be necessary if an actual passenger jet truly did strike the Pentagon?
Originally posted by NWOwned
You wouldn't need to "stage" anything if a real plane was used.
Originally posted by NWOwned
I go so far as to include the smoking generator in all of this. Why? Well what's it doing? It's smoking. Why is it smoking? It's on fire. Why is it on fire? It was hit by an airplane in passing. Was it now?
Originally posted by NWOwned
Like are you sure?
Originally posted by NWOwned
You got any video of it being hit? You got any witness accounts of seeing it get hit? You got ANY decent film of an airplane at all? No? So you got tales of an airplane, a damaged generator and a billowing vertical smoke plume. Yeah, that's about right. And so you automatically assume and think that one thing must follow from the other cause and effect like then right, even though you don't have any video of the strike?
Originally posted by NWOwned
It's like that thing I seen on the web about reading a short paragraph with all the correct words in it except that the letters of each word are mixed up, turns out, the brain don't care if the letters are in the right order, long as the letters are there for each word the brain can read the paragraph.
Originally posted by NWOwned
There's a smoking generator with a gouge on top in front of a damaged wall with plane parts scattered over the lawn but there's no video. Brain steps in and says: "Well, what must've happened is a plane came charging in, hit the generator, hit the wall, exploded and left bits of itself scattered about!" Maybe. Maybe not.
Originally posted by NWOwned
I'm pretty much convinced the Pentagon scene was "staged".
Originally posted by NWOwned
And that means I think the smoking generator was 'in on it'.
Originally posted by NWOwned
Think about it. A plane comes in at just the right height to damage and set a fire and produce generous smoke plumes in an object set directly between the most heavily damaged section of the Pentagon wall and the closest part of the nearby highway. Convenient.
Originally posted by NWOwned
Coincidence you ask, or some sort of Plan.
You got ANY decent film of an airplane at all? No?
Originally posted by GenRadek
reply to post by psyop911
I'll ask you this then:
Do you honestly believe that if there truly was a clear shot of the plane and the impact, would the truthers accept it? Would they accept it if one discovered unseen footage of it, and it clearly shows an impact?
Be honest.
I already know the answer.
Originally posted by NWOwned
The smoking generator is a smoking gun.
I've mentioned this before in another thread but I'll recap it here.
I have reason to believe that the Pentagon scene was "staged". That being so, why would any such thing be necessary if an actual passenger jet truly did strike the Pentagon? You wouldn't need to "stage" anything if a real plane was used. I go so far as to include the smoking generator in all of this. Why? Well what's it doing? It's smoking. Why is it smoking? It's on fire. Why is it on fire? It was hit by an airplane in passing. Was it now?
Like are you sure? You got any video of it being hit? You got any witness accounts of seeing it get hit? You got ANY decent film of an airplane at all? No? So you got tales of an airplane, a damaged generator and a billowing vertical smoke plume. Yeah, that's about right. And so you automatically assume and think that one thing must follow from the other cause and effect like then right, even though you don't have any video of the strike?
It's like that thing I seen on the web about reading a short paragraph with all the correct words in it except that the letters of each word are mixed up, turns out, the brain don't care if the letters are in the right order, long as the letters are there for each word the brain can read the paragraph.
There's a smoking generator with a gouge on top in front of a damaged wall with plane parts scattered over the lawn but there's no video. Brain steps in and says: "Well, what must've happened is a plane came charging in, hit the generator, hit the wall, exploded and left bits of itself scattered about!" Maybe. Maybe not.
I'm pretty much convinced the Pentagon scene was "staged".
And that means I think the smoking generator was 'in on it'.
Think about it. A plane comes in at just the right height to damage and set a fire and produce generous smoke plumes in an object set directly between the most heavily damaged section of the Pentagon wall and the closest part of the nearby highway. Convenient.
A plane comes in and flies just the right height to hit it but not topple it over like the light poles. Interesting. The light poles were anchored too, unlike the trailer which was just sitting there on its wheels alone. Comes in and hits it at all and not fly over, or flies too low and completely obliterates it. Right? You follow?
It's like the Earth, closer to the sun we'd burn up, further out we'd freeze. Why we're right in the sweet spot zone! Just like that generator.
Coincidence you ask, or some sort of Plan!!
Cheers
A dog with a mallett up his arse can see that the pentagon attack was
staged, with a plane flyover and timely explosions (destroying the very
area (recently renovated (ideal for planting explosives)) containing the records
holding the key to the whereabouts of the unaccounted for trillions announced
the previous day by slimey rumsfeld) passed off (with media complicity) as a BS
terrorist attack (just like other events that day).
reply to post by GenRadek
C) a real plane is somehow switched with a small drone or a look alike, and is sent into the Pentagon
Originally posted by Danbones
reply to post by DaRAGE
don't forget to seriously consider the OS supporters proof of rebuttal using FAMILY GUY as a reference
Im sure all the forensic acountants investigating the missing trillions and others that died that day are rolling in their graves over that one.
Im sure one day they will issue the actual film of the event taken from any one of the gazzillion cameras as proof of what happened for sure....
nawwww ....the oS spporters would all get lynched if the peeps en mass ever found out the real truth.edit on 11-3-2012 by Danbones because: (no reason given)
so much evidence and theory to offer.
Well done!
Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by pshea38
A dog with a mallett up his arse can see that the pentagon attack was
staged, with a plane flyover and timely explosions (destroying the very
area (recently renovated (ideal for planting explosives)) containing the records
holding the key to the whereabouts of the unaccounted for trillions announced
the previous day by slimey rumsfeld) passed off (with media complicity) as a BS
terrorist attack (just like other events that day).
Only if you ignor the eye witnesses from the expressway.
And you still don't get it that 2.3 trillion is more that the ENTIRE DEFENCE BUDGET FOR 8 YEARS. No money was missing.