September 11, 2001 (long read)

Smdio,thanks for the I phone thread answer,wanted to visit your thread,read most pages.Here's my take:

If there are some insane countries who will come up with a plan of killing 5000 citizens so that they will have a right/justification to start some wars,therefore changing the governments that will obey them,sell cheap oil,I'm sure USA is one of themIn fact,there might be a time that we'll be all dead and 80-100 years later next generations would know it's done for the future benefits,safety of americans,and 5000 citizens had to be lost unfortunately etc etc.Not hard to imagine,after all,didn't we kill our own president Kennedy

But my feeling/opinion is the government didn't set this up,but government forces,the army,CIA all had the information,data,knowledge of the attack,they thought it's more beneficial/profitable to let it happen rather than arresting those guys.Mohammed Atta,one of the terrorists was interrogated for few hours and they have found information/plan about the September 11 attack in his laptop,.the bastard is released after few hours.

There is no way there can be hijacking,attacking towers etc on this land with this big magnitude of terrorist action without CIA and government knowing it.I'm sure of that.

If they arrested the guys before the attack,they wouldn't have enough support to send troops to afghanistan,iraq,not that usa always seek for the permission/common agreement of nato countries,but i think they agreed they should let it happen,we will lose couple thousand citizens but the future of usa is more important than them.

104 directly saw the plane hit the Pentagon.

6 were nearly hit by the plane in front of the Pentagon. Several others were within 100-200 feet of the impact.

26 mentioned that it was an American Airlines jet.

39 others mentioned that it was a large jet/commercial airliner.

2 described a smaller corporate jet. 1 described a "commuter plane" but didn't mention the size.

7 said it was a Boeing 757.

8 witnesses were pilots. One witness was an Air Traffic Controller and Pentagon tower Chief.

2 witnesses were firefighters working on their truck at the Pentagon heliport.

4 made radio calls to inform emergency services that a plane had hit the Pentagon.

10 said the plane's flaps and landing gear were not deployed (1 thought landing gear struck a light pole).

16 mentioned seeing the plane hit light poles/trees, or were next to to the poles when it happened. Another 8 mentioned the light poles being knocked down: it's unknown if they saw them hit.

42 mentioned seeing aircraft debris. 4 mentioned seeing airline seats. 3 mentioned engine parts.

2 mentioned bodies still strapped into seats.

15 mentioned smelling or contacting aviation/jet fuel.

3 had vehicles damaged by light poles or aircraft debris. Several saw other occupied vehicles damaged.

3 took photographs of the aftermath.

Many mentioned false alarm warnings of other incoming planes after the crash. One said "3-4 warnings."

And of course,

0 saw a military aircraft or missile strike the Pentagon.

0 saw a plane narrowly miss the Pentagon and fly away.

"0" FILM OF A PLANE HITTING THE PENTAGON.

really are you this dumb and gullible to believe any of those numbers?

Like i have been saying over and over again, show me 1 damn clear photo of the plane heading towards the Pentagon and then this arguement is over, but there is no photos because a damn plane didnt hit the friggin building.  Isnt it amazing how that specfic side of the building was being worked on at the time. 

Fuckin clues are right in front of you dummies, but you wont let your minds take it in, instead you let the govt brain wash you with their bullshit.

didn't the plane hit the wrong side or some crap? what's the debunking side on the idea that the hole is to small or that it would be near imposable to hit it w/o skid marks? also no room for the wings or tale of  the plane from the hole, or that for the first time since having the ability f-16's were not sent up, the plane was of course for 45 minuets. i also heard something that's probably bullshit about the possibility that a war game was going on about the same situation of 9/11, most if not all of this has an explanation, anyone got a link

smdio even if you had a team of lawyers, it's the Internet its going to look like bullshit, no matter whats true with your personal life lets only deal with what we can show with links about the topic, most of the research about 9/11 has been on the Internet unfortunately credibility is hard enough to find on the topic, so lets not add insult to injury

even if war games were taking place and i really believe that to be bullshit, how the hell couldnt they have fighter jets or a missile ready to take out this airliner which was heading for one of the most secure buildings on the planet?  Shit our enemies might as well do a full scale assault on our stuff, since it appears we have no defense systems to defend anything.

You can bet your ass there are fighter jets on standby 24/7/365 with no other mission but to guard buildings like the Pentagon, Whitehouse, etc etc.  Also we have no missile systems to shoot down planes?  Yeah right, maybe the chumps that are brain washed by the govt will believe all their bullshit excuses, but i dont buy any of them.  They didnt send anything up, because they didnt want to stop this shit from happening. Amazing how that side of the building didnt have any important people working over there because it was getting worked on.  They knew exactly where to fire the missile into the building to do the least amount of damage.

