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: 6
32
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 07:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by MysterX
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)


What does remote control gear have to do with the speed of a airliner?


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).


Where exactly was this done....why did no one notice?


The bodies are easily disposed of after that,


So you think it is easy to dispose of so many bodies and no one noticed?




posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 07:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter

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)


Everybody can plainly see that you posted the C-Ring exit hole as the supposed entrance of a Boeing into the Pentagon so there is not much point in denying it.

So far as the link you have now posted I think that gives a pretty good idea of the extent of the damage where the plane hit. Did you expect the proverbial cartoon cut-out ?



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 07:04 AM
link   
reply to post by UnifiedSerenity
 




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.

So they convinced an American Airlines pilot to fly his airliner to appear as if he was going to hit the Pentagon, but not actually hit it. Then when he landed they executed everyone on the plane and cremated their bodies.

They shot a missile into the Pentagon, then had a cargo plane drop the parts of the 757 into the building in a precision strike.

Something about this doesn't seem believable to me.



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


My niece was giving a presentation the morning of 9/11 to a very large client and she could see the Pentagon in the distance as she spoke.

She watched the plane hit, and STILL has nightmares about it.

Sorry folks, it was a plane.



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 07:21 AM
link   
No offense meant.
edit on 12-8-2013 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 07:23 AM
link   
Delete post.
edit on 12-8-2013 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 07:25 AM
link   


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 ?

In reply to Alfie1.
1. After any airliner crash the motion of getting the pieces by hands is rather ridicules, as it was so with other airliner crashes pieces arent picked up at the moment after the air crash but after few hours due to the fie and hot temps from the airliners debris.

2.Official version believers they still believe the governments version of Airplane” That Hit The Pentagon yet miss there own arguments, as including the missing light poles and why would an Boeing leave an car undamaged only to have its windows smashed and front of the vehicle.
And why would this specif car have a book written by david icke?

3. In reality planes and airliners do not have the strength, nor physics do this kind of removal.


Does this even look like Boeing?
4.Cam footage.




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

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

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

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



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 07:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by UnifiedSerenity
 




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.

So they convinced an American Airlines pilot to fly his airliner to appear as if he was going to hit the Pentagon, but not actually hit it. Then when he landed they executed everyone on the plane and cremated their bodies.

They shot a missile into the Pentagon, then had a cargo plane drop the parts of the 757 into the building in a precision strike.

Something about this doesn't seem believable to me.


C'mon, whats the problem ? You have missed out a couple of things though. It was also necessary to precision drop body parts and personal possessions of passengers and crew of AA 77 plus the hastily re-programmed flight data recorder showing that AA 77 crashed into the Pentagon. And of course you had to chop down some light poles, trim trees, damage a generator, fencing, a low wall etc to simulate the passage of a plane. V important no-one saw anything of course.

All you got to do then is get all the witnesses to lie that they saw a plane when they really saw a missile and to continue to lie for ever.

So much more straightforward than just smacking a plane into the Pentagon. What could possibly go wrong ?



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 07:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


See my reply to you above.

Is this even an Boeing Jet? i am quite sure cams back in 2001 would have picked it better.



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 07:43 AM
link   
I am an expert with aircraft ordnance however it stops at 1945. My statement was that no fighter jet has ordnance that can impact a building perpendicular at ground level-that is for any aircraft in any time period.

The notion that truthers use that America's air defense is the 'best in the world' and that points to a conspiracy is simply gibberish.

America is the most venerable nation in the world to any attack. The most heavily defended nation is Israel and the most heavily defended city is Jerusalem- they do seem to go somewhat overboard to a Westerner. A tall, blond, blue eyed obviously American man doesn't like having a bazooka pointed at his head.

The point is that yes, an attack on the old city would have to be an inside job with the government as the number 1 culprit. That however, applies to the Middle East not America. The truther notion that sinister forces told US defenses to 'stand down' so we can pull off this plot is just ludicrous.

There are no defenses to stand down. All America can do is react and counterattack which they can do with devastating swiftness and that is our main defense-you will be sorry. The Taliban and Al Qaeda learned that lesson the hard way.

The whole 'Operation Northwoods' claim of a past cold war deceptive invasion somehow proves America would engage in such swagger in modern times just shows ignorance about that time period. That is just another silly CIA plan right along with 'Mongoose' and the exploding cigar, the contaminated wetsuit and the drug to make Fidel's beard fall out.---just rubbish.



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 07:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by matadoor
reply to post by awakehuman
 


My niece was giving a presentation the morning of 9/11 to a very large client and she could see the Pentagon in the distance as she spoke.

She watched the plane hit, and STILL has nightmares about it.

