It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Pentagon was not hit by an airlainer

page: 5
15
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 22 2010 @ 09:57 AM
link   
On a completely different note, but pertaining to 9/11 and the Pentagon:

The other night I was watching a Discovery channel episode about the Kensington Runestone. Supposedly an artifact left by Scandanavian explorers in the new world in about 1362. It was discovered in Minnesota in the 1800's. For details you can look up the Discovery channel episode. Now, how does this pertain to 9/11?

Well, one of the experts called to examine the stone and try to determine its age and its authenticity was Scott Walter. Mr. Walter is a professional geologist and an independent consultant that does microscopic petrography. Thats the microscopic examination of rocks and rock products like concrete. He is often called in to examine concrete and determine the cause of the failure. One of his past projects was examining the concrete from the Pentagon after 9/11 to determine its performance and failures.

Now ask yourself: if no airliner hit the Pentagon on 9/11 and it was all an elaborate hoax using slight of hand and explosives, isn't it rather risky to call in an independent authority to do a microscopic examination of the building? Now, you can postulate that he was paid off, he was threatened, or he is in on it but all those conjectures still beg the question: then why refer him in the first place?

Just a thought.



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by eiefar
reply to post by -PLB-
 


not at all. A missle fired from across the street would be SO much less conspicuous would it not? maybe a smoke or vapor trail that hangs or disappates fairly quick, or some other explosive projectile that is even less noticable. All I'm saying is that a massive amount of people would've noticed a plane over 66. I am actually quite sure alot of people who were and weren't there claim they saw a missle, but all I'm addressing is no one saw a plane that I'm aware of.
edit on 19-10-2010 by eiefar because: reworded.


An air launched cruise flys with a tiny turbojet engine, no smoke. Sounds like a small jet and could' ve been launched ( released) from 1500 miles missed on atc radar; and reliably hit any window you'd prefer.



 
15
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join