Originally posted by babybunnies
Why coming forward now? This sounds like another one of those unsubtantiated claims threads that really shouldn't be on ATS.

Can you read? I've given my reasons already. And if you wish it removed, perhaps there's another motivation at play? hmmmm?

The part that I always thought suspicious, was the trajectory. The hole in the building, is from the ground up, and one would think that if a plane flew in, it would have been angled down, and taken out part of the roof, or more of the ground.

The hole that's always been shown, looks like something drove directly in along the ground


Quote from TheMindWar:

We know 9/11 was not done by some cave men in tora bora, that falsehood is total hogwash.

And that ^
They supposedly had better cell phone service than Canada, I've been bugged by that for years now.
They had cell capability in a cave in Afghanistan, that many years ago, and I still don't have cell service where I live?
Satelite cell phones aren't cheap.....

I thought first-hand means from their perspective, not relying on others?

Originally posted by babybunnies
For me, the best evidence that no plane hit the Pentagon is the complete lack of footage showing the plane on approach.

With all the CCTV and building security cameras in place around the Pentagon, the hardest part that I have a problem believing is that there is no footage of the plane coming in.

Release the footage, and you'll silence the skeptics, well, most of them anyway. There will still be the idiots out there who will claim the footage has been faked.

Exactly the reason why they can't, because the footage shows the truth. All those trying to slam doubt on this thread already...and how does such a new post get all this attention anyway btw? I'm stumped. But not really. We all know that we are monitored in real-time, and flags go up instantly when something like this comes up. Sorry, but you guys have already lost. Because I was there, and I saw what I saw. Now, certainly, you can cause those on the fence to stay on your side. Good for you.

Originally posted by snowspirit
The part that I always thought suspicious, was the trajectory. The hole in the building, is from the ground up, and one would think that if a plane flew in, it would have been angled down, and taken out part of the roof, or more of the ground.

The hole that's always been shown, looks like something drove directly in along the ground

Let me tell you, that hole didn't collapse until the next day after when I was there. It was a small hole, as one internet search will show you. No bldg damage from the wings. It was a missile. That's the only way you could achieve that kind of angle, of course. (So easy, a cave man could do it.)

Originally posted by babybunnies
For me, the best evidence that no plane hit the Pentagon is the complete lack of footage showing the plane on approach.

With all the CCTV and building security cameras in place around the Pentagon, the hardest part that I have a problem believing is that there is no footage of the plane coming in.

Release the footage, and you'll silence the skeptics, well, most of them anyway. There will still be the idiots out there who will claim the footage has been faked.

As a fellow skeptic of the O.S. I can guarantee one of the OS Troops is going to flame you and deny the Pentagon had any cameras on the outside. They truly believe the Pentagon has only 1 shoddy ass camera watching the exterior wings of the building and that the DoD feels no need to surveillance the grounds even though classified/top secret things are being held within the building.

You were there you said, and this.

The clearance I had included all areas, including the debris collecting point. That's when I saw all the debris, and what was clearly lacking: any debris from an aircraft.

You saw all the debris, what kind of debris, what did you collect, what did the debris look like to you, and how are you qualified to determin what is plane debris, or something different?

You are very defensiv against the skeptics, you shouldent be, they want the truth as much as anyone.

This is the first time I have seen some of these pictures of the debris inside thanks to the regen article. Unless someone placed a couple large pieces of a commercial airliner in their office before the impact this evidence clearly shows that a plane hit the pentagon.

However it does not explain the coincidence of the fact that the plane hit the only portion of the pentagon that was reinforced to receive an impact like that, nor does it explain the countless other "coincidences" that happened on that day.

Personally this puts to rest my concern of a missle hitting the pentagon. To be honest though that never made much sense to me anyway. If you are orchestrating a false flag operation, why would you use 3 real planes and one missle? Too many people would be able to see it fly across the lawn and hit the building at that time of day. As a matter of fact there are plenty of eye witness accounts that claim to have seen a plane hit the building that morning. Who sent it though is still up for debate.