Sorry folks, it was a plane.



Yeah, my wife was on the way to work at the Pentagon when it hit. She saw it from the road. She was pregnant and was late due to some morning sickness. Might have lost them both had she been on time. I was at WRAMC at the time and we took in casualties from the attack. I was afraid that the next burned body on the stretcher would be hers. Didn't hear that she was okay for several hours because we were very, very busy.



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 07:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
Does this even look like Boeing?


Yes it does actually......

Any proof at all that the Pentagon is the "most guarded building on earth?

Any proof at all that "there are more CCTV cameras covering this building than any other building on the planet"

Also we have a youtube video with added music, which = hoax!

funny, several times you made the claim "the Pentagon is the most secure building" but every time you are asked to back that claim you run away!
edit on 12-8-2013 by hellobruce because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 07:55 AM
link   
reply to post by spooky24
 





There are no defenses to stand down. All America can do is react and counterattack which they can do with devastating swiftness and that is our main defense-you will be sorry. The Taliban and Al Qaeda learned that lesson the hard way. The whole 'Operation Northwoods' claim of a past cold war deceptive invasion somehow proves America would engage in such swagger in modern times just shows ignorance about that time period. That is just another silly CIA plan right along with 'Mongoose' and the exploding cigar, the contaminated wetsuit and the drug to make Fidel's beard fall out.---just rubbish.


Just rubbish?
Its rather ironic you claim to talk of The Taliban and Al Qaeda in which you state they have The Taliban and Al Qaeda. Yet you still dont get it.




That is just another silly CIA plan right along with 'Mongoose' and the exploding cigar, the contaminated wetsuit and the drug to make Fidel's beard fall out.---just rubbish.


Before you start calling it you should do more research on the issues including on Operation Northwoods, as Operation Northwoods isn't rubbish its the reality.

Just whom armed the Taliban? the American government did, 9/11 was the prefect excuse as the cause for war in Afghanistan they already had the plans to invade anyway.

I read in an BBC from 1997 that the Pentagon had plans to invade Afghanistan in an future event.



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 07:57 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.


Perhaps you can answer these then, since you appear to have all the answers...

How does a passenger aircraft's engines not create entrance holes or damage window surrounds or plough deep channels into the soft ground, the wings do not damage adjacent windows, the high tail section does not damage upper levels of the building...when we are expected to swallow that the same jetliners' flimsy nosecone and fuselage apparently is able to punch through multiple, steel reinforced layers of concrete creating a neat round hole that exits, still apparently intact through the exit hole (again, a nice and neat hole), when we are told the force of impact caused massive disintegration and vapourisation of most of the aircraft?

And don't you find it at least ever so slightly curious that the pieces of the supposed jet scattered being retrieved by hand show very little evidence of heat and burning?

If the majority of the aircraft, including the bulk of the wings, tail, seating, baggage, passengers and even the engines was vapourised (as has been the claim) upon impact, how does a vapourised fuselage punch a neat 16 foot (approx) hole through multiple heavilly reinforced (conveniently recently closed off and worked on to supposedly strengthen that section) layers / steel girders and supports and and still be intact enough / non-vapourised enough to create a nice neat punch out hole in the C-Ring?

Can't be both and no matter how many times it's said online, it will never make it be both.

It was a missile that hit the Pentagon, probably using the planned chaos at the WTC as a cover..the reason?

2.3 Trillion of them...since the data centre that contained the records of the whereabouts of the 'untracked' (stolen, missappropriated, used for black ops, lining the pockets of the big boys and girls, whatever) budget money was in the 'impact' area and was obviously destroyed.

You obviously have your own take on what happened, and paralells the OS almost exactly, here's my take on what happened at the Pentagon:

No jetliner hit the Pentagon, nice, clean shiney and small pieces of aluminium aircraft pieces were planted in that area of the Pentagon prior to 9/11, most likely using the opportunity when the retrofit / strengthening of that section was being carried out. (Just as the WTC 1&2 towers had been very recently retrofitted / upgraded just prior to 9/11)

The missile hit, creating a very recognisable and typical entrance hole for a cruise missle type weapon and punched through, the debris pieces already secreted in situ was then scattered and landed around the blast point and lawn showing little evidence of the extreme heat generated upon high speed impact, forces and heat that the OS would have us believe vapourised the majority of the rest of the aircraft.

In fact, the majority of the pieces picked up outside on the lawn looked as bright and shiney as the day they were made, certainly not something that was subjected to the massive forces and resulting extreme heat generated that would completely disintegrate and vapourise the majority of a jetliner and it's components.

