Independent Investigation Into Pentagon Attack Yields Alarming Information

Originally posted by jthomas
Only 9/11 Deniers think one needs pictures and videos to prove events happened.

Since the eyewitness reports are contradicting and inconsistent with the official story AND the photos don't resemble photos of other plane crashes...

I would expect proof from some of the many cameras that should have recorded the plane before any critically thinking individual would accept the official story.

I don't completely believe any of the many alternate theories but it is completely ridiculous to pretend that they have any less evidence than the official story...

Their simply is no definitive evidence that the official story happened...especially considering so many anomalies.

reply to post by jthomas

Conspiracists are afraid to have their fantasies destroyed, so they scrupulously avoid contacting the hundreds of Pentagon 9/11 first responders and the over 8,000 people who worked on rescue, recovery, evidence collection, building stabilization, and security in the days after 9/11. These are just some of the organizations whose members worked on the scene:

All the pentagon has to do is release a few unedited videos of the 80 + VIDEOS of the alleged Boeing 757 plowing into the Pentagon. It is clear the Pentagon is hiding something don’t you think? The Pentagon gives us only one short edited video with only a few frames on it and claims there is a 757 in it. The problem is there is no plane in the video period.

You have a problem with anyone who questions the FBI video. WHY? Who are you protecting? You talk about Conspiracists being afraid of having their fantasies destroyed. First of all, people searching for the truth are no more Conspiracists than those supporting the OS. Second of all, I am not a Conspiracist, I am an individual searching for the truth. You on the other hand are a Conspiracist because you do whatever it takes to keep the truth from coming out and that is a fact.

reply to post by Lillydale

You claim that a plane flew into the pentagon. Do not say you do not need to prove it. We know you can't anyway. The question is, why can't you prove your premise?

Jthomas can’t prove it because NO Boeing 757 hit the pentagon and the FBI video proves it.

Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by Lillydale

 

You claim that a plane flew into the pentagon. Do not say you do not need to prove it. We know you can't anyway. The question is, why can't you prove your premise?

Jthomas can’t prove it because NO Boeing 757 hit the pentagon and the FBI video proves it.

I know that. You know that. Throatyogurt even knows that. The problem is that he has been asked so many times and he just keeps claiming he does not have to or tosses out some distraction. The thing that I do not get is why he can feel superior believing what he does when he does not even know why he believes it. I mean come on now. Why on earth would anyone be sooooo supportive of a story that they do not even know why they believe?

reply to post by Lillydale

The thing that I do not get is why he can feel superior believing what he does when he does not even know why he believes it. I mean come on now. Why on earth would anyone be sooooo supportive of a story that they do not even know why

He, like others who defend the OS with no evidence, suffer from a common mental affliction known as “ Patriotic Denial.” It appears to be non-contagious but beware of those suffering from PD as they often assemble in groups and love kicking sand at those of us searching for the truth about 911.

Originally posted by impressme
He, like others who defend the OS with no evidence, suffer from a common mental affliction known as “ Patriotic Denial.” It appears to be non-contagious but beware of those suffering from PD as they often assemble in groups and love kicking sand at those of us searching for the truth about 911.

As you search for the truth you should also consider the evidence. Looking at the Pentagon evidence, there is no compelling reason to believe that anything other than the events as described by the Government comission, occurred. That does not mean that everything occurred exactly as described, but that no strong evidence exists to support theories such as the CIT flyover with blinding explosions and planted light poles.
I have challenged those who ask for a reinvestigation to select an aspect of the 911 events that they think has the most promise to show such an anomaly, state what aspect would be investigated, what evidence might be pertinent, and who would do the investigation to get a truly unbiased answer. This is a survey and there are no right/wrong answers. I will compile the responses at some point and post them for comment.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by pteridine
I have challenged those who ask for a reinvestigation to select an aspect of the 911 events that they think has the most promise to show such an anomaly, state what aspect would be investigated, what evidence might be pertinent, and who would do the investigation to get a truly unbiased answer. This is a survey and there are no right/wrong answers. I will compile the responses at some point and post them for comment.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

You have also ignored the actual pertinent questions you claim to ask for.

