9/11: The Pentagon - Jesse Ventura Speaks With Pilots For 9/11 Truth

Originally posted by george_gaz

Not to mention the fact that he goes around saying he was a Navy SEAL when he wasn't. I don't want to fall into the trap of slandering him based on one lie he told but he keeps telling it over and over and over again. It is getting embarrassing.

From September 11, 1969, to September 10, 1975, during the Vietnam War era, Ventura served in the United States Navy. While on active duty, Ventura was part of Underwater Demolition Team 12 (UDT).[4] The UDTs were merged with the US Navy SEALs in 1983, 8 years after Ventura had left the Navy.

FOUND HERE

If the Underwater Demolition Team are now called Navy Seals, then 'yes', he was a Navy Seal.
Of course, you may be talking about semantics.

I will definitely watch this episode. I record all of them.

My issue with the OS is, 1) That section of the Pentagon had just been re-vamped and "fortified". Yet there is a perfectly round hole on the inside of the 3rd ring. There is NO WAY an airliner cold make it through 3 rings, 2) the precise hand-flying of an airliner that would be necessary to execute this attack is not likely going to be gained by a student pilot with a couple hours of sim time and 3) Complete lack of an airplane. Other than a few fragments, which I believe were somehow planted or staged, there is NO airplane. Oh, and a jet engine that couldn't have come from this aircraft. I believe Shanksville suffers from the same "lack of evidence" problem. I don't care if that aircraft hit the ground vertical; it wouldn't have disintegrated into confetti. And you wouldn't have found pieces of it 3 miles away. Yea, they conveniently found passports and other identifying "Muslim hijacker" paperwork. The fact that the vast majority of American's believe this garbage is testament to how dumb we really are and how we lack the ability to be critical thinkers.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


OK I gotta ask you this:
Who are these eye witnesses? Why are they the ones telling the truth? Have they been examined, even to the point of you like the brush they use on their hair? Your eye witnesses don't have a list, most never were interviewed for anything and now won't come forward. Oh and why do you put so much faith in their testimony when there has been none officially provided? If so, please provide the links!
As for your "This is nothing but innuendo dropping- the plane hit a blank wall that had no main entrance, and all the cameras were/are trained on high traffic areas like entrances, parking lots, security gates, and the like, so there's no sign anywhere except in the mind of the conspiracy people there even is any additional footage."
You, sir just told a big fat juicy one. Pentagon Damage Please note that each side of the Pentagon has a main entrance and always has! I've been in there and my father use to work there. If anyone is deliberately dropping innuendo, it's you!
Also have you ever been on a base? You have got to be kidding me when you say this building wasn't watched on all sides. They had more cameras per square inch than anyone. Every building on every base in this area has had the same type set up and they still do, at minimum 2 per 5 ft. The information from them was not given to you so you feel its not there. Boy that's ego! So your statement about no entrance is easily debunked by a picture. Oh and here: Please notice where the cars are parked and the entrances are. This is the side of the building years before it got hit.
to add: I'm referring to the far left of picture, not the main parking lot. On that side, the red car and white van are near that entrance. Its not a grand entrance, you won't find a tour there, but its there. Oh and see the glaring guard shack? The two utility trucks?
Your problem with truthers is you don't care to know the truth, otherwise you wouldn't post stuff easily debunked.
Have a truth day!

reply to post by impressme


You can supply evidence all day if you would like.... Why is it that truthers concoct a "theory" Then they CROWBAR said "evidence" to fit this theory.

Opinions and assumptions are NOT evidence.. The sooner that "truthers" realize this the better.

reply to post by impressme

You are the one that needs to do some real research. Most people know by now that the OS is a fraud, yet you still defend the “proven lies,” why is that weed?

Can you please give me examples of these "proven" lies?

reply to post by impressme

(BTW...interrupting myself here, with an observation. Take a moment, and review ANY NUMBER of the posts made by ATS members who try to make a case for the "TM". You will notice, hopefully, a pattern: Many common "catch phrases" will be seen, and repeated. Over and over again. Think of them in the same way you would the much-discussed "talking points" that are a trademark of "Fox News"...watch Fox contributors make the rounds on pundit talking heads shows, and listen to the way they ALL follow the same script, on any given day. SAME thing with the "TM"...aka "truthers"...).

