Pentagon Survivor April Gallop: "It's obvious the official story was fabricated..."

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by Yukitup

 

It's called primer. I know, why bring more facts into it.

Likely that it was, indeed, but before I call it a fact I would probably do more that just state it and hope that everyone takes my word for it....got any sources to back up your "fact"?

reply to post by vipertech0596


I'm sorry you had friends and family directly affected by 9/11, but we were ALL AFFECTED BY 9/11, and one of my friends was murdered on that day. Please don't think that I don't have sympathy. And I also will not allow the ignorance of the "OS" to run rampant either.

Stick to the original topic please.

reply to post by babybunnies


Can you please let me know what evidence you have for air defences at the Pentagon (a) being there ? (b) being stood down ?

With regard to the NORAD exercises can you name the one please that was the " exact same scenario " ?

The 7/7 exercise in London did not exactly mirror reality and it was a paper exercise conducted by a handful of people in a room. No involvement of police, emergency services or anyone else so what significance do you think it had ?

Originally posted by filosophia

I think this video is clear evidence of a missile, from the pentagon's own surveillance tapes, so regardless of what any eyewitness said, how do you deny video evidence? Remember this is video from the government.

This is how Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon would really look if it was true:
www.lookingglassnews.org...

Originally posted by Kailassa
The cement columns, blocking the entry hole you marked out are deformed?
Not half as deformed as they'd be if your putative airliner had passed through them.

They're not cement, they are wound steel. This alone proves you haven't read any report on The Pentagon. I also like that apparently you know how they should look, even if you don't know what they were made from.

It's easy to tell when someone isn't going to listen to reason.

reply to post by Seti_Starr


Are you joking? How big do you think a 757 is? If it was going as fast as that video implies it would be under 50mph, it would be taxiing across the ground.

Why do people post utter rubbish like this? Some complete idiot photoshopped a plane onto an image and somehow that is definitely the truth because after all it's a gif on the internet and that must make it true right?

If you want to Deny Ignorance, perhaps you could look up an actual 3d recreation of the impact:


What's that? Accurate scaling and it looks exactly as it's supposed to? Well that's a shock.

PS. Video conversion also reduces the quality available to study, so click here and tell me what sort of missile has a tail plane the size of a 757?

reply to post by Seti_Starr


If you are seriously seeking the truth about AA 77 and the Pentagon I would suggest you read this earlier thread :-

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Not a single eyewitness saw a missile and no trace of one was recovered. Also begs a whole host of awkward questions like why did so many witnesses see a large plane ? How come radar and the recovered flight data recorder place AA 77 at the Pentagon ? Where did the Boeing plane parts and passenger body parts come from ? What did happen to AA 77 and its passengers ?

With regard to the Looking Glass News simulation you linked to; it is entirely unrealistic. They have several frames recorded in a fraction of a second whereas the Pentagon camera only recorded 2 frames per second while recording a plane flying at 530 mph or 777 feet per second.

reply to post by Seti_Starr


And if you were truly affected by the events that day I would hope you would actually look for reality....rather than grasping at silly conspiracy theories, which pretty much covers Ms Gallop's....game.

Originally posted by hayzues
reply to post by TrueAmerican

 

Proof of the pemtagon not being what it should be was nearly 10 years ago when they confiscated all cctv within miles radius. not saying it was struck by missile or anything els but from official pictures there seemed to be no plane debris other than strategically placed airplane parts.

Spread the word to those who don't believe, big brother and survivor is not what life is about

The fact that the FBI collected cctv tapes from premises around the Pentagon keeps being brought up by truthers as though it is some unique and suspicious thing.

It is simply standard investigative procedure anywhere in the civilized world. And the investigators are not just looking for the impact to the Pentagon but for anything that might be potentially useful. Possible perps, vehicles in area, potential witnesses etc.

Originally posted by exponent
So wait, one person, who has some rather dubious history of making grandiose claims is taken as incontrovertible evidence, but to believe that an aircraft hit, you not only need 100+ people seeing it, a few people nearly getting hit by it, the wreckage everywhere, the DNA evidence and the firefighter accounts, but you also want to see even more photos of the dead and the destruction?

