757 Plane Did Not Hit Pentagon - Hard Visible Proof!

I am a career military officer, retired in 2006. I was in the Pentagon when the plane hit on 9/11, had to do things, see things, that were most unpleasant. I held part of the aircraft in my hands that day.

Implicit in your theory is that many military people were willing to simply follow orders that would have been immoral and offensive, if given.

Gravy and others have done a fine job in establishing the impossibly of your "theory" so I have a different question.

Do you really believe members of the US military were so amoral that day that they willingly cooperated in such a massive governmental cover up? Do you believe that we military officers would actually keep silent about criminal actions of those above us regarding this horrible day? Do you truly think not one of us would have come forward if what you say is actually true?

forums.randi.org...

Excellent post Jonh is Hal lying ?

Care to answer his questions ?


[edit on 31-3-2007 by Stateofgrace]

[edit on 31-3-2007 by Stateofgrace]

Wow! A Career military officer, wonderful, and you were at the Pentagon the day the plane struck, even better.

And held a piece of the aircraft in your hands, almost to good to be true.

Since you are trying to establish credibility here answer this:

What is your name and rank? John Lear has come forward with his info and service why not you?

Show us some pictures with the fragments.


Did you know that impersonating a military officer is a federal offense? And if you are who you say you are and can provide your credentials, please except my humble apology.

Originally posted by Stateofgrace
I am a career military officer, retired in 2006. I was in the Pentagon when the plane hit on 9/11, had to do things, see things, that were most unpleasant. I held part of the aircraft in my hands that day.

Implicit in your theory is that many military people were willing to simply follow orders that would have been immoral and offensive, if given.

Gravy and others have done a fine job in establishing the impossibly of your "theory" so I have a different question.

Do you really believe members of the US military were so amoral that day that they willingly cooperated in such a massive governmental cover up? Do you believe that we military officers would actually keep silent about criminal actions of those above us regarding this horrible day? Do you truly think not one of us would have come forward if what you say is actually true?

forums.randi.org...

Excellent post Jonh is Hal lying ?

Care to answer his questions ?


[edit on 31-3-2007 by Stateofgrace]

[edit on 31-3-2007 by Stateofgrace]

[edit on 31-3-2007 by Realtruth]

Originally posted by Realtruth
Wow! A Career military officer, wonderful, and you were at the Pentagon the day the plane struck, even better.

And held a piece of the aircraft in your hands, almost to good to be true.

Since you are trying to establish credibility here answer this:

What is your name and rank? John Lear has come forward with his info and service why not you?

Show us some pictures with the fragments.


Did you know that impersonating a military officer is a federal offense?

Originally posted by Stateofgrace
I am a career military officer, retired in 2006. I was in the Pentagon when the plane hit on 9/11, had to do things, see things, that were most unpleasant. I held part of the aircraft in my hands that day.

Implicit in your theory is that many military people were willing to simply follow orders that would have been immoral and offensive, if given.

Gravy and others have done a fine job in establishing the impossibly of your "theory" so I have a different question.

Do you really believe members of the US military were so amoral that day that they willingly cooperated in such a massive governmental cover up? Do you believe that we military officers would actually keep silent about criminal actions of those above us regarding this horrible day? Do you truly think not one of us would have come forward if what you say is actually true?

forums.randi.org...

Excellent post Jonh is Hal lying ?

Care to answer his questions ?


[edit on 31-3-2007 by Stateofgrace]

[edit on 31-3-2007 by Stateofgrace]

I take it you are unable to understand what I posted. I posted a reply from Hal Bidlack on the jref forum. I did not say anything otherwise, I did not pretend to be him, and I did not pretend to be otherwise.

Stop twisting my posts, in a pathetic attempt to avoid the questions raised by this man.

Either contribute to the tread or keep out of it.

Most probably another disnfo guy...if those questions are so impostant use the other thread do no derail this one....

John Lear asked great questions and I posted doubts...... Ultima Too they have not been answered...

As for the alleged officer I can post BS from other forums 24/7... and then demand answers too...

Let's see, first, since I started the thread I would ask the same of you.

Originally posted by Stateofgrace


Either contribute to the tread or keep out of it.

