Satellite photo of the pentagon lawn shows something might be buried.

I wonder if this picture is valid.



Was the penatgon lawn dug up days before 9/11 to lay down a guidance landing system for the 757?

What exactly were they covering up with all that sand that they layed down after the attack?

Why do satellite photos taken 4 days before 9/11 show a white marking on the front lawn, marking almost the exact trajectory of whatever hit the Pentagon 4 days later?

A "white marking?" Looks like a tan path in the grass to me. Perhaps it's a remnant of digging done to access electrical, sewage, etc. Remember the construction? The big cable spools?

Source
www.ccdominoes.com...

[edit on 21-8-2006 by In nothing we trust]

4 days before huh? what were the satelites doing taking pics of the pentagon 4 days before 9/11...is there proof? or was the photos afterwards? sounds to me a fake...

Originally posted by tayzer
4 days before huh? what were the satelites doing taking pics of the pentagon 4 days before 9/11...is there proof? or was the photos afterwards? sounds to me a fake...

Now that's interesting. I just found an earlier picture of the penatgon lawn. You can see a marking on the lawn, which is coincidently along the same path that the 757 flew on.

Now that's too much to be a coincidence.

Pentagon before the attack
(December 28, 2000)

Source
www.mth.msu.edu...

[edit on 21-8-2006 by In nothing we trust]

It looks to me like they rerouted some underground utitities. I bet they ran some new electrical feeder lines in to new transformers.

The pentagon had a lot of power issues due to its age.

Originally posted by HowardRoark
It looks to me like they rerouted some underground utitities. I bet they ran some new electrical feeder lines in to new transformers.

The pentagon had a lot of power issues due to its age.

Could a pilot use some kind of electronic equipement to focus in on a buried electrical line and use it as a homing beacon?

Why? He could hardly miss seeing the building.

Remember it was being reinforced and having whole new internals added to make it more energy efficient - so that mark could just be one of those strange coincidences that life throws at us from time to time... BUT, and its a big one... What are the odds of the mark matching the exact angle of the incoming flight??? I know one thing, im going to have a look at this...very interesting indeed.

is it just me or does the first picture with the noticable line in the lawn, not appear in the 2nd enlarged picture?

There are two lines, in slightly different locations. Since there was extensive utility upgrades, this is not surprising.

Originally posted by Circa
is it just me or does the first picture with the noticable line in the lawn, not appear in the 2nd enlarged picture?

It must be your computer or something. I'm afraid the noticable line does appear in both pictures. It is darker in the second picture though.

One thought springs to mind here though - who said there even had to be a pilot???

And also, if it is indeed a guidance beacon of some sort, why did they just not build it in the walls? Then no nosey ATS hounds would stumble across it.

oh okay, the 2nd picture just makes it look like grass.. i see

Originally posted by HowardRoark
There are two lines, in slightly different locations. Since there was extensive utility upgrades, this is not surprising.

Here compare the pictures side by side. Same line, but the picture is at a different angle.

Pretty damn peculiar if you ask me.

Source
www.ccdominoes.com...

Pentagon before the attack
(December 28, 2000)

Source
www.mth.msu.edu...

Now reference the flight path of flight 77.

That's right on target.

Source
thewebfairy.com...

[edit on 21-8-2006 by In nothing we trust]

Ok In nothing we trust got the wrong image on his thing there.
I have the original one here.



The link to the original.

www.spaceimaging.com...#

Look where it says 9-7-01

Link to high res.
Image size 1500x1614
www.spaceimaging.com...

So ya the image is as fake as the towers falling down due to the steel melting at 3000 degrees f and falling. Or a plane hitting the pentagon and no other footage to catch it other than some crap security camera. Or that NORAD was doing their job that day. or many people in government stopped flying before 9/11 and so on and so forth. So next time you say fake why don't you look at the link on top and do some searching on this forum or Google to see how fake a photo is. Cause chances this photo has been talked about a billion times already..

Nothing against you in nothing we trust Just others who think everything is fake.






[edit on 8/21/2006 by ThichHeaded]

[edit on 8/21/2006 by ThichHeaded]

Originally posted by ThichHeaded
So next time you say fake why don't you look at the link on top and do some searching on this forum or Google to see how fake a photo is.

Nothing against you in nothing we trust Just others who think everything is fake.

Someone woke up on the wrong side of bed didn't they.

I just like to see something from more than one source is all.

Originally posted by In nothing we trust
Here compare the pictures side by side. Same line, but the picture is at a different angle.

Pretty damn peculiar if you ask me.

Source
www.ccdominoes.com...

Pentagon before the attack
(December 28, 2000)

Source
www.mth.msu.edu...

Now reference the flight path of flight 77.

That's right on target.

I'd like to point out that those 2 lines are at different angles. Look at the square of the heli-pad. In the first photo, the "line" is at an angle to the heli-pad. In the second photo, the "line" is parallel to the heli-pad. Conclusion- totally different "lines".

Edit: Unless in the second photo you are talking about the darker line? If so, they seem to match up.

[edit on 8/21/2006 by Griff]

The darker line in the earlier photo matchs up with the later photo.

I still think it has to do with new utility service being brought in.

What's the latest info on the correct flight path?

[edit on 23-3-2008 by In nothing we trust]

reply to post by In nothing we trust


Thanks innothingwetrust, that picture comparison shows me one thing for sure, the trajectory path of the plane does not match the bare grass patches at all. Not any one of them. There are several to chose from too. As a matter of fact, my newest conspiracy is why don't they take better care of the lawn at the pentagon. You clearly point out here that the path of the plane and the bare lawn are not one in the same.

Originally posted by space cadet
Thanks innothingwetrust, that picture comparison shows me one thing for sure, the trajectory path of the plane does not match the bare grass patches at all. Not any one of them. There are several to chose from too. As a matter of fact, my newest conspiracy is why don't they take better care of the lawn at the pentagon. You clearly point out here that the path of the plane and the bare lawn are not one in the same.

Yes, i have the Flight 77 FDR data from the NTSB and it shows a different flight path then the official story.