IT'S OFFICIAL: Even conspiracy web sites acknowledge it was flight 77 that hit the Pentagon

reply to post by hdutton


As Alfie1 correctly pointed out, that site (seems your favorite?) called "serendipity" is rife with errors, and upon a deep examination, has absolutely NO credibility. Its statements are mostly utter hogwash. I've had the misfortune of being directed to it, before. It is truly astonishing that such crap remains posted up on the Internet, and it continues to poison the well of understanding, with the junk it spews.

Like, this:

As the the author's statement about a "no-fly zone" above it. Your link shows a plane at some
distance from it, and not moving in it's direction.

Lack of understanding about matters involving aviation is at the heart of these misconceptions...whether innocent, or intentional. (In some cases, these "9/11 conspiracy" sites are intentionally deceptive, as it's big business, to them. They are charlatans and hucksters of the most vile and unethical sort....)...

There isn't any "No Fly Zone" over top of the Pentagon...not now, and not in 2001. Here is an image from an aviation Aeronautical Sectional Chart...this represents POST-9/11 airspace changes...which were actually minor. A 60-nautical mile radius "special use airspace" designation was added to the Washington, D.C. area. It encompasses a new ADIZ and FRZ (Air Defense Identification Zone, and Flight Restricted Zone).

This is IN ADDITION to the pre-existing "Class B Airspace" (the old "TCA", or Terminal Control Area) which is merely a requirement for positive ID, and ATC radio communication in order to properly enter it. The "Class B" is not ALL-inclusive, and VFR traffic is free to navigate around, above and beneath its environs. On the Chart, see the shaded blue arcs and circles? They are labeled with the altitudes they define. See, where there is:

100
25

OR,

100
SFC

That is the "top" of Class B airspace, at 10,000 feet MSL. The underneath is defined, in first example, at 2,500 feet. The other one, is to the surface.


The 60-nm radius "special use" applies to just enhanced regulations, increased awareness, and enforcement of actions on those who violate the rules.

Looking at this image:




There are TWO "Prohibited Areas"....both designated "P-56". One is P-56A, and the other, P-56B. The blue areas, with hash marks....in the D.C. area. The bigger one covers the Washington Mall area, from the Monument to the Lincoln Memorial, and includes the White House. The smaller round one is for the Naval Observatory, the Veeps' official residence. P-56 only extends vertically to 18,000 feet, where it stops.

(Another, irrelevant one, P-73 is located down South....it actually is there to cover George Washington's Mount Vernon estate...)

Here is a portion of the verbiage from the FARs published in 2009, RE: the special use requirements for entering the ADIZ and FRZ....it was newly enacted to preclude the many (innocent) errors committed by inexperienced Private Pilots:

Sec. 91.161 Special awareness training required for pilots flying under visual flight rules within a 60-nautical mile radius of the Washington, DC VOR/DME.

(a) Operations within a 60-nautical mile radius of the Washington, DC VOR/DME under visual flight rules (VFR). Except as provided under paragraph (e) of this section, no person may serve as a pilot in command or as second in command of an aircraft while flying within a 60-nautical mile radius of the DCA VOR/DME, under VFR, unless that pilot has completed Special Awareness Training and holds a certificate of training completion.
(b) Special Awareness Training. The Special Awareness Training consists of information to educate pilots about the procedures for flying in the Washington, DC area and, more generally, in other types of special use airspace. This free training is available on the FAA's Web site. Upon completion of the training, each person will need to print out a copy of the certificate of training completion.

Navigate to this site: www.skyvector.com... and you can also see version of that same (and other) charts online, with better clarity. There are ways to learn how to decipher the many symbols, too. Legends are printed on the end panels of the charts, and can be viewed online as well.

Here, is a pilots' guide (of sorts..one of many different versions) to help in orientation for first-time operators into DCA:



With the descriptive text that accompanied it:

www.faa.gov...

