Pentagon Vid.No Plane in Sight / Unreal Video/You Have Got To See This!/Pentagon Vid

[prezhorusin04]

No wreckage at the Pentagon-No plane-All lies

Check out the flash video footage:
http://www.black-tactics.com/penta.swf

[VegasRonin]

Cool video Prez. So we get our Representatives to subpoena these confiscated video tapes. Start a petition Prez. I'll sign it.

[prezhorusin04]

Dang Vero. You must have a fast connection. That vid took me about 10-15 minutes to open, but it's worth it..

Good to know you'd sign the petition Ronin. I'll try and work one out, but i'd only be happy with atleast a few thousand names.But it's gotta start somewhere.!

Looks like a missle strike to me..What do you think? There are many reports that the flight in Pennsylvania was downed my a missle as well..

The only thing that adds up is a massive amount of lies..

[Rage_Garden]

Good idea for a petition. Ill sign it if you start one. Its not likely they will listen though, the FBI and CIA dont seem to have any obligation to listen to what you have to say, or let you know of what they are up to for that matter. I found a Save Hubble petition by the way, it had a few thousand signatures already, I think its on Art Bells website.

[Strife]

Whoa, I didn't know this video is spreading so fast!

Hey if theres a petition count me in!

[Marajadex]

Too bad this video and others of it's type won't be taken seriously by those in power. They are the ones who have confiscated most if not all of the other video's that actually show what happened. Talk about cover up and conspiracy!

All these lies...
All these cover ups...
And still no one is being held accountable.

If there is a petition I'd sure sign it.

ok great, but one thing? what happened to my neighbor? who was on that flight. she wasn't right next door to me, but she lived a couple blocks away from me, and was on that flight. What would the government have done with the airplane. What COULD they have dont without anyone noticing? Surely, someone would witness it be shot down over West Virginia or wherever they chose to do this, and escape the FBI break the news to the world before ther were "brainwashed". Who nows, the whole conspiracy could be true, but i doubt it. That evidence is a bit disturbing, so you never know, but im just saying...

[Strife]

Alright I got a few questions.

From this video, what hit the pentagon?
If it wasn't a passanger plane, then what happened to the passanger plane?
Was there ever a passanger plane?
And by dabears response, what happened to the people?

[Strife]

http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/911/Eastman/m18h05.html

Check out also the 'distraction' link, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/9-11-d...eup/message/38

[stewey]

Fortunately, physics explains what happened at the Pentagon crash. I recommend checking these links:

http://paulboutin.weblogger.com/2002/03/14 (Written by a physicist and engineer)

http://news.uns.purdue.edu/UNS/html4....Pentagon.html (computer simulation)

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm (explains the damage details and lack of a craft, read the whole thing)

http://www.usatoday.com/graphics/new...agon/frame.htm (another good site)

And finally, http://ourworld-top.cs.com/mikegriffith1/refute.htm (lots of links)

[MetalMilitia]

Protesters Allege 9/11 Terror Attacks Were Government Conspiracy

On the final day of the Republican National Convention, protesters gathered where the World Trade Center once stood to allege a massive government conspiracy and cover-up regarding the terror attacks of September 11, 2001.

The protest, which was part of the official "counter convention calendar" of events, alleged that the U.S. government needed an excuse to seize power in America, and it either allowed the terror attacks to happen or was actively involved in them.

The afternoon event, sponsored by 911truth.org, was called "Vigil For Truth at Ground Zero."

"[9/11] was an inside job, a fraud, a scam, equivalent of the [burning] of the Reichstag that led to a reign of terror across Nazi Europe. And it seems like that's what is happening now," protestor David Hylander told CNSNews.com.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.as...20040903a.html

----

This isn't just for internet sites and conspiracy hang outs - it's a fairly mainstream idea. Just ask those "whacky" Canadians or those lovable Germans what they think of 9/11

[prezhorusin04]

Exactly Metal, good post..This isn't just about some French mans book Stewey, this same question is asked by hundreds of millions, if not a billion citizens of this planet..

Where is the real proof of any visible wreckage at the Pentagon? They can find a "terrorist" passport in the WTC rubble, but no real plane wreckage at the Pentagon?

Why no video evidence? They played the trade towers footage a million times, why no Pentagon footage if ANY was available, which was before it 3was confiscated..

