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

Originally posted by Merlin Lawndart
As others have said, I will need proof. There is no evidence that a plane hit the Pentagon. There are some supposed pictures of plane debris, none of it conclusively showing the pictures were taken at the Pentagon. There were at least 85 working cameras that day pointing at the Pentagon and not one video showing anything hitting the building, only the explosion. The movie National Security Alert Sensitive Information is a great documentary that focuses strictly on the Pentagon attack. I suggest everyone watch that film.

If you are going to brush off all existing photographic evidence with such thoughtless irreverence, then what magical proof could any of the pentagon footage possibly contain that you'd ever accept it without likewise brushing it off?

reply to post by GoodOlDave


i do get your point completely, however to say there was ANY evidence of a plane is ridiculous. there was no evidence and if there was i would love to see it. shanksville and pentagon = no plane. planes do not vaporize and planes (747 in paticular) would have taken out a massive chunk out of that wall.

it's quite obvious. they screwed themselves when they gave us this clip of a trail following what is CLEARLY not an airplane

reply to post by weedwhacker


Although this does seem to dispel the "myth" that they confiscated and haven't looked over/released the videos, how come none of it has been released?

It seems pretty unlikely to me that out of all that camera footage, only 1 caught sight of the plane.

So there is no plane footage simply because the FBI investigation "says" there is none?

reply to post by GoodOlDave


I thought we were done with this discussion long time ago. It was a missile, wasn't it? The hole in the wall of the pentagon was too small to conclude that a Boeing 747 went through including the wings. Where were the huge wings? Who found them in the cemetry? Where are the damaged wall photos due to the wings hitting the wall and broke off. Too many stinking dead rats..

reply to post by Hardstepah

there was no evidence and if there was i would love to see it.

I'm curious - how did you come to this conclusion and statement of fact? There are photos of both crash sites that show plane wreckage. That is evidence of a plane crash.

Doesn't everyone on this thread know that:
1. America was apparently the worst defended country in the world at the time, no fighters (ok 14), no SAM's, no intelligence, etc.
2. Cameras were nowhere to be found in and around the Pentagon complex.
3. Those cameras that were snuck in there by conspiracy theorists and Muslim terrorists luckily didn't work.
4. The American gov't apparently has no authority or motive to confiscate the known video evidence on the optical laser star wars drives that the footage was stored on, even though they admit that they did.
5. Eyewitness accounts of bombs in NY aren't credible (even though video and audio evidence supports them), but eyewitness accounts of huge airplanes invisible to the camera eye are, as long as they deal specifically with the Pentagon attack on 9/11.
6. Known operating limits of air speed and maneuverability as well as pilot experience do not apply to this same invisible yet visible jet.
7. Crime scenes are always immediately tampered with and evidence removed, at least when it comes to the Pentagon attack on 9/11.
8. An aircraft carrier could have fit in the hole in the Pentagon, in fact, it could have been an aircraft carrier that struck it, or its landing gear.
9. Common sense need not apply.
10. Michael Jackson and Elvis just flew a UFO to CIA headquarters, got out with a Reptilian Jesus figure and showed the future of mankind through a giant plasma bubble for all the world to see. Unfortunately, there are no cameras at CIA headquarters so nobody will ever see it.

reply to post by hooper


If you consider a missile to be a plane, that would make sense. But not everything that flies is an airplane. There are all sort of things that flies but not all of them are air planes. For example, drones, are they air planes also? Yes they are, you might say, but what if it is loaded with explosives? It is simply a flying, plane like, missile.

reply to post by budaruskie

1. America was apparently the worst defended country in the world at the time, no fighters (ok 14), no SAM's, no intelligence, etc.

Yes, America's defenses did not have the capacity to shoot down any or all of the passenger planes in the sky over the US in a 30 minute timeframe. Shame on us.

2. Cameras were nowhere to be found in and around the Pentagon complex.

There were plenty of cameras, just that until 9/11 no one ever theought of pointing one at an open piece of grass between the building and the highway.

3. Those cameras that were snuck in there by conspiracy theorists and Muslim terrorists luckily didn't work.

Huh?

4. The American gov't apparently has no authority or motive to confiscate the known video evidence on the optical laser star wars drives that the footage was stored on, even though they admit that they did.

Again....huh?

5. Eyewitness accounts of bombs in NY aren't credible (even though video and audio evidence supports them), but eyewitness accounts of huge airplanes invisible to the camera eye are. as long as they deal specifically with the Pentagon attack on 9/11.

