short 9/11 video (includes molten steel columns

RolandTD20Kdrummer

Another question I have on the pentagon thing is why fly so low to the ground and risk crashing beforehand when they could have just aimed for the center of it like a hitting a bullseye but at an angle. Mind you the pilot apparently sucked and could barely fly a Cessna. It certainly would make a bigger mess and make the cleanup and repair much harder.

Aren't the more important areas near the center? I have no idea, but it seems from that vantage point the most logical thing to do is aim for the heart of it. I dunno.

mookie9999

Specifics wrote:

I pose to you, have you actually read the page you posted and what do you think about what is suggested?
As it seems that you are trying yourself to deny the whole thing using the very tactic described.

Wait a second, I'm trying to deny what whole thing?? What I've read so far on the page is the eyewitness accounts of the plane hitting the Pentagon. Additional link needed to click on. I also watched the BBC video that I had never seen prior to today. To be honest with you I haven't read over the rest of the page. I just found the page today, and currently am at work. But what I have read so far via the eyewitness accounts ( http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/911_pentagon_eyewitnesses.html) is that without a doubt, a passenger plane hit the Pentagon.

mookie9999

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

Another question I have on the pentagon thing is why fly so low to the ground and risk crashing beforehand when they could have just aimed for the center of it like a hitting a bullseye but at an angle. Mind you the pilot apparently sucked and could barely fly a Cessna. It certainly would make a bigger mess and make the cleanup and repair much harder.

Aren't the more important areas near the center? I have no idea, but it seems from that vantage point the most logical thing to do is aim for the heart of it. I dunno.

I'll answer this and hopefully you will answer my question of where is the plane if it didn't crash into the Pentagon. I believe your assumption to be correct that if they hit the center it would have made the cleanup that much harder. But, I believe you answered your own question in that the pilot wasn't the best, and probably got lucky that he hit the damn building at all. Much harder feat than hitting the twin towers. Now your turn.

Specifics

mookie9999 wrote:

Wait a second, I'm trying to deny what whole thing?? What I've read so far on the page is the eyewitness accounts of the plane hitting the Pentagon. Additional link needed to click on. I also watched the BBC video that I had never seen prior to today. To be honest with you I haven't read over the rest of the page. I just found the page today, and currently am at work. But what I have read so far via the eyewitness accounts ( http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/911_pentagon_eyewitnesses.html) is that without a doubt, a passenger plane hit the Pentagon.

Ok, im not assuming, but i am guessing, that you're not going to be loving the page quite as much when you read it all I think its very interesting and its a thought i've had for a while.

However it does seem like a quite a feat of flying for a partially trained terrorist. Isn't landing the hardest part of flying supposedly??

RolandTD20Kdrummer

mookie9999 wrote:

Now were getting somewhere. So the supposed plane (Flight 77) never hit the Pentagon? Ok, where is it? Where are the passengers? Since so many people speak out for the conspiracy side from Europe, what do you think of this video by the BBC? http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/ppfinal.html

Disregard the majority of the information on the page considering how it will debunk what you hold in your heart to be true, and just focus on the first video down from the front. Granted it doesn't show the plane hitting the pentagon, but let me know what you think.

Maybe it's a plane. I just can't tell. An interesting question is why were the Sheraton and Citgo tapes confiscated immediately the crash? How was that in their thought process right away? It would probably take them at least 5 minutes just to walk to their car and start driving over there. So that's more or less an immediate reaction. Wierd. Boom...quick get the tapes!

You would think they'd be like... oh fuck! ...whoa! Get over the shock then react. It's odd that they had the frame of mind to immediately race over and snap up the tapes. I read somewhere the Sheraton folks were actually watching their taped footage when the FBI arrived. I wonder what they saw?

It could be so easy to clear this pentagon thing up. Why not do that? You would think they would want to show people the tapes for that reason alone. Why didn't they at least say the confiscated tapes didn't show anything conclusive instead of hiding them? That would have been a no brainer. Also I'm sure the pentagon had another camera that saw something.

It doesn't make a lot of sense.

Specifics

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

Maybe it's a plane. I just can't tell. An interesting question is why were the Sheraton and Citgo tapes confiscated immediately the crash? How was that in their thought process right away? It would probably take them at least 5 minutes just to walk to their car and start driving over there. So that's more or less an immediate reaction. Wierd. Boom...quick get the tapes!

You would think they'd be like... oh fuck! ...whoa! Get over the shock then react. It's odd that they had the frame of mind to immediately race over and snap up the tapes. I read somewhere the Sheraton folks were actually watching their taped footage when the FBI arrived. I wonder what they saw?

It could be so easy to clear this pentagon thing up. Why not do that? You would think they would want to show people the tapes for that reason alone. Why didn't they at least say they confiscated tapes didn't show anything conclusive instead of hiding them? That would have been a no brainer. Also I'm sure the pentagon had another camera that saw something.