Why all the Bush/Cheney connections to Haliburton and the Carlyle group which are making a fortune off of pipelines and business deals in Iraq? Why the Bush family connection to the Bin Laden family?

Why are both Bush and Kerry members of Skull and Bones? Why are Bush and Cheney members of Bohemian Grove? Why all the Freemasonry among their ranks?Why the strong ties with Israel and Zionism?

Why are their family connections between Prescot Bush and the funding of Nazi Germany? Why does the German Thule society branch off and become the American Skull and Bones in 1832, which holds Bush AND Kerry?

WHY?WHY?WHY? And the answers don't lie in more lies and propaganda that helps to hide the Elites and the plan for the New World Order...The New World Order which both Bush SR, and Jr, have announced many, many times..

I looked at all of your sites Stew, i could provide just as many, or more, who are not convinced with the "official" version of 911, or HISTORY..-Show me a plane, show me MAJOR plane wreckage, and i might believe the "official" story..But i doubt it..

[humanhybrid]

OK Prez, Why the big coverup at the pentagon. What purpose does the fake plane crash serve? What motive! good day!

[prezhorusin04]

Hybrid. I don't really have the answer for that. I know a plane, and people dissapeared that day, but from what i see, and the damage done at the Pentagon, it looks like a missle strike to me..

There should have been numerous, and massive pieces of wreckage at the Pentagon, not to mention scattered human remains..Yet we see/have none of this?!?

There is no video footage of the plane that day, yet there is a camera RIGHT ON the Pentagon crash site, that shows no plane?(Other then a military jet that possibly passed by at the time!)

I'm not a evil genius mastermind..I don't know why a missle was used at the Pentagon instead of a plane..Other then the fact that they can get away with it..I don't know what really hppened to the Pentagon plane and the people on board..

I've got questions and answers just like everyone else..I'm just saying that i don't accept the official version of what transpired on 911. Nor should anyone who observes the evidence logically...It's like saying that we should acccept that Kennedy was killed by a lone gunman, when there is overwhelming evidence that prooves a coverup..

[Marajadex]

I suppose that if the powers that be who knew about the pending attack on WTC felt that they needed a bigger threat. What could be a bigger threat than an attack on the nations capital. What better place than the center of the military. Especially if as is alluded to the area hit was known to be mostly empty. As to the planes and those booked on the flights... how about the government relocating them and setting them up with a new identity in another country. Not a bad deal to shut the heck up and live comfortable and anonymously for the rest of their lives... Hmmmm... Makes you wonder... I mean this did hit pretty close to home for me as my Dad was booked on the flight that went down in Pennsylvania. He luckily took a flight a day earlier.

Just my ramblings...

[Zach]

I think you guys are probably right. I mean, looking at the hole, there is no way a 747 could make a perfect hole like that.

For the people, they probably landed the plane somewhere else and had like the FBI or some other govenment agency meet the people as they got off the flight and either offered to move them to another country or "brainwashed them". I mean, just using like geometry, you can tell that a 747 couldnt have made a hole like that. I think you guys are on to something.

[Zach]

Actually, i take that back. There still is some evidence that proves that it could be false. I mean you guys may be on to something but there was someone i know who worked in the Pentagon who was killed and they really are dead. I dont think the government would kill their own people. So, i no longer know what to think.

[Strife]

You never know Zach. Out of all respect, I don't mean to say this intentionally to any lives lost that day. But maybe the government no longer had use of those who worked in that section of the pentagon. Perhaps there were already different individuals ready to be installled into their spots.

Didn't really felt like saying that, but its just a possibility.

[Marajadex]

Is the term something like...
"Acceptable Casualties"?

[blahblahblah]

This stuff has long been put to rest. Take a look at the article in Snopes (full article here, with pictures: http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm):

The notion that the Pentagon was not damaged by terrorists who hijacked American Airlines Flight 77 (a Boeing 757) and crashed it into the military office complex, but that the whole affair was staged by the U.S. government, has been promulgated by French author Thierry Meyssan in his book, The Frightening Fraud. Meyssan offers no real explanation for what did cause the extensive damage to the Pentagon, asserting only that Flight 77 did not exist, no plane crashed into the Pengaton, and that "the American government is lying."

Unfortunately, the appeal of conspiracy theories has resulted in widespread dissemination of Meyssan's "theory" in France and the USA, particularly in web sites that mirror his work. As Le Nouvel Observateur noted: "This theory suits everyone - there are no Islamic extremists and everyone is happy. It eliminates reality."

