9/11: A Boeing 757 Struck the Pentagon

1. Where are the photos of parts of the plane that would have survived?

Appearantly this wasnt a DC8 then because no large pieces survived. 911review.com... 911review.com... And that was just crashing into the ground/car lot and not a stone building.......

reply to post by ULTIMA1 You'll find more here but haven't you been stating frequently that you already researched all this?

Originally posted by Pilgrum [You'll find more here but haven't you been stating frequently that you already researched all this?

Still waiting for a report with page or paragraph that shows any parts with matching numbers to the planes. [edit on 31-5-2008 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by Disclosed

Originally posted by ULTIMA1 Most of the evidence that show AA77 hitting the Pentagon has not been released. SO WE DO NOT KNOW IF AA77 HIT THE PENTAGON.

This is a very interesting quote from Roger. He says "Most of the evidence that shows AA77 hitting the Pentagon has not been released.". his words... That tells us a couple things:

1. There is evidence that shows AA77 hitting the building...it just hasnt been released yet.
2. MOST of the evidence has not been released. That implies that some evidence has already been released that shows AA77 hitting the Pentagon.

Otherwise....Roger would have said NO evidence has been released showing AA77 hitting the Pentagon. By saying "most evidence" has not been released....implies that some has already. Sounds like Roger is finally seeing the truth of what happened....and that the official accounts are indeed a correct assessment of what happened that day. [edit on 30-5-2008 by Disclosed]

Yes, it is actually worse than that. Putting it into standard form, Ultima1 is stating: There is evidence showing that AA77 hit the Pentagon. Most of the evidence has not been released. Therefore: We cannot know if AA77 hit the Pentagon. High school students are taught fallacious reasoning. Ultima1 never has never been exposed to logic and critical thinking otherwise he would never have have made such an illogical statement. Ultima1, here is my favorite book on critical thinking. If you have the courage to read it, I assure you that you will come back here and admit that you got it all wrong. Here it is: www.amazon.com...

Well, I am not one of the people who question whether planes actually crashed into any of the buildings specifically, I am however someone who questions other events within the September 11th "facts" that are there for the public. I have heard countless, and I do mean countless different variations on the story, from a Pentagon Colonel using a guided-missile to shoot the Pentagon, to a hologram in connection with the same said Colonel, to planned detonation charges in the Twin Towers, I have also heard that SEAL Team 6 were a part of it being that the "Saudi's" were "Saudi-American's" being that they were foreign-born American citizens that they "fit the profile" of looking like "terrorists". Who knows at this point. Needless to say, there are many various accounts of the story. Just like the "traffic accident" where 20 people were witnesses, you will get differing stories and accounts. My biggest question has always been in why Tower number 7 fell. It was not hit by a plane, nor was it hit by building debris. If you look at Google Earth, there you can see it was not close enough for building debris to have smashed into it, and there were buildings between it and the Twin Towers as well to act as a shield of sorts. [edit on 31-5-2008 by SpartanKingLeonidas]

Originally posted by SpartanKingLeonidas Well, I am not one of the people who question whether planes actually crashed into any of the buildings specifically, I am however someone who questions other events within the September 11th "facts" that are there for the public. I have heard countless, and I do mean countless different variations on the story, from a Pentagon Colonel using a guided-missile to shoot the Pentagon, to a hologram in connection with the same said Colonel, to planned detonation charges in the Twin Towers, I have also heard that SEAL Team 6 were a part of it being that the "Saudi's" were "Saudi-American's" being that they were foreign-born American citizens that they "fit the profile" of looking like "terrorists". Who knows at this point. Needless to say, there are many various accounts of the story. Just like the "traffic accident" where 20 people were witnesses, you will get differing stories and accounts. My biggest question has always been in why Tower number 7 fell. It was not hit by a plane, nor was it hit by building debris. If you look at Google Earth, there you can see it was not close enough for building debris to have smashed into it, and there were buildings between it and the Twin Towers as well to act as a shield of sorts. [edit on 31-5-2008 by SpartanKingLeonidas]

Just because a "question" is raised does not mean it is a valid question. And your claim that WTC 7 wasn't close enough to have been hit by debris is based on exactly what other than your impression? When "questions" are based on impressions that may not be valid, how should we treat the "question"?

reply to post by jthomas Simply put, first they would have been talking about Tower 7 and debris having hit it, and the news as well as online never once mentioned it. I found this interesting DVD on Amazon other ATS'ers might be interested in Pen tagon - History, Renovation, Rebuilding after 9/11, September 11th Memorial, Phoenix Project at America's Defense Department Headquarters [edit on 31-5-2008 by SpartanKingLeonidas]

Originally posted by SpartanKingLeonidas reply to post by jthomas

 

Simply put, first they would have been talking about Tower 7 and debris having hit it, and the news as well as online never once mentioned it.

