Question for 'no 757 hit Pentagon, but 767 hit WTC' crowd

A lot of people who believe no 757 hit the Pentagon *don't* believe that 767's, or "no planes", hit the WTC. The reason I mostly hear why these people don't believe in the no planes at the WTC theory is because of the "thousands of witnesses" that they somehow know were watching the WTC before the alleged crash.

My question is, if 767's had to have hit the WTC because "thousands of witnesses" were watching there, how do you explain that a 757 *did not* hit the Pentagon when people say that there were "hundreds of witnesses" there?

Wow, I can't believe there hasn't been a reply to this thread yet. I guess everyone on the conspiracy forum believes a plane hit the Pentagon, or they've all come around to accepting that the No Planes Theory makes the most sense?

Where is everybody?

From the videos i have seen alot of witnesses at the pentagon either had said it was a 757, a small plane, or another type of plane. There was alot of mixed responses between the people that witness whatever it was hit the pentagon.

Theres even a video floating around of a news reporter who was saying there is no evidence that a plane has hit this building. He was saying this while he was standing right outside of the pentagon.

...as for the WTC crowd, we were all looking up at the first building while it was on fire and alot of us got a clear view of the second plane coming in. It was a large plane, whether or not it was a commercial plane, or a plane painted to look like a commercial plane, i am not sure. But if it was a Hologram then whoever/whatever produced it did a damn good job.

Originally posted by hikix
From the videos i have seen alot of witnesses at the pentagon either had said it was a 757, a small plane, or another type of plane. There was alot of mixed responses between the people that witness whatever it was hit the pentagon.

Theres even a video floating around of a news reporter who was saying there is no evidence that a plane has hit this building. He was saying this while he was standing right outside of the pentagon.

And a lot of witnesses said it was a 767, 737, small plane, helicopter, and missile at the WTC. There was alot of mixed responses between the people that witness whatever it was hit the WTC.

There was little plane debris found at the WTC as with the Pentagon.

So again, what's the difference?

Originally posted by bsregistration
Wow, I can't believe there hasn't been a reply to this thread yet. I guess everyone on the conspiracy forum believes a plane hit the Pentagon, or they've all come around to accepting that the No Planes Theory makes the most sense?

Where is everybody?

Everyone is sick of the pathetic straw man threads the two of you keep posting...thats where everyone is.

Originally posted by CaptainObviousEveryone is sick of the pathetic straw man threads the two of you keep posting...thats where everyone is.

Or you guys can't give a logical explanation.

Originally posted by Killtown

Originally posted by hikix
From the videos i have seen alot of witnesses at the pentagon either had said it was a 757, a small plane, or another type of plane. There was alot of mixed responses between the people that witness whatever it was hit the pentagon.

Theres even a video floating around of a news reporter who was saying there is no evidence that a plane has hit this building. He was saying this while he was standing right outside of the pentagon.

And a lot of witnesses said it was a 767, 737, small plane, helicopter, and missile at the WTC. There was alot of mixed responses between the people that witness whatever it was hit the WTC.

There was little plane debris found at the WTC as with the Pentagon.

So again, what's the difference?

Yet there was plane debris found nevertheless but i suppose i am going to be told that it was planted.

[edit on 6-6-2007 by SR]

Killtown

I personally always believed a plane hit the pentagon. And also planes hit the towers.

The reason I say this is because the military can't control every camera in the area, some people might be filming that day that the military would know nothing about.

*IF* that was the case then it would blow the story. So yes a plane flew into the pentagon and for the very same reason, planes flew into the WTC towers.

Originally posted by killtown
My question is, if 767's had to have hit the WTC because "thousands of witnesses" were watching there, how do you explain that a 757 *did not* hit the Pentagon when people say that there were "hundreds of witnesses" there?

The notions surrounding the idea that a passenger aircraft did not strike the Pentagon surround the lack of available direct evidence. While we (web conspiracy speculators) have access to "some" online photography of numerous items that appear to be passenger aircraft debris, we do not have dozens of video from dozens of angles showing the impact.

