The Pentagon on 9/11

Discussion in '9/11' started by Bob0627, Nov 1, 2016.

  1. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    3,119
    Likes Received:
    357
    Trophy Points:
    83
    There is a tremendous amount of controversy regarding the alleged large airplane impact at the Pentagon among those who don't buy the OCT. Some well known researchers claim that using the scientific method, they have concluded that a large plane did indeed impact the Pentagon on 9/11. They do not make any claims about any alleged hijacking or that any human pilot guided the alleged plane into the Pentagon, just that it was a large plane and very likely Flight 77. There are several articles and videos on the subject at this site:

    http://www.scientificmethod911.org/pentagon.html

    Many posters in this forum reject the idea that a large plane impacted at the Pentagon for many reasons. I personally am not convinced about anything about the Pentagon given the entity that gave us the story and the lack of key evidence, namely videos and the missing matching of serial numbers from the alleged recovered parts (especially the FDRs) to the actual logs of the physical planes, among other issues. And unlike one article called Bringing Closure to the 9/11 Pentagon Debate, IMO there is no closure to be had without a legitimate investigation into 9/11, which I know will never happen. Nor do I believe the Pentagon controversy distracts from anything with regard to 9/11 OCT skeptics, just the opposite, everything about 9/11 should be on the table, nothing should ever be omitted/ignored. The OCT after all, was and still remains a criminal fraud in its entirety.

    http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2016/10/07/bringing-closure-to-the-911-pentagon-debate/

    I would like a discussion on the subject with those who don't buy the OCT. Note this would not be about the Hani Hanjour myth, I don't believe anyone who rejects the OCT believes that fairy tale story and as already explained, it is not part of the scientific method used on the subject.

    There is a 3+ hour long video presentation by Barbara Honegger where she rejects the large airplane impact theory in favor of explosives. It's called Behind the Smoke Curtain:

    [video=youtube;sALa-E56Zms]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sALa-E56Zms[/video]

    And a paper that refutes her claim called The Pentagon Event: The Honegger Hypothesis Refuted

    http://www.scientificmethod911.org/docs/Honegger_Hypothesis_042916.pdf

    Note that the source for all the above are from those I personally consider reliable and/or genuine experts.

    Of course everyone is invited, I am not in any position to say otherwise. However please keep in mind that I may not respond to those I consider disingenuous posters, depending on the content of their individual post. I'm much more interested in a discussion on the subject with those who do not buy the OCT.
     
  2. cjnewson88

    cjnewson88 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,054
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    38
    In all honesty the Pentagon attack no-plane theories was one of the biggest downfalls of the truther movement, because it was so easy for average Joe to do a 2 minute google image search see for themselves that an aircraft did crash there. Once people realised conspiracy theorists could be dishonest with that, it sewed doubt into everything else they were saying. You can't have 1/4th of the day be a legitimate terrorist attack and the other 3/4th be a government conspiracy, it just doesn't work. Ultimately over the years the conspiracy theories have unraveled and now we're left with a die hard tiny minority which still believe the no-planer nonsense.. but I digress..

    Over the years I collected as much of the Pentagon attack evidence I could into one place:

    http://therightbloggerbastard.blogspot.co.nz

    Included is a full rundown of the pilot hijacker Hani Hanjour. He was more than capable of piloting the aircraft. His name was on the passenger list, along with 4 other al qaeda terrorists, with video of all of them boarding the aircraft. Once you have a look at the analysis of the flight path leading up to the Pentagon, you'll see it was not that hard to pilot at all.
     
  3. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,248
    Likes Received:
    60
    Trophy Points:
    48
  4. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    3,119
    Likes Received:
    357
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Thanks for your input but this thread is NOT about any "truthers", "truther movement" or any other boogieman. It is also not about Hani Hanjour as already explained. It is also not about OCT defenders parroting the OCT or defending the OCT. If that's what it was about, all you need to do is provide a link to the 9/11 Commission Report and the NIST reports. This thread is about whether a large commercial airliner impacted the Pentagon or not for non-OCT believers/defenders. And it was created just because some reliable expert non-OCT believers claim that the issue is settled and believe that the Pentagon question is a distraction.
     