That is just a supposition on your part and does not qualify as positive physical evidence.

Originally posted by jthomas

Originally posted by SpartanKingLeonidas reply to post by jthomas

 

Simply put, first they would have been talking about Tower 7 and debris having hit it, and the news as well as online never once mentioned it.

That is just a supposition on your part and does not qualify as positive physical evidence.

Thanks for your "perfect" arguement as well as assumption. You're obviously not a free-thinker.

reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas 'obviously not a free thinker' interesting statement....full of hogwash, but interesing nonetheless. Since this thread is about the Pentagon, I will not post a full on list of evidence about wtc7. However, Kingie, I would suggest you might want to do some research about WTC7 before you continue posting false statements about the damage that building suffered

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999 Appearantly this wasnt a DC8 then because no large pieces survived. 911review.com... 911review.com... And that was just crashing into the ground/car lot and not a stone building.......

Stunning. We should start a new thread. The US destroyed an old DC-8 as a practice run before the events in Sept 2001. Amazing what a combination of collision and ground fire can do to an aircraft. Also note this was not an accident that happened at near-to top speed.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1 Actually the only evidence released is the securty camera video that does not actually show anythig but a blur. There are some 80 other videos and a few thoused photos that have not been released along with the main reports.

You'd think that a person with your alleged training in criminal proceedings would know about these court rulings and what it says about whether or not the FBI, etc is even allowed, BY LAW to release any tapes: …due process ordinarily requires the government to return the confiscated property to its owner “once those proceedings have terminated or it is determined that the property is not related to or is otherwise not needed for those proceedings.” DeBellis v. Property Clerk of City of New York, 79 N.Y.2d 49, 57 (1992). www.oag.state.ny.us... Florida Statute 705.105 states that evidence becomes the property of the seizing law enforcement agency if the owner does not claim it within 60 days of the conclusion of the proceeding www.fdle.state.fl.us... Remember the Zapruder film? It wasn't released to the public for how many years again? It's because Time-Life didn't WANT to, and that's their right to do so. [edit on 31-5-2008 by Seymour Butz]

Originally posted by jthomas There is evidence showing that AA77 hit the Pentagon. Most of the evidence has not been released

Unless you can show actaul evidence that AA77 hit the Pentagon then you and other believers have (0) credability. And only post opinions and not facts.

Originally posted by Seymour Butz You'd think that a person with your alleged training in criminal proceedings would know about these court rulings and what it says about whether or not the FBI, etc is even allowed, BY LAW to release any tapes:

You would think anyone with basic intelligence would know what a FOIA request is and what infomration you can get. Also i guess you do not know or ignore the fact about the tapes from cameras on the Pentagon, the DoD gas station and DoT highway camera.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1 Unless you can show actaul evidence that AA77 hit the Pentagon then you and other believers have (0) credability. And only post opinions and not facts.

There has been tons of evidence, but truthers such as yourself refuse to believe it because it goes against your conspiracy theories. Covering your eyes and ears and going nyah nyah nyah doesnt change that fact. But...this is the US...and you can believe what you want. If you think holograms hit it, then that is your right. You can stand on a soapbox and preach whatever 911 religion you want.

oops...double post. My apologies. [edit on 31-5-2008 by Disclosed]

Originally posted by Disclosed There has been tons of evidence,

Thats what makes the beleivers such jokes (as you guys refer to me) I have yet to see tons of evindece that has been proven. If there is tons of actaul evidence i would love to see it. It should be easy for you to post it if there is so much, but be sure to post sources.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1 If there is tons of actaul evidence i would love to see it. It should be easy for you to post it if there is so much, but be sure to post sources.

there is this forum you should check out, Roger. Its at abovetopsecret.com. They have been posting information about the events of 9/11 for a number of years. You should log on there and read some of the posts. I believe they will answer your questions. You should sign up for a user account there too so you can contribute, or ask questions if you need.

Originally posted by Disclosed there is this forum you should check out, Roger.

Just as i thought, trolling again. You cannot post any evindece that AA77 hit the Pentagon.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1 You cannot post any evindece that AA77 hit the Pentagon.

the word is evidence, not evindece. There has already been a TON of posts on these forums showing you evidence about the Pentagon attack. It is not our fault that you are too scared or afraid to believe them...because they go against your story. I know some dont have sources immediately available (which should be when the NTSB and FBI release their final reports), but the evidence is already overwhelming. So there you have it, Roger. If you choose to believe there was not plane involved at the Pentagon, well thats up to you. Just realize that the facts and evidence will always prove you wrong. Dont get mad at us, we're just the messengers.