Interestingly, Vice President Cheney was apparently in charge of ALL of the war games and coordinated the government's "response" to the attacks  

https://www.911proof.com/9.html

Quote Originally Posted by Spitfire15:

The plane crashed into the side of the pentagon that was 'under construction', and if my memory serves me correctly 2 people were killed who were in the building


I don't have any great theory about what happened, but it's definitely hard to believe that the construction was a nice coincidence and VERY hard to believe that there is no video


The scenario about what happened on flight 93 never added up in my mind either...

Actually, 125 people died that were inside the Pentagon.  Another 66 were claimed to have died from the passenger list on the plane. 

And you're right about the construction, but there's more than just that.  The construction being done was to fortifiy the building against missile attacks.  It was the only area of the building that was specially reinforced to sustain the impact of a high speed missile.

Most of you won't believe me, but I encourage you to do your own research on the subject

Sorry that I missed this question before Drizle.  I'm doing my best to answer everyones questions and I guess sometimes I miss one along the way.  Great question though, but I do have an answer.

Immediately after 9/11 (I believe it was in the first few weeks), both Brooks and Lagasse were interviewed by the Library of Congress to recount their recollections of the day.  I don't have the link anymore but it is indeed on the internet somewhere.  Both Brooks and Lagasse admitted that they did not see the plane hit the Pentagon, but did see a huge explosion in the same direction that the plane was traveling.

I believe the CIT team chose to let out the part of the interview in which Brooks and Lagasse say they saw the plane strike the building, because it completely contradicted what they went on record saying.  Ranke and his team from CIT viewed this as a lie, and intentionally omitted it from the interview, but I don't believe it was to mislead people. The point of the CIT interview with these people was to confirm a NoC (North of Columbia) approach that Flight 77 took en route to the Pentagon.  If it did indeed take the NoC approach, it is 100% scientifically impossible that the plane hit the downed light poles, and more importantly, caused the very specific damage to the Pentagon on 9/11

Also, there is only ONE PERSON on record saying that they say the plane actually hit the Pentagon.  When under oath, all of the people that tillyo quoted above would not admitt to seeing the plane strike.  Why you ask?  Because they didn't see it.  The only person to go on record saying that he saw the plane fly INTO the building was Mike Walter.  I can get into another 3-4 pages of debate as to why Walter is a lying sack of shit, if you want.  I've spent hours picking his story apart, starting with the fact that he ALSO says the plane take a NoC approach, but then goes on to say that he witnessed the light poles being hit (impossible).

Once again, an NoC approach (north of Columbia Pike, North of Citgo gas station, and directly over the Navy Annex) makes it 100% physically impossible for the plane to strike a single light pole, as well as cause the very specific damage to the Pentagon building. After watching this video, I find it hard to believe that anyone in this thread can admit that any plane hit the Pentagon on 9/11

I'm not sure what this question means.  The Pentagon was the most secure building not only in this country, but in the entire world.  Specifically, this statement refers to the amount of security guards (mostly Secret Service) on duty at the building, the amount of video cameras focused on the building at all times (every one of these cameras has their own specific security guard that monitors each camera at all times.  Yeah, I know, it's nuts.  But look it up for yourself.  The information is available.  There are 158 cameras in total), the airspace of the Pentagon is patrolled by the FAA and the US Government at all times.  If something is to even come close to the flagged airspace, fighter jets are positioned just minutes away at Reagon Int'l airport. 

Since it has been active, the Pentagon has been dubbed as "the most secure building in the world" and has never lost that title.

Oh and the fighter jets positioned at Reagan Int'l on 9/11?  They were "mistakenly" directed over the Atlantic Ocean just minutes before the explosion at the Pentagon.  WHO WRITES THIS STUFF !!!!

I'm going to attack this post now, since I like the fact that your starting to participate since my threat of reporting you for trolling.  Here it goes:

"104 directly saw the plane hit the Pentagon. "

Incorrect.  There is just 1 person that has admitted to the US government that he saw the plane strike the building, and his name is Mike Walter.  I will absolutely devour you in a debate about why Mike Walter is lying, but I encourage you to call my bluff. All of your other 100+ people would not admitt under oath that they actually saw the plane strike the building, only that the saw a plane.

"6 were nearly hit by the plane in front of the Pentagon. Several others were within 100-200 feet of the impact. "

So what? I admitt that Flight 77 was flying very low on 9/11, and flew directly OVER the Pentagon, tailed by a fighter jet, and landed at Reagan Int'l airport just a couple miles from the Pentagon. I am sure there are people who thought they would be struck by the huge low-flying aircraft, as that's a sight that you do not see quite often. Most of the people you are quoting admitted to "ducking and covering their heads" as the plane was approaching, therefore hiding their eyes from the actual impact.

