Was the pentagon hit by a plane or a missile on 9/11?

with respect no it didnt the plane they claimed crashed into them was a boeing 747

that sure as hell was not a boeing. trust me i know my planes. that looked a tomahawk similar cruise missile

I never really gave it much thought until I saw this video.

As both an engineer, and someone familiar with aircraft and aviation, there is enough evidence to ask the question that is being asked. At first glance, I would have to say that the damage wasn't caused by an aircraft. Time to look for other photos of the initial crash on the inter net....

i know planes and i know wepoans and i plane use them well when i join the military. beleive me that was a missile

flynavy

and since the three events on sept 11th are linked.....if you find fault with one.....that means you must suspect them all.

the evidence is quite clear..there was no damage outside of the 60 ft on the pentagon....the roof was initially intact...there was no damage to the lawn.

we are not being told the truth.

How can a missile be fired from a passenger plane? I Know the area well, having lived not far from there for 4 years. And I know someone who was working at the Pentagon that day and they sent those of us who know her an email later that day describing what she saw and heard. Also, there were people driving by the Pentagon that day at the time the plane crashed into the Pentagon, and they did not see a missile, they say a plane. One of the people who was in charge of one of the Federal communications offices my own town had just left a meeting at the Pentagon and he too, saw the plane as it crashed into the building. He did not say missile, he said plane, not missile.

And how about telling all the men, women and children who died on that plane that day that it was not their plane that crashed into the Pentagon after all, it was a missile from some other plane in the area and they aren't really all dead. And what happened to this other plane that fired the missile that has never been mentioned or identified?

It could have been that the wings of the plane broke off as it neared the ground and only the fuselage entered the building. But, I was listening to the calls for those who has just witnessed the plane hitting the building that day, the plane that had just barely cleared the top of their car, and no one ever mentioned seeing or hearing a missile, only the one plane.

So if they are now going to say it was a missile, then they best be rounding up all those eye witnesses who saw that plane hit the Pentagon, those whose cars the plane flew right over on its way to the Pentagon and reprogram them to believe the lie about the missile.

And if there was another plane in the area that shot the missile at the same time the plane hit the Pentagon, what happened to it? Did it not show on radar? Did not one else see that plane fire the missile?

I know the people who told me what they saw and heard, and I believe them, as they were right there at the scene when it happened. They are not blind, they are stupid, and they are not liars.

They are, even today, very scared and very emotionally disturbed what they saw and heard that day. It is embedded in their memory forever, I have no reason not to believe them.

To lay this to rest all the Pentagon has to do is release the footage taken of the impact - it would have been captured on video from each of the roof-mounted cameras (there are several dozen on the roof at intervals).

The only footage released to date was actually dated 9/12, and had many frames missing. The roof-mounted cameras are much higher quality than the camera mounted across the way at the guard gate.

If they have nothing to hide, they shouldn't hide it. They should put it all to rest.

with respect no it didnt the plane they claimed crashed into them was a boeing 747

How many planes do you think have crashed into the Pentagon? The one on Sept 11 2001 was a 757.

To lay this to rest all the Pentagon has to do is release the footage taken of the impact - it would have been captured on video from each of the roof-mounted cameras (there are several dozen on the roof at intervals).

The only footage released to date was actually dated 9/12, and had many frames missing. The roof-mounted cameras are much higher quality than the camera mounted across the way at the guard gate.

If they have nothing to hide, they shouldn't hide it. They should put it all to rest.

Yet they have not. Plus they confiscated all the video from other locations.

And how about telling all the men, women and children who died on that plane that day that it was not their plane that crashed into the Pentagon after all, it was a missile from some other plane in the area and they aren't really all dead. And what happened to this other plane that fired the missile that has never been mentioned or identified?

With all due respect for the families, the truth and evidence could put this all to rest but it doesn't add up. Free fall speed of three buildings with no explanation that would allow a building collapse at free fall needs to be addressed as well as the pentagon questions. With respect for those who have died in connection with 9/11 it is time to release any and all information in regards to these events. It is respectful to make sure they didn't die in vain. This includes our soldiers in the Middle East.

firefighters all confirm plane debris.

Aeronatical parts of a cruise missile could also be interpreted as aircraft parts,..

Aeronatical parts of a cruise missile could also be interpreted as aircraft parts

The engines used in 757s are not used in cruise missiles. Neither are the data recorders.

You know it is down right disrespectful to the families that lost loved ones on these flights to say that they didn't hit the buildings. That includes the Towers and the Pentagon. It happened the way we all saw it. (There is video of a plane hitting the Pentagon)

I guess you think FDR knew Pearl Harbor was going to be attacked. If you believe that, I have a bridge I would like to sell you.

No, what's downright disrespectful is to suggest that nobody deserves to know how and why they died, and whether the official story is correct or not.