No eyewitness accounts of bombs anywhere. Plenty of eyewitness accounts of planes.

6. Known operating limits of air speed and maneuverability as well as pilot experience do not apply to this same invisible yet visible jet.

The invisible jet that all those people saw crashing into the Pentagon? Oh, I forgot, they're all "in on it". Not all pilots are created equal.

7. Crime scenes are always immediately tampered with and evidence removed, at least when it comes to the Pentagon attack on 9/11.

They are when they are still rescue and recovery scenes.

8. An aircraft carrier could have fit in the hole in the Pentagon, in fact, it could have been an aircraft carrier that struck it, or its landing gear.

Yeah, but we know it was a plane because of all the people that saw it crash, the remains of the last passengers found at the crash site, the remains of the plane found at the crash site.

9. Common sense need not apply.

Ok, there I agree with you.

10. Michael Jackson and Elvis just flew a UFO to CIA headquarters, got out with a Reptilian Jesus figure and showed the future of mankind through a giant plasma bubble for all the world to see. Unfortunately, there are no cameras at CIA headquarters so nobody will ever see it.

I'll bet you I can find at least 10 people on the internet, many of them "experts" that will swear to that as a fact.

reply to post by notsoperfect

If you consider a missile to be a plane, that would make sense.

What would make sense?

But not everything that flies is an airplane.

OK.

There are all sort of things that flies but not all of them are air planes.

This is true, including, well....flies. But when someone says they saw an airplane I don't think they mean they saw an ICBM but use the phrases interchangably. Do you? Do you know what an airplane looks like?

For example, drones, are they air planes also?

Yes they are, why?

Yes they are, you might say, but what if it is loaded with explosives?

Its still an airplane, regardless of the cargo.

It is simply a flying, plane like, missile

Yeah, like, wow.

Not only every "conspiracy theory" web site, but every logical human being believes it was a plane that hit the Pentagon. It's not a conspiracy theory anymore.

But hey, to each their own.

How many cameras were there in and around the site of the plane crash?...80 something? Will they be releasing that footage? I hope they will soon and stop playing the "It's a matter of national security" card and get oin with it. It shouldn't be a problem if they have nothing to hide...unless it a USAF plane.

Originally posted by Hardstepah
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

i do get your point completely, however to say there was ANY evidence of a plane is ridiculous. there was no evidence and if there was i would love to see it.

No you don't, otherwise you'd have already followed the link to Dr. Legg's podcast. It's the whole reason why I started this thread. Laying out the evidence showing it was flight 77 that hit the Pentagon is why he made the podcast; he wants to get the point across that the 9/11 truth movement should be based upon taking the facts into consideration, and that means ALL the facts, not just those one or two sexy sounding cherry picked tidbits you want to hear.

Here's the direct link to his podcast. Don't be surprised if he covers evidence you were never aware of. The evidence was always there, it's just the case those con artists Alex Jones and Dylan Avery don't want to show it to you:

Link to Dr Legge's podcast

shanksville and pentagon = no plane. planes do not vaporize and planes (747 in paticular) would have taken out a massive chunk out of that wall.

The plane that hit the Pentagon didn't vaporize. It shattered like a mirror, leaving engine parts, pieces of fuselage, seats, and human remains littered throughout the area. Which one of those damned fool conspiracy web sites told you that it actually "vaporized", may I ask, 'cause someone fed you a bullsh*t sandwich with snow job dressing.

Originally posted by Hardstepah
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

i do get your point completely, however to say there was ANY evidence of a plane is ridiculous. there was no evidence and if there was i would love to see it. shanksville and pentagon = no plane. planes do not vaporize and planes (747 in paticular) would have taken out a massive chunk out of that wall.

it's quite obvious. they screwed themselves when they gave us this clip of a trail following what is CLEARLY not an airplane

For Pete's sake. You can say you reject the :-

Eyewitness testimony because ...............

The wreckage because...............

The radar records because...........

The Air Traffic Control records because............

The dna identified body parts and personal effects of AA 77 passengers and crew because..........

The flight data recorder data because..............

The phone calls from the flight because...............

but to claim there isn't "ANY" evidence is just silly and you can't even get the plane right.

Originally posted by notsoperfect
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

I thought we were done with this discussion long time ago.