The text cited in the example above comes from a Hunt the Boeing! And test your perceptions! web site, one of the English-language mirrors of Meyssan's claims, where readers are invited to ponder a series of questions about why photographs of the damaged Pentagon seemingly show no evidence of a crashed airplane. The answers to the questions are:


1) Can you explain how a Boeing 757-200, weighing nearly 100 tons and travelling at a minimum speed of 250 miles an hour only damaged the outside of the Pentagon?
Despite the appearances of exterior photographs, the Boeing 757-200 did not "only damage the outside of the Pentagon." It caused damage to all five rings (not just the outermost one) after penetrating a reinforced, 24-inch-thick outer wall. As 60 Minutes II reported in their "Miracle of the Pentagon" episode on 28 November 2001, the section of the Pentagon into which the hijacked airliner was flown had just been reinforced during a renovation project:


"We made several modifications to the building as part of that renovation that we think helped save people's lives," says Lee Evey, who runs a billion-dollar project to renovate the Pentagon. They’ve been working on it since 1993. The first section was five days from being finished when the terrorists hit it with the plane.
The renovation project built strength into the 60-year-old limestone exterior with a web of steel beams and columns.

"You have these steel tubes and, again, they go from the first floor and go all the way to the fifth floor," says Evey. "We have everything bolted together in a strong steel matrix. It supports and encases the windows and provides tremendous additional strength to the wall."

When the plane hit at 350 miles an hour, the limestone layer shattered. But inside, those shards of stone were caught by a shield of cloth that lines the entire section of the building.

It is a special cloth that helps prevent masonry from fragmenting and turning into shrapnel. The cloth is also used to make bullet-resistant vests.

All of this, especially the steel, held up the third, fourth and fifth floors. They stayed up for 35 minutes. You can see them through the smoke, suspended over the hole gouged by the jet. Only after the evacuation did the heat melt the new steel away. Evey says that without the reconstruction, the floors might have collapsed immediately.

Exterior photographs are misleading because they show only the intact roof structures of the outer rings and don't reveal that the plane penetrated all the way to the ground floor of the third ring. As a U.S. Army press release noted back on 26 September 2001, one engine of the aircraft punched a 12-foot hole through the wall of the second ring:


On the inside wall of the second ring of the Pentagon, a nearly circular hole, about 12-feet wide, allows light to pour into the building from an internal service alley. An aircraft engine punched the hole out on its last flight after being broken loose from its moorings on the plane. The result became a huge vent for the subsequent explosion and fire. Signs of fire and black smoke now ring the outside of the jagged-edged hole.
Recall that when the first airliner was flown into a World Trade Center tower on September 11 — before it was known that the "accident" was really part of a deliberate terrorist attack — newscasters were speculating that a small plane had accidentally flown into the side of the tower, because the visible exterior damage didn't seem as extensive as what people thought a large airliner would cause. Even though the two airplanes flown into the World Trade Center towers were travelling faster at the time of impact than the Pentagon plane was (400 MPH vs. 350 MPH), hit aluminum-and-glass buildings rather than reinforced concrete walls, and didn't dissipate much of their energy striking the ground first (as the Pentagon plane did), they still barely penetrated all the way through the WTC towers.

Below is a recent (11 March 2002) photograph of the the rebuilding effort underway at the Pentagon, demonstrating that far more than just the "outside" of the building was damaged and needed to be repaired:




2) Can you explain how a Boeing 14.9 yards high, 51.7 yards long, with a wingspan of 41.6 yards and a cockpit 3.8 yards high, could crash into just the ground floor of this building?
As eyewitnesses described and photographs demonstrate, the hijacked airliner dived so low as it approached the Pentagon that it actually hit the ground first, thereby dissipating much of the energy that might otherwise have caused more extensive damage to the building; nonetheless, as described by The New York Times, the plane still hit not "just the ground floor" but between the first and second floors:


The Boeing 757 crashed into the outer edge of the building between the first and second floors, "at full power," Mr. Rumsfeld said. It penetrated three of the five concentric rings of the building.
Another account of the crash described:


The plane banked sharply and came in so low that it clipped light poles. It slammed into the side of the Pentagon at an estimated 350 miles per hour after first hitting the helipad. The plane penetrated the outer three rings of the building. The jet fuel exploded, which sent a fireball outward from the impact point. About 30 minutes after the crash, a cross-section of the building collapsed, but only after enough time had elapsed for rescue workers to evacuate all injured employees.
The fire was so hot that firefighters could not approach the impact point itself until approximately 1 P.M. The collapse and roof fires left the inner courtyard visible from outside through a gaping hole. The area hit by the plane was newly renovated and reinforced, while the areas surrounding the impact zone were closed in preparation for renovation, so the death toll could have been much higher if another area had been hit.