Passenger bodies.

Plane parts from flight 77.

The wings.

Those three should keep you busy for a little while.

reply to post by Lillydale


I am not fixated on the Pentagon nor did I ask specifically for Pentagon reinvestigation plans unless you think that is the best opportunity to show a conspiracy. All I asked for was opinions of those who want a reinvestigation. What each person thinks will show conspiracy in some aspect of 911. What evidence they would look at; physical, video, witnesses, paperwork, etc. How they would select the investigators to get an unbiased assay. How they would have the investigators report.
This is easy. It is an opinion survey that requires a little thought. It is non-confrontational.

What do you think?

reply to post by pteridine

As you search for the truth you should also consider the evidence. Looking at the Pentagon evidence, there is no compelling reason to believe that anything other than the events as described by the Government

Total state of denial.

That does not mean that everything occurred exactly as described, but that no strong evidence exists to support theories

There is no strong evidence that supports the OS pentagon crash.

but that no strong evidence exists to support theories such as the CIT flyover with blinding explosions and planted light poles.

It is our eyewitness, verse your witness there is no reason anyone should believe in yours because; the government has been caught lying and hiding all the evidences from everyone. The FBI has hid evidence that could prove the OS is right if only they would give it up. So until the government is willing to at lease show us some proof such as time change out parts that would identify the crash Boeing 757 as proof, or the serial numbers to the black boxes to prove it belong to said aircraft then, you have no proof to what hit the pentagon. One only needs to look at all the photos, videos of the pentagon right after the event took place, and one can clearly see there is no evidence of a plane crash.

There was no damaged done to the foundation of the pentagon as the government contends that a Boeing 757 plowed threw the first floor thousands of tons of an aircraft slamming and sliding on the ground floor and it did not so much leave a scratch or a gouged on the floor of the pentagon.

You cannot scientifically being to explain how an object as big as a Boeing 757 that weighs thousands of tons leaves no damaged.

Now let’s talk about the small entry hole that the OS supporters want us to believe, the wings on the Boeing folded back and broke off. In that case, what happened to the missing engine?
Boeing 757 has two engines not one. There is no sign that a commercial airliners crashed at the pentagon. We all have seen hundred if not thousands of plane crash photos, videos, and comparing those crash scene debri to the pentagon events shows no plane crash there.

You want us to believe in a story that defies logic and sciences. You will not sell that garbage to me until you can produce some of the above proof that I mention.

You can justify all you want. I only believe in facts and what sciences can prove. So far, there is no proof a plane crash into the pentagon. You can show me all the same old pentagon photos over and over it proves nothing but, how gullible some people are who desperately want to believe into the OS of the pentagon so, they don’t have to ask any questions and don’t have to believe in such nonsense that our government could possibly be involved. Those that can’t fathom the idea that a small group in our military and our government couldn’t pull off an event as big as 911 has to be delusional themselves. The United States in no stranger to false flag operation, we have been doing it for decades.
Why should it surprise you or anyone else that our government would carry out such a deplorable treasonous act. We do it in other countries why not our own, do you think these people give a ….. about you or me, no they WANT THEIR WAR! These people will murder millions of people if they have to, to get what they want, we are expendable.

Originally posted by impressme

What proof to you have that a plane hit the pentagon?

The same proof you do.

We don’t want to hear you say Oh I told you all years ago!

Strawman. I never have. You need to refute the evidence that AA77 hit the Pentagon. You need to take responsibility for your OWN claims. You refuse.

I am asking you now, what proof do YOU have that an airplane hit the pentagon?

Just answer the question.

Let's try again. Pay attention and stop the evasions. What wreckage was recovered from the Pentagon and seen, handled, and sorted by over 1,000 people. Demonstrate what the wreckage was not from AA77

SHOW us it was not from AA77.