Let's see no quotation marks or external source acknowledgments is against ATS policies, so I would say that your attempts are the ones that are poor.

Originally posted by Stateofgrace

I take it you are unable to understand what I posted. I posted a reply from Hal Bidlack on the jref forum. I did not say anything otherwise, I did not pretend to be him, and I did not pretend to be otherwise.

Stop twisting my posts, in a pathetic attempt to avoid the questions raised by this man.

Either contribute to the tread or keep out of it.

Originally posted by Realtruth
Let's see, first, since I started the thread I would ask the same of you.

Originally posted by Stateofgrace


Either contribute to the tread or keep out of it.

Oh I see, so posting a statement from somebody who was there, unlike yourself is not valid in a thread about whether a plane hit the pentagon or not.

Maybe next time you start a thread, you should invite guesses only, you know those non disinfo agents only.

Pathetic.

I see you have failed to answer this mans questions, any chance you may, or is it better to dismiss him?

Originally posted by Realtruth
Let's see no quotation marks or external source acknowledgments is against ATS policies, so I would say that your attempts are the ones that are poor.

Originally posted by Stateofgrace

I take it you are unable to understand what I posted. I posted a reply from Hal Bidlack on the jref forum. I did not say anything otherwise, I did not pretend to be him, and I did not pretend to be otherwise.

Stop twisting my posts, in a pathetic attempt to avoid the questions raised by this man.

Either contribute to the tread or keep out of it.

Oh dear me, your feeble attempts to dismiss what I posted are almost unbearable, any chance , any chance at all you may actually read what I posted and address it ?

[edit on 31-3-2007 by Stateofgrace]

Keep this discussion on topic, and civil, no more personal attacks.

Any posts in this thread after this, that fail to meet the above will likely receive a warning, and points deduction.

Originally posted by UM_Gazz
Keep this discussion on topic, and civil, no more personal attacks.

Any posts in this thread after this, that fail to meet the above will likely receive a warning, and points deduction.

Fair does and in line with forum protocol here is a statement from Hal Bidlack who was inside the pentagon when flight 77 hit it.

I am a career military officer, retired in 2006. I was in the Pentagon when the plane hit on 9/11, had to do things, see things, that were most unpleasant. I held part of the aircraft in my hands that day.

Implicit in your theory is that many military people were willing to simply follow orders that would have been immoral and offensive, if given.

Gravy and others have done a fine job in establishing the impossibly of your "theory" so I have a different question.

Do you really believe members of the US military were so amoral that day that they willingly cooperated in such a massive governmental cover up? Do you believe that we military officers would actually keep silent about criminal actions of those above us regarding this horrible day? Do you truly think not one of us would have come forward if what you say is actually true?

HERE is the link it was taken from.

forums.randi.org...

Please answer this mans questions.


[edit on 31-3-2007 by Stateofgrace]

Originally posted by Stateofgrace
Please answer this mans questions.
[edit on 31-3-2007 by Stateofgrace]

If thier is nothing to hide why have we not seen the videos, photos and the crime scene reports?

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by Stateofgrace
Please answer this mans questions.
[edit on 31-3-2007 by Stateofgrace]

If thier is nothing to hide why have we not seen the videos, photos and the crime scene reports?

I am not here to defend anybody, so you questions about the way the USG has handled this event are irrelevant.

I present facts and testimony, period, if you wish to dispute these facts, do so.

I neither care for or like the USG, I care for facts,logic and evidence, if you have some present it and answer the statement from Hal.

Originally posted by Stateofgrace
I present facts and testimony, period, if you wish to dispute these facts, do so.

I neither care for or like the USG, I care for facts,logic and evidence, if you have some present it and answer the statement from Hal.

Ok, here is a fact. We have no FBI or NTSB reports on the crime scene, without those reports we do not know what actually happened.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by Stateofgrace
I present facts and testimony, period, if you wish to dispute these facts, do so.

I neither care for or like the USG, I care for facts,logic and evidence, if you have some present it and answer the statement from Hal.

Ok, here is a fact. We have no FBI or NTSB reports on the crime scene, without those reports we do not know what actually happened.