"26 mentioned that it was an American Airlines jet. "

Indeed, we finally agree on something.  Flight 77 did indeed exist and did indeed fly directly over the Pentagon on 9/11. Many people saw the AA aircraft.  I'm not debating this at all. I am however debating that it hit the building.

"39 others mentioned that it was a large jet/commercial airliner."

Refer to my previous answer.  There's no debate that a plane was near the Pentagon on 9/11.

"2 described a smaller corporate jet. 1 described a "commuter plane" but didn't mention the size. "

Although I view this statement as irrelevant and unrelated, don't you think people would easily be able to see the difference between a small corporate jet and a huge 757 Boeing aircraft?

"7 said it was a Boeing 757. "

Once again, I'm not debating this whatsoever.

"8 witnesses were pilots. One witness was an Air Traffic Controller and Pentagon tower Chief."

This is a broad statement.  Witnesses to what? The flyover? The NoC approach? Santa Clause? I have a witness named Terry Morin who is a professional aviator that says the plane flew directly over the Navy Annex building.  Terry was inside the building at the time (in one of the wings in which the roof is exposed) and claimed the plane flew directly over his head.  If this is the case, it again confirms the NoC approach, and makes it physically impossible for the plane to hit the Pentagon.  Something ELSE hit the Pentagon that day.

Continued on next post..

Continued from above..

"4 made radio calls to inform emergency services that a plane had hit the Pentagon."

Really?  Then let me listen to the tapes!  Because from my lawsuit, I'm also seeking all the 911 calls made to emergency officials on 9/11 regarding the Pentagon.  They have been confiscated and deemed classified.  Do you have these tapes?  If you do, I'll pay top dollar. This statement is false and only something you read on the internet.  Do some research on the 9/11 emergency tapes.  It will really piss you off (or should).

"10 said the plane's flaps and landing gear were not deployed (1 thought landing gear struck a light pole). "

I don't see the importance or rellevance of this statement.

"16 mentioned seeing the plane hit light poles/trees, or were next to to the poles when it happened. Another 8 mentioned the light poles being knocked down: it's unknown if they saw them hit. "

Actually, you're wrong.  None of them saw the poles be hit.  How do I know?  Because in all of the witnesses interviews with the US Government, there isn't a single person that admitted to seeing the light poles being hit by anything.  They only admitt that the saw downed light poles, and were in the vicinity of those downed polls (but not while they were hit).  Do you know why they didn't see them hit?  Because if Flight 77 took a NoC approach, it is physically impossible for the aircraft to have hit a single pole.

"42 mentioned seeing aircraft debris. 4 mentioned seeing airline seats. 3 mentioned engine parts. "

Not a single peice of debris has EVER been linked to positively being from Flight 77.  Not a single peice. Every photo ever shown shows the same peices of debris. The engines were never recovered. The onyl debris found was big enough to be pick up by hand.  Keep in mind, None of the debris found has ever been linked to Flight 77.

"2 mentioned bodies still strapped into seats."

Another erroneous statement.  Why?  Because the official government story says that the fuselage disinegrated upon impact.  If this is the case, you would not see any "seats" or "bodies straped to them". This is just a statement that you pulled from the internet.  Further investigation on your behalf will prove it 100% incorrect.

"15 mentioned smelling or contacting aviation/jet fuel. "

Actually, you or whoever made this list modified this statement.  There were nearly 2 dozen people that reported smelling a very unique smell at the Pentagon after the explosion, but they didnt report jet fuel.  What did they smell? Cordite.  Cordite is used in military missiles, such as cruise missiles, for it's explosive characteristics.

"3 had vehicles damaged by light poles or aircraft debris. Several saw other occupied vehicles damaged. "

Wrong once again.  Only one car was struck by a light pole, it was taxi-driver Lyode England.  I can get into a completely separate debate as to why Lyode is lying about his cab being struck, if you want. But your quote above is very incorrect, once again.

"3 took photographs of the aftermath."

So what? Don't say stupid things in my presence, please.

Oh and tillyo, you saved the best for last:

"0 saw a military aircraft or missile strike the Pentagon. "

"0 saw a plane narrowly miss the Pentagon and fly away."

Wrong and WRONG. Multiple reports from eye witnesses are quoted on record stating that they saw a missile like object heading towards the Pentagon.  Also, Pentagon employee Roosevelt Roberts claimed to have seen an aircraft flying directly over the Pentagon shortly after the explosion. There are at least 4 others that witnessed the flyover, and the list continues to grow.