Absolute proof: A Pentagon picture montage from start to finish

I am the last person to say that nothing happened and that everything they've been saying is true. I have always highly doubted everything about the attack on the towers and especially The Pentagon.

But i still always wonder about one thing......

What benefit would the government have in lying about this? Of course, unless EVERYTHING is a lie...(so basically that there were also charges in the towers, and that it was basically a inside job) then i can understand why they blew up The Pentagon as well...simply to make it even look more serious.

However, are there any people in here who believe in the story about the towers, but also believe that the story about the Pentagon is NOT true? If so...why do you believe it? What benefit do you think the government has with that?

"I have no idea what the "average landing speed" is, and certainly couldn't watch a plane and tell you whether it was going above or below that landing speed. I personally have never watched a plane land in person, having always been inside the landing plane instead."

As I stated, average landing speed for a 757 is approximately 150 MPH. You've been to an airport and inside planes, but you've never been in close proximity to an airport, glancing at a plane overhead coming in for a landing?

Not that I'm trying to be cute or anything, but if you haven't witnessed something that most people see by the time they're seven years old, then why are you even discussing this issue?

What really bothers me, is what did they do to the passengers on this "supposed" flight?

My good friends Aunt was on the flight that "hit" the pentagon. She remains dead - not heard from to this day.

Were they all executed? Or were they drug to Dulce and had hideous experiments done to them... I feel bad for all of those passengers who thought they were in store for a normal flight.

As I stated, average landing speed for a 757 is approximately 150 MPH.

And as I stated, I didn't know that. I don't see why I would be expected to, not being in aviation.

You've been to an airport and inside planes, but you've never been in close proximity to an airport, glancing at a plane overhead coming in for a landing?

Nope, I've been preoccupied with checking my bags, talking on my cell, reading magazines/books, that sort of thing. I don't make a habit of staring at the planes as they come in, as shocking as that sounds.

Not that I'm trying to be cute or anything, but if you haven't witnessed something that most people see by the time they're seven years old, then why are you even discussing this issue?

So, you think most seven-year olds would be able to tell you if a plane is coming in too quickly or not?

I fear you put too much stock in children and their ability to judge time, speed, and altitude.

hholy fu**ing sh**.... Mate... do you realise what we have here? this... well hold on. this can go one of two ways. A) the american people grow a spine and demand both answer, and punitive action for the entire bush administration, which inturn will remind politicians of their station and for whom they work, and not the other way around, or B) this like everything else that is handed to the people goes unnoticed, and the american people sit there comfortably infront of the telly as per usual. funny thing is, this also puts the blair administration in jeopardy as well.. considering they agreed do this war which is already being investigated for legality, and missing truths... etc

Originally posted by libertytoall
They modified an existing 757 into a drone armed with 2 cruise missiles. You can clearly see the missile bays under the 757 when freezing frames in many of the trade tower videos.

Oh no, the pod people are back!!! that was shown to be incorrect here
www.abovetopsecret.com...

also have a look here wtc.nist.gov...
for a more detailed look at the aircraft - and no pods!

reply to post by Thermo Klein


I am on record as believing that sadly, 9/11 happened just the way it is popularly presented. We were caught with our pants down and I think its a lesson to all that we DO have enemies who would see us dead just because we are a beacon of World Freedom which is anathema to those that would rather enforce control of other people. 911 conspiracy theorists have a ready made situation they can use to promote what I firmly believe are false contexts for a tragic loss of situational awareness on our country's part.

As far as the Pentagon...

I have serious issue with Pentagon Conspiracy theorists. Primarily because the evidence is overwhelming for an aircraft hit yet they make it sound otherwise.

Wing scars in crashes are actually NOT very common. The scar on the WTC was a special case and was due to construction of the towers. The widely separated beams were designed to handle large vertical forces, NOT horizontal impulse forces such as an aircraft hitting it with the force that they did. The Pentagon is wholly different in construction. The outer casements are thicker than the WTC beams, continuous, and thickly connected to each other horizontally throughout the construction This effectively created a solid wall as far as the aircraft is concerned. The wings which hold the fuel RARELY survive explosive impacts because thermal forces vaporize them if you can imagine that much lightweight aluminum vaporizing. But that is just what happens, especially with a near full fuel load. Also, most of the aircraft in the initial fire will be completely melted and vaporized. That is also why in such solid impacts seen around the world sadly, much of the aircraft is gone and there is only charred ash deposits left behind. Aircraft are very easily consumed by fire.

I have NO trouble with no wings being found as they would have vaporized. Wing scar absence is debatable by the way.. To date there are NO high resolution images of the lower floor area of that building that show in any clarity worth analysis that wings did not damage the stone edifice. And you may say "wings moving several hundred miles an hour would have shown up!!!" and initially you might be very strongly convinced of that. But I am not. Wings are very light in weight, made of thin aluminum sheet with low melting points, and the ribs are also aluminum with by the way is full of round weight reduction holes which allow heat to easily access all parts of the wing quickly. And since the tank is part of the wing, the explosion of wings would easily mask any wing scarring in addition.

Now, I know of at least ONE engine picture that shows the engine having punched a ROUND hole through the wall of the Pentagon inner ring. THAT is the image you showed and said it was the fuselage of the aircraft. It was an engine punchout you saw, not the fuselage. What is missing from your picture is the REST of the picture. You presented a cropped image of the overall shot which to the right and on the ground shows a literal 'puddle' of aluminum and .... an interior compressor assembly of a jet engine that escaped the main heat of the fire. This is all perfectly reasonable. If you are going to show data, you need to make sure it is all of the data.