You mean "catch phrases" that are trademarks from people who believe in the OS, like twofers, delusional, paranoid, fantasy world, tin foil hats, daydreams, and the likes.

These are descriptions not catch phrases. The real difference is this.... Truthers have a select few "catch phrases" to go into battle with. These are phrases used in defense of their theories.

The words you so predictably pointed out are common words used in society.

Do you really not see the difference?

Jesse is the man!

Ron Paul for President , Jesse Ventura for Vice President - the dream ticket for 2012!

I can't wait for Jesse to destroy the LIES of our government when he shows that a plane did not hit the Pentagon! From the previews it looks like another hard hitting episode!

Keep spreading the truth guys about 911! The official story is truly a fairy tale and MOST Americans know this know. Wait until millions more get exposed to this new Jesse Ventura episode about 911! It's time for their wake up call!

Reading this thread got me to thinking. Just in the last few days it has been released that the US long range missle defense has failed. We've tried two times this year and have failed both times. Everyone keeps talking about a missle hitting the Pentagon so is it possible this could have been a long range attack on the US by Russia or some other country? Obviously a cover up would be made because if it got out that we were just attacked and were unable to prevent it there would have been mass hysteria.

www.cnn.com...

Originally posted by DaWhiz
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

OK I gotta ask you this:
Who are these eye witnesses? Why are they the ones telling the truth? Have they been examined, even to the point of you like the brush they use on their hair? Your eye witnesses don't have a list, most never were interviewed for anything and now won't come forward. Oh and why do you put so much faith in their testimony when there has been none officially provided? If so, please provide the links!

Absolutely. I have such a list handy since I know Alex Jones and Dylan Avery aren't going to tell you trusters any of this. Here's a list of eyewitness accounts of the passenger jet that hit the Pentagon. I accept their accounts to be legitimate becuase they were there at the time, which is the exactly same reason you rely on your "witnesses heard explosions" claims.

Pentagon eyewitnesses

...and no, I didn't "analyze their accounts down to what kind of comb they used in the morning." If you have to get down to such a ridiculous micro level of research that you demand to know if they had tea or coffee for breakfast, then this isn't research. It's grasping at straws out of desperation from not wanting to accept anything that disproves your conspiracy stories. YOU are the ones who have this hangup that secret agents are sneaking around planting disinformation, not us.

You, sir just told a big fat juicy one. Pentagon Damage Please note that each side of the Pentagon has a main entrance and always has! I've been in there and my father use to work there. If anyone is deliberately dropping innuendo, it's you!

All right then, I stand to be corrected. Please provide an overhead layout of the Pentagon showing where the cameras are positioned, as well as their field of view. If you're claiming there's some sinister conspiracy based on the Pentagon not releasing the video footage of a bunch of people in the parking lot staring at something off camera then you've been caught red handed at dropping innuendo to give your conspiracy stories false credibility, regardless of what your perceptions of my motives are.

Please just come out and admit it- you really have no idea whatsoever whether there's actually any more video, do you? You're simply repeating the drivel Dylan Avery, Alex Jones, etc are shoveling out and you're trusting it to be true.

Also have you ever been on a base? You have got to be kidding me when you say this building wasn't watched on all sides.

I know it was watched on all sides. By security guards. The same security guards you trusters are claiming are lying to cover something up. You've therefore built up a convenient case of circular logic, where you're trying to submit some made up BS conspiracy to explain away some other previously made up BS conspiracy.

Sorry, but your bait and switch game fails before it even started.

reply to post by General.Lee


Since your comments were not directed at any specific member, thought I'd chime in. Just to clarify a few things, clear up what keeps being repeated (usually) from the many "conspiracy" sources....

1) That section of the Pentagon had just been re-vamped and "fortified". Yet there is a perfectly round hole on the inside of the 3rd ring. There is NO WAY an airliner cold make it through 3 rings....

