I don't know if this is bs or not but after watching this it seems to me they are right about the fact that it does not seem to be a 757 that hit the building. What if it was a missile? What are we in store for?

do you think a building of that size would just collapse and not make any kind of explosion? if anything the explosion seen in that shot is from the fuel tanks in the plane....seriously what would the odds be that the government placed a bomb at the exact floor the plane hit

We saw the planes hit the WTC; surely there can be no doubt about that?
If two planes were used in NY, why is it so ludicruous to suggest that a third may have been used in Washington?

oh please that image was taken at the moment of collapse--the fires were practically out --the tanks did not cause that explosion--how can you ignore firefighter testimony about bombs being used--they have the expertise and the knowledge to know the difference--and the odds thing falls apart when you consider it was premeditated and the bombs could have been placed on any floor with ease considering marvin bush was in charge of security at the towers where his two year contract just happened to end on sept 11,01--you guys are in denial--the proof is right under your noses --LOOK at the emperors clothes for gods sake

time and ommon sense

Exactly.
If 4 ducks were crossing a busy road and 3 were found to have been run over and the 4th duck was only found in small pieces, it's not rocket science to reasonably assume that that 4th duck was also squashed.

Hello !!!!!!!!!!

Here's a more accurate analogy: You were TOLD 4 ducks were run over crossing the road, but only 3 remains look like duck. The 4th remains have no resemblance to being a duck. No parts look like duck at all. But you were re-assured that they took it back to the shed and pieced together a duck - although when you ask to see it, they won't show it to you. Then when you ask if anyone filmed the event, you find out that everyone who videotaped it had their film taken away. But they still tell you "For sure it was a duck - take our word for it!"

All 4 had established and irrefutable manifests concerning departure across the road. And all 4 ducks, with babies, are now gone.
So, what happened to the 4th duck?

That's a good question!! Let's ask to see the confiscated videos - that should be a no-brainer, right? We will put an end to the speculation in an instant. Of course, if the videos show only three ducks, we still don't have an answer to your question. Anyway, how good do you think our chances are that they will let us see the videos??

Ok.. I'm going to try to say this without sounding like a complete conspiracy nut, although I know I'll probably fail.

First, lets review some images:





In the first image, you see the tail section of a plane right above the right-most pillar. Ok, so there IS a plane there. But it's not from a Boeing 757.. not in my professional opinion... IMHO, that tail belongs to...


The F-18 Hornet.

I spent four years on the Dwight D Eisenhower as an Aviation Electronics tech. I know that plane, I spent four years seeing it nearly everyday.

The other thing that really jumps out in these pictures is the obvious contrail that's shown in images 2 and 3.

In regards to (here comes the consipracy theorist)


My cousin knows Jim carry's best friend.. so what? For all we know, they were paid or threatened to say what the government wanted them to say. I base my feelings on factual evidence.
#1: I see a f18 and a missle contrail in those frames. And I've been trained to identify planes. (Yes, this is my opinion, not fact)
#2 there are indeed at least two other cameras that were taken by the feds and never released. And even in the video we do have, there are 2 frames of footage missing. The first is 17:37:18 and the second is 17:37:20.
#3 This video also contains 2 frames labeled 17:37:19
#4 The major lack of plane at the "plane crash"
#5 The hole is all wrong, windows are intact where they shouldn't be, etc.
#6 Lack of external ground damage.

And when was the last time the government needed a reason to do anything?

Reference: George Carlin, Rockets and Penisis in the Persian Gulf.

"War gets good ratings."
"Bush has been called a wimp for so long, that he needs to act out his manhood fantasies by sending other people's children to die"

so let me get this straight, they flew a fighter jet (or fighter/bomber whatever) with the boeings black box and filled with passenger remains into the pentagon?

and witnesses mistook this FA18 to be a passenger jet....because they do look pretty similar...

I'm just wondering why those clips are dated September 12, 2001?

