The strangest Coincidence regarding the Pentagon attack on 9/11

a reply to: D8Tee

BTW, what is your source for this, I'd like to know more about it.

This information requires no sources, it was on mainstream propaganda media, the whole world saw it.

You are a season pro when it comes to 911, like me, we both know the in's and outs of all the events.

When you need to move emergency service vehicles into the area, the last thing you want is a bunch of sharp objects laying around that are going to puncture the tires.

Thats a good one.

The problem with that excuse is, the area they were picking up debris from, never had any vehicles driving on that part of the Lawn, even way past the clean up.

So I don't buy it. I agree not everything is a conspiracy, but I wasn't born yesterday, Whatever they were picking up, was never released to the public or shown as any kind of evidence.

a reply to: Informer1958

No, I would like to see sources for how many people picked up what where. You can't have a debris field and expect to drive emergency vehicles across it can you? Were they clearing a path? What were they doing, I wish to know more, and you brought it up.

btw, i haven't watched mainstream news except on rare occasions since 1993.

a reply to: D8Tee

No, I would like to see sources for how many people picked up what where. You can't have a debris field and expect to drive emergency vehicles across it can you? Were they clearing a path? What were they doing, I wish to know more, and you brought it up.

9/11: Pentagon Lawn Mystery Crew

Published on Sep 10, 2015

Moments after the Pentagon was attacked on 11 September 2001, a crew of over 20 people are spotted by a helicopter camera engaging in odd behaviour.

www.youtube.com...

a reply to: Informer1958
It's no great mystery.
It's called a line check or green sweep where you get online and walk the entire perimeter of the scene picking up anything and everything that could be considered evidence. Go to spot 36:50 in this video.

a reply to: D8Tee

I am well aware of the OS, that is what your video is. I just don't believe in everything I read, or view. Anyone that does doesnt have any thinking skills.'

I am not fooled by controlled properganda, perhaps many are, tell it long enough people start believing it.

originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: D8Tee

I am well aware of the OS, that is what your video is. I just don't believe in everything I read, or view. Anyone that does doesnt have any thinking skills.'

I am not fooled by controlled properganda, perhaps many are, tell it long enough people start believing it.

How did a jet engine from a 757 end up inside the penagon?

originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: D8Tee

I am well aware of the OS, that is what your video is. I just don't believe in everything I read, or view. Anyone that does doesnt have any thinking skills.'

I am not fooled by controlled properganda, perhaps many are, tell it long enough people start believing it.

There is nothing wrong in questioning the OS, or any OS of any event for that matter. It's how we learn differences in understanding of what evidence we have been given.

I personally question the OS of 9/11. I watched the events unfold live hidden away in the mountains as part of a teenage writing trip. I do not however question that AA77 crashed into the Pentagon. I am comfortable with the evidence that has been presented thus far, although from time to time I will raises questions in which I require further clarity.

What I do question is the OS overall about who was involved, their motivations etc

Justice has still not been served in the memory of those who died that day, those who died in the intervening years, the survivors and their loved ones. There are more responsible for the attacks than the hijackers and the helpers that were caught over the years. There's the financiers which must be brought into account.

a reply to: D8Tee

How did a jet engine from a 757 end up inside the penagon?

Many possibilities.

The question you should ask, why was only one engine found?

originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: D8Tee

How did a jet engine from a 757 end up inside the penagon?

Many possibilities.

The question you should ask, why was only one engine found?

How do you know this to be true? You are basing that on only one having pictures taken of it and released which means nothing.

a reply to: D8Tee

How do you know this to be true? You are basing that on only one having pictures taken of it and released which means nothing.

Well, if you want to play it down, of nothing of importance then it means nothing.

On the contrary, it is very important, the public has a right to see all evidence retrieved from the alleged crash site.

It was "never" mention that the other alleged engine was recovered. If that is the case, then no boeing crashed into the Pentagon.

The lacking evidence supports this narrative, not the OS.

a reply to: Informer1958

Yea you're right, it was a waterlogged Russian missile that came out of the Kursk.