Well, I thought to look into the claims of "re-vamped and 'fortified' ".....I've linked previously, but you can do your own research. Really, the general concept of the "re-vamping" of the Pentagon is mostly an update to more modern, i.e., late 20th, 21st century standards. In terms of the infrastructure....the support systems. YES, it does include window replacements...to be more blast-resistant. BUT, that is supposing lessons learned from incidents like, say...Oklahoma City. Certainly there is NO "retro-fit" capable (nor needed) to provide full resistance from a suicide attack via airborne airliner??? WHO would go that far over-board?

The window changes seem to be about IT, as far as improving exterior, outer-perimeter wall blast resistance. There certainly is no complete "removal/replacement" of exterior structure, correct??

BTW...the enhancements that are underway (still ongoing) involve the OUTSIDE perimeter....and the interior offices spaces, as I mentioned about "infrastructure".

The more interior concentric rings?? What purpose would there be to "reinforcing" those areas??? Think it through for a moment...and realize how the "rhetoric" of the "truth movement" is used to sway opinion...even when it is completely irrelevant. THEY use "emotional" tricks, exclusively....the "wall" that is shown int eh iconic "truther" propaganda is just a simple concrete block wall....you know the type. You build fences with them, you make building walls with them, you can buy them at your local DIY store......

Similar to these:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/f69f615f64f3.jpg[/atsimg]

You may wish to watch this professional evaluation of the impact sequence of American flight 77, a Boeing 757-200, at the Pentagon:



Followed by the uninterrupted (and no soundtrack) video produced by Purdue University, portions of which were featured in the first video:



NOW, this next bit, I can speak to from a positon of great authority...due to experience in the same type of airplane involved:

2) the precise hand-flying of an airliner that would be necessary to execute this attack is not likely going to be gained by a student pilot with a couple hours of sim time...

Firstly, it is an incorrect claim that Hani Hanjour, on American 77, (or ANY of the hijackers who did the actual suicide flying) were "student pilots". Any of their simulator experience wouldn't be needed just for the basics of steering, and aiming, in order to "hit" what they wished to hit....just as YOU can steer your car into a bridge abutment, if you desired....even if it was your FIRST TIME behind the wheel!!!

NO, the "practice" they obtained from the simulator time was to familiarize themselves with the layout of the various controls and devices they'd need, in order to know how to operate the Autopilot, and to navigate to the general area of their targets....where, once there, they just took over visually. I wrote a long post, in another thread, all about it....will link on edit....
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
As promised....this is a link to a post, another thread. Intent is to show how, with just a little bit of basic instruction, a person like me (who has the hands-on experience, decades of airline flying, and about 20,000 hours total time) can teach even someone who knows nothing about flying to start with, how to use the on-board equipment that is installed in the Boeing 757/767. This is JUST a taste, an example. A few hours of actually using the devices, and it gets even easier to comprehend.

Combined with even a BASIC understanding of piloting? The hijackers had at least several hundred hours, each. For perspective, the FAA minimum to earn a Private Pilot Airman's Certificate? 40 hours. With a Private license, you are "qualified" to carry passengers (though not for hire) in visual flight rules (VFR) conditions, both day time and night time. Next step, if you care, is to earn an "Instrument Rating", to fly in various inclement weather conditions. To be barely qualified for a "Commercial" license (still, USA) you must have at least 250 hours total time. AND, the Instrument Rating, of course...you can look all this up, if you wish.

HERE is my post, giving a bit of a "lesson", just to illustrate how it can be learned, really...by anyone who applies themselves to WANT to learn:

www.abovetopsecret.com...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



As to the above, an "airplane is an airplane"...just as a "car is a car", at its basest level. Difference, and "familiarity" involves the location and specific operation of the various controls, as I mentioned....


I can also address this:

3) Complete lack of an airplane. Other than a few fragments, which I believe were somehow planted or staged, there is NO airplane.

I don't think you comprehend, fully, the FORCES of the impact. The airplane was SHREDDED. Into many, many if not millions, at the very least hundreds of thousands of bits.