I know - you're thinking, "Oh no! What a huge wingspan!" Well, no worries! Those wings will fold in on impact. Then the whole thing scoots through a nice and ccmpact 18 foot hole. Boeing makes 'em that way just for occasions such as this!

If the wings fold on impact or not there would still be damage to the walls and windows alos as mentioned before, why did it only hit the 1st floor? how can a plane like this take down the twin towers hitting the 92nd floor to the ground and yet this one just damage a small section of the pentagon? what was radar doing not dtecting it heading towards the pentagon nearly an hour after the other two hit the towers?

Exactly - plus why do they have to hide the videos they 'stole' from everybody? They don't even show all the frames from the crap they DID release!!

Mistake by the man who wrote on them? I simply google'd the images I was lookiing for and found his page.



No, I'm saying it was a missile, lauched by an F18 at very close range. My guess from the damage done would be a custom fitted AIM-9. I saw a number of different warheads for the sidewinder while in the navy. They could have packed larger amounts of C4 onto the rocket since it was only suppose to fly, what? 50 feet?

As for the bodies and black box.. as far as you or I know, they could have been put there before, or after the explosion. Or they could have been on the plane that hit, 757 or not... We don't know.

As to the "eyewitness" civilians... Half the military is walking around with secrets... some form of classification... and they don't talk about it... they know what will happen.. what makes these people any different?

remember curiosity didnt just kill the cat... it tied the cats legs up and chucked it into the river
but still you know the police are covering somthing up

so i take that a) you are an expert in plane crash physics or you can cite experts who say its impossible?

here's a really good article on the crash

Click Here

Best site I've found about the 757 that hit the Pentagon...

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911_pe...e_evidence.html

very good site:)

Prolly not a plane, but most people think you're crazy when you bring this up, so I dance around it, and use some of the other 600 smokeing guns of Govt involement in 911.

But think about this,

Tower 1, blown up

Tower 2, Blown up

Flight 93 (likely shot down)

Pentagon Plane: Who the hell knows?

Now, why would the globalists go to all the trouble blowing up tower one and two? The attack would still be devastating enough to pull their nwo/police state agena through without demolishing the buildings? Likely because, they did not want to chance someone finding the remote control technology used to fly the planes, we don't seem to have any wreckage at the pentagon either, so it could have been a missile, and another one could have blowin up the pentagon's flight up too, but then it gets WAY to far into theory for my taste. Most of what I talk about isin't a theory at all, so that's why I stay away from this. that's my two cents. 1

If the plane exploded and left no wreckage what so ever how come the found bodies?

JAMIE MCINTYRE(CNN): From my close-up inspection, there's no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the Pentagon.

The only site, is the actual side of the building that's crashed in. And as I said, the only pieces left that you can see are small enough that you pick up in your hand. There are no large tail sections, wing sections, fuselage, nothing like that anywhere around which would indicate that the entire plane crashed into the side of the Pentagon and then caused the side to collapse.

Ooops!! That was before CNN went and TOOK IT OFF THEIR WEBSITE!

But we CAN always look at the numerous videos shot that day..... oops, I almost forgot - the Hacks swiped them all away!!

Maybe it was pulled after the smoke and water cleared and he saw the various pieces of wreckage? *shrug*

keep ignoring the evidence whilst we continually demolish your points

who cares what some retarded journalist said? there are images of plane wreckage around if you actually look for them. The plane itself got turned into tiny pieces as it hit the pentagon.

Care to present any other cases of planes traveling at 400+ m/p/h smashing into a steel reinforced concrete building whilst at the same time being topped up with fuel?

Yes, please show me all the tiny pieces of plane! And all the bodies were identified? Show me the proof. You have done nothing but post links that prove nothing. By the way, if he said he saw plane parts to match your story, he would be your prized eyewitness!

maybe you should read through this thread
maybe you should read through every other thread that has been done regarding this topic.

Check the link already provided by Bad Mojo, your evidence is there!

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911_pe...e_evidence.html

Here's the landing gear, there's tons more in the link

I guess this reporter would no be retarded if he wrote and agreed with a plane hitting the pentagon.