I doubt anything will ever be done to bring the real criminals to justice, so this ongoing debate is fairly futile. It really only comes down to what each of us believe in our hearts, you have your beliefs, others including me, have a different view...although Karma has a way of jumping up and biting the guilty in the backside sooner or later, one way or another they'll get what they deserve, that's certain.

We're just going to have to agree to disagree on the details.



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 07:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
Does this even look like Boeing?


Yes it does actually......

Any proof at all that the Pentagon is the "most guarded building on earth?

Any proof at all that "there are more CCTV cameras covering this building than any other building on the planet"

Also we have a youtube video with added music, which = hoax!

funny, several times you made the claim "the Pentagon is the most secure building" but every time you are asked to back that claim you run away!
edit on 12-8-2013 by hellobruce because: (no reason given)





Yes it does actually..

Really? proof it then.





funny, several times you made the claim "the Pentagon is the most secure building" but every time you are asked to back that claim you run away

Nice try on twisting else words buy claiming i made the claim Pentagon is the most secure building? firstly i am not the person whom claimed that.




Any proof at all that "there are more CCTV cameras covering this building than any other building on the planet"


Could you rephrase it a bit better?




Also we have a youtube video with added music, which = hoax!

I am not sure i am following you there.



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 08:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by MysterX
How does a passenger aircraft's engines not create entrance holes


It did...


plough deep channels into the soft ground,


As it never hit the ground why should it plough a deep channel?


' flimsy nosecone and fuselage apparently is able to punch through multiple, steel reinforced layers of concrete creating a neat round hole that exits,


Oh dear, what makes you think the nosecone punched the exit hole out?


If the majority of the aircraft, including the bulk of the wings, tail, seating, baggage, passengers and even the engines was vapourised (as has been the claim) upon impact


Who made that claim?


2.3 Trillion of them...since the data centre that contained the records of the whereabouts of the 'untracked' (stolen, missappropriated, used for black ops, lining the pockets of the big boys and girls, whatever) budget money was in the 'impact' area and was obviously destroyed.


Source for that claim? What makes you think the data centre was destroyed? Why ignore that the $2.3 trillion has now been tracked...


(Just as the WTC 1&2 towers had been very recently retrofitted / upgraded just prior to 9/11)


They were? care to provide a source for that claim?
edit on 12-8-2013 by hellobruce because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 08:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by MysterX
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.



Interesting but lacking a shred of evidence.

And doesn't explain how body parts and personal possessions of AA 77 passengers and crew got into the Pentagon before 1st responders did.



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 08:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
Nice try on twisting else words buy claiming i made the claim Pentagon is the most secure building? firstly i am not the person whom claimed that.


You posted a video that you agreed with that made that statement...


Could you rephrase it a bit better?


You posted a video that you agreed with that made that statement...

how about showing why you agree with them?



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 08:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
Nice try on twisting else words buy claiming i made the claim Pentagon is the most secure building? firstly i am not the person whom claimed that.


You posted a video that you agreed with that made that statement...


Could you rephrase it a bit better?


You posted a video that you agreed with that made that statement...

how about showing why you agree with them?


I am sorry you lost me there.



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 08:14 AM
link   
These 9/11 threads are rather tiresome.

And still, I can't get myself to skip them. Always hoping for some groundbreaking revelation.

Any and all discussions on the subject are fruitless now, and will be in the future. Use a JFK case as an example. 50 years have gone by...and no amount of credible or non credible evidence or suspicion is going to change the history note. The LHO did it...he was alone. And those who doubt it...have been on the conspiratorial wagon fruitlessly for half a century now...The official rhetoric is firmly embedded in the minds of the "followers"/voters...no matter how ludicrous or unbelievable...it's like a belief in God. You believe because not believing is too terrible to imagine.

The mere implication of what it would mean for the US if it ever came out as the truth...the it indeed it was an inside job...and yes...JFK was killed by [name_your_culprit]...it would be devastating for the moral of a nation, not to mention the diplomatic consequences for the US and it's place in the world...those consequences would be so dire...that NO LIVING soul in the know would dare to expose it. The US could be reverted back to stone age...

So don't sweat it guys...history books are already written. It states..."Al-Qaeda did it".

There will be no new official investigations...all new evidence is brushed aside as a conspiracy. And Georgie Boy...is somewhere in Bahamas...sippin' Gin and Juice with a small umbrella. Without a care in the world.

In hindsight...I'm very puzzled as a human being...how on earth...could the Bushes rule the US over the last century. A known and penalized Nazi supporters.

Just goes to show...money can buy anything...including the presidency. At this point I'm wishing there is a God, and hell...because it is the only way they will ever be punished for the crimes the Bush clan has committed over the century.



new topics

top topics



 
32
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join