NOTE, on the diagram, the alignment of Runway 15/33. It is the shortest one, and northernmost on the airport property. (Runways are numbered, BTW, according to their magnetic alignment. Runway 33's magnetic "heading" is actually 333.4 degrees. Rounded to the nearest whole multiple of ten, and the final zero dropped, is the runway "number":



Because of its short length, Runway 15/33 is suitable only for smaller, commuter and regional jet types...most as an extra landing option, at busy times. Arrivals to 15, which will be almost directly overhead the Pentagon on final. Approaches to 33, that have to reject the landing (go-arounds) would necessarily proceed straight ahead, climbing to a safe altitude (usually 800 to 1,000 feet) before turning to return, and commence another landing approach.

Any questions??

reply to post by impressme


Quick question?

No plane crashed at Pentagon, and all those photos all over the internet of airplane parts prove absolutely nothing.

Are you seriously suggesting that the scraps from the scrap yard, where put there by unknown, rogue elements, without anyone, and I mean ANYONE seeing? Seriously?

And parts from an airplane dont prove anything? Go back to re-runs of sesame street kid....your only making yourself look really , really bad~

reply to post by Alfie1


Honestly I apologize because I do not mean to be coming across as though I am grasping for straws. I was just offering mere suggestions that came to mind merely two posts ago. When I am outside of this little box here typing about 9/11 it is the last thing on my mind. It's been done, and beaten to death.

I couldn't honestly, and I am not trying to be disrespectful to the lives lost and affecting by the events that took place on 9/11, care any less about this event that took place a decade ago, and I certainly am not interested in 'solid' evidence, or 'proof' that is, as I mentioned, only pathetically now being placed into mainstream media 10 years after the fact. No, because 10 year's wouldn't be enough time for anyone to polish out, create testimonials, evidence, or simply come up with the lies to fill in a story.

I suggested a missile fired, or planted bomb because everything about the US governments history that I have seen, or read about in history books, as non-US citizen gives my gut the sickening feeling of their involvement. There is in fact no way I wouldn't believe this. Now you can call me 'layman' or whatever other witty insult you can think of in trying to discredit me as I am going on my own personal perception from what I have seen, and witnessed, and that is fine because at the end of the day I still know the US government did it.

Airliner, or no Airliner, TNT placement, or per-structural weakening, no matter how many American's choose to ignore, or are simply too contempt to roll in the feces their government feeds them, they cannot take away all the inconsistencies, and proposed accounts of what took place on 9/11 that defy the laws of nature itself.

This is all I have to say on this 9/11 banter. The floor is yours, rebuttal away little sheep.

reply to post by loagun


You seem to me to be saying that you can't actually come up with any evidence that stands up but you just know in your "gut" that the US gov. was involved.

Well, I may be a sheep, as you say, but I need something more substantial than your gut instinct and I haven't seen it yet.

This whole pathetic screed has been an attempt at legitimizing their case in support of the official lie. A mutual admiration society. It's hard to pick out the worst of their players, but the one who claims to have done everything but fly with the Wright bros.,annoys me the most. If we are as stupid as he says, why does he bother?

reply to post by weedwhacker


I would like to politely disagree with a couple points you made. First, just because a website has some pieces of information that are fudged or incorrect, should not discredit the entire website, especially if some information is correct. I have not gone through most of the things on serendipity, but they do have a few things that actually are enlightening, such as this:
www.serendipity.li...
Secondly, you said that these conspiracy sites are just there for big business. I have been researching 9/11 truth for over 4 years and have not spent one dime on anything related to 9/11 truth. Everything I found was available for free. Now, that isn't to say others haven't spent and people aren't making money off of it because that would be silly, but most are not in it for the money. All 9/11 truth films are available free of charge on the internet and people like Alex Jones carry no copy right infringements. They actually tell people to copy their DVD's and give them to people. There are people who make T-shirts and bumper stickers, but not much more than that.
The big business of 9/11 was the attacks themselves, not the truth movement. Big business is war. Big business is the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan. Building guns, ammo, tanks, helicopters, fueling those vehicles, hummers, strykers, bombs, missiles, jets, etc. That, is big business. The truth movement can't even compare to the business of war. People have made billions off the wars. Larry Silverstein is a good start. Small groups of 'businessmen' are sending our family, friends, brothers and sisters off to die merely for their profits and control grid based on events that they planned. Meanwhile, they get ready for their weekly manicures and eat their $1000 meals. All the while George Bush is making jokes about all the deaths, but what can you expect from a Skull and Bonesmen?
From the snakes mouth himself:
www.youtube.com...
Apparently, the genocide of people in the Middle East and murder of Americans is funny:
www.youtube.com...
If all that isn't insulting enough, Bush calls it a "freedom operation" and "Operation Iraqi Freedom". Are these people "free"?
WARNING GRAPHIC IMAGES