One missing picture I never see in these discussions is one that I have [searching!] of the LANDING GEAR of the airplane tangled in the Pentagon wreckage. I never thought the obvious would ever end up in debate.

I am respectful of your points and theory, but I am less respectful when subsets of data are cherry picked from context to make a point. Saying of photos showing debris, "obviously planted to further the story" is unethical because it is wholly unprovable and doesnt explain where the missing family members who were on the flight went!! I suppose the government killed them to further the story's plausibility?

Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa
reply to post by mitman93

 

I just searched for "american architectural foundation thermite" on google and got no results. Could you post a link?

well, just out of curiosity, i did the same to thing to see if it was true ... i googled "american architectural foundation thermite" and got 1,550 results.

hmmm.

VneZonyDostupa's post about his inability to do a google search is actually the very first link returned, so one would think his internet fame would help out with his internet savvy!?

Originally posted by Hadrian

Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa
reply to post by mitman93

 

I just searched for "american architectural foundation thermite" on google and got no results. Could you post a link?

well, just out of curiosity, i did the same to thing to see if it was true ... i googled "american architectural foundation thermite" and got 1,550 results.

hmmm.

VneZonyDostupa's post about his inability to do a google search is actually the very first link returned, so one would think his internet fame would help out with his internet savvy!?

I meant "no results" as in, I got no hits relating to a study by the AAF that claims "nanothermite" was used.

Feel free to post the study the previous poster claimed he saw, if you found it. I'm genuinely curious to read it.


[edit on 2/7/2010 by VneZonyDostupa]

I love this picture:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/ff14290b95a1.jpg[/atsimg]

Of course there's no parking...It looks like a drive-thru.

On a serious note, nice compilation OP. and S&F




[edit on 7-2-2010 by Aggie Man]

Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa

I meant "no results" as in, I got no hits relating to a study by the AAF that claims "nanothermite" was used.

Feel free to post the study the previous poster claimed he saw, if you found it. I'm genuinely curious to read it.


[edit on 2/7/2010 by VneZonyDostupa]

actually, i find the same to be true: no direct attribute to the aaf pertaining to thermite ... or anything having to do with the pentagon or wtc.

reply to post by Meesterjojo

Folks: This is why college students can't use "Google.com" as a source for their reports. Do some real homework, get information directly from as many sources as possible. I really shouldn't have to repeat this every time a thread like this is started.

So now that you've corrected this assumed "college student," will you be smacking him with a ruler across the knuckles next for acting against your rules and regulations, Teacher?

reply to post by NightGypsy


dude......... thats kink! LMFAO

Now that we know what happened (the missile theory) what did they do to the people that where on American Airlines Flight 77. I don’t think they killed them to preserve the farce. There would be too many people involved in the cover-up. Someone would talk. There were 64 people on board. Two people made phone calls during the hijacking to family. How can we explain that?

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by hmmmbeer
Wow. So a solid 6 tonne engine bounces off the wall

who said it bounced off the wall? You have not looked at any aerial pictures of the Pentagon, have you!!

Please provide the links for these aerial photos.

Also, pleaswe provide links for the following...

the pictures of a 757 undercarriage found inside the Pentagon?

the picture of a 757 engines found inside the Pentagon?

the picture of 757 damage caused to the outside of the Pentagon before it collapsed?

the evidence of where the body parts from Flight 77 were found inside the Pentagon?

the picture of 757 wreckage on the lawn outside the Pentagon?


If you can't, or if the photos are not conclusive, then stop asserting these claims.

A plane hit the Pentagon. There are witnesses, aircraft wreckage, radar, flight data etc etc, yet no witnesses saw a missile, global hawke, a flyover or anything of the sort. NONE.....If there are witnesses coming forward after over 8 years, please feel free produce them.

I remain totally unconvinced that human remains capable of identification could have been retrieved from the conflagration that consumed, virtually in entirety, one massive great airliner complete with two huge engines.
I cannot believe they would even be able to find any remains in such an environment.
Sadly I do beliveve they have the DNA but I think it was taken either by willing people who would get new identities or by victims whose fate, as someone else has commented, is perhaps too awful to ever want to consider. I would put nothing past the Bushes, Blairs and Cheneys of this world.
As there was no airliner anyway - the fact they found DNA is just another lie in my view.
Surprised, I think not.

Originally posted by Hadrian
well, just out of curiosity, i did the same to thing to see if it was true ... i googled "american architectural foundation thermite" and got 1,550 results.

you left the quotation marks out of your google search...... if you put them you get 1 result, here

Originally posted by Emilymary
I remain totally unconvinced that human remains capable of identification could have been retrieved from the conflagration that consumed, virtually in entirety, one massive great airliner complete with two huge engines.
I cannot believe they would even be able to find any remains in such an environment.
Sadly I do beliveve they have the DNA but I think it was taken either by willing people who would get new identities or by victims whose fate, as someone else has commented, is perhaps too awful to ever want to consider. I would put nothing past the Bushes, Blairs and Cheneys of this world.
As there was no airliner anyway - the fact they found DNA is just another lie in my view.
Surprised, I think not.

I'll ask the same question I've asked several times (with no answer) in this thread:

You honestly think it would be easier for the government to hide 64 people and an entire plane and then launch a missile mocked-up to look like the exact same plane, rather than just use the plane itself?

How many extra people (and extra potential leaks) would that complicated plan involve? Dozens? Hundreds?

Originally posted by Emilymary
I cannot believe they would even be able to find any remains in such an environment.

why do you ignore the photo's used at the 2006 trial U.S. v. Moussaoui.? You know, the photo's his defence objected about?

Anyone know why "truthers" refuse to research properly?

[edit on 7/2/10 by dereks]