Can you show me your source that shows the speed of the plane travelling 400+mph?

Can you also explain how two planes hitting above the 90th floor managed to bring down the twin towers to rubble yet this plane had localised 1st floor 18ft hole damage ? perhaps the twin towers should have been constructed from the same material as the pentagon??????

You know, some people are just friggin idiots.

4 planes were hijacked by Islamic radicals and driven into the twin towers, a field, and the Pentagon. Case closed.

For those that refuse to believe that one of those planes hit the Pentagon, I have but one question: Where is that plane, the pilots, and travelers now?

Come on, suck it up. Where is that plane?

Wow.. Problem solved I am sure with all your extensive research into this you have made a real impact here..

being from australia im not entirely sure of all the events that occur, but wasn't it believed that the A/C (aircraft) that went down in the field was shot down by F-16s that where scrambled to any A/C that was of course and not responding to radio calls.
Also a Tomahawk missile can be fired from 1400nm away and with GPS guidance and terrain mapping it can appear like a small A/C moving a incredible speeds around buildings along highways etc.
Just food for thought.

Where is that plane?

Start by answering these:

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?

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?

Can you explain what happened to the wings of the aircraft and why they caused no damage?

Can you explain why the County Fire Chief could not tell reporters where the aircraft was?

Can you also explain how two planes hitting above the 90th floor managed to bring down the twin towers to rubble yet this plane had localised 1st floor 18ft hole damage ?

WHERE IS THAT PLANE, with 58 passengers, 4 flight attendants and 2 pilots? You refuse to answer that question.Will you EVER answer that?

Guess what?
If one cannot address what happened to the PHYSICAL elements of Flight 77 (i.e, the plane and passengers) why, in God's name, should I even consider their ramblings.
A house is built by the floor up, not the roof down.

How hard is it to radio a piloting crew, tell em there's an emergency of national security, and they need to land the plane immediately at an army base! After that just blow the bodies up in a room. That simple. As for the plane, anything's possible....

And weren't 6 out of 8 pilotes ex-military? Its kinda silly that all 8 were overpowered by a few iraqis with box cutters So fast, that they couldnt even radio for help................... all at the same time.

Well, at least you have the willingness to respond. Thank you.

So, in your view, 64 innocent people(men, women, children) from Flight 77 were re-directed in-flight and subsequently murdered by the U.S. military in order to propagate a 9/11 conspiracy.
Along with that, the huge jetliner was disposed of.
Of course, it would take a minimum of 25 people to even begin to carry this out(from the chain-of-command on down), and all of them are in agreement with murdering innocents.
Hmmm... I don't even buy that.

Thousands of innocent people are killed every day in Iraq. How do you justify that? How is that any different, just because its in a different country? It was for a greater cause. You should compare burning of Reichstag and the 911. Ask yourself questions, like who benefited from them? What hapend as direct result of these events?

OK, so what happened to the plane and passengers of Flight 77?

Hmm I have to agree with pallidin here, it would seem we need to figure out what happened to the plane before we can go any further with this discussion.

I also think it's rather illogical for the US govt to have fired a missile or anything else at the pentagon. Let's examine this from a conspiracy standpoint. Supposedly the US govt diverted a 747, murdered the passengers and hid the plane, okay. Now we saw at least one plane hit the towers on tv so there isn't anybody who isn't going to bbelievethat a plane could have flown into the pentagon. Why would the US go through all of the trouble to re-route the plane, kill the passengers, hide a 747 and hit the pentagon with a missile, when they just could have had the 747 fly into the pentagon in the first place? It would have saved them a whole bunch of time and money, not to mention it would have covered up any trail they would have left behind. It just doesn't make sense to me.

perhaps you should have read some of the links posted?

1) well if its flying fairly level its more than possible, care to explain how this is physically impossible?

2) there is plenty of evidence to suggest they snapped backwards on impact or just priot too (hitiing the generator and a construction vehicle), this would explain the huge external fuel based fireball.