Back in some of the ancient courts of Rome I think it was, the first thing they would look at when investigating a crime is, who is to gain? Who is to profit from this? Truthers are not profiting from the things I posted above, CEO's and businessmen are.

reply to post by Merlin Lawndart

Secondly, you said that these conspiracy sites are just there for big business. I have been researching 9/11 truth for over 4 years and have not spent one dime on anything related to 9/11 truth. Everything I found was available for free. Now, that isn't to say others haven't spent and people aren't making money off of it because that would be silly, but most are not in it for the money

You do understand that a website can sell advertising space based on the number of persons that access the site?

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by Merlin Lawndart

 

Secondly, you said that these conspiracy sites are just there for big business. I have been researching 9/11 truth for over 4 years and have not spent one dime on anything related to 9/11 truth. Everything I found was available for free. Now, that isn't to say others haven't spent and people aren't making money off of it because that would be silly, but most are not in it for the money

You do understand that a website can sell advertising space based on the number of persons that access the site?

Yes

reply to post by dillweed


We are supposed to be impressed by your "experts", yet you are offended by someone with extensive knowledge, that disagrees with you.... That is the stance I would expect a person of your intellect would take.

It is amazing how truthers will use their extensive (hearsay) knowledge to argue with someone with FIRST HAND knowledge of the subject..

reply to post by Merlin Lawndart


Then why did you give that lengthy explanation of how they are basically "non profit"???

That is 99% of the money grab - web traffic!!

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
From 911blogger.com...as you recall, Dr. Legge is one of the people who co-authored the "Thermitidc material found in the WTC dust" report...

Dr Frank Legge on Visibility 9-11: Mounting Evidence Shows Boeing 757-200 Impact with Pentagon Probable

"In this lengthy and detailed discussion Dr Legge is careful to lay out clearly his way of thinking on the Pentagon issue and why it is so important to the 9/11 Truth Movement not to make unsupported claims about the events there. Legge looks at this issue from a purely scientific perspective and is only interested in what he can prove to be true based on hard evidence. It is clear to Legge and to the vast majority of scientists who have studied the issue that while the Pentagon is a mystery to a degree, it is most likely that AA Flight 77, a Boeing 757-200 did hit the building based on the physical evidence available.

We now have the correctly decoded digital flight data from Flight 77 and it’s time for more people to get behind the call to reason on the Pentagon issue leading up to the tenth anniversary of the 9/11 Attacks! There is nothing wrong with supporting the parts of the “official story” of 9/11 that are most likely true. The team at Visibility 9-11 believe, as does Dr legge that it actually helps the interested public and especially the scientific community to see us as reasoned and balanced truth advocates when we do exactly that.
Lets stop being what we are labeled as “conspiracy theorist’s” and become “conspiracy factulist’s”!"

Link to 911blogger article

How do you trusters who explicitely trust everything these conspiracy web sites are putting out explain this?

what does the bold statement mean?

reply to post by Resurrectio
You need to get a life. Common sense is what I rely on and it's annoying to me that this twit finds it necessary to demean others lack of understanding. Common sense tells me that the official story is full of lies. Common sense tells me that anyone who supports it has an ulterior motive.

Originally posted by Resurrectio
reply to post by Merlin Lawndart

 

Then why did you give that lengthy explanation of how they are basically "non profit"???