Personally, I find it INCREDIBLY interesting that they find all this DNA evidence, but cant find the plane. Biological material certainly doesn't survive when aluminum and steel is disintegrated. Also, why is it that "Firefighter accounts" are held as gospel at the Pentagon, but considered dross when they talk about timed explosions at the WTC towers? Talk about "cherry picking"

..Ex

Originally posted by v3_exceed

Originally posted by exponent
So wait, one person, who has some rather dubious history of making grandiose claims is taken as incontrovertible evidence, but to believe that an aircraft hit, you not only need 100+ people seeing it, a few people nearly getting hit by it, the wreckage everywhere, the DNA evidence and the firefighter accounts, but you also want to see even more photos of the dead and the destruction?

Personally, I find it INCREDIBLY interesting that they find all this DNA evidence, but cant find the plane. Biological material certainly doesn't survive when aluminum and steel is disintegrated. Also, why is it that "Firefighter accounts" are held as gospel at the Pentagon, but considered dross when they talk about timed explosions at the WTC towers? Talk about "cherry picking"

..Ex

How so many truthers can post on here that there was no evidence of a plane at the Pentagon is beyond me. Is ignoring this :-

www.rense.com...

searching for the truth ?

reply to post by v3_exceed


Firstly, they found plenty of the plane, including the black box! Just because every truther site repeats that they didn't doesn't actually make it true. They found significant quantities of debris, many pieces identifiable as aircraft debris, many as 757 debris and indeed the FDR which is identifiable as AA77 as it contains previous flights.

Secondly, nobody ignores what firefighters said at WTC, but equally nobody says they are perfect witnesses. When a firefighter says that they saw a body strapped into a seat in the Pentagon, it's hard to dismiss that. However, when a firefighter mentions they heard explosion sounds in the WTC, that is much easier to explain without involving controlled demolitions.

This is the only standard that should be applied, in that explosions have multiple causes but bodies strapped into airline seats typically only have one.

Originally posted by Alfie1
How so many truthers can post on here that there was no evidence of a plane at the Pentagon is beyond me. Is ignoring this :-

www.rense.com...

searching for the truth ?

It is an extremely common disinformation ploy to take photos from angles that remove context. This way we can have the photos represent anything we want. Ultra closeups and corresponding images that "prove" what we are looking at. Clear examples of what I am referring to can be seen in the early scenes of the Da Vinci Code. Where Tom Hanks is showing the slide show to the group of people.

If it were the "truth" that the Government/FBI/CIA were in fact trying to expose, releasing the surveillance video of the Pentagon, releasing the video confiscated from the stores in the vicinity and removing the gag order on their employees would be a very good start. Real time surveillance cameras observing someplace as important as the Pentagon, really don't shoot at 2 frames per second, even in the early 21st century. Webcams in 2000 did better than the professional surveillance equipment used on that day.

I do like how the term "Truther" can be used as a derogatory however. It shows just how far the psychology of information management is at work here. Personally I have no vested interest in this either way except that I do know when I'm being fed a load of poo, and the magical events of 9/11 are indeed a load of poo. So If I'm considered a "truther" does that make the proponents of the OS ..."falsers"? heh.

..Ex

reply to post by v3_exceed


The videos that had the best chance of showing anything were released long ago ........and they really did not show anything. Imagine that......a security camera for a business that shows the business.....and not the office building across the street.

reply to post by mbkennel


why the pentagon? more importantly why that section of the building? because that part of the building hit was their financial and audit record offices. we all remember donny rumsfelds passionate speech on 9/10 about how mismanaged finances had permitted the pentagon to lose track of 2 trillion in spending in FY 2001 alone.

reply to post by chaeone86


Complete and total ignorance of the facts in your post. Try reading a couple of pages back to learn something.

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by v3_exceed

 

The videos that had the best chance of showing anything were released long ago ........and they really did not show anything. Imagine that......a security camera for a business that shows the business.....and not the office building across the street.

