JoeR

thats big...cant read now though <_< but id like to stay with my missle or small military jet theory [whistle]

nice find buck'o [cheers]

Thanks for clearing that up.

Ok, guys you can close this website now. This guy has explained it all fully.

No need for any further research. [crylol]

mikewilson

this can be found elsewhere in this forum

bestandworst911

Don't miss the point ... just because it looks as if 77 did hit the pentagon doesn't go against 911 truth

e.g. why did it hit where it hit? and who got killed there and why? ... we already know about robot aircraft

Don't stop looking for the truth, keep reading, there are many many other more informed movies than loosechange


http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=5589099104255077250

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-6708190071483512003

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3498980438587461603

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4...itics+of+9%2F11

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=2601232339745819805

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=473989504967756082

Joel's work is definitely worth review. A little hasty maybe and written in reaction as opposed to a personal search.

The key is, IF it is right - how do we move beyond it and what should the focus of the future Pentagon work be?

The Pentagon isn't going to go away and finding a plane at the scene is NOT capitulating to the official story.

I feel we should plan now and be prepared to move forward with a rational presentation that contributes to the overall debunking of the official story in the big picture.

Ideas?

"Finding a plane at the scene"! :D

http://KenJenkins

MikeRuppert

DavidRayGriffin

look at Ken Jenkins, Mike Ruppert and David Ray Griffin

Quote them.

You have to look at more than one film and read more than one website to make an informed opinion reply once you have had time to have a good look at 77 related link on this website

JoeR website

This animation i came across in the forum also seems to support the site

MikeWilson

can you consider that there could be the slightest possibility that 77 really did hit?

One certainty is that there were an enormous number of coincidences that happened in order for it to hit where it hit and nowhere else (not forgetting the extraordinary manoeuvre that it made before hitting)

Show us an American Airlines 757 hitting the pentagon, until then its spinning wheels.

The only clear video we have from a govt agency of American 77 does NOT show the 757 hitting the pentagon or striking down the light poles.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzR-q0ijbV0

Two points: the scope of what these guys discuss goes way beyond just 77 which is the subject of this part of this forum.

I will try to summarise several hours of video here anyway...

911 was a highly complex operation that had been extensively preplanned and coordinated to ensure maximum effect

the principle motivation was to cause a "pearl harbour" type event to terrorise public opinion to allow the government to carry out the Afghanistan and Iraq wars and probably future wars

the reasons for these wars is to ensure world domination and control of oil, it also allows the government to completely consolidate its control of the american public eg patroit acts etc...

this strategy has been developed in detail over many years


This is an extremely short summary I suggest maybe try to look at one of the sites I have linked to before rejecting this out of hand.

There are too many anomalies. For one thing, the light pole damage is fake. You might want to look at that simulation again. It's got some pretty serious flaws.

I agree completely with your post.

I wont be convinced that an American Airlines 757 hit the pentagon or the light poles till i see a clear video and that video has been independently analyzed combined with an explanation from the NTSB for the FDR conflicts. So far the information we have been provided by a govt agency shows AA77 too high to hit the light poles and unlikely it struck the pentagon.

It actually looks more like a bombing run with some type of MOAB which agrees with your above post, the physical damage, and the FDR.

If everything you believe about 911 truth completely depends on a missile/global hawk or whatever hitting the pentagon then go ahead, whatever is good for you.

I am prepared to imagine that maybe 77 did hit?

Look at the links ... this does NOT mean that I think 911 was done by Osama

I dont "believe" anything. Im telling you what the facts represent.

I have no idea what hit.. and neither do you or anyone else here.

If you want to form a "belief" based on what people tell you, you are certainly entitiled.

I'm merely suggesting another possiblity and trying to back it up a little.

Personally I am

another possibility suggested by other sources.

Here is some stuff I found interesting maybe you will too?