That is 99% of the money grab - web traffic!!

Then apparently the rest of what I said went completely over your head. The overwhelming majority of truthers are not profiting at all! Even given the ones that are profiting, it does not even compare to how much people are making off of the wars. That is the bottom line.

reply to post by dillweed


That is the single most ignorant paragraph I have ever read. That was like a child lying on his back and flailing his arms in a store.. Way to go.. When I didn't think I could have less respect for truthers... YOU, single handed were able to drop to a new low..

Lets get this straight ... because you feel that the OS is a lie.. EVERYONE must agree with you, or they have an "hidden motive".. Doesn't that sound ignorant to you?

I don't believe ALL of the OS... I am sure most don't... Unlike yourself, I am intelligent enough, to separate the parts I do believe and the parts I don't... It must be easy to close your eyes and scream "I DONT BELIEVE ANY OF IT"

I was there... I saw the plane hit the pentagon.. nothing you can say or do will change sept. 11th for me.. Your insistence and temper tantrum tactics, make me think it is you that has the motive..

I am a single father of 3 from Michigan.. Do I fit a mold of a paid agent? Is the hockey company I work for a Govt. cover? Do I contact my Govt. handler through my sons xbox? Maybe I talk to my handler when I am snowboarding or ice fishing??? Or.... maybe I am just an average Joe. or Shaun!


The true definition of Irony: Your screen name is Dillweed .. Now that's irony!

Originally posted by Resurrectio
reply to post by dillweed

 

That is the single most ignorant paragraph I have ever read. That was like a child lying on his back and flailing his arms in a store.. Way to go.. When I didn't think I could have less respect for truthers... YOU, single handed were able to drop to a new low..

Lets get this straight ... because you feel that the OS is a lie.. EVERYONE must agree with you, or they have an "hidden motive".. Doesn't that sound ignorant to you?

I don't believe ALL of the OS... I am sure most don't... Unlike yourself, I am intelligent enough, to separate the parts I do believe and the parts I don't... It must be easy to close your eyes and scream "I DONT BELIEVE ANY OF IT"

I was there... I saw the plane hit the pentagon.. nothing you can say or do will change sept. 11th for me.. Your insistence and temper tantrum tactics, make me think it is you that has the motive..

I am a single father of 3 from Michigan.. Do I fit a mold of a paid agent? Is the hockey company I work for a Govt. cover? Do I contact my Govt. handler through my sons xbox? Maybe I talk to my handler when I am snowboarding or ice fishing??? Or.... maybe I am just an average Joe. or Shaun!


The true definition of Irony: Your screen name is Dillweed .. Now that's irony!

edit on 2/9/2011 by Resurrectio because: (no reason given)

No you were not there, and you are a kid aged 17 years old and living just down the road from me. I know your dad.

Look. Come with evidence. What you have there is not evidence. You unlike many here simply hide behind your handle. You can say whatever you like. Just like I could if that is the way I wanted to post. What you need to do is make an argument based on evidence that can stand up on its own legs and doesn't rely on you spouting off about your personal attributes we are expected to believe make you wholly convincing as an eye witness.

As I have posted above in two posts on this thread. Not only the evidence I have shown but also the fundamentally bad so bad its awful so called 'official findings' of Legge show him up to be a total fraud. He is as I posted and for the reason I posted either a charalatan or shill.

You and other posters like you attacking people who present good evidence in their arguments are totally unbelievable. If the best contribution you can make to support the patently fraudulent Dr Legge PDF is to attack others on the basis your credentials are under your fictitious name you must accept you yourself come off as a government shill, someone bent on obfuscation. You want to stop others from coming to the only rational reasonable conclusion one can from the total evidence available, and that is that whatever hit the Pentagon on that day certainly was no flight 77.

reply to post by Tallone


look.. Between the 2 of us, I am the only one that CAN produce any evidence.. All you can do is regurgitate "facts" you have swallowed from "truther" sites!