AND...no, "staging" wasn't a logical possibility!! How could that have been accomplished? In a split second???

Again you have bad info, on this....(I know, because I've seen "Loose Change"...):

Oh, and a jet engine that couldn't have come from this aircraft.

Wrong. Been covered already. "Loose Change" is a joke, and a waste of time, for serious discussion.

Guess I should repeat this Dutch documentary video, for edification. Conveniently, it also dispels the notion of the so-called "difficulty" of flying a big, wide normal turn, while descending, in order to line up, aim, and hit a target on the ground...like, the Pentagon:

I believe Shanksville suffers from the same "lack of evidence" problem.

Plenty of other threads, on that. You have a tough uphill battle there, since BOTH Flight Recorders were readable, from that airplane. You can see my contributions on that, on other threads.

I don't care if that aircraft hit the ground vertical; it wouldn't have disintegrated into confetti.

Yes. It would.

And you wouldn't have found pieces of it 3 miles away.

Light weight debris, mostly. Yes, it happens. See other similar events, like PSA 1771, in 1987, I believe (have to look it up).

Yea, they conveniently found passports and other identifying "Muslim hijacker" paperwork.

Yes. AND, many, many other similar identifying items, from the personal possessions of the passengers and crew.......

Rest of your post I am replying to was a diatribe that you may regret writing, on review.....

reply to post by weedwhacker


What does any of this have to do with a plane hitting the Pentagon...we want to see the goddam pictures and somehow they are not being released...since we are not programmed as you to even see such a thing as being possible we know it did not happen...stop making excuses and trying anything to make it even seem remotely true that a jetliner hit this building.

You clearly have not used a weedwhacker in your own backyard in some time, i suggest you get it repaired and get whackin.

reply to post by weedwhacker

NO, the "practice" they obtained from the simulator time was to familiarize themselves with the layout of the various controls and devices they'd need, in order to know how to operate the Autopilot, and to navigate to the general area of their targets....where, once there, they just took over visually. I wrote a long post, in another thread, all about it....will link on edit....

This is the first I've heard of the hijackers getting simulator time..
Where did this take place?
Do you have any proof WW...

Originally posted by backinblack

Isn't there a heliport on that side?
Surely that would have had a decent camera aimed at it

This is a nonsequitor. If there was one, the camera would have been positioned to cover the helipad, not the brick wall behind the helipad, nor the empty field in front of the helipad, nor even the light poles on the other side of the street next to the field in front of the helipad.

Listening to you conspiracy people, you'd think the Pentagon had a camera aimed at every garbage can and traffic cone. What diffference does it make, anyway? If you people have fallen so hard for the drivel that a cruise missile hit the Pentagon then you wouldn't believe any video footage even if it did exist. You insist all the eyewitness accounts are disinformation agents and that all the aircraft wreckage was planted, so I guarantee you'd simply brush off any footage as being manufactured at some secret gov't sound stage the same way your conspiracy partners claim the moon landing footage was faked.

I invite you to explain how I'm incorrect.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by backinblack

Isn't there a heliport on that side?
Surely that would have had a decent camera aimed at it

This is a nonsequitor. If there was one, the camera would have been positioned to cover the helipad, not the brick wall behind the helipad, nor the empty field in front of the helipad, nor even the light poles on the other side of the street next to the field in front of the helipad.

Listening to you conspiracy people, you'd think the Pentagon had a camera aimed at every garbage can and traffic cone. What diffference does it make, anyway? If you people have fallen so hard for the drivel that a cruise missile hit the Pentagon then you wouldn't believe any video footage even if it did exist. You insist all the eyewitness accounts are disinformation agents and that all the aircraft wreckage was planted, so I guarantee you'd simply brush off any footage as being manufactured at some secret gov't sound stage the same way your conspiracy partners claim the moon landing footage was faked.

I invite you to explain how I'm incorrect.

Are you on drugs???
I just asked is there a heliport there because YOU stated there was nothing on that side of the Pentagon worthy of a camera..
Seems you were wrong...That's incorrect, isn't it Dave...