From http://www.oilempire.us/remote.html#empty


At least among those with a mind for such things, it's fairly well-remembered that on September 10, 2001, Donald Rumsfeld made the shocking announcement that the Pentagon "couldn't track" $2.3 trillion of its transactions. "Iroquois" observes, "What's interesting to me is that he made his press release on a Monday. In DC, I always see bad news given on a Friday, usually late in the afternoon on Friday. The exception, of course, would be when someone happens to know that there is a far bigger story coming out."
And we know that Flight 77, allegedly piloted by an incompetent, made an aerobatic, spiralling descent over Washington, effecting a 270-degree turn to strike the Pentagon from a western approach at ground level. The side struck was the only one with an exterior wall hardened against attack, and was relatively empty while renovation continued.
Relatively. The unfortunate construction workers perished outside, but who were the expendables within?

From The Pittsburg Post Gazette, December 20, 2001: "One Army office in the Pentagon lost 34 of its 65 employees in the attack. Most of those killed in the office, called Resource Services Washington, were civilian accountants, bookkeepers and budget analysts. They were at their desks when American Airlines Flight 77 struck."

The Arlington County After-Action Report noted that the "impact area included both the Navy operations center and the office complex of the National Guard and Army Reserve. It was also the end of the fiscal year and important budget information was in the damaged area." And Insight Magazine editorialized that "the Department of the Army, headed by former Enron executive Thomas White, had an excuse [for not making a full accounting]. In a shocking appeal to sentiment it says it didn't publish a "stand-alone" financial statement for 2001 because of "the loss of financial-management personnel sustained during the Sept. 11 terrorist attack."

High Crimes of State often come down to the movement of capital, and so the high criminals generally share the gray and black economics of common felons. Money is money; it's the magnitude of the heist that's different, and the means to effect and cover-up the crime. And part of the cover-up of the Pentagon heist has been the no-plane shell game, played smartly by Rumsfeld himself who "misspoke" that a "missile" had struck the Pentagon the same week Thierry Meyssen's original no-plane website was launched.
It's such disinformation that has drilled irrelevance and folly into a once potentially dangerous and angry army of authentic skeptics.

Most of your post is old news.

However, the information and facts provided by a govt agency conflict with the official govt story. You cant "imagine" it away. It is there, it is hard data and it is from the govt. The govt thus far refuses to explain it. It could be "disinfo" disseminated by the govt. In that case, it is just as alarming as it being accurate since a govt agency has its signature on it.. literally.

Yes, I certainly don't claim to know any better but the argument about WHAT hit the pentagon is certainly deflecting the discussion away from WHERE the pentagon was hit which is maybe much more significant?

But hey we're all in the dark ... in fact there is no decent film footage of any of the aircraft so maybe there's something about all the aircraft that the gov needed to conceal?

why is this picture totally ignoring the spools?




where is the impact mark made by the turbine?



is it even possible for the wing of a 757 to get within inches of the ground....nevermind the belly of the plane/ turbines/ spools!!.....,,and how did the wing damage the wall BEHINED THE TREE?!?!?!?!



""the white debris MIGHT be the wing!!!"" hello!! its not a kite!...

Didn't Rumsfeld say a missile hit the Pentagon? He should know. [whistle]

we are to believe that this damage is from the wing of a 757?



i notice how the "wing " damage is contained to the first floor..as per the official report, "the plane slid under the first floor slab".... now lets look at a 757...




i need to assume that a guy that was 6 feet tall could probably see into the bottom of the turbine.....not to mention the wing is ALOT higher then the turbine.....is it just me or does it look like there should be actual wing damage to the 1st / 2nd / and 3rd floor... yet it the picture on top, they try to pass off that the wing damage was ont the first floor, an inch or 2 above ground level.... totally impossible!




it is IMPOSSIBLE for the wings to get that low and not scratch the ground...or hit the spools...

Re the Rumsfeld "missile" it is quite probably disinfo but that is already mentioned above.

