Leaked: 911 Anniversary Pentagon Hit With Cruise Missle

Threads like these are always interesting,

you can start to spot the serious "truthers" who ask very serious questions about 9/11 and really do actually know their stuff from the people who just believe everything that the "9/11 truth movement" spoon feeds them.

Threads like this say much more about specific truthers than it does about 9/11.

its like that hoax video of WTC-7 a very well known hoax and ever 6 months or so it pops up with people claiming its some smoking gun. When if you really knew your topic you would knot it was a hoax, same with this, anyone on either side of the debate knows the hoax's.

Its a hoax guys, get over it.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


While I don't think that 9/11 was a grand conspiracy I think there is enough evidence that we are not getting the entire truth.

Especially in regards to the Pentagon hit. I find it very doubtful due to the impact point, and the released video, that anyone could logically assume that it was a plane that did that. This would lead us to wonder why it is being covered up.

Its not because the government was in on it but perhaps because the terrorists may have also had access to missiles that were fired off that day but the government found it easier to lie about them all being planes rather than admitting their epic failure of losing control of weapons or not finding them or whatever.

I have very little doubts that the government was caught with their pants down on this whole affair and all the cover-ups we are seeing is a result of that, not because they were the perpetrators of it.

reply to post by Spookybelle


which leaves,,
1.how do u go from,, dinamite vests too cruise tech?,,,mercs?
2.Cia and Pentagon where in a heated battle,,,Cia won,,,the batlle,, but will the Pentagon, retaliate,,if true???
of course pure spec. ulation on my part.
too much like a palace fued.

BobAthome
reply to post by Spookybelle

 

which leaves,,
1.how do u go from,, dinamite vests too cruise tech?,,,mercs?
2.Cia and Pentagon where in a heated battle,,,Cia won,,,the batlle,, but will the Pentagon, retaliate,,if true???
of course pure spec. ulation on my part.
too much like a palace fued.

Well I know politics fairly well and I know that everything politicians do is based on risk v. reward.

The amount of reward gained from 9/11 compared to the amount of risk is not even comparable. You'd expect an event like 9/11 to issue in a new era of society and other than longer lines at the airport and some more rules we need to follow, there hasn't been anything that would qualify an event of that magnitude.

Sure we have the Patriot Act now, and the whole terrorism issue but all of that could have been done without 9/11. We still could have slipped the NDAA in somewhere and I can't fathom any politician attempting something so risky without one helluva payoff at the end.

Hell, Bush spends his days on the golf course now and the occasional trip to Africa. Hardly what you would expect from someone pulling of the worlds largest false flag in the history of mankind.

Everything about 9/11 and America's response just oozes reactionary. You look at the mindsets of the people Bush surrounded himself with and you would expect the response the gave to 9/11. If they were actually controlling things and doing this on purpose we would be seeing something far different happening in the world and none of them would include giving power to the democrats and Obama.

We would be living in an alternate reality right now.

Its just not plausible that they set this up no matter how you look at it.

Spookybelle


I have no problem believing the government puts out false flags but you need to be realistic at some point. Nixon couldn't get away with a couple guys breaking into an office and Johnson couldn't put a lid on the release of the Pentagon Papers or the government couldn't keep hidden NSA spying but we are expected to believe that the most complicated false flag in history was pulled off with nothing going wrong and no Snowden's lurking about anywhere?

Add the unbelievable odds of this ever working to the fact that something much less detail orientated would have worked just as well and you have to come to the conclusion that it probably is crazy enough to be legit, even if we can't explain everything about it.

Do yourself a favor and put yourself in this scenario. Obama and cia approach you and ask you to devise a false flag that will allow him to institute martial law nationwide. Come up with your best plans and see how complicated they actually are.

Are you going to come up with a plan that is so complicated that hundreds of people need to be involved and the chances of something going wrong are enormous or are you going to go with the simplest method with as few people involved as possible?

Would you set up one large attack to give the perception that the US is being attacked and therefore martial law is required or would you find thousands of people and pay them all off to hold violent Tea Party rallies and constantly threaten the government forcing the president to declare martial law?

Because of the pyramidal hierarchy of government and all institutions, information works on a need to know basis.
Many people can be involved in something and not even have a clue as to what the CEO's plans are.
A few people in very important strategic places can achieve great deceptions, simply by controlling the flow of information. 911 was a wake up call to the power of the internet as a conduit for uncontrolled information flow.
Which leads us where we are now, calls for internet censorship. 911 was used to get the laws in place ready for when they finally do declare martial law with no doubt another grand atrocity.
They did it first at Oklahoma. 911 wasnt really anything new.
The plan isnt complicated and neither are many of the big players, which is why the truth will out.

Spookybelle


Sure we have the Patriot Act now, and the whole terrorism issue but all of that could have been done without 9/11. We still could have slipped the NDAA in somewhere and I can't fathom any politician attempting something so risky without one helluva payoff at the end.