Apparently not, since there are people out there who want to believe it was a missile/predator drone/UFO/whatever regardless of all the evidence showing that it was a passenjer jet. As far as I'm concerned the 100+ people who specifically saw that it was a passenger jet trumps all the make believe paranoia being put forth by Dylan Avery, Alex Jones, and that French crackpot who invented the whole "missile at the Pentagon" claim to begin with-

Eyewitness accounts of the Pentagon attack

Not that it matters, since if someone is of a mind that it's some grandiose conspiracy they'll no doubt believe all these poeple are secret gov't disinformation agents too. Heck, they can't even believe the guy who found the thermite at the WTC. Reality doesn't even remotely apply here anymore.

Al quaida used armour piercing box cutters on the pentagon. Its the only way they could take out the HQ of the greatest military power in the world. They used ordenary box cutters on the WTCs. Not bad going, considering that they were cave men.

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by budaruskie

 

1. America was apparently the worst defended country in the world at the time, no fighters (ok 14), no SAM's, no intelligence, etc.

Yes, America's defenses did not have the capacity to shoot down any or all of the passenger planes in the sky over the US in a 30 minute timeframe. Shame on us.

2. Cameras were nowhere to be found in and around the Pentagon complex.

There were plenty of cameras, just that until 9/11 no one ever theought of pointing one at an open piece of grass between the building and the highway.

3. Those cameras that were snuck in there by conspiracy theorists and Muslim terrorists luckily didn't work.

Huh?

4. The American gov't apparently has no authority or motive to confiscate the known video evidence on the optical laser star wars drives that the footage was stored on, even though they admit that they did.

Again....huh?

5. Eyewitness accounts of bombs in NY aren't credible (even though video and audio evidence supports them), but eyewitness accounts of huge airplanes invisible to the camera eye are. as long as they deal specifically with the Pentagon attack on 9/11.

No eyewitness accounts of bombs anywhere. Plenty of eyewitness accounts of planes.

6. Known operating limits of air speed and maneuverability as well as pilot experience do not apply to this same invisible yet visible jet.

The invisible jet that all those people saw crashing into the Pentagon? Oh, I forgot, they're all "in on it". Not all pilots are created equal.

7. Crime scenes are always immediately tampered with and evidence removed, at least when it comes to the Pentagon attack on 9/11.

They are when they are still rescue and recovery scenes.

8. An aircraft carrier could have fit in the hole in the Pentagon, in fact, it could have been an aircraft carrier that struck it, or its landing gear.

Yeah, but we know it was a plane because of all the people that saw it crash, the remains of the last passengers found at the crash site, the remains of the plane found at the crash site.

9. Common sense need not apply.

Ok, there I agree with you.

10. Michael Jackson and Elvis just flew a UFO to CIA headquarters, got out with a Reptilian Jesus figure and showed the future of mankind through a giant plasma bubble for all the world to see. Unfortunately, there are no cameras at CIA headquarters so nobody will ever see it.

I'll bet you I can find at least 10 people on the internet, many of them "experts" that will swear to that as a fact.

1. Total BS. The American military and its supporting industrial complex have the most advanced technology in the world and have been the leader in this area for generations. You are telling me that all of those weapon systems were brought from idea to reality, only to not ever be deployed. Oh, I see, just not deployed to protect the collective leadership of both the military, gov't, and military industrial complex, right. I guess there are no spies at CIA HQ either.
2. In my thread that all of you OS guys ran from, plenty of times it was proposed that there were no cameras, don't play stupid.
3. Yeah, its sounds ridiculous I agree. But somehow those cameras that supposedly didn't exist got there on those pictures. See my thread.
4. G.O.D. or Dave, however you want to call him, knows exactly what I'm talking about here. Again, see my thread.
5. No eyewitness accounts of bombs anywhere? Who is discounting the witnesses now hooper? Again, don't play stupid.
6. Pilots are not created equal, that's the point. Those who have a proven ability to fly, say it couldn't be done. I guess, they are all "in on the conspiracy". I see now that you clearly aren't playing dumb.
7. Total BS. Who were they rescuing when they backed up those dumptrucks full of dirt on the lawn within a few days? But, like everything else, all logic and precedence must be discarded when dealing with this event...in order to believe the OS.
8. Whatever. What kind of fire vaporizes entire planes but leaves human parts. Where are the human parts? Total BS! I asked you for this same evidence, well the cockpit evidence anyway, in the last thread...but miraculously you never showed any.
9. Obviously you agree with me on this, its the backbone of your story.
10. Yes, there are at least 10 crackpots out there that believe there are no cameras at CIA HQ.

reply to post by budaruskie

1. Total BS. The American military and its supporting industrial complex have the most advanced technology in the world and have been the leader in this area for generations. You are telling me that all of those weapon systems were brought from idea to reality, only to not ever be deployed. Oh, I see, just not deployed to protect the collective leadership of both the military, gov't, and military industrial complex, right. I guess there are no spies at CIA HQ either.