Incorrect, we know Flight 77 has disappeared from the face of the planet.

We know that the plane parts and black boxes were found at the Pentagon. We know that the DNA and body parts from the passengers were found at the pentagon and many eye witness accounts from people would saw the plane hit the Pentagon.

We have eye witness accounts, expert testimony and forensic science all saying Flight 77 hit the Pentagon.

I also have a statement from somebody inside the Pentagon who held plane parts in his hands.

If you can offer something substantial do so, other wise please stop your flight of fancy and incredible make believe.

I do not need to substantial this, you need to disprove this, the burden is upon you.

Proceed.

Originally posted by Stateofgrace
We know that the plane parts and black boxes were found at the Pentagon. We know that the DNA and body parts from the passengers were found at the pentagon and many eye witness accounts from people would saw the plane hit the Pentagon.

We have eye witness accounts, expert testimony and forensic science all saying Flight 77 hit the Pentagon.

1. Please show me any report that matches the parts found to flight 77.

2. The flight data recorder also shows a different fligh path then the official story.

3. If the fire was hot enough to destroy the plane it would have been hot enough to destroy DNA evidence.

4. Between all of the eyewitnesses they could not verify it was a 757 let alone flight 77.

The only time someone states they do not have to prove something means they do not have the facts to support thier side.



[edit on 1-4-2007 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by Stateofgrace
We know that the plane parts and black boxes were found at the Pentagon. We know that the DNA and body parts from the passengers were found at the pentagon and many eye witness accounts from people would saw the plane hit the Pentagon.

We have eye witness accounts, expert testimony and forensic science all saying Flight 77 hit the Pentagon.

1. Please show me any report that matches the parts found to flight 77.

2. The flight data recorder also shows a different fligh path then the official story.

3. If the fire was hot enough to destroy the plane it would have been hot enough to destroy DNA evidence.

4. Between all of the eyewitnesses they could not verify it was a 757 let alone flight 77.

The only time someone states they do not have to prove something means they do not have the facts to support thier side.



[edit on 1-4-2007 by ULTIMA1]

1. Are you saying a performance report into this building as not be done or are you suggesting the plane parts found did not come from Flight 77?

Please tell what plane these parts came from.

2. Incorrect.

3. Are you saying the 50 forensic scientists that spent two weeks identifying all but one of the passengers from flight 77 are lying?

4. Incorrect, many eye witnesses saw the Plane hit the Pentagon and many some saw it hit the lamp posts on the way in.

Are you suggesting they are lying?
Are you suggesting the plane did not hit the lamp posts?
Are you suggesting Lyod England who was in his cab and had a lamp post smacked into the front of it has Flight 77 travelled towards the Pnetagon is lying?

Where did it go?

Please put forward a fully working and plausible thesis, one that matches all the know facts and not just small anomalies you have found on the net.

Also will you answer my other question which you have failed to do.

Is Hal Bidlack lying ?

Originally posted by Stateofgrace
1. Are you saying a performance report into this building as not be done or are you suggesting the plane parts found did not come from Flight 77?

Please tell what plane these parts came from.

2. Incorrect.

3. Are you saying the 50 forensic scientists that spent two weeks identifying all but one of the passengers from flight 77 are lying?

4. Incorrect, many eye witnesses saw the Plane hit the Pentagon and many some saw it hit the lamp posts on the way in.

1. I am stating we have no crime scene report from the Pentagon that matchs the parts found to a 757 or flight 77.

2. The NTSB has done a report and a animation that states the flight path for the plane is different then the official story states. Please see the following site.

www.pilotsfor911truth.org...

3. I am stating that we did not have the DNA testing back then to do test on bodies that were severely burned or crushed. Thats why NIST DNA experts had to come up with new testing just for the WTC crime scenes. These new test were not ready uintil 2002.

www.nist.gov...

Due to the nature of the World Trade Center disaster, it quickly became evident that traditional methods for performing DNA typing were not likely to be fully successful in identifying all of the recovered remains. Traditional DNA ID methods depend on the presence of long, intact segments of DNA in order to accurately type the sample. The DNA in many of the samples recovered in this situation were so fragmented that these standard methods were ineffective.

