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.

 

“I can Prove That It Was Not An Airplane” That Hit The Pentagon : Retd. Major General

page: 5
32
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 11 2013 @ 11:50 PM
link   
Evidence That A Boeing 757 Really Did Impact the Pentagon on 9/11

From ATS and a member who actually did research and not just link a youtube video.




posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 12:47 AM
link   
The front of the Pentagon did not collapse until well into the burning of the Pentagon. The original hole was only 16 feet! Now, how do 7 foot diameter titanium Jet engines disappear? Pure physics means they would have to impact the Pentagon first, and yet there is not a scratch on the building outside of the hole. Spools are on the ground, windows are not messed up, but the plane for the first time in history just squished itself into a 16ft hole, never hit the lawn, took out multiple light poles that should have ripped off a wing at least, and there is NO debris!




During an appearance on The Power Hour radio program today, USAF Col. George Nelson (ret.), a 30 year veteran, aircraft accident investigator and expert in aircraft maintenance and aircraft identification, stunned listeners by stating that in regard to the 911 attack at the Pentagon, "I didn't see any damage on the sides of that hole, anything that would say that an airplane that size could have gone through a 16 or 18 ft. hole." He was referring to the hole seen at the Pentagon before the collapse of the e-ring. He went on to say, "There would be large parts of that wing lying on the ground on the outside. It wouldn't all go through that holeIt is impossible for all of the time change parts that have these serial numbers that are trackable to the specific aircraft, it is impossible for them to be totally destroyed where these serial numbers could not be read." www.physics911.net/georgenelson.htm


SOURCE

ThisATS post deals with the obvious fact the light poles were CUT.

This Link shows the clear problems with the light poles. You can even see the scratch mark where it was dragged into place! Note, not a scratch on the cabbies vehicle hood.

LIGHT POLES

These eyewitnesses saw a WHITE plane, I guess they didn't need to be listened to:




For the most secure building in America, it's amazing there are NO images of the plane coming in, but some six delayed photo shots of a fireball and something. No plane is seen anywhere. I will also point out that people could see a plane flying over head and assume that hit the building only to be duped by a decoy.



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 01:24 AM
link   
reply to post by UnifiedSerenity
 


You really should check the post before yours this quote is from that linked thread.




Review the facts

• Size of 757 matches the initial size of hole in the building - somewhere between 13 and 16 feet (757 is 13 feet wide/high)

• Rims found in building match those of a 757

•Small turbine engine outside is an APU

• Same engine has been clearly stated to not match a Global Hawk engine

• Blue seats from 757 laying on ground in photos

• Part of "American" fuselage logo visible in more than 1 photo

• Engine parts photographed inside match a Rolls-Royce RB211

• Structural components photographed in wreckage match Boeing paint primer schemes

• Large deisel generator in front of building hit by a large heavy object

• Large deisel engine outside is spun towards the building - could not be result of bomb blast or missile explosion

• Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner

• Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner hit the Pentagon

• 60+ bodies, matching the passenger list and flight crew roster identified and returned to families from Pentagon wreckage





The above are facts



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 01:31 AM
link   
I can give you a laundry list too, but I know what my eyes saw. There was no real debris that indicated a massive jet crashed into the Pentagon. Here is a series in chronological order of the military photographer. Jason Ingersoll, who started taking pictures immediately after the crash to 9pm that night. There is no interpretation or changes. These are the images he took in order. Note the small hole it made going into the Pentagon, the lack of damage to the lawn, the lack of debris, the lack of wall scarring where the wings should have hit with 7 ton engines, the spools standing in place right by the hole. WHERE IS THE PLANE?




posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 01:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by UnifiedSerenity
Now, how do 7 foot diameter titanium Jet engines disappear?


What makes you think the whole engine was made of titanium?


never hit the lawn


Why should it have have hit the lawn?


took out multiple light poles that should have ripped off a wing at least,


Why do you think a light pole should have ripped the wing of a high speed airliner?


and there is NO debris!


Why tell a lie like that? There is a lot of debris from a 757...


For the most secure building in America,


Your source for that claim is what exactly?

Have you worked out that the blue tent was being carried in, not out of the area yet?



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 01:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


You know, the government planned another fake attack to draw us into war against Cuba which JFK would not go along with called Operation Northwoods.






It is clear that Lemnitzer and the JCS had gone over the edge. In a Memorandum of 7/27/1962 (nara.gov doc 63), they admitted that the operation would mean a soar in both Cuban and American casualties, but that they intended to go ahead with it anyway. The following, from the report of 4/9/1962 (nara.gov docs 138-42) is a summary of the corrupt incidents that the US government would instigate in and around Gauntanamo to entice public backing for their war:

(1) Start rumours (many). Use clandestine radio.

(2) Land friendly Cubans in uniform “over the fence” to stage attack on US base.

(3) Capture Cuban (friendly) saboteurs inside the base.

(4) Start riots near the base main gate (friendly Cubans)

(5) Blow up ammunition inside the base; start fires.