Next question:


3) You'll remember that the aircraft only hit the ground floor of the Pentagon's first ring. Can you find debris of a Boeing 757-200 in this photograph?
You'll recall from the discussions above that the hijacked airliner did not "only hit the ground floor of the Pentagon's first ring" — it struck the Pentagon between the first and second floors and blasted all the way through to the third ring. Because the plane disappeared into the building's interior after penetrating the outer ring, it was not visible in photographs taken from outside the Pentagon. Moreover, since the airliner was full of jet fuel and was flown into thick, reinforced concrete walls at high speed, exploding in a fireball, any pieces of wreckage large enough to be identifiable in after-the-fact photographs taken from a few hundred feet away burned up in the intense fire that followed the crash (just as the planes flown into the World Trade Center towers burned up, and the intensity of their jet-fuel fires caused both towers to collapse).

Small pieces of airplane debris were plainly visible on the Pentagon lawn in other photographs, however, such as the one below:


--4 cut because of post size restrictions, see the link

5) Can you explain what happened to the wings of the aircraft and why they caused no damage?
As the front of the Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon, the outer portions of the wings likely snapped during the initial impact, then were pushed inward towards the fuselage and carried into the building's interior; the inner portions of the wings probably penetrated the Pentagon walls with the rest of the plane. Any sizable portions of the wings were destroyed in the explosion or the subsequent fire. Nonetheless, damage to the building caused by the plane's wings is plainly visible in photographs, such as the one below (note the blackened sections on both sides of the impact site):



--ditto 6--

7) Can you find the aircraft's point of impact?
Immediately after Flight 77 smashed into the Pentagon, the impact was obscured by a huge fireball, explosions, fire, smoke, and water from firefighting efforts. Within a half hour, the upper stories of the building collapsed, thereby permanently obscuring the impact site. It simply wasn't possible for photographs to capture a clear view of the impact site during that brief interval between the crash and the collapse.

In photographs like the one provided (below left), the impact site is obscured by water from firefighters' hoses and smoke. A two-story high impact hole does exist right behind the fireman in the photograph, but it's covered over by water issuing from the fire truck.

By the time the smoke and water cleared, additional portions of the building had collapsed (below right), further obscuring the impact point.

[prezhorusin04]

Blahblah, that's the same post that Stewey made a few days ago..I read it then, and it's funny how so many words can answer NO questions...All i hear from that is a bunch of double talk BS!

[Strife]

True, this still wont answer no questions. I'm still waiting for an answer to the confiscations of all the cameras that may have captured this 757 if it did indeed crash into the pentagon.

Is the term something like...
"Acceptable Casualties"?

That summarizes right there what I had to say.
:bread: <--(the meaning of this??)

[VegasRonin]

I'm still waiting for an answer to the confiscations of all the cameras that may have captured this 757 if it did indeed crash into the pentagon.

Yep, that's all I want as well. My thoughts on the whole thing is as yet, undecided. Get the film footage out, and put a rest to all the doubters, once and for all. Easy solution but it won't happen without a lot of pressure; after all, the Govt. won't release the footage of the Oklahoma bombing either.

ye ye, w.e, what happened to the wreckage of the plane.>?? the plane crashed and the ppl died so if it didnt crash into the pentagon then sum1 would have seen the plane crash somewhere else........idc wat ne1 else says......its jus obvious that the plane had to go sumwhere

[RightWingNutJob]

Don't be so quick to believe everything you hear, especially conspiracy theories from the internet.

Here's some points to consider:

Point 1



This is a turbine with missing blades. Turbine blades are small on the biggest engines, they return power to the fan. Considering the blades were made out of titanium, carbon fiber, and other more exotic alloys which can melt at various temperature, doesn't take much of conspiracy theorist to realize these blades could have easily evaporated in temps upwards of 1,500 degrees, which a 757 loaded with jet fuel could have generated.