No, without 911 there would be no patriot act or "war on terror". Its classic problem reaction solution.
The people wouldnt have accepted the solution without the PERCEIVED problem.

reply to post by Spookybelle


"none of them would include giving power to the democrats and Obama. " maybe too pay for there parties sins.?against the people.

the2ofusr1
reply to post by eso322

 

To bad they won't release all the other vid's surrounding the Pentagon but I would imagine the cat would really be out of the bag and maybe they may have to account for all the billions that went missing prior to 911 .

This is my point, too. It is obvious to me there is something on these videos or they would have just released them. A veteran I have seen both plane crash and missile hits. This looked like missile.. My friend lived less than a block from park in Colorado Springs when flight went down there. It was terrible. Even then there were allot of body parts. I don't remember hearing much about bodies or parts collected at Pentagon.

What did they say about that I don't remember. I just have real problem with video at Pentagon, if you been there you know there are cameras everywhere. For that matter just check the flight path in there with Google and check all the places where there should be cameras. They confiscated allot of video why not release it unless in fact it shows a missile and not a plane.

The plane that crashed in Colorado came down straight into ground. Even then there was wreckage. I don't know there is allot of doubt about the Pentagon for me...

The Bot

reply to post by dlbott


"don't remember hearing much about bodies or parts collected at Pentagon. " neither do eye,, but i do remember a Rummy fell a .

dlbott
I don't remember hearing much about bodies or parts collected at Pentagon.

WARNING - GRAPHIC CONTENT!! This should put you off your lunch then

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul



with all due respect for the dead,,why do you include

"Photo of Fireman Danny Suhr on 9/11/01."
when that is new york firefighters are they not?

may they rest in peace.

this is about a JET LINER'S body count. at the Pentagon,, or am i missing something?
respecfully.

reply to post by OneManArmy


I understand your view but your missing the larger picture.

That larger picture is that there is no need for overt grand control when they can do it all behind the scenes. Basically, if they have that much power, they've already achieved their goals.

Subjugation of hundreds of millions of people is not only impossible, its unwise. No ruling power has ever been able to maintain overt control of that many people do to any number of factors. The Chinese have a large number but its all one group with similar beliefs. America is not China and anyone looking to control multiple groups through force will fail.

The Romans couldn't do it, Genghis Khan couldn't do it, Charlamagne couldn't do it, the Soviet Union couldn't do it, its frankly not possible.

The only way to manipulate people is if they do not know they are being manipulated. What will instituting martial law do other than piss a lot of people off and make them fight back? There's no way you could ever have enough people on your side to enforce any policy you wanted.

Basically, the entire premise of why the government would enact a 9/11 event is false, therefore by extension, the conspiracy itself is false.

BobAthome
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

this is about a JET LINER'S body count. at the Pentagon,, or am i missing something?
respecfully.

Yes - you are evidently missing the ability to search for "pentagon" on that page - there are 3 rather gruesome photos.

OneManArmy

Spookybelle


Sure we have the Patriot Act now, and the whole terrorism issue but all of that could have been done without 9/11. We still could have slipped the NDAA in somewhere and I can't fathom any politician attempting something so risky without one helluva payoff at the end.

No, without 911 there would be no patriot act or "war on terror". Its classic problem reaction solution.
The people wouldnt have accepted the solution without the PERCEIVED problem.

Possibly but you certainly did not need something as complicated as 9/11 to get those programs. A single person committing a terrorist act would have been justification for that. Another timothy McVeigh would have given them ample reason and there's far less risk then what they are accused of pulling off.

reply to post by Spookybelle


That is merely your opinion. The PNAC report made by those that were in actually in power at the time even claims that an event like Pearl Harbor would have needed to take place in order to reach certain goals, and it happened.

Your opinion means nothing and it also is rubbish.

reply to post by Spookybelle


well there was gold ,mentioned,, and some files at # 3.
enron???files???

***ATTENTION***

Allow me to remind members that civility and decorum is EXPECTED within all forums of ATS. Be it the HOAX forum or any other.

Please keep your comments regarding other members to yourselves and discuss the TOPIC.

Further violations will result in posting bans.

~Tenth
ATS Super Moderator

reply to post by TheNewSense


Yes it is just my opinion and no more valid than anyone else's but you can't discount my theory as being plausible.

And I think that if you are crediting a government that can't even get a website to run properly or to hide some snooping activity to pull off the greatest false flag ever that you may be giving them much more credit than they actually deserve.

The risk of failure involved in this was so great that I doubt even the terrorists themselves gave it much chance of succeeding but I guess if you want to believe that theory then that is your right.

Not to say they didn't have the motivation to do it but I highly doubt they had the skill necessary.

reply to post by Spookybelle

Not to say they didn't have the motivation to do it but I highly doubt they had the skill necessary.

Did you not read my post? Are you not aware of PNAC? How can you say they had no motivation when the PNAC report basically lays out their motivation and what they needed to make their plans happen, namely an attack on the scale of Pearl Harbor.

Maybe SkepticOverlord can comment on why this crappy low res compressed footage was in this case allowed to determine that a missile was fake, when normally it is not seen as valid evidence by him when such footage is used to prove that a plane is fake.

I await your answer, oh SkepticOverlord.