Here's a link to the same stuff
http://www.oilempire.us/pentagon.html

The Youtube link (see above) gives a possible suggestion for the spools. They could have passed between the engines and the fuselage.

An engine was found inside the pentagon in the region that collapsed, see JoeR picture 15. It is very damaged so we aren't expecting to see nice round holes where the engines impacted. We aren't looking for engines on the lawn, the WTC impacts showed that no large parts of the aircraft rebounded from the impact there either. Interesting that the dimensions shown by JoeR mean that the engines can fit into the collapsed part.

Take some time to read the websites and not just look at the pictures.

The wing seems to have damaged the tree and the wall. This seems a possible thing to happen but presumably the global hawk or missile explanation has a clear answer for this?

What is important is WHERE the pentagon got hit and not WHAT hit it:
WHERE? ... a largely empty section being reinforced by contractors. A bunch of accountants had their offices in the same section and were investigating missing Rumsfeld money. They conveniently got greased and bang goes the investigation. Afterwards he drops the "missile" comment and we waste all our time arguing whether it was a plane or a missile.

So lets say it was a missile if you feel more comfortable with that. Now, lets talk about why it did a huge loop around the whole area to home in on exactly that part of the complex?

i agree,

im not completely sold on the missile idea, but i personally think its impossible for a 757 to have it it..

and showing us a burnd up landing gear and a melted turbine and hub is not proof at all in my book, the could have thrown a 350 smallblock in there and said it was a 69 nova!...

I'm not typing this again, last post. Includes a video of an aircraft hitting concrete at 480mph with engines and fuel tanks filled with water so no pesky fireball to sort through. 20+ high speed camera views from every angle including ON the concrete itself, enjoy a taste of reality....You can play 'where'd the plane go' with that one too all you want.

http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_F...opic=5571&st=60

From Joe R.

Further down

Other pro-planers disagree.
http://911review.com/errors/pentagon/columns.html

This I get from skimming half the page. The author exaggerates and is as error prone as anyone else.

I fail to see any such video

?

dequincy, thanks for the link.
I try to keep an open mind about each suggestion and theory
http://911review.com looks pretty well put together

Thats because it was quickly deleted. You can find it by searching for 'phantom crash test' in google or ask.

OHHH, that video. /yawn

And that relates to Pentagon AA77 how?

I have a thread I never finished about the Science paper for that test.
Oh, actually Russel started it.
Here it is
http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_F...topic=10827&hl=

So, what are you trying to prove with the F4 test?

Criminy, here we go again.

Look, wouldn't it have been nice if the damage at the Pentagon looked like an airplane crash site? If there was a crumpled and broken fuselage sticking out of a hole with pieces of plane all over the lawn, with giant engines inside the building, with bodies and luggage everywhere.

BUTTHATWASNTTHECASE!

You plane-huggers realize the absurdity of the position you are taking? You have to make a tiny feiry hole in the wall become a plane crash site when. The plane is gone. Vanished. "Vaporized." No chunks of fuselage. No wing sections. No tail sections. Just tiny chards of crumpled metal, small enough to be carried away by hand.

You stand back and say, "behold! The plane in its entirety, all 150+ feet of it with 140+ feet of wings was sucked into the tiny hole as if that hole were the mouth of a vacuum and once inside that hole the plane "vaporized."

Wow. Really?

Yep.

Then we have the footage, which doesn't show a plane that is twice as long as the Pentagon is tall. Meanwhile footage from the other alleged airplane crashes that day at least do show what clearly is a plane. The TV people felt it pertinent to saturate us with footage of the impact at WTC. We couldn't see enough of it. It was shown to us over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over.

But not the Pentagon. No. All the footage, some 80+ tapes, was confiscated. One might think, hmmmm, if they want to push us to war, why not show things like the real deal footage of the Pentagon. With 80 tapes they could release 1 a month for years and traumatize us all with the footage. But that ain't happening. Why?

