The Pentagon on 9/11 - MODERATOR WARNING ISSUED

Or maybe I like to let anyone else who reads this thread know that you have no idea what you are talking about, non-pilot.

 

Sorry, that won't work either, 9/11 isn't about me. The OCT "hijacker" story is still amazingly preposterous. For those interested, this website gets into detail about the OCT "hijackers":

http://www.consensus911.org/the-911-consensus-points/

See Consensus Points E, H and V. And the rest ... if interested. If not, of course please skip.

The content for the site was put together by a collaboration of several prestigious members.

http://www.consensus911.org/panel-members/

http://www.consensus911.org/honorary-members/

I do appreciate that you reminded me about the OCT "hijackers" though. Thank you.

 

You're playing dumb about this info.

http://www.911-strike.com/ldsxox1.gif

April Gallup - Was there a bomb in the Pentagon?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88JQL4esHFg
(2:20 time mark)


This expert's testimony supports the idea of there not having been a plane crash.

http://www.physics911.net/georgenelson
(excerpt)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft — and in most cases the precise cause of the accident. This is because every military and civilian passenger-carrying aircraft have many parts that are identified for safety of flight. That is, if any of the parts were to fail at any time during a flight, the failure would likely result in the catastrophic loss of aircraft and passengers. Consequently, these parts are individually controlled by a distinctive serial number and tracked by a records section of the maintenance operation and by another section called plans and scheduling.
----------------------------------------------------------------

The crash site in not consistent with a 757's having crashed there.
http://physics911.net/missingwings/


The above info shows that no 757 hit the Pentagon. That area of the picture you say is a plane is really just a blur. If we start with this solid proof and work from there, we can deduce that the picture can only be an attempt at damage-control by the purpetrators. It's a doctored picture. The supposed smoke and the supposed plane were probably both added. As for the narrator's seeing the nose where you see smoke, that was just his theory of what the perpetrators were trying to make us think when they doctored the picture. You just have a different interpretation.

 

Not necessarily. There could have very well been a plane crash. The problem is that it's obvious they didn't want to physically identify the plane (if it was a plane). In other words, another obvious coverup just like everything about 9/11. And in doing so, it is quite likely that it wasn't AA77, otherwise I'm sure they would be eager to prove it was.

 

More than enough witnesses and debris, light poles etc to prove a plane hit the Pentagon ... was at AA77? ... I can't possible say with 100% accuracy but the fact that a Boeing is missing along with the passengers and crew (and of course the alleged hijackers) points me toward the conclusion that AA77 hit the Pentagon ... serial numbers yada yada ... American Airlines was obviously satisfied with what happened as they collected (unless they were in on it too?) ...

that's my take on the Pentagon ... but it's not about me of course ...

 

Oh I should have added that there were at least 2 FOIA requests for the serial number match and both were denied.

http://911blogger.com/node/16089

Note that some of the links in the content above are dead but I've seen the FOIA responses.

Thanks for reminding me Shiner. I'll try to find the right links when I get a chance, just for you, not.

Obviously.

 

This isn't quite what I was looking for but nonetheless is very interesting. An excerpt:

Point Flt-4: Unexplained Black Box Anomalies for the Four 9/11 Planes

According to a file released by the NTSB in response to an FOIA request from Aidan Monaghan, the flight data file for American Flight 77, which was based on this FDR, was created at 11:45 PM on Thursday, September 13. This is a serious contradiction within the official story: According to the Pentagon, the FBI, and even the NTSB, the FDR was found early on the morning of Friday September 14, and authorities later in the day were hoping that information on it could be recovered. And yet according to the NTSB file released only after there was a FOIA request for it, the file based on flight data file for AA 77 had already been created the previous day. How could the file based on the AA flight data have been created a day before the FDR itself was found? [17]

According to an NTSB investigation handbook, accident investigators are required to list the manufacturer/model, serial number, and maintenance readout of the Flight Data Recorder. [18] However, there have been no serial numbers published for any of the recovered black boxes from the four flights. [19] Retired Air Force Colonel George Nelson, a specialist in aircraft accidents, reports that every plane has many “time-change parts” which must be changed periodically because they are crucial for flight safety. Each time-change part has a distinctive serial number. These parts are virtually indestructible, so an ordinary fire resulting from an airplane crash could not possibly “destroy or obliterate all of those critical time-change parts or their serial numbers.” [20] That the serial numbers on the AA 77 black boxes were not reported is another serious problem with the official account.

http://www.consensus911.org/point-flt-4/

An intelligent person who is truly interested asks questions about the OCT ... many of them and always holds officials accountable for their actions (or non-actions). One who has another agenda defends everything, including the officials, often trivializing their gross failures and asks no questions about the OCT.