  5. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    3,119
    Likes Received:
    357
    Trophy Points:
    83
    A directory to the New Pearl Harbor video with regard to the Pentagon (note some of it is not part of this discussion):

    [video=youtube;8DOnAn_PX6M]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DOnAn_PX6M[/video]

    PART 4 - THE PENTAGON

    0.02:35 - Downed light poles
    0.03:30 - The missing plane
    0.04:30 - The official version
    0.05:24 - Problems with the official version (wing, ailerons, tail, engines)
    0.13:09 - The mystery hole
    0.14:10 - The debunkers' explanations
    0.16:20 - Conclusions on damage analysis
    0.17:00 - The missing tapes
    0.18:30 - Security video analysis
    0.23.40 - Pentagon summary
     
  6. Shinebox

    Shinebox Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    572
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    18
  7. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,248
    Likes Received:
    60
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Here's some more info.
    http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=10632
    http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=11037

    National Security Alert - Sensitive Information Part 1/8
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGvXVzdlcQk

    It seems that a lot of witnesses just saw the 757 flying toward the Pentagon and then saw the explosion but were too far away to see the actual crash. This is consistent with the scenario of a 757 flying over the Pentagon and landing at the airport behind it while something else caused the explosion.
    http://www.citizeninvestigationteam.com/faq/can-north-side-plane-hit
     
  8. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,248
    Likes Received:
    60
    Trophy Points:
    48
  9. Shinebox

    Shinebox Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    572
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    18
    sure Scott ... all the witnesses were in on "it" ... and it flew over the Pentagon and landed at an airport behind it? ... I guess all the ATCs were in on "it" too? ...
     
  10. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,248
    Likes Received:
    60
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Start watching this at the 7:25 time mark.

    National Security Alert - Sensitive Information Part 5/8
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YPp4TYs7es

    National Security Alert - Sensitive Information Part 6/8
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CSX4p6i1qR4


    There were witnesses who saw the plane after it had flown over the Pentagon.

    In an operation as big as this one there are going to be some bogus planted witnesses who are going to support the official story and say they saw a 757 hit the Pentagon. In a real terrorist attack there wouldn't be so many other witnesses who contradict the official story by saying there was a plane flying away on the other side.
     
  11. Shinebox

    Shinebox Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    572
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    18
    people with an airliner flying 40 feet over their heads do not see right banks or straight path ... their were no explosives attached to the light poles ... get over it Scott ... a hijacked plane hit the Pentagon ... Jeebus man ...
     
    Margot2 likes this.
  12. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,248
    Likes Received:
    60
    Trophy Points:
    48
    This woman's testimony supports the scenario of a bomb exploding.

    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 downed light poles could easily have been set up in advance.
    http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=9632&st=0&start=0


    This explains the passengers' remains we are told were found at the Pentagon.

    Painful Deceptions 911 Documentary by Eric Hufschmid Full Version
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jXfm2y5Ifw
    (43:45 time mark)


    Here's a short summary of that eight-part video in case there's anybody who doesn't have time to watch it.
    http://wtcdemolition.com/blog/node/2170
     
  13. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    3,119
    Likes Received:
    357
    Trophy Points:
    83
    And all that and more, much, much more, is ample reason why the Pentagon issue is far from settled.
     
  14. cjnewson88

    cjnewson88 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,054
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Fly over plane is nonsense that CIT made up and was debunked years ago. Radar doesn't show a fly over. Flight data recorder doesn't show a fly over. Despite what you claim, not a single eye witness saw a fly over.
     
  15. l4zarus

    l4zarus Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2012
    Messages:
    823
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Hold on, isn't this stuff from those two marketing guys is SoCal? Ranke and Aldo? Weren't they supposed to be "in danger for their lives" or something while doing their "research"? I dimly remember them from JREF and not in a good way.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Then you need to start a private group or forum just for "truthers". While you are posting in a pubic forum, except replies from everyone.

