Al Qaeda Leader dined at the Pentagon months after 9/11

Originally posted by Mary Rose

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
. . . you didn't answer the question; why is flying in a circle such a hard thing to do that a guy with 6000 hours of flight time can't do it?

The following is from a 2005 blog article. Is the information correct?

The Washington Post states, "The unidentified pilot executed a pivot so tight that it reminded observers of a fighter jet maneuver . . . . Aviation sources said the plane was flown with extraordinary skill."

CBS news reported, "The hijacker-pilots were then forced to execute a difficult high-speed descending turn. Radar shows Flight 77 did a down-ward spiral, turning almost a complete circle and dropping the last 7,000 feet in two-and-a-half minutes."

And ABC news wrote, "The speed, the maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that that was a military plane . . . ."

. . . In addition to these fighter jet pilot like maneuvers, Hanjour supposedly flew the 757 a few feet off of the ground for several hundred feet before plowing into the West Wing of the Pentagon, a very difficult feat even for the world's most experienced pilots. . . .

I thought it was already established that it takes no great skill to crash an airplane. During WWII the Japanese were enlisting complete novices off the street to train to fly bomb laden planes in one way suicide missions and their success against US navy ships was legendary. The dropping of 7000 feet in two and a half minutes is by definition part of the act of crashing an airplane. In the case of Shanksville, it was probably measured in seconds.

The whole reason for flying in a circle is that they flew over the Pentagon for what many presume was an attack run against another target in D.C. (I.E. the Capitol building or the White House), and not being able to find it from the air they turned around for an attack run on the Pentagon, an equally famous building which definitely can be seen from the air. Once lined up they merely needed to fly in a straight line until they hit it, regardless of whatever altitute they were at when they came out of the circle, and by the time they reached it, the plane would have naturally been only a few feet from the ground. Since the Pentagon is out in the middle of an industrial park and many eyewitnesses specifically saw that it was a passenger jet that struck the Pentagon, it goes without saying that a 757 can in fact physically make a stable circular turn, regardless of whether anyone knew it could do so or not.

The only thing left therefore is the ability of Hani Hanjour to actually fly in the circle. So, why is flying in a circle so complex?

So the AlQaeda leader dined at the Pentagon before he was known to have AlQaeda ties.
John Wayne Gacy received Secret Service clearance and was photographed with First Lady Rosalyn Carter. I suppose this was a cover story for the Democrats should Gacy ever been involved in the Reagan assassination attempt. I know John Wayne Gacy has nothing to do with 9/11, but neither does flying in circles have anything to do in a thread about Anwar al-Awlaki.

Originally posted by youdidntseeme
So the AlQaeda leader dined at the Pentagon before he was known to have AlQaeda ties.
John Wayne Gacy received Secret Service clearance and was photographed with First Lady Rosalyn Carter. I suppose this was a cover story for the Democrats should Gacy ever been involved in the Reagan assassination attempt. I know John Wayne Gacy has nothing to do with 9/11, but neither does flying in circles have anything to do in a thread about Anwar al-Awlaki.

You are right, of course; the piloting abilities of the hijackers has nothing to do with Anwar al-Awlaki. I'm giving you a star for your wise counsel.

That said, I looked up this "ground breaking story" and found that the story was broken NOT by Alex Jones or any of the 9/11 conspiracy flunkies, but rather by Fox news, who the truthers religiously insist is the mouthpiece of every coverup perpetrator there is. Fox news in turn is quoting information from an investigation into the Fort hood shooting by the FBI, which almost every truther insists are either part of the coverup, or contributors of the conspiracy itself. So we have two sources who up until now was villified as being liars and murderers who are now spontaneously pillars of credibility for their investigation into Anwar al-Awlaki.

I'd like to know how you truthers explain this contradiction, becuase if even a microbe of any of your accusations were true, Fox news and the FBI would be the last ones on Earth to ever admit there was any Pentagon connection to Anwar al-Awlaki.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


Well said Dave.
I too had noticed that ironic twist of fate here, but I just couldnt get past the circular argument of those flying in circles.

Originally posted by youdidntseeme
So the AlQaeda leader dined at the Pentagon before he was known to have AlQaeda ties.
John Wayne Gacy received Secret Service clearance and was photographed with First Lady Rosalyn Carter. I suppose this was a cover story for the Democrats should Gacy ever been involved in the Reagan assassination attempt. I know John Wayne Gacy has nothing to do with 9/11, but neither does flying in circles have anything to do in a thread about Anwar al-Awlaki.

I guess we should of mentioned that to Dave beforehand as he was the one who started talking about it:

and after someone listened to his drivel they now think it's impossible for a novice pilot to know how to crash an airplane

Just another example of deflection and its a wonder that anyone can take it seriously. Another red herring is the questioning of the source of this story.

reply to post by Big Trouble in Little Chi


My comment was not in reply to anyone in particular.
To me it doesnt really matter 'who started it first.'
I was trying to lasso the conversation back to its roots.