Meanwhile no parts are turned over for identification to the FAA. The plane isn't deristered until when? And the flight wasn't even in the airport databases? What are you trying to pull?

Anyway, keep it up. Meanwhile I'm going to dynamite my back yard and try and convince my insurance agent that the hole is where a terrorist hijackd my car with my wife in it and crashed it.

But no bodies? No debris? This looks like a hole in the ground.

Shut up and pay me.

OK George, but we do know that SOMETHING blew up at the Pentagon. We know from 100+ eyewitness testimonies that it was an airplane of some sort. We know from the fallen light poles and the lack of eyewitness testimony involving anything to the effect of the light poles just randomly falling on their own without anything hitting them that SOMETHING must have hit these light poles, thus it couldn't be a bomb or a missile. It HAD to have been a plane. And, apparently, no matter what plane it was that crashed into the Pentagon, there are very few traces of said plane left. What does remain provides strong evidence that it was a Boeing 757, which is what Flight 11 was, and there is little or no evidence suggesting that any type of military aircraft hit the Pentagon. It had to have been Flight 77. I don't think of myself as a "plane-hugger" as much as I do a "reality-hugger".

Nice how they have "enhanced" the frame allegedly showing the tail of the plane.

Why is it "impossible"? And don't talk about extraneous factors like Rumsfeld's comment or stolen video recorders. How is it logistically impossible that the Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon? As the original source of this thread indicates, the size of the hole and the dimensions of the plane seem to agree. Sure, very little of the plane was recovered, but what was recovered matches the components of a 757. It's FAR from impossible.

The truth movement is getting so carried away with semantics that it really, really is starting to scare me.

It's also nice how he probably put hundreds of hours into analyzing the situation with sophisticated engineering software and supporting the theory that a 757 hit the Pentagon, rather than forming a haphazard opinion on the matter on the basis of a few random facts!!!

I'm sorry. Evidence does not just vaporize. Please name one other plane crash anywhere .. anywhere! .. where it was impossible to recover at least one part of the crashed plane that was clearly identifiable. Parts have numbers! These numbers are recorded! My god, they found out within half an hour of the crash on 10-11-06 into the NYC apartment building precisely which aircraft hit the building, who it was owned by, and who was in it.

And if such a part was recovered, why would information about it be withheld?

Planes do not de-materialize. Buildings do not just explode into fine dust all by themselves.

Name another day .. any other day! .. when a US airliner crashed and the NTSB did not have jurisdiction to reconstruct the crash. The FBI took over that day, and refuses to release information they gathered.

I don't know what did the damage to the Pentagon. But there is almost no evidence that it was flight 77, eyewitness accounts of planes flying low notwithstanding. 757's don't make entry holes in buildings at ground level. They can't .. it's virtually physically impossible to fly that low to the ground at the reported airspeeds.

I try to keep an open mind. I'm willing to entertain possibilities. But you gotta show something other than 20 foot wide holes at ground level with NO damage to the lawn, to the spools, to the windows on either side of that hole... you gotta show something besides one small crumpled piece of aluminum with red and blue paint on it. Luggage! Seats! Hell, how about a body, even one?

[flyaway]

It didn't. There are several pictures on the internet of various components of Flight 77.

There was no such crash. Not even the crash on the Pentagon. Do a little research, and you'll find that several pieces have been tied to those found in a 757.

Um, they did know what aircraft hit the Pentagon, who owned it, and who was in it on September 11th.

It wasn't withheld. You just haven't looked hard enough for the evidence!

Flight 77 did not de-materialize; many parts of it were found. The building that exploded into fine dust has nothing to do with the current discussion.

You mean they refuse to come straight to your door and drop the evidence off at your house? Do some research, man.

You mean 100+ eyewitness accounts notwithstanding, right? And you probably aren't referring to the fact that the evidence that actually is at the scene points to a 757 and not anything else?

No, it's not.