Ok, I've seen this syndrome before. Its the "uber government" syndrome. It allows its sufferer to imagine that the government is capable of anything that they can imagine. Its basically a mental tool that allows the user to kind of "color outside the lines" of reason and logic. Whenever the extrapolation of their bias (a reflection of their ego) reaches a logic obstacle they can always depend on this convenient tool to dissolve the obstacle without denting their bias. Its wonderful, its lighweight, requires no special skill to deploy and is untestable, therefore mentally indestructible.

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by budaruskie

 

1. Total BS. The American military and its supporting industrial complex have the most advanced technology in the world and have been the leader in this area for generations. You are telling me that all of those weapon systems were brought from idea to reality, only to not ever be deployed. Oh, I see, just not deployed to protect the collective leadership of both the military, gov't, and military industrial complex, right. I guess there are no spies at CIA HQ either.

Ok, I've seen this syndrome before. Its the "uber government" syndrome. It allows its sufferer to imagine that the government is capable of anything that they can imagine. Its basically a mental tool that allows the user to kind of "color outside the lines" of reason and logic. Whenever the extrapolation of their bias (a reflection of their ego) reaches a logic obstacle they can always depend on this convenient tool to dissolve the obstacle without denting their bias. Its wonderful, its lighweight, requires no special skill to deploy and is untestable, therefore mentally indestructible.

Let me get this straight. Believing that the Pentagon, D.C., and America in general would actually use the weapons systems that it spent billions if not trillions on creating is illogical...that's your story? I've seen this syndrome before, its the "head stuck up your ____ syndrome". Address the rest of the post, address the post I left you in my thread.

reply to post by budaruskie

Let me get this straight. Believing that the Pentagon, D.C., and America in general would actually use the weapons systems that it spent billions if not trillions on creating is illogical...that's your story?

Its not illogical, per se. It simply avoids logical examination. There's no need to investigate your assumption since in your worldview your assumption is without form or limits. It can adapt to any challenge because it has no foundational limits.

Your uber government can intercept and neutralize any moving object at a whim, and failure to do so is only confirmation that the system was nullified by the "powers that be" for nefarious purposes. And of course, this uber government, once established, can now move about all branches of the conspiracy; performing miracles, perverting witnesses, corrupting officials and manipulating common citizens into acts of murder and treason on a biblical scale.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by The Baby Seal Club
That's your quote from later on in the thread Dave. You DID put all truthers into one group.

Not all "Truthers" think that it was something else besides a plane that flew into the Pentagon. Truthers don't believe the OS put forth by the Govt; that 9/11 was a bolt-out-of-the-blue surprise attack upon the US by Muslim terrorists. And that, (the OS), we know is a lie.

All right, truthers don't believe the OS put forth by the gov't. What you're negelcting to mention is WHY you don't believe the OS put forth by the gov't. After all, when I hear eyewitness statements from fire fighters stating that fires were burning out of control in WTC 7 and they were causing bulging in the side of the building and that they knew from the poor condition of the building that it was going to come down, it tells me that the fires were at least doing something bad to the structure. I have to presume that you're not a stark raving lunatic who listens to voices in your head so someone is telling you that what he's saying is wrong. So, who was it?

*I* say it's from the paranoid nonsense being put out by those damned fool conspiracy web sites being run by college kids out of their dorm room. What do *you* say?

WTH? What are you talking about Dave? I didn't say anything about WTC7, your thread is about the Pentagon, and I didn't say anything about worshiping Loose Change.
What I said was that you made the comment that all truthers believe that it was a missile, or a drone, something else besides a plane. I said that is not true. Truthers have many different theories but they do have one thing in common and that is the idea that the OS is false and that there needs to be a new investigation.

Now to be fair, you are right that there are a lot of "damned fool conspiracy web sites" that do promote false or misleading information. These sites information is the exact opposite of respectable govt. information which has never misled or lied (Gulf of Tonkin, WMDs in Iraq, October Surprise, etc.).

In terms of your problem with Legge and truthers who don't agree with him on the pentagon. How hard is it to understand that thermite (and the WTC theory) are separate from the pentagon? I mean I'll listen all day to Mike Tyson explain to me how to box, but I won't listen to him tell me how to pick up women.