In the case of the World Trade Center, we have the much needed video evidence. In addition, tens-of-thousands of people exited their lower Manhattan offices and lined the shores of New Jersey and Staten Island to witness the second impact.

I believe the speculation of "no plane" at the World Trade Center stems from the inexperienced spending too much time with heavily compressed digital video. I've yet to see a "no plane" theory that includes even one high-quality original video as a source.

I hope that helps.

Im sure the people who think that a missle, a small plane or a helicopter hit the wtc werent looking directly at it.

Now, im sure the same goes for the pentagon........ but the difference is that the damage from the pentagon did not look like it was caused by a plane, nor were there any large debris of a plane found, nor any videos of a plane hitting that building.

The WTC has tons of videos showing planes hitting the buildings... what exactly is the point of this thread?

Originally posted by SRYet there was plane debris found nevertheless but i suppose i am going to be told that it was planted.

Plane debris was found at both Pentagon and WTC.

Originally posted by talisman
Killtown

I personally always believed a plane hit the pentagon. And also planes hit the towers.

The reason I say this is because the military can't control every camera in the area, some people might be filming that day that the military would know nothing about.

*IF* that was the case then it would blow the story. So yes a plane flew into the pentagon and for the very same reason, planes flew into the WTC towers.

Then this thread is not for you.

Originally posted by Killtown

Originally posted by hikix
From the videos i have seen alot of witnesses at the pentagon either had said it was a 757, a small plane, or another type of plane. There was alot of mixed responses between the people that witness whatever it was hit the pentagon.

Theres even a video floating around of a news reporter who was saying there is no evidence that a plane has hit this building. He was saying this while he was standing right outside of the pentagon.

And a lot of witnesses said it was a 767, 737, small plane, helicopter, and missile at the WTC. There was alot of mixed responses between the people that witness whatever it was hit the WTC.

There was little plane debris found at the WTC as with the Pentagon.

So again, what's the difference?

Thank you Kiltown. Exactly - people won't believe the simplest common sense # just becuase they don't have fifteen live news feeds recording it as it happened. Small plane parts pool - most of have'nt gotten to see INSIDE the buildings. Give these kids a blank piece of paper and they'll draw whatever silly thing comes into their minds. Metaphor beomes reality! Most of the hole covered in foam becomes a tiny hole! Video of whatever happened held back becomes proof that the video showed a global hawk or missile or DC10 - anything other than a 757.

Oh wait, you meant this the OTHER WAY AROUND, trying to morph this stupid mystery around as a no-planes at WTC either thread. Ooops. You meant to convince the teletubbies generation that even their precious video is not immune to subduction to mystery. Well screw REALITY, they say, just don't mess with our video-confirmed reality. No wonder they're pissed.

ETA: Sorry Hihix, I posted this before I read your post. I'm just guessing at reactions here... Cheers!


[edit on 6-6-2007 by Caustic Logic]

caustic, i was there and i saw a plane hit the wtc... it looked like a large commercial plane to me. I wasnt sitting in front of my television warching it.

once again, im not sure what the purpose of this thread is, can someone please explain it to me.

Some of you guys are screwing with my mind so much i am starting to second guess that i saw a plane hit the building. i guess, in the words of george bush, if you repeat things over and over again it catapults your propaganda.

Originally posted by hikixonce again, im not sure what the purpose of this thread is, can someone please explain it to me.

Ok I will. many truthers who despise the no-plane theory at the WTC think that no plane hit the Pentagon. One of the main reasons they believe 767's hit the WTC because "thousands of witnesses" saw them hit. But "hundreds of witnesses" saw a plane hit the Pentagon, yet they believe one didn't.

So, why the inconsistency of their logic about the witnesses?

Killtown ~

Are you trying to rack up points so you can change the color of your avatar? WTF? Your threads have ZERO ...ZERO ...ZERO evidence. You are here becasue LCF banned you, Jref thinks you should be put away in a straight jacket, and any other "truther "site won't have you.