It doesn't make a lot of sense.

Read the link that mookie posted. See what you think about it. You might have heard it before or thought about it yourself i dont know. I find it an intriguing theory when its all added up.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

Another thing is, I know it's a walk on the dark side, but did they find enough remains to identify for the families on 77?

To put in perspective, they probably don't really give a shit about a few lives on an airplane. I mean they're over there bombing the tar out of neighborhoods and killing a lot of innocent Iraqi's, and putting troops into harms way (dead) over a war not a lot of people see as even legitimate in the first place.

Given that mindset and the scope of what's going on...what's a few people on a plane? Sounds pretty sick, but in reality they're doing it every day and don't lose a wink at night.

They could have landed the plane anywhere, hooked up gas to the plane's ventilation system, offed everyone and done whatever afterwards.

It's crazy, but I'm just saying. I've read a bunch of eyewitnees that saw and heard a missile.

It seems for every person that saw a plane, another saw a missile. Crazy...

And I do believe an airplane can disintegrate like that. If it was a plane it definitely vaporized nicely. Which is possible.

I just watched this vid:
http://www.pentagonstrike.co.uk/flash.htm

RolandTD20Kdrummer

Another thing on 77

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Sep2001/200109114a_hr.jpg

The lawn looks perfect!

spiral out

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

Another thing on 77

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Sep2001/200109114a_hr.jpg

The lawn looks perfect!

I'm sure one of the guys will be along shortly with a perfectly resonable explanation.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

No one could have ever imagined 9/11.... :rolleyes: we didn't know how to react....it was all such a huge suprise :rolleyes:

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/wtcdrill3.wmv

"In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way."
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Vedderlution_Baby

Why not focus on the Bush administration ignoring information that they had handed to the by the previous administration and information they obtained under their own watch. I mean, you got the group that believes it was a terrorist plot, nothing else. Then you got the group that believes it wasn't just a terrorist plot and something pretty fucking foul is a afoot. These two groups are never going to agree with each other so forget all that. can we not agree that the Bush administration willingly ignored information that not only dealt directly with this nation's security, but information that if had been acted upon would have certainly saved american lives?

RolandTD20Kdrummer

sowing the seeds of fear...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZF6GBpWwzI&mode=related&search=

Coming back to life

Specifics wrote:

Ok, im not assuming, but i am guessing, that you're not going to be loving the page quite as much when you read it all I think its very interesting and its a thought i've had for a while.

However it does seem like a quite a feat of flying for a partially trained terrorist. Isn't landing the hardest part of flying supposedly??

I'm not a yank, I've never lived there, but even I know they had flying lessons. Come on.

Vedderlution_Baby

Coming back to life wrote:

I'm not a yank, I've never lived there, but even I know they had flying lessons. Come on.

I believe that the flight instructors said that the ones learning to fly could barely handle the small training aircraft, so a 747 is out of the question.

69charger

Vedderlution_Baby! wrote:

I believe that the flight instructors said that the ones learning to fly could barely handle the small training aircraft, so a 747 is out of the question.

Really? Pick up a copy of Microsoft Flight Simulator X. Not that difficult especially when the real pilots already had it in the air.

FYI it wasn't a 747.

gue_barium

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

Another question I have on the pentagon thing is why fly so low to the ground and risk crashing beforehand when they could have just aimed for the center of it like a hitting a bullseye but at an angle. Mind you the pilot apparently sucked and could barely fly a Cessna. It certainly would make a bigger mess and make the cleanup and repair much harder.

Aren't the more important areas near the center? I have no idea, but it seems from that vantage point the most logical thing to do is aim for the heart of it. I dunno.

That's a good question.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

gue_barium wrote:

That's a good question.

The only thing I can think of is that the more senior staff positions are situated in the outer rings because of the "office with a view concept".

MakingWaves

This is an article from a Russian webpage...I think.

Now it all makes sense! The Rutgers story is actually part of the 9/11 conspiracy that Imus knew about and they had to get him fired. The Russians are on top of things.

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/13-04-2007/89728-Don_Imus-0

gue_barium

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

The only thing I can think of is that the more senior staff positions are situated in the outer rings because of the "office with a view concept".

The pilot/terrorist may have also made the flyover to get a visual on the Pentagon in the first place. It still seems shady to me, though, with the testimony of experienced pilots, etc..

RolandTD20Kdrummer

MakingWaves wrote:

This is an article from a Russian webpage...I think.

Now it all makes sense! The Rutgers story is actually part of the 9/11 conspiracy that Imus knew about and they had to get him fired. The Russians are on top of things.

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/13-04-2007/89728-Don_Imus-0

I guess Rosie is next then...when things get too tied up in the semantics, I thank god for funny vids like this:

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-6046596687847798944

Oh man, sometimes you just have to sit back and laugh at all the goings on