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0274.shtml

From the Popular Mechanics article:

"Blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer was the first structural engineer to arrive at the Pentagon after the crash and helped coordinate the emergency response. "It was absolutely a plane, and I'll tell you why," says Kilsheimer, CEO of KCE Structural Engineers PC, Washington, D.C.

"I saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box." Kilsheimer's eyewitness account is backed up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building. Kilsheimer adds: "I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts. Okay?"

Excellent.. this guy has reports from the govt showing these parts matched up with AA77 serial numbers...

We'll be waiting for that report.. thanks.

The rest of your post i didnt read.

This is a complete lie.

The "black boxes" were found on Sept 14th.

Also.. he held the tail of a 757 in his hands huh? What was that 757 made of.. Balsa wood? Might as well have been...

Anyone have a picture of this "757 tail"?

[rofl]

You are so funny... It's like a 9 years old boy convinced of the REAL existence of santa claus !

Let"s review your post ( and laugh a bit ) ;)

Ooooouuu That's hard evidence ! Anybody couldn't have planted theses or just shows photo ? What about the references ??? I can show you 100 pics of 757 debris in my yard ; does that means a 757 crash here ?? And by the way thoses components COULD be from an 757 ... who say's it actually from flight 77 ???

You've been shooting at yourself... THAT'S the WHOLE POINT ; THEY DID NOT ! They says they knew... but 5 years later , still unable to prove it. Don't you find that strange ??

Cool ! So YOU have the evidence ? What are you waiting for sharing with us all ?? The whole planet is waiting for this since 2001 !! if I had the time I'll show you at least 100 news showing clearly that EVERYTHING about 9-11 was withheld by the gov. C'mon... you must been kidding me !?

[rofl] Said THAT to the officials WHO'S said : the plane was vaporized due to the extreme heat. And : The plane doesn't leave wing and tail scars because they turn into a close to liquid state on impact... [box] many parts were found ...right. But of it ?? Nobody's knows for sure.

P.S.: The fine dust HAS everything to do with it. Because it's an IRREFUTABLE proof of inside job.. So YOUR points are most irreveleant now.

... :blink: Just put them on TV , that's will be ok. Show us the 85 tapes , the black boxes transcript , etc, etc, etc.

100+ ?? WHERE ??? The last counts was WAY less than that. You're talking about the ones that said it was a choper , then a small jet , then a cargo , then a midsized jet , an A-3 warrior , then a GlobalHawk , then a commercial jet but a blue one , or without glass... etc. Nice evidences ! Wow. Who needs a commision ; THE EYEWITHNESS'S said so.

What FACT ? What evidence ?? From wich planet do YOU come ?? All those pseudo-evidences ALL prove to be fairly impossible. In best case ; very very improbable. Forget the photos ( too easy to plant ) and ALL the fact disprove you...

He saws the mark of the wing... Nice. Why IS IT NOT on ANY of ALL the Photos ???

He helped coordinate the emergency response... Since when you let a blast expert coordinate the emergency ?? Is like tossing out the firefighters on a fire and coordinate it by the clean-up team...

He picked parts of the plane... On a crime scene. that's against the law. And higly forbidden on a scene like this.

He held the tail section... Cool , go see some pics of an 757 tail... Dare to go. And why there's no photo of that tail anywhere ?? Such a piece of evidence , why we don't have any pics ??

He found the black box... This guy is sooo cool ! Great chance HE was there ! With all these people on the site that day. He is the one that Coordinate the emergency , He is the only one who had seen the wings mark , the tail and he found the black boxes ! WOW.

He then found body part... And he tell's us that so smoothly. No problem ! It's just a body part... From a plane that vaporized ... nice.

But , we DO have pics of him at the site... so everything he said , its true of course ! Santas Claus told me so many thing on site , when I was a kid...


You consider yourself open mind ? Maybe you,re TOO opened , or not in the good direction.

[hmm]