Do you understand your responsibility or are you going to keep evading it, like you've done for weeks?

Originally posted by Lillydale

You have offered the premise. You say that a plane flew into that building. Can you explain why anyone should just accept that unless they prove it did not happen?

Strawman. I never claimed anyone should just "accept it." It is the complete opposite. Give me a good reason why anyone should accept the claim that "there is no evidence that a jet hit the Pentagon."

Seriously, I have an invisible dragon in my garage. According to your logic, that is true unless you can prove it is not. It does not work that way.

You've got it bassackwards. You all are claiming that NO evidence of AA77 hitting the Pentagon exists. YOU want US to accept that claim.

You claim that a plane flew into the pentagon. Do not say you do not need to prove it.

I don't need to prove it. It has been conclusively demonstrated from multiple lines of evidence, and thousands of people from those who saw the crash to those who worked at the Pentagon in the hours, days , and weeks after 9/11. The same evidence that is available to me is available to you. Yet you want to deny it all.

Now, tell me, just WHO do you think is not laughing at you?

We know you can't anyway.

I have. That you won't listen is entirely your problem.

The question is, why can't you prove your premise?

I have done so for three years without refutation. Watch, I'll prove right now that you will refuse to refute the evidence: Tell us just what wreckage over 1,000 people saw, handled, removed, and sorted openly on the Pentagon lawn in the hours, days, and weeks after 9/11. What are those people's statements?

Originally posted by Lillydale

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by Jezus

 

Do you think that a claim that a plane crashed into the Pentagon, as seen by many witnesses, is more outrageous than the farcical CIT scheme which has absolutely no evidence to support it?
As it is, we have an explanation that satisfies the facts. You claim something different. You get to prove it.

Where are the wings?

What was the wreckage recovered from inside the Pentagon?

Originally posted by jthomas

Originally posted by Lillydale

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by Jezus

 

Do you think that a claim that a plane crashed into the Pentagon, as seen by many witnesses, is more outrageous than the farcical CIT scheme which has absolutely no evidence to support it?
As it is, we have an explanation that satisfies the facts. You claim something different. You get to prove it.

Where are the wings?

What was the wreckage recovered from inside the Pentagon?

Not sure.

But that doesn't make the pictures look anymore like an airplane...

Originally posted by Jezus

Originally posted by jthomas
Only 9/11 Deniers think one needs pictures and videos to prove events happened.

Since the eyewitness reports are contradicting and inconsistent with the official story AND the photos don't resemble photos of other plane crashes...

We depend on multiple lines of evidence that converge on the same conclusion. In fact, the eyewitness testimony of a twin-engine jet, moving fast, and crashing into the Pentagon is completely consistent with the other lines of evidence showing AA77 hit the Pentagon. A missile striking the Pentagon, or the jet flying over the Pentagon instead of hitting it, are examples of claims that are entirely inconsistent with the other lines of evidence, and do NOT have any positive, verifiable evidence to support them.

The claim that "photos don't resemble photos of other plane crashes..." is a meaningless strawman. There are many factors that determine what any one crash will end up looking like including the nature of the impact point (soil conditions, water, buildings, etc), speed, angle of attack, etc.

I would expect proof from some of the many cameras that should have recorded the plane before any critically thinking individual would accept the official story.

First there is no "official story" to accept. There is only the evidence. And videos are not needed to know from all of the other lines of evidence that AA77 hit the Pentagon. Your claim is strictly a common strawman tactic common to all conspiracy theorists.

Their simply is no definitive evidence that the official story happened...especially considering so many anomalies.

There is no "official story." There is only the evidence and you haven't refuted that evidence.

Originally posted by Jezus


Where are the wings?

What was the wreckage recovered from inside the Pentagon?

Not sure.

Why not?

Originally posted by jthomas

Originally posted by Jezus


Where are the wings?

What was the wreckage recovered from inside the Pentagon?

Not flight 77

Not sure.

Why not?