(6) Burn aircraft on air base (sabotage)

(7) Lob mortar shells from outside of base into base. Some damage to installations.

(8) Capture assault teams approaching from the sea or vicinity of Guantanamo City.

(9) Capture militia group which storms the base

(10) Sabotage ship in harbour; large fires - - napthalene

(11) Sink ship near harbour entrance.

Conduct funerals for mock victims.
SOURCE

Gee, might they make up people dieing? List names and all their baggage? You act like some list reported means it is a fact. Look at those pictures of the Pentagon. WHERE IS THE PLANE? Surely more than a torn piece of metal should have existed? Look at the damage inside of the pentagon, why were those first floor partition walls still up? I mean the images speak for themselves.




We could develop a communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami areas, in other Florida cities and even in Washington… (nara.gov doc 140)…the terror campaign could be pointed at Cuban refugees seeking haven in the United States. We could sink a boat load of Cubans enroute to Florida (real or simulated). We could foster attempts on lives of Cuban refugees in the United States…
SOURCE




Use of MIG type aircraft by US pilots could provide additional provocation. Harassment of civil air, attacks on surface shipping and destruction of US military drone aircraft by MIG type planes would be useful as complementary actions.

An F-86 properly painted would convince air passengers that they saw a Cuban MIG… (nara.gov doc 141) …Hijacking attempts against civil air and surface craft should appear to continue as harassing measures condoned by the government of Cuba… It is possible to create an incident which will demonstrate convincingly that a Cuban aircraft has attacked and shot down a chartered civil air liner enroute from the US to Jamaica, Guatamala, Venezuala or Panama. The destination would be chosen only to cause the flight plan route to cross Cuba. The passengers could be a group of college students off on a holiday, or any group of persons with a common interest to support chartering a non-scheduled flight…

The plan was to replace said aircraft with an identical drone, flown by remote control, and land the original plane at an airforce base where passengers, boarded under prepared aliases, would be evacuated. The drone would then fly the route and when over Cuba, emit a distress signal before being destroyed by radio signal.

A further plan involving a plane involved a USAF plane appearing to be shot down by Cuban MIGs in an ‘unprovoked attack’ over international waters. The pilot would broadcast that he was under attack and then cease all transmission. He would then fly back to a base where the plane would be given a new tail number and the pilot would resume his real identity. Then a US submarine would disperse some destroyed plane parts in the water. Thus the result is a missing plane and pilot and wreckage in international waters after reports of an attack by MIG aircraft.
Source

To think some list given about what was at the crash is factual begs the question of can you trust the government given it's past subterfuge and willingness to do terror attacks in America to propagate a war with Cube and by extension Russia?



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 02:16 AM
link   
reply to post by UnifiedSerenity
 


Ok, I like this game, I can play too. Find the plane that hit this building:



Ok now find the C-130 that "allegedly" crashed into this building!



I dont see any debris that proves any planes crashed here too!

I dont see a 747 crashing here either!



Hell looking for the El Al 747 crash I dont see any photos of any plane parts there either!



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 02:29 AM
link   
reply to post by GenRadek
 


There is so little given about any of these crashes, it's not hard to imagine taking one or two photos and saying, "SEE NO PLANE". The story doesn't even say if the plane clipped the building and crashed a mile away, because it's obvious it did not bury itself in the building.

The other image again is a single image and it looks like it went through the building, but as there are no images of the other side of the crash site, you can't say there was not debris.

As for the small plane hitting that building, here it is:




posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 02:30 AM
link   
reply to post by awakehuman
 


I actually believe whatever hit the Pentagon was not an Boeing jet.



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 02:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by butcherguy
For those members that believe that the AA 757 didn't hit the Pentagon:

1. Did it take off that day?
2. If it did take off, where did it go?

Oh, and tell us again how all the parts from a 757 ended up at the Pentagon as wreckage...



Light poles, small holes, to this day no more video evidences, if you would like to believe that the small debris that are picked up by hands at the Pentagon are that of the 757 go right ahead and maybe then i would agree that GW Bush isn't war criminal at all.




edit on 12-8-2013 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 05:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by redoubt
reply to post by awakehuman
 


I cannot believe that it was a plane that plowed into the Pentagon. I am not making any claims as to what it was because I was not there... but in my heart and my mind, I cannot accept the OS at this particular site.

That is some convincing arguments you got there.



I do not care to speculate here as to what actually happened...

Oh.

This was rather informative.



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 06:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by UnifiedSerenity
The front of the Pentagon did not collapse until well into the burning of the Pentagon. The original hole was only 16 feet! Now, how do 7 foot diameter titanium Jet engines disappear? Pure physics means they would have to impact the Pentagon first, and yet there is not a scratch on the building outside of the hole. Spools are on the ground, windows are not messed up, but the plane for the first time in history just squished itself into a 16ft hole, never hit the lawn, took out multiple light poles that should have ripped off a wing at least, and there is NO debris!



Do you seriously think your statement "there is not a scratch on the building outside of the hole " is compatible with this shot taken soon after impact ?