In early November 2001, Dr. Robert Shaler, the director of the WTC DNA identification effort, contacted me and asked if I would be willing to develop some new DNA tests to help in the identification effort. I agreed to fast track our research efforts over the next several months and produce some test materials for his laboratory to try by January 2002.

4. Correct they saw " a plane ". They could not agree if it was a 757.

Since we have no videos, photos , or reports stating that a 757 or if it was flight 77 that hit the Pentagon we have to do more research.




[edit on 1-4-2007 by ULTIMA1]

You are using the pilots for truth as a source?

Are these the same people that have just produced the Pentacon whereby they use four witnesses who saw Flight 77 hit the Pentagon to prove it did not?

I can link to no end of JREF threads, from Aircraft engineers, data recorders and air crash investigators that simply trash every thing they say.

For those that are not aware, the pilots for truth theory is as follows.

A plane, probably under remote control was flown at high speed towards the pentagon. Because this plane was under remote control, pre arranged damage had to be staged to prove it flew down a pre determined path. This was done by staging damaged lamp posts, in broad day light and hopes that nobody would notice.

Then in broad day in front of potentially hundreds of witnesses who just happened to be in the area, a plane is flown at high speed towards the building. At the last moment it pulls up and fly over it. This fly over is disguised by a massive explosion from pre planted explosives, which of course nobody noticed and nobody saw them being planted.

Then in the confusion and chaos plane parts, body parts and both black boxes from flight 77 are planted at the Pentagon.

Then every single witness who may have seen the fly over is told that they did not see it, but saw another plane that just happened also to be in the area.

This plan also allows for CCTV cameras to not be disabled to film the entire event and then be confiscated afterward. This CCTV is then digitally altered and released to the public, hoping nobody will notice.

In their new movie they even acknowledge that the plane was flight 77 but of course it did not hit the Pentagon.Thye are even using the black boxes recovered from the Pentagon to prove it did not hit the Pentagon.

I am sorry but unless you can link me to something better than the pilots, your claims and theories are meaningless.

Now please answer my question, Is Hal Bidlack, who was inside the Pentagon lying?


[edit on 1-4-2007 by Stateofgrace]

Originally posted by Stateofgrace
You are using the pilots for truth as a source?

Are these the same people that have just produced the Pentacon whereby they use four witnesses who saw Flight 77 hit the Pentagon to prove it did not?

No, i am using pilots for truth because they have the NTSB report and animation taken from the flight data recorder.

And the report stated the plane flew a different path, thier are witnesse that report it flew on the other side of the gas station then the official story states it did.. Alos according the the flgithdata recorder their is a discrepancy with the altmeter. Please try to do more research before comming back with more post.

I noticed you did not bother to debate anything else i have proof for. Was that the only debate you could make was to misinterpert what the NTSB reports states.

[edit on 1-4-2007 by ULTIMA1]

Flight 77 data recorder explained here.

forums.randi.org...

Destruction of Pentacon the movie here.

forums.randi.org...

Destruction of the black box data being altered here.

forums.randi.org...

And finally a death threat from the pilots here.

forums.randi.org...

I suggest you read very carefully what is written in these threads, and I suggest also you should maybe choose those you align yourself with more carefully.

ALL the rubbish the pilots have come out with as been completely trashed.

You have failed yet again to answer my question, you are simply skirting around in an attempt to make me do the work for you. You offer unsubstantiated claim upon claim and expect me to debunk it. This will not happen; it has already been debunked by those who actually know what they are talking about.

The burden lies with you to prove not to me but the entire scientific and engineering community what exactly happened to this plane if it did not hit the Pentagon, to date you and the pilots have failed to do so. Simply claiming everybody is lying and that all the evidence was planted is not enough. You have to offer a thesis, one that will stand up to close scientific scrutiny. Again you have failed.

On this I will bid you good day, I only post here now and again and see absolutely no point is discussing this further with you. You have clearly determined that your fellow country is not only capable of, but actually participated in mass murder of their own. I cannot help you to change you mind, nor do I have any desire to. I have better things to do with my time than try and reason with the unreasonable.

Good day sir.


[edit on 1-4-2007 by Stateofgrace]