You're posts in ANY forum is a laughing stock. you should start selling what your smoking

Originally posted by hikix
caustic, i was there and i saw a plane hit the wtc... it looked like a large commercial plane to me. I wasnt sitting in front of my television warching it.

once again, im not sure what the purpose of this thread is, can someone please explain it to me.

Some of you guys are screwing with my mind so much i am starting to second guess that i saw a plane hit the building. i guess, in the words of george bush, if you repeat things over and over again it catapults your propaganda.

Again, sorry, you doubly don't count as not being pissed and in being an eyewitness. The point here I guess is to smear the no-757 Pgon mystery over onto the WTC thing for his no-767 theory. Then I added my own point, talking to the same people who'll believe video and eyewitnesses in one spot and not trust no video and eyewitnesses in another, but approaching it from the other side.

Goodness me the tactics being used here could be identified by a fourteen year old.

So what have we got the old divide and conquer situation of trying to discredit eyewitness accounts via the confusion of what people have saw (Yet i think the majority of people have yet to see a compiled list of who saw planes vs the other claims etc. if such a list exists then would someone please point me in it's direction) and video capture of the event so that leaves us with one alternative if we can't trust our own eyes and in some cases ears anymore...the evidence of the event.

Ahhhh The evidence of the event that time and time again is called into question and usually dismissed as..it's either to damaged...or there isn't enough of it...or it was planted...it's been taken away.

So what are we left with if you null both of these options..Oh yes conviently hollogram's theory becomes one of the most creditable 'IN THEORY'.

But wait a minute!!! Did you actually see the two planes hit wtc or a plane hit the pentagon with your own eyes?

If so how have you suddenly deprogrammed your brain 'from the apparent brainwashing' that everyone else has saw.

If you didn't see the event then can you please state your education or qualification in videography that enabled you to understand what was happening in the reduced sized videos you's have posted.

And i pose the question...if you were able to detect the irregularities have you gone to leading experts in the video field with your results to get an outside evaluation to prove said claims.

Now onto the evidence... Personally I keep reading the same garbage spewed out by ignorant people within the truth movement that there was little evidence found and it was the wrong plane type.

Erm well excuse me but i didn't know so many people where actually there helping clear the debris to be qualified to make that statement. It seems to me that far too many people have read the same old stick on a website and believe it blindly without doing there own research. Just because you've seen photos of some of the wreckage doesn't mean that more wreckage didn't exist Rense isn't the end all and be all of the truth movements judgement on plane wreckage you know

www.aerospaceweb.org...


Just one of the many websites that have responded to the many internet warriors claims of 'lol lol pentagon got no 757 wreckage lol lol' with real analysis.

Also serious questions have been asked in other threads regarding this theory and many of the members who asked for them still go unanswered.

Once again i state it seems convient how this is all unfolding the question people have to ponder is did all of the bold statements and 'facts' of this theory bsregistration has been making the point of illuminating everyday..come from your own research or have you been using the truth movement as a pick n mix to colloborate and invent this theory.

It's amazing how as time goes by and sadly as the truth movement is losing steam that things like this occur and ignorance does indeed breed ignorance and i fear that it will only get worse in time.

For someone who seems to throw the disinfo agent slur around bsregistration you seem to be applying the same tactics many ATS members would expect to see of one. Attack as the best form of defense maybe? throw the word around at other people so it distracts them from making the same claim of you...

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
Killtown ~

Are you trying to rack up points so you can change the color of your avatar

Killtown's post was on topic unlike your post. Please refrain from such abusive behavior. You're discrediting the name of the real Captain Obvious.

Dismissed!

Personally, I think the answer is quite simple. There are Many videos both broadcast and personal that clearly show aircraft striking the towers, but there are only 5 frames and (what?) two very grainy videos of Anything at the Pentagon.

As for the differences in eyewitness accounts, I think it's more a matter of two entirely different locations, angles of attack, skylines, etc. THAT, and there was only one strike at the Pentagon, while there were Two strikes in NYC. Even though Many may not have seen the first plane hit the north tower, I'd say it's rather obvious that Many more were out on the streets with "eyes to the skies" when the second plane came into view, hit the south tower.