Fact is you are obviously not an air crash investigator as evidenced by your ignorance about the titanium engines as you describe them. The fan blades were made of titanium which is anyway not stronger than good steel but is lighter and less likely to corrode.

Instead of just amateur speculation about the scene how about explaining how dna identified body parts of passengers and crew were recovered from the Pentagon ? How did heavy aircraft parts get into the Pentagon while it was blazing ? How did personal effects from AA 77 passengers get into the Pentagon ? Why are there so many witnesses to a plane ? Why did Arlington police report an American Airlines plane to their dispatcher ? How about the flight data recorder recovered which included data from previous flights known to have been made by that aircraft ?



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 06:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


Maybe you can explain so easily onto why the supposed Boeing airliner pieces were picked by hands?


Only one light pole?



Why is This Boeing piece so small?




So an huge Boeing airliner made this hole into Pentagon. Again the size looks rather quite small for an huge airliner doesn't it?


edit on 12-8-2013 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 06:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter

Originally posted by butcherguy
For those members that believe that the AA 757 didn't hit the Pentagon:

1. Did it take off that day?
2. If it did take off, where did it go?

Oh, and tell us again how all the parts from a 757 ended up at the Pentagon as wreckage...



Light poles, small holes, to this day no more video evidences, if you would like to believe that the small debris that are picked up by hands at the Pentagon are that of the 757 go right ahead and maybe then i would agree that GW Bush isn't war criminal at all.




edit on 12-8-2013 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)


Is this the sort of small debris that could be picked up by hand that you have in mind ?



How did that and other heavy engine parts get deep into a fiercely blazing part of the Pentagon ?



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 06:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
reply to post by Alfie1
 



So an huge Boeing airliner made this hole into Pentagon. Again the size looks rather quite small for an huge airliner doesn't it?


edit on 12-8-2013 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)


I am sorry but you are obviously so ill-informed about this that you don't know the entrance from the exit hole you have linked.



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 06:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


Ah yes landing gear just like that story of this April how an Part of 9/11 plane's landing gear found in NYC with the Boeing identification number after 10 years later with no one else in the area to notice it?



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 06:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
reply to post by Alfie1
 



So an huge Boeing airliner made this hole into Pentagon. Again the size looks rather quite small for an huge airliner doesn't it?


edit on 12-8-2013 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)


I am sorry but you are obviously so ill-informed about this that you don't know the entrance from the exit hole you have linked.


Your accusing me of being ill-informed? thats rather odd for a new member whose also soul focus is into defending the GW Bush Government's official line.

No offense meant, going off with the accusations of ill-informed by claiming that i dont know that the image shows the entrance from the exit.

Since you want to play that way.

Here you go.



Now do explain how can an Boeing airliner of that size accomplish it?
edit on 12-8-2013 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 06:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
reply to post by Alfie1
 


Ah yes landing gear just like that story of this April how an Part of 9/11 plane's landing gear found in NYC with the Boeing identification number after 10 years later with no one else in the area to notice it?




That's just an attempted diversion. You alleged that any aircraft debris at the Pentagon could be picked up by hand. Do you think you could pick up the landing gear ? And how could it have got right into a blazing Pentagon ?



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 06:58 AM
link   
reply to post by theRhenn
 





but still.. where did those people go that were on that flight?


I've seen this question asked repeadedly and the answer really is very simple.

Short answer is they were murdered, assuming there was duplicate / substitute aircraft used (IMO highly likely, as remote control gear had to have been fitted to enable the highly unusual flight characteristics such as pin-point accuracy, speed beyond design at low altitude etc. demonstrated by the jets that hit WTC)

IMO, the most likely scenario is that they were disembarked, after gas or acrid smoke was pumped into the cabin to cause a reasonably believable excuse to make an emergency landing...the passengers were probably told there was a fire / electrical problem and to disembark immediately upon landing...meanwhile, the retrofitted cloned aircraft were taking off parallel to the genuine jets landing...one comes in and touches down, the other cloned aircraft is taking off at the same time (there was a brief period the jet went off the screen, this is probably when the switch was made).

The passengers would not have been aware of anything untoward at this point, and would have been more concerned with exiting their aircraft they thought was on fire, or about to explode via the emergency exits and grateful to be alive.

It was then a simple case of shepherding them into a hanger or other holding building and killing them. (take your pick of methods).

The bodies are easily disposed of after that, and nobody is any the wiser.

The 'missing passengers' question is easy to explain and even easier for the conspiritors to handle...probably one of the easiest elements of the whole operation in fact...if you're a cold blooded monster without a shred of humanity or empathy with the hundreds of people on the aircraft and thousands on the ground you're about to murder.



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 07:00 AM
link   
reply to post by UnifiedSerenity
 




took out multiple light poles that should have ripped off a wing at least, and there is NO debris!

Are you serious?
There are tons of videos online where Russian drivers take out light poles and it doesn't rip the car in half.

Did you take science class in school?
We shoved PAPER straws through raw potatos.



new topics

top topics



 
32
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join