The dead deserve the truth. So do their families, and so do we.

The engines used in 757s are not used in cruise missiles,..

Show me pictures of the engines and the wings [of the 757] the largest parts of the plane,.. and i'll shut my yap.

http://www.rense.com/general32/phot.htm

Thanks, Ringo.

Certainly

I'm not a skeptic, but if I were, I would say that the photos supplied by Ringo's would be inconclusive (not being antagonistic Ringo, just analytic. No offense intended).

In a crash of this airframe, there would be five big chunks of debris that would survive any fire and pending collapse. Those being the two rotors of the main engines, the main mounts, and the nose gear. most of the rest would be incinerated to the point where it was unrecognizable.

I've got to stick with Occam's Razor on this one until I see more, or don't see more... That being that a 757 did in fact hit the Pentagon.

Thanks Ringo,

as far as i know missles don't have landing gear.

If we're going to spend time looking into conspiracy theories I would suggest the passenger filled plane to France that went down mysteriously off the coast of Long Island.

I have reason to believe that to this day the plane explosion was caused by a missile - due to either a military submarine error or a land based attack.

Either way there was a very air tight clamp down on the ensuing investigation with a Federal investigator's arms rapped firmly around the final report.

Can you imagine what damage that either event would have caused to American exceptionalism?

It had to be covered up if I am correct.

Ringo those photos are more enlightening than any others I've seen thus far.

So the Pentagon will allow pictures of inside the building released but confiscate the surveillance videos of outside the Pentagon even from other sources? Doesn't make sense.

the most guarded building in the world....with more video cameras watching it than there is watching paris hilton...and that is all we get.

no....no cover up there.

UNA_Lion:

So what happened to the passengers on the plane,

Good question.

and how many family members have sued the the government for wrongful death?

Another good question.

If you know, I'd be interested to hear the answer.

My sense is that the families pretty much had to waive the right to sue the government to receive any of the 9/11 hush money that was sold as being compensation.

gee - lots of PIECES ON THE LAWN - identifiable as 757

hugh b, I recall watching news of the aftermath of the Pentagon attack. There was debris all over, and yes, the tail was around, it just wasn't in that photo. They even showed the engines.

And no, Capt Ace, they never said it was a 747.

i disagree,

they should release all pertinent tapes of the event

never once did i ever see anything resembling, even remotely a tail section

who are the contractors that hauled off the engines

SpoxLogic:

...news of the aftermath of the Pentagon attack. There was debris all over, and yes, the tail was around, it just wasn't in that photo. They even showed the engines.

Source please.

Thanks.

pieces

(this appears to be a truther site, but the pictures are good)

http(colon)//911research(dot)wtc7(dot)net/pentagon/analysis/conclusions/debris(dot)html

Whozhiztory, You nailed it. The section of the Pentagon that was hit had those records in it. The DOD had offices in Bldg. 7. Probably all coincidental again? Doesn't anyone wonder where that 2trillion went, and why has it been ignored even to this day?

So has that money ever been found?

I have not been able to find updated info on that...has anyone else?

Nope, never been found nor adequately explained as to why it's missing in the first place. With a 600billion+ annual defense budget just imagine how easy it is to embezzle from those funds. Then there's the 500million in "cash" sent to Iraq that came up missing not so long ago also to consider. These SOBs are stealing our money right from under our noses and we continue to let them do it by not pushing the issues. This is off topic but what about the RICO suit filed against HSBC and JPM for silver manipulation. Where did that investigation end up. Haven't heard a word since the one and only news flash a year ago. Check it out.

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/rico-suit-filed-against-hsbc-and-jpmorgan-silver-market-manipulation

the 500 million in cash...... was explained as being iraqs money that was was released...(we froze their banks so Sadaam could not get to money).. may be may not be.. but looting was def being taking place in a large manner.

May be as you say. I wonder why it was actual cash dollar currency though? Don't they take checks? Looks like they also looted a USAF C-130 filled to the brim with cash dollars as well.

can we say federal reserve.....they get paid for each dollar printed..

gee mike - have they found a cure for head-up-ass-itis?

Please explain? Why do you suffer from it?

I'm Ringo:

none of the conspiracy theorists have ever actually been able to address any of those issues.

None of what you say is supported with any credible evidence.

The first thing you need to do when making these wild claims is to offer some specific evidence, and then the people you are accusing of being unable to address those issues will be able to address that specific evidence.

Right now, you are simply mindlessly repeating wht the military industrial media has programmed you to repeat.

Good luck coming up with hard evidence to support your wild claims, btw.