3) misquote perhaps? maybe he was referring to the fact that the plane was still mostly in the building? Can you explain the photos of wreckage? the black box recovery? the passenger remains?

4) the plane actually penetrated 3 rings into the pentagon, that said the buildings are of completely different design, you can'tcompare them. Yay for physics, something invented by cheney to explain their lies:)

So all the bodies of the crew and passengers and the pentagon workers were all identified, even though no pictures show any remains? All, that is, except for our infamous five hijacker bodies? Including Salem Alhazmi (Flight 77)?

"Mr Al-Hamzi is 26 and had just returned to work at a petrochemical complex in the industrial eastern city of Yanbou after a holiday in Saudi Arabia when the hijackers struck. He was accused of hijacking the American Airlines Flight 77 that hit the Pentagon." - Telegraph 23rd September 2001

Where are the rest?

The rest of the 'hijackers'? Or the bodies of same?

The rest of the passengers. If a plane didn't hit the pentagon, where is it? Because it loaded up with people and left the terminal.

Actually, that is another interesting thing - there were 64 people, crew and passengers, listed on that flight (in itself a VERY low number - three times below normal for the same flight on the same day and time previously). Of those 64 people, only 14 are listed in the SSDI (22%). The Social Security Death Index (SSDI) is a privately-owned website that is not affiliated with Social Security. But it boasts an accuracy rate of about 83%
SSDI Index This link lets you input names to find passed away family members.- try it yourself for accuracy. Be sure to input their full and proper names as registered with the Gov't.

Only five families of the 64 dead filed for the 9-11 Victims Compensation Fund
This is where the government opened up the Treasury and gave family members of those who lost their lives that day lots of money. In return, these families were basically told to shut up about anything else concerning 9-11.

So where is the plane, if not the Pentagon? I can't tell you - nothing backed by facts anyway. IMO it was either 1.) diverted off over the ocean and crashed & sunk, or 2.) diverted remotely to another airport, re-loaded into another plane (maybe, not likely, with the Pennsylvania flight passengers) and flown into the ocean. That is something we are only able to investigate after determining 100% that it either did or did not crash into the Pentagon - but we are being denied the videos of the event - the evidence that would prove what happened beyond any doubt. So we are stuck going nowhere.

Iraqis? Who were Iraqi? Weren't they all Saudi or Egyptian?

The points that have been raised above are exactly the questions I've been asking: everyone saw on TV at least one plane hit the WTC, and there can be no doubt that eyewitnesses also saw the first one. We know another 757 came down in a field (whether it was shot down or not is another question). But there can be no doubt they were real airliners. So why is it so illogical to suggest another hit the Pentagon? Sure, it's a difficult target to hit, but that raises questions perhaps about who was flying it, and where they may have been trained, rather than doubts that a plane was involved at all.

okay, now shoot me down in flames ...

Yeh right... have you read any of the posts here or looked at any of the pictures... Where is your source that proves the design of the Pentagon is stronger then one of the twin towers? If the plane was flying level on impact... highly unlikely as it is ground level... then why was the damage localised to the first floor? the plane nearly as high as the pentagon?

The wings that actually snapped back on impact never cause any damage to the windows and surrounding structure... fantastic design... and now we are to believe that the plane was completely obliterated to nothing yet all the bodies survived to be identified.

Why was the Pentagon allowed to be hit if it was hit nearly an hour after the towers? did radar not work allowoing this to happen?

As for where is the plane now... perhaps it never existed ?

I can't believe you would even attempt to argue that. I'll just counter with where is your proof the pentagon was equal to or weaker than the design of the WTC. Good luck hunting



The body of a 757 is 12'4" wide and 13'6" high. So unless the pentagon was only one story tall, the plane wasn't even close to being "nearly as high as the pentagon."



The windows of the pentagon are blast-resistant. Nearly 2" thick. Given that, do you think the walls were stucco?



Focus elsewhere?