You know I'm kinda of getting tired of you sprouting line after line of BS that isn't relevant to the question you are answering..
I've reported you for spaming and I hope others do the same..
I hope ATS sees your tactics and stops them soon....

Debate the points raised in the post you are answering..
Not the 30 lines of drivel about holograms, lasers, Alex Jones and damn fool conspiracy sites..

Originally posted by Human_Alien

 

That is reported in US News. Good grief. I do believe they reported Global Warming too (eye roll)

Oh, good grief, you conspiracy people have really lost all grasp on reality. I quoted that web page becuase it's in English. Are you saying now that every English language report on the hijackers are all secret agents spreading disinformation and cannot be believed? All right, then, here's a Washington based Saudi news agency giving the backgrounds on all the hijackers in their own language. They acknowledge the hijackers were Saudi so they have nothing to hide. Does it help you at all?

Saudi news agency lists bios of the 9/11 hijackers


You and I know what you're doing isn't research. What you're doing is trying to find any excuse you can come up with however pathetic that will allow you to dismiss everything that refutes your conspiracy stories. You asked for proof showing the hijackers were genuinely dead and I gave it to you. Please have the courtesy to either show why the information I presented was false or acknowledge you're barking up the wrong tree with this bit.

Okay, you know what it is? Once you know what's REALLY going on (see: Illuminati unless of course, you're going say THEY don't exist) it's hard to give the Global cabal the benefit of doubt when every single thing points to their involvement or remains, questionable. Listen, I was merely a NY bystander watching TV that day. The victim families don't believe this either. What does THAT say? They already got millions so it's not about money. They want (demand) the TRUTH!!!

You are lying through your teeth here. The Jersey girls have been quoted and misquoted ad nauseum here. They want to know where the breakdown in the structure occurred which allowed the attack to succeed so that it doesn't happen again. Thsi is exactly what I'm rooting for myself, so please do not associate them OR me with your kind, becuase you conspiracy theorists and your delusions of secret controlled demolitions and lasers from outer space do not represent us in any way, thank you very much.

The Trusters, to me, remind me of a devoted spouse who does NOT want to recognize/admit that their spouse is cheating no matter how many examples of infidelity you show them. There's a blanket of denial over their eyes because there is no way they are ready for the ramification of such implications.
That's how I see this.

You are exactly right, this IS how the trusters see things. The trusters explicitely trust everything Dylan Avery, Alex Jones, David Ray Griffin, and now as this very forum proves, Jesse Ventura, are shoveling out regardless of how many times it's been proven they're wrong. That's why they come up with such goofball excuses for why they won't believe anything unless someone takes the time to hire a translator, travel to Saudi Arabia, and get a one on one interview with the relatives- they know full well it's never going to happen. They might as well demand the interview be done on the moon.

Thank you for agreeing with me.

reply to post by backinblack


Look here:

hcgroups.wordpress.com...

Inside that web page, look for the links to "FBI summary of information" reports, (or just "summary") for each group of hijackers, grouped by the flights they participated in.

FBI files, labelled "LES"....(Law Enforcement Sensitive). Out in the open, nowadays of course....

Lots of info there. Things that aren't usually mentioned on the "9/11 conspiracy" websites.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by backinblack

 

Look here:

hcgroups.wordpress.com...

Inside that web page, look for the links to "FBI summary of information" reports, (or just "summary") for each group of hijackers, grouped by the flights they participated in.

FBI files, labelled "LES"....(Law Enforcement Sensitive). Out in the open, nowadays of course....

Lots of info there. Things that aren't usually mentioned on the "9/11 conspiracy" websites.

I'll take a look but in fairness, I've seen you carry on for ages that they didn't need any special training..
This simulator training is new and I haven't seen you mention it in the past..
Can you show me where YOU first mentioned it??

Also, shouldn't the FBI etc be investigating why these nobodies were allowed into these facikities to train?
It's not like the average Joe is allowed on these things..
Though I know some very frequent flyers that have been invited to try out airline simulators....

I have all of Ventura's Conspiracy Theory Season One in iTunes.