Considering that surveillance cameras would be placed throughout the inside of the pentagon as well, there would surely be footage of a plane the size reported going through the halls. In addition, it is common practice to place cameras also surveying the externals of the building to catch license plates, people hiding by entrances (employee safety) and parking areas. So often cameras will catch other events besides their own buildings, please visit You tube for about a billion examples of this.

Lets pretend for a moment that the pentagon isn't the only building on earth with cameras. Nothing was released on the pentagon a long time ago except the for the heavily edited, 6 frames of an explosion taken from the parking entrance cam. If I were an American, I would be outraged that the government is treating it's citizens as such fools and further outraged that my tax dollars were being wasted on people posting on forums.

..Ex

Originally posted by v3_exceed

Originally posted by Alfie1
How so many truthers can post on here that there was no evidence of a plane at the Pentagon is beyond me. Is ignoring this :-

www.rense.com...

searching for the truth ?

It is an extremely common disinformation ploy to take photos from angles that remove context. This way we can have the photos represent anything we want. Ultra closeups and corresponding images that "prove" what we are looking at. Clear examples of what I am referring to can be seen in the early scenes of the Da Vinci Code. Where Tom Hanks is showing the slide show to the group of people.

If it were the "truth" that the Government/FBI/CIA were in fact trying to expose, releasing the surveillance video of the Pentagon, releasing the video confiscated from the stores in the vicinity and removing the gag order on their employees would be a very good start. Real time surveillance cameras observing someplace as important as the Pentagon, really don't shoot at 2 frames per second, even in the early 21st century. Webcams in 2000 did better than the professional surveillance equipment used on that day.

I do like how the term "Truther" can be used as a derogatory however. It shows just how far the psychology of information management is at work here. Personally I have no vested interest in this either way except that I do know when I'm being fed a load of poo, and the magical events of 9/11 are indeed a load of poo. So If I'm considered a "truther" does that make the proponents of the OS ..."falsers"? heh.

..Ex

In respect of the pictures I linked you to :-

www.rense.com...

Can you please indicate to me the ones which were taken "from angles that remove context " and explain why ?

You see truthers often allege that Boeing airplane parts could have been dropped surreptitiuosly, despite landing gear and engine parts being beyond what a man could carry. But I wanted to point out to you that many aircraft parts are shredded aluminium wound around concrete columns. Any suggestions as to how that was done while the whole area was an inferno ?

Originally posted by v3_exceed
Considering that surveillance cameras would be placed throughout the inside of the pentagon as well, there would surely be footage of a plane the size reported going through the halls. In addition, it is common practice to place cameras also surveying the externals of the building to catch license plates, people hiding by entrances (employee safety) and parking areas. So often cameras will catch other events besides their own buildings, please visit You tube for about a billion examples of this.

If I were an American, I would be outraged that the government is treating it's citizens as such fools and further outraged that my tax dollars were being wasted on people posting on forums.

..Ex

If it werent for the fact that you so obviously believe what you posted I would get a chuckle out of it.

"surely be footage of a plane the size reported going through the halls"

Umm..first off, you would have to have the existance of said cameras in the halls...which, save the secure areas of the Pentagon (NMCC, JCS Briefing Area, etc) you do not have. Hate to break it to you, but there just isnt the camera coverage of the Pentagon that so many people seem to think there is. The primary security of the Pentagon, was ALWAYS the people at the doors and the security team. But to go with your supposition....do you think the inward crush of building materials just might obscure any view inside the building?

"In addition, it is common practice to place cameras also surveying the externals of the building to catch license plates, people hiding by entrances (employee safety) and parking areas."

Your point? Oh yes, back to the surrouding businesses that you think that would buy cameras and point them at the Pentagon..... The "best" view of the Pentagon would have been from the gas station...and its cameras were focused on the building and the gas pumps...that video was released several years ago.


"If I were an American, I would be outraged that the government is treating it's citizens as such fools and further outraged that my tax dollars were being wasted on people posting on forums."

And just who do you think is being paid to post on here by the government? Little ole me? That dog dont hunt.

reply to post by vipertech0596


UH, did you just tell me how to mourn the death of my friend who lost his life on 9/11?
OH NO YOU DIDN'T!

You are completely breaking the rules here and you are out of line! Be careful, your AGENDA is showing.