I worked for Blackboard.com .. Our office was in the golden triangle of DC. 19th and L. I drove that route every day for 6years... I was there.. I saw it.. So did 2 others with me.. I dont need to prove anything to you.. NOTHING!

I know what I saw, and to have some internet detective tell me what my Sept. 11th was or wasn't is laughable and pathetic!

If you search google images of the pentagon 9/11 you'll see a pic of a gray "man van" aka mini van with the drivers door open.. That was mine! We were standing about 20 ft behind it talking to a group of people.. I was able to find it a year or so ago, when I posted here on the same subject.. It doesn't seem to be as easy to locate today..

We saw it.. Period! If you don't believe that... so what? Do you think I expected you to? Do I think anything will ever be enough proof for you? Not a chance!

This is a fact: All of you internet detectives would be 100% disappointed to find out the OS was true.. Heart broken.. Don't lie and say other wise.. You would feel like you lost "the game"...

With that in mind, ask yourself, are you truly searching for truth? Or simply emotionally involved now?

A true American would be relieved to find out the OS was accurate...

This is where you will tell me how the OS (stinks) (smells) (has more holes than swiss cheese) and many more catch phrases that have been regurgitated by Authors, used to suck in the mindless net detectives.. Which might I add, seems to be working well.

Then, you'll point out how common sense only applies if you doubt the OS and a ton more mindless drivel, that has been used up.

If you would like my name U2U me and I will give it to you.. And I will give you my intelli search print out of my addresses and employment..

Would any of this mean anything to you? Nope!! Your only calling my bluff, as if I was bluffing.. If I could prove to you my exact location that day, you would then accuse me of being an agent, or delusional.. Admit it, you have far to much invested in denying a plane hit the Pentagon.

reply to post by Tallone


You have accomplished no such thing:

As I have posted above in two posts on this thread. Not only the evidence I have shown but also the fundamentally bad so bad its awful so called 'official findings' of Legge show him up to be a total fraud.

I went back and read your post on page #11...wherein you call Dr. Legge's paper an "opinion piece". (??)

It is a 15-page PDF document, with a great deal of corroborating EVIDENCE and FACTS....and includes a thorough contribution of facts from the more accurate (and additional last seconds) of the SSFDR decode.

You are just hand-waving ineffectually. for some as yet unknown personal agenda, it would seem. Your "criticism" of the paper is vague, and nonspecific...which is a rather telling aspect of the failure to properly debate its conclusions.

This is a fairly typical tactic seen, by "deniers" of facts regarding events of 9/11.

reply to post by Whereweheaded

Are you seriously suggesting that the scraps from the scrap yard, where put there by unknown, rogue elements, without anyone, and I mean ANYONE seeing? Seriously?

Absolutely not, I am certain that those depositing the debris knew exactly who they were and what debris went where. No confusion at all. You should stay away from G_O_D_’s damn fool’s conspiracy OS websites.

Originally posted by Resurrectio
reply to post by dillweed

 

That is the single most ignorant paragraph I have ever read. That was like a child lying on his back and flailing his arms in a store.. Way to go.. When I didn't think I could have less respect for truthers... YOU, single handed were able to drop to a new low..

Lets get this straight ... because you feel that the OS is a lie.. EVERYONE must agree with you, or they have an "hidden motive".. Doesn't that sound ignorant to you?

I don't believe ALL of the OS... I am sure most don't... Unlike yourself, I am intelligent enough, to separate the parts I do believe and the parts I don't... It must be easy to close your eyes and scream "I DONT BELIEVE ANY OF IT"

I was there... I saw the plane hit the pentagon.. nothing you can say or do will change sept. 11th for me.. Your insistence and temper tantrum tactics, make me think it is you that has the motive..

I am a single father of 3 from Michigan.. Do I fit a mold of a paid agent? Is the hockey company I work for a Govt. cover? Do I contact my Govt. handler through my sons xbox? Maybe I talk to my handler when I am snowboarding or ice fishing??? Or.... maybe I am just an average Joe. or Shaun!