The USA didn't have enough missiles of their own, so they decided to do it that way.

a reply to: D8Tee

Yea you're right, it was a waterlogged Russian missile that came out of the Kursk.

The USA didn't have enough missiles of their own, so they decided to do it that way.

Is that what you believe?

a reply to: Informer1958

Can you name one other instance where the public has had access to every scrap of evidence in an investigation?

Just one?

a reply to: cardinalfan0596

Can you name one other instance where the public has had access to every scrap of evidence in an investigation?

Just one?

Clap, clap, clap.

The fact is, if one must hide evidence then one is involved in a coverup. If one is a low level employee, he is following orders, people only in the higher levels "on the need to know" and ordering removal of evidence are criminals themselves, and are coconspirator
accomplices in helping the real terrorist to escape justice.

Anyone doing real research into 911, can clearly see the curcanstanual evidence, that supports my statement.

originally posted by: AnAbsoluteCreation
...

Look how cavalier Porter Gross is as you can ear the Pentagon being attacked.

As you can hear he tells reporters that "THEY" had always considered airplanes flying into America Buildings. Later that day both GWB and Rice went public saying, "we never ever, in my administration, or anyone else, thought they'd fly planes into buildings."
...

Excellent deductive reasoning AAC!

If I recall correctly it was GWB's and Rice's assertions soon after September 11 that no one could've "imagined" the terrorist plot occurring that piqued my curiosity and investigation into the terrorist attack. And this excellent e-book Imagining 9/11 (www.scribd.com...) confirms elements of the whole sordid plot were definitely imagined--even foreshadowed--in the years and decades prior to 2001 in popular culture.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Salander

You are wrong.

Works cited that prove so. Again.

Can you provide a logical and fact based argument to refute them?

www.scientistsfor911truth.org...

www.foreignpolicyjournal.com...

stj911.org...

www.journalof911studies.com...

Quoted myself for ease..,

All the boasting? Yet not one of you can discredit the work from Scientists for 9/11 Truth showning a large jet struck the pentagon.

The only thing jet deniers have is innuendo.

Cannot even explain away the results of DNA samples that proves the crew and passengers of flight 77 ended up dead in a crashed jet at the pentagon.

Cannot even explain what remains were released to families of flight 77 for burial?

originally posted by: D8Tee

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: D8Tee

What motivates them to go seize it quickly, instead of requesting the hotel to send them copies? They act like they are hiding something.

Everybody knew (assuming it was true) that an airliner crashed there, who gives a GGD if they have the video of it?

If the story were true, who cares what might be on some video across the street? If the story were false.....?

It was a criminal investigation. It's how they are trained to do it, they don't deviate from the Standard Operating Procedures, they follow protocol. What a very weak argument you have presented.

A criminal investigation?

You might have been too young at the time to remember, but even though they were clueless about the attacks the day before, by sometime after lunch on 9/11, the government and all the media knew exactly what happened and who did it.

They already had all the answers. What's to investigate? Bush saw no need for an investigation, and that's why the Jersey Girls applied political pressure which eventually prevailed.

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: Informer1958

There was an explosion of some kind at the Pentagon, people killed, and people in power were more interested in confiscating surrounding business videos, instead of tending to the victims.

WOW, just when I think I've heard the weakest argument ever along comes this!

Do you think there was a shortage of people attending to the victims?

There was no shortage of manpower, this happened in DC dude, it's crawling with feds.

Oh you've heard some weak arguments in your day. Indeed, here on this forum you defend the weakest of them all, the claim that 19 guys with box cutters hijacked 4 airplanes.

That is the weakest argument of them all, yet here you are defending it as true and accurate. Yes, you are intimately familiar with weak arguments.

a reply to: Informer1958

Not posting all the evidence for public consumption, is not "hiding" anything. Nor is it evidence of a cover up. Unless of course you are someone who refuses to accept reality.

a reply to: Salander

There was a lot of immediate speculation that Osama was behind the attacks, which only made sense given his record of hatred of the USA stretching back to 1990. However, it was not until September 24-25 that the FBI was confident that the hijackers were connected to Al Qaeda.