Why are you sure at all?

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by Lillydale

 

I am not fixated on the Pentagon nor did I ask specifically for Pentagon reinvestigation plans unless you think that is the best opportunity to show a conspiracy. All I asked for was opinions of those who want a reinvestigation. What each person thinks will show conspiracy in some aspect of 911. What evidence they would look at; physical, video, witnesses, paperwork, etc. How they would select the investigators to get an unbiased assay. How they would have the investigators report.
This is easy. It is an opinion survey that requires a little thought. It is non-confrontational.

What do you think?

Honestly? I think that I already answered your question. I have no idea why you feel it is confrontational to answer you honestly just because you dislike my answers. You asked, and I answered. Now you tell me that I should not be looking at the pentagon?

No. You want to know what would be valid questions -

Where are the passenger bodies?

Where are the pieces of flight 77?

Where are the wings?

Please make me keep asking until I ask questions you like.

Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by jthomas

 

Conspiracists are afraid to have their fantasies destroyed, so they scrupulously avoid contacting the hundreds of Pentagon 9/11 first responders and the over 8,000 people who worked on rescue, recovery, evidence collection, building stabilization, and security in the days after 9/11. These are just some of the organizations whose members worked on the scene:

All the pentagon has to do is release a few unedited videos of the 80 + VIDEOS of the alleged Boeing 757 plowing into the Pentagon.

There are none.

It is clear the Pentagon is hiding something don’t you think?

No, it is not clear at all. Why should it be? We already have the evidence that AA77 hit the Pentagon. We don't need photos or videos to "prove" it, do we?

The Pentagon gives us only one short edited video with only a few frames on it and claims there is a 757 in it. The problem is there is no plane in the video period.

So what?

You have a problem with anyone who questions the FBI video.

No. I have a problem with those who claim we have to have a video to "prove" AA77 hit the Pentagon. That claim is completely irrational.

WHY? Who are you protecting? You talk about Conspiracists being afraid of having their fantasies destroyed.

Your fantasies were stillborn. I am showing you that your thinking is completely illogical.

First of all, people searching for the truth are no more Conspiracists than those supporting the OS.

First, there is no "OS" to support. What we know comes from multiple lines of evidence involving thousands of people that converge on the conclusion that AA77 hit the Pentagon. What we know is that you actually have no interest in the truth otherwise you wouldn't have the necessity to deny the evidence. The 9/11 "Truth" Movement has never been about the 'truth' in any way.

Second of all, I am not a Conspiracist, I am an individual searching for the truth.

Then stop denying the evidence and acting like a quintessential 9/11 "Truther." The choice is entirely yours.

You on the other hand are a Conspiracist because you do whatever it takes to keep the truth from coming out and that is a fact.

By just asking questions of you about your claims? Explain.

Originally posted by Lillydale

Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by Lillydale

 

You claim that a plane flew into the pentagon. Do not say you do not need to prove it. We know you can't anyway. The question is, why can't you prove your premise?

Jthomas can’t prove it because NO Boeing 757 hit the pentagon and the FBI video proves it.

I know that. You know that. Throatyogurt even knows that. The problem is that he has been asked so many times and he just keeps claiming he does not have to or tosses out some distraction. The thing that I do not get is why he can feel superior believing what he does when he does not even know why he believes it. I mean come on now. Why on earth would anyone be sooooo supportive of a story that they do not even know why they believe?

LOL. Neither one of you can answer a simple question about your own claims.

Gosh.

Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by Lillydale

 

The thing that I do not get is why he can feel superior believing what he does when he does not even know why he believes it. I mean come on now. Why on earth would anyone be sooooo supportive of a story that they do not even know why

He, like others who defend the OS with no evidence, suffer from a common mental affliction known as “ Patriotic Denial.” It appears to be non-contagious but beware of those suffering from PD as they often assemble in groups and love kicking sand at those of us searching for the truth about 911.

Ah, more dissembling by impressme, Mr. Strawman himself.