 

The ease with which the masses believe fake news stories is clearly demonstrated with this story. It matters not the facts, if the government and media tell a spectacular story, many ask no questions and happily consume the fake news. UA77 is a classic case of fake news.

 

Oh, I forgot ... the media is in on the conspiracy also ...

perhaps that''s why nobody has broken open the "real" story of what happened on 9/11 and won that Pulitzer ...

 

Finally! A truthful and accurate statement from Shinebox! Even a blind hog finds the occasional acorn, LOL.

Yes Shinebox, now you get it--yes, the media is very much in on the coverup.

 

awesome ... now could you move your post over to the "How Many at a Minimum ..." thread and answer the OP ... please tell us who was in on it ... I don't care about the number of people, just the organizations needed according to your beliefs ... thanks in advance ...

 

How am I supposed to know who exactly was in on it? If you think I work at the Pentagon, you would be wrong.

I am but an ordinary citizen who it took 5 years to figure out he had been duped by the official story. Better late than never, I know understand I was fooled by the terrific sleight-of-hand practiced by the perpetrators, whoever exactly they might be.

Am I extraordinary in finally discovering I was tricked? No, I'm not.

 

If this really is such a surprise to you, you should check out some of this info.
http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=477904&page=12&p=1066772020#post1066772020

 

you have only been tricked by the Truther Movement ... gullibility and confirmation bias coupled with disinformation ...

learn how to summarize Scott ... I'm getting tired of the same links that show nothing over and over ...

 

You mean it took you 5 years to see a 10 minute youtube clip that immediately exposed 'the truth' and you have been too lazy to look up an explanation for the last 10 years?

 

without question, you just figured that out?

 

Show nothing? A lot of viewers are probably checking out the info and they can see that it shows a lot of important stuff and not nothing.

You're basically just handwaving away the info.
http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=477904&page=12&p=1066772020#post1066772020

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand-waving
(excerpts)
----------------------------------
Hand-waving (with various spellings) is a pejorative label for attempting to be seen as effective – in word, reasoning, or deed – while actually doing nothing effective or substantial.[1] It is most often applied to debate techniques that involve fallacies, misdirection and the glossing over of details.
----------------------------------
Handwaving is frequently used in low-quality debate, including political campaigning and commentary, issue-based advocacy, advertising and public relations, tabloid journalism, opinion pieces, Internet memes, and informal discussion and writing. If the opponent in a debate or commentator on an argument alleges hand-waving, it suggests the proponent of the argument, position or message has engaged in one or more fallacies of logic,[2] usually informal, and/or glossed over non-trivial details,[2] and is attempting to wave away challenges and deflect questions, as if swatting at flies.
----------------------------------

That info pretty much discredits this post of yours whether you recognize it or not.
http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=482175&page=26&p=1067020694#post1067020694

 

I don't need your definitions Scott as I have accused troofers here of hand waving on numerous occasions ... I also don't need your links ... please post or cut and paste from your links relevant passages to support your ridiculous claims ...

when this is the first link, I know I'm dealing with a child ... http://www.thismodernworld.org/arc/1...ntion-span.gif

 

Are you now?

 

yes, people with childlike minds living in fantasy worlds ...

 

Yeah a world where "troofers" under your bed keep you awake every night.

 

no, I rather enjoy troofers ... they amuse me ...

 

Yeah I stand corrected sonny.

 

No, I was tricked by the official story, at first. Though I had some questions, I mostly believed the official story for about 5 years.

By coming to terms with the fact that I had been deceived, I found some large element of the truth, and was, thereby liberated to some degree. Just as ignorance is often bliss, so too the truth can set you free.

- - - Updated - - -

No, it took me 5 years to discover my ignorance. For 5 years I never knew that WTC 7 had come down. It was a magnificent deception.

 

Hani Hanjour could not pilot a small aircraft let alone a 757.absolutely ridiculous...read pilots for 9/11truth and see what the professionals have to say about this...