The true definition of Irony: Your screen name is Dillweed .. Now that's irony!

edit on 2/9/2011 by Resurrectio because: (no reason given)

I'm confused by your admission above. You don't believe all the OS? So you think certain parts of it are a lie? Which ones? If you don't mind my asking?

I am curious because OS people keep on saying 'the evidence' and 'the evidence shows' and, you know... so how can you have been shown 'the evidence' of the OS and not just see That (ALL OF IT) as the evidence of the OS and simply accept it as the people who believe the OS believe a 757 hit the Pentagon because there was a hole, plane parts and flight recorder data?

But of course you were there so I'm betting you're good on the plane thing, but what bothers you about the rest of the OS? What don't you believe about it?

Frankly, I find it hard to believe someone, who doesn't, by his own admission, believe all aspects of the OS would be so upset with others who also don't believe all aspects of it (to various degrees).

Or are you just talking about the Pentagon plane in that way? Are you saying you AGREE with some things that have been said in doubt of the OS? What are they? For if you don't believe it all then you must share those particular doubting aspects with some "truthers" or with just those people who don't know and wonder and want to really know exactly what did happen.

Cheers

reply to post by NWOwned


I'd like to talk a bit more about "the evidence".

A Scenario:

Let's say you're a kid, you're at home minding your little brother and you're playing soccer with him in the house, which you were told repeatedly not to do and you know, but well, too bad! You go for a goal kick in the living room, your little bro saves but deflects the ball to his right with his hand, the ball veers off near the fireplace, over the loveseat, hits the window ledge and then that table in the corner with the expensive Ming vase on it. The vase wavers, rocks and then falls to the hardwood floor in pieces. You and your little bro both lunge but fail to catch it. The noise scares the cat who had been sitting in the open window looking out. She darts to the safety of the kitchen etc.

Now your mom is out grocery shopping and should be home any minute. You were told not to play ball in the house and neither you nor your little brother want the wrath of mom etc. You have to think quick! You grab the cat and your digital camera, you place the cat on the floor, she sniffs the pieces, just then, you snap a few shots!!. You then sweep the pieces up into a little pile you place the cat back in the window and you and your bro go upstairs to play on the computer and wait for mom to arrive.

Twenty minutes later mom shows up, puts the bags on the kitchen table, goes into the living room, notices the pile of vase shards and quickly calls out your name... you boys go downstairs and there she is wanting an explanation and SO you give it to her.

"Oh yeah, well me and Jimmy were UPSTAIRS watching George Bush read a goat story to some kids on 911 on Youtube, and then we heard a meow and a rumble and a crash and we came downstairs, I had my camera, (shows her the pics) and I saw that the cat had *somehow* left the window ledge too abruptly, lost her footing maybe, lost her traction, slipped and jumped for the table, hitting the vase and crashing it to the floor!!"

Mom examines "the evidence."

Mom sees a broken vase, pics of the cat near the vase and a story from 2 PEOPLE that seems to indicate that the CAT BROKE THE VASE. And well, that's right isn't it? The cat did break the vase after all right? I mean, that's what 'the evidence' shows!!

Case Closed. Nothing more to see here...

---

I'd really like those who support the OS and are always going on about 'the evidence' to try and take this little scenario example to heart. It certainly IS possible that all that 'evidence' may not be what it seems. But to fail to acknowledge this simple potential loophole in the presentation of 'the evidence', is well, astounding to me.

And I'm not even talking about 911, apart from 911 even, not everything presented as evidence, or 'the evidence' of this or that is free of manipulation by virtue of the fact that it is, 'the evidence'.

I'd really like the OS people to dig for the evidence, to dig for the truth, to find out what really happened, and if it happened the way 'the evidence' says it did then great, but I want them to be doing that while admitting that Mom had 'evidence' to go on too when she got home and wanted to know what really happened and she ended up blaming the CAT. (Oh she probably had her nagging doubts about that though but how could she prove the kids or anyone else did it? Difficult without waterboarding lol. It would bother her for nearly a decade, that vase.)

Cheers