    Hope that helps.
     
  16. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    3,119
    Likes Received:
    357
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I don't need to do any such thing for your personal demons and your dictate, I started this thread for the purpose I stated. What you do (or don't do) is your business. Like it or don't is also your business.

    Tell me something I didn't already acknowledge.

    So far no, you haven't contributed anything within the purpose of this thread.
     
  17. l4zarus

    l4zarus Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2012
    Messages:
    823
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Great. You're entitled to your feelings.

    Now about the marketing clowns from SoCal. I can't find the thread right now, it was either at Intl Sceptics or the SLC forums, but I definitely remember one of them shrieking about how their lives were at risk or in danger. What are they up to now? Their forum looks dead except for one guy who isn't even part of CIT:

    z3.invisionfree.com/CIT/index.php?showtopic=1892


    Because, to state the obvious, he's been conned by a couple of frauds who long since bailed.

    [last activity of Aldo was late Oct 2016. Last activity of Ranke Mar 2015]

    Other exciting topics endorse by these clowns:

    Pinned: The Franklin Scandal
    Pinned: Obama
    Pinned: Inspirational Words from the Bible


    You consider these people credible why again, Bob? Why are you pushing their theories? Why don't they come here themselves?
     
  18. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    3,119
    Likes Received:
    357
    Trophy Points:
    83
    The paper called The Pentagon Event: The Honegger Hypothesis Refuted contains the following on Page 9:

    In previous websites14, articles15 and papers16, the authors of this paper have concluded that a large plane, a Boeing 757-200, most probably Flight AA 77, did in fact impact the Pentagon on 9/11. While some questions still remain, there is no compelling reason at this time to question the identity of the plane.

    http://www.scientificmethod911.org/docs/Honegger_Hypothesis_042916.pdf

    I disagree (note the use of the qualifier "most probably"), there is one highly significant reason to question the identity (AA 77) of the plane (assuming a plane did impact the Pentagon). The fact remains that none of the allegedly recovered parts' serial numbers (including the allegedly recovered RFD) were matched to the logs of the physical plane designated as Flight 77, in direct contradiction to standard airline (NTSB) crash investigation protocol. Without that, there can never be a conclusive claim that the plane in question was actually AA 77. While the possibility exists that it may have been a large plane (and that is not settled by any means) that impacted the Pentagon, it could have just as easily been a plane other than AA 77.
     
  19. cjnewson88

    cjnewson88 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,054
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    38
    How do you know? Have you asked the NTSB or the FBI about this? What was your response?

    Source this, because it is complete nonsense. The only reason they would track serial numbers for the sole purpose of identifying which aircraft it came from, would be if multiple aircraft collided. The main reason they track serial numbers is for if they wanted to trace a specific part which caused the accident to occur.

    What nonsense. AAL77 was was loaded with passengers and crew, and departed from IAD. It was tracked on radar by multiple radar sites for the entirety of its flight. It had 5 al Qaeda terrorists on board. It was hijacked the same morning as 3 other airliners were. It was spotted by many crashing into the Pentagon. And inside the Pentagon, they found American Airlines debris, the black box from AAL77, passenger bodies DNA identified inside the Pentagon. What f****** more do you need????
     
  20. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,248
    Likes Received:
    60
    Trophy Points:
    48
    The crash site in not consistent with a 757's having crashed there.
    http://physics911.net/missingwings/


    This pilot says that the maneuvers that flight 77 had allegedly done just before the alleged crash were impossible.

    Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXA-enq65ng


    The security video analysis makes it pretty clear that there was manipulation of the footage shown to the public.

    September 11 -- The New Pearl Harbor (FULL)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DOnAn_PX6M


    The plane parts found in the rubble were plantable so they aren't proof of anything as they may have been planted before the alleged crash.


    I'm convinced that a 757 didn't hit the Pentagon. Whether the damage was caused by a bomb, a smaller plane, or a missile, I don't know.
     

Share This Page