The Pentagon pictures suggest an american air cruise missile struck on 911

Hello,

No one reported visually seeing an incoming plane or missile strike the Pentagon. Perhaps the strike came from nearby under the Pentagon's helicopter pad. Simply raise the pad and shoot point blank your missile and the raised pad blocks most views and might go unnoticed if you have a lookout and timed when bystanders are not in the area.
I have also heard all the camera footage at the Pentagon is locked up and not available.

No one reported visually seeing an incoming plane or missile strike the Pentagon.

Only the cars on the road that saw the plane strike the light poles first and then the building.
That's what happens when you get your news from the conspiracy websites.

Originally posted by antelopone
Hello,

No one reported visually seeing an incoming plane or missile strike the Pentagon. Perhaps the strike came from nearby under the Pentagon's helicopter pad. Simply raise the pad and shoot point blank your missile and the raised pad blocks most views and might go unnoticed if you have a lookout and timed when bystanders are not in the area.
I have also heard all the camera footage at the Pentagon is locked up and not available.

"Raise the helicopter pad and shoot a missile at the building."

I'll add that to the list of brilliant theories.

reply to post by trebor451


yeah they were testing a new missile delivery system....
idiots...

Originally posted by antelopone
Perhaps the strike came from nearby under the Pentagon's helicopter pad. Simply raise the pad and shoot point blank your missile and the raised pad blocks most views and might go unnoticed if you have a lookout and timed when bystanders are not in the area.

Just when you thought the truthers could not make up any sillier conspiracy theories they surprise you with this!

The American Airlines paint job on the cruise missile is photoshopped.



More on that here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by Chadwickus


that was a given chad..
things people do to make themselves be believed....

reply to post by knowneedtoknow


Why would we use a bunker buster missile? That makes no sense. The pentagon is not that fortified. Look up what a bunker buster missile does and is used for. Another thing is the witnesses said they saw some kind of air craft so if anything it would most likely be a cruise missile. And a bunker buster is dropped directly ontop of the forified facility not flown into the side of it.

reply to post by Reign02


Why not a bunker buster it pass through 6 renforce brick and cement walls

Originally posted by Reign02
reply to post by knowneedtoknow

 

Why would we use a bunker buster missile? That makes no sense. The pentagon is not that fortified. Look up what a bunker buster missile does and is used for. Another thing is the witnesses said they saw some kind of air craft so if anything it would most likely be a cruise missile. And a bunker buster is dropped directly ontop of the forified facility not flown into the side of it.

Did you take a look at Chadwickus photo of that cruise missile? Btw Chadwickus, that is one scary looking weapon. Reign, if you were to put one of those(CM) next to a 757 jet, I think you would see the idea of someone mistaking a cruise missile(with it's wings open) for a 757 jet, or even any type of aircraft that carries people, would be almost impossible.

Also, there are lots of different bunker busters, that all attack in their own way. Always, the objective is to penetrate the target by a certain depth and then explode. Don't quote me, but I'm almost positive that they make bunker busters that do actually enter from the side, like when they need to attack a fortified entrance on the side of a mountain.

Your "ultimate proof" is a video that starts out saying "I found these pictures on the net", and contains pictures with captioned names like "Conda Lisa Rice"?

Originally posted by knowneedtoknow
reply to post by Reign02

 

Why not a bunker buster it pass through 6 renforce brick and cement walls

No, it passed through ONE reinforced concrete/brick wall. Interior walls were not reinforced.

Originally posted by ipsedixit
From Larry's point of view the smartest thing to do was to "pull it". The dumbest thing to do was to talk about it.

You realize they could have used the same "pull it" excuse for the 2 WTC towers as a safety measure incase of a toppel. But they realize how stupid we are so they didn't use it

Click here to learn more about this warning.

reply to post by samkent


Ok, What do you guys need more it was a missile that hit the pentagon

here is a witness



here is the Commissioner says missile hits the Pentagon









[edit on 1-9-2010 by knowneedtoknow]

[edit on 1-9-2010 by knowneedtoknow]

[edit on 1-9-2010 by knowneedtoknow]

[edit on 1-9-2010 by knowneedtoknow]

Originally posted by knowneedtoknow
reply to post by samkent

 

here is a witness

here is the Commissioner says missile hits the Pentagon

For Pete's sake, is that the best you can do ? The man says specifically an " American Airlines Jet " he uses " like a cruise missile with wings " as a simille. Is that so difficult to follow ?





[edit on 1-9-2010 by knowneedtoknow]

[edit on 1-9-2010 by knowneedtoknow]

reply to post by Alfie1


ok that is unreal you did reaply 5 second after i post it and you don't know nothing are you a bot or something