I cannot find a place to put this, and cannot post it myself, for I am new to this board, as of today. But I came here deliberately to get this info out to Marrs and whoever cares.

gsn.nti.org...
FBI Wants Anthrax Attacks Report Postponed (Dec. 10, 2010)
Representative Rush Holt (D-N.J.) in a letter to FBI Director Robert Mueller said the request suggests the bureau “may be seeking to try to steer or otherwise pressure” the National Academy of Sciences panel preparing the report “to reach a conclusion desired by the bureau.
and www.thesunnews.com...

The article at gti states that the FBI withheld 500 documents from the anthrax science investigation, which they just recently delivered to the following a year or so of waiting time.

Also the article says that there is a great push by the FBI to influence the scientific investigation findings.

This is shady dealings by the FBI. It needs to be watched.

I was listening to a late 2008 podcast interviewing Jim Marrs and he mentioned the Anthrax Killer. Wanted to keep him up-to-date on the antics of the FBI regarding this issue.

BTW, I think the Anthrax Killer is still at large, regardless of the lies we are told by the FBI.

I am a 9-11 Truther. Unlike many of you, I didn't need to be convinced. I GNEW there was something amiss when it happened. I never once believed we were being told the truth.

Originally posted by backinblack

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by backinblack

Isn't there a heliport on that side?
Surely that would have had a decent camera aimed at it

This is a nonsequitor. If there was one, the camera would have been positioned to cover the helipad, not the brick wall behind the helipad, nor the empty field in front of the helipad, nor even the light poles on the other side of the street next to the field in front of the helipad.

Listening to you conspiracy people, you'd think the Pentagon had a camera aimed at every garbage can and traffic cone. What diffference does it make, anyway? If you people have fallen so hard for the drivel that a cruise missile hit the Pentagon then you wouldn't believe any video footage even if it did exist. You insist all the eyewitness accounts are disinformation agents and that all the aircraft wreckage was planted, so I guarantee you'd simply brush off any footage as being manufactured at some secret gov't sound stage the same way your conspiracy partners claim the moon landing footage was faked.

I invite you to explain how I'm incorrect.

Are you on drugs???
I just asked is there a heliport there because YOU stated there was nothing on that side of the Pentagon worthy of a camera..
Seems you were wrong...That's incorrect, isn't it Dave...

All right, look, I'm not going to waste my time arguing over something so flipping obvious like how any camera near a helipad is going to be trained on the helipad and not a blank wall behind the helipad, nor am I going to argue how they should have trained a camera on the blank wall so they can satisfy the paranoid delusions of you conspiracy people. I ASKED you to back up the claim there were any additional cameras aimed at that specific location and you've pretty much done everythign you can to avoid having to answer the question. How about answering it now- what proof do you have that there were additional cameras trained on the location where the plane impacted other than simply quoting the mindless drivel Alex Jones and Dylan Avery are spoon feeding you?

Sheesh, according to you trusters, the Pentagon has a camera focused on every garbage can and traffic cone.

reply to post by GoodOlDave

All right, look, I'm not going to waste my time arguing over something so flipping obvious like how any camera near a helipad is going to be trained on the helipad and not a blank wall behind the helipad, nor am I going to argue how they should have trained a camera on the blank wall so they can satisfy the paranoid delusions of you conspiracy people. I ASKED you to back up the claim there were any additional cameras aimed at that specific location and you've pretty much done everythign you can to avoid having to answer the question. How about answering it now- what proof do you have that there were additional cameras trained on the location where the plane impacted other than simply quoting the mindless drivel Alex Jones and Dylan Avery are spoon feeding you?

Sheesh, according to you trusters, the Pentagon has a camera focused on every garbage can and traffic cone.

More drivel Dave and you still managed to get Alex Jones in again..

It was YOU that stated there was nothing worth filming on that side of the Pentagon...
I stated there was a helipad..
You know, people coming and going in helicopters and well worth keeping an eye on..
Now imagine how utterly STUPID it would be for the Government (or any company) to provide details of where all their security cameras are..

You're becoming a joke Dave..
You were proven wrong and just sprout more bull to cover it....