That was a very long-winded way for you to say you don't have anything to back up the missile nonsense

He has as much to back up his position as you have yours, is what it sounded like to me. What I did get out of Upswings reply is that I did not get from yours, is an open mind, and curiosity for a topic that still has more gray areas than black and white ones. This being the case any responsible person using logic and common sense would not be satisfied with any of the explanations being provided by Government, or Pentagon via media as being adequate without a reasonable doubt along with corroborating evidence to back it up. All I have to say about the video in this seed is, jury is still out in my case. Just more logical questions that need to be answered, but can't, or won't. Those that do wonder along with myself, with understandable reason will continue to be labeled as nutjobs to divert the attention off the real issues here.

I invite anyone to bring any contrary evidence to light. So far, I've never actually seen anyone claiming it to be a missile actually provide ANY evidence of a missile.

I wonder if a "Droan" could be outfitted to resemble any plane debris that might have been found at the site? It already been stated by experienced pilots of which the pilot of the Pentagon plane was not, that "NO" pilot could pull off the maneuvers that it would have taken to crash into the Pentagon in a jet that size, going at the speeds supposedly reported.

They had one guy on video saying it, and a lot of other pilots who cannot come up with any reason why it would be impossible.

Boy you got an answer for everything, don't you. What credentials do you put on the table in this discussion besides denial. The video I saw on the matter had experienced "Pilots" plural, on a simulator trying to do it and none of them could.

Well, as a professional pilot that spent three years flying there, I'd say I know a bit. Knowing many other professional pilots, I'd say they know a bit, too. How much sim time do you have? Have you ever flown one that works just like the real aircraft? I've never seen any such simulator.

No I'm no pilot, but a friend of mine who is a 25yr+ USAF retired test pilot has his doubts it went down as reported. That's good enough for me, to keep questioning the events as has been reported. You also use the word Impossible. Maybe not impossible but very unlikely possible with a pilot of the experience level of that of the pilot flying that aircraft. We must also take into consideration the shear capabilities of that aircraft at those altitudes he was flying at.

Go for it, question all you like. I merely point out that the evidence we CURRENTLY have all points to an airliner. Give me evidence to the contrary, and I'll re-evaluate.

I thought that's what the video contained in this seed did. Offered questionable evidence, to the contrary of what we've been told. How do you explain the lack of heat in this crash to burn items shown in the video?

Wait, so the evidence is that it looks like some plane crashes and not like other plane crashes? Well that qualifies as pretty much any crash ever.

Where did all the plane parts come from? Where did flight 77 disappear to? Why did all those people, including pilots, see a plane crash into the Pentagon if there really wasn't any plane?

Why aren't very combustible office supplies burnt, melted, or show any signs of smoke damage? Take into consideration the proximity of impact and confined area in question. Why is there no video of crash? If there are actual eyewitnesses there is no harm in releasing videos, to back their accounts of what really happen. As to my question of a possible Droan type aircraft being used? Is that a possibility? After all wasn't it travelling in excess of 400mph. At that speed it might have appeared to be a plane. In my opinion you take a passenger jet full of fuel and crash it into the side of a building at 400+ mph you're going to have more damage than that which we have been shown. As another poster suggested releasing just one video showing any part of a passenger airline hitting the Pentagon would put this debate to rest. Why won't they do that simple request to clear any suspicions the public might have?

Ringo...I'm with you on this one....and I have 30 years flying heavies.....the maneuvers can be done to make the flight.

another colonel

by a novice pilot who had only flown small planes??

Marshall,

One who is not adverse to the danger can accomplish the feat...it is the fear of contact with the ground that usually leads to a mistake. These guys did not care. On a side note, I had just left the building weeks prior for a new assignment...two of my friends watched the aircraft strike the building....so, you may be able to see where I find the arguments otherwise presented here.

But, by all means, do enjoy the discussion......

since the novice only had to fly the plane into a building, the SIZE of aircraft really doesn't matter. ever hear of flight simulator marshall? Great TOY and useful for teaching flight control coordination to pilots. It's what the barefoot bandit used to learn to fly (and yes, there is a vast difference between a a light aircraft and commercial jet BUT NOT A LOT IN HOW THEY FLY ONCE THEY ARE IN THE AIR - just the speeds)

birther...truther...iceberg...goldberg...what's the DIFFERENCE? (stupidity on display for all to see)

now this one has been shown before to be a dedicated truther... take that for what it's worth

immediately rules out a large passenger aircraft

Ah, so engines, flight recorder, and tail from a large passenger aircraft all rule out a large passenger aircraft.....suuuuuuure

The evidence includes the near-impossible maneuver any aircraft would have had to have made to hit the front, as opposed to the top, of the Pentagon pursuant to it's claimed flight path

Unless, of course, someone actually knows anything about flying. If they do, then seeing through the make believe of that statement is quite easy.

Ringo:

Ah, so engines, flight recorder, and tail from a large passenger aircraft all rule out a large passenger aircraft.....suuuuuuure

Again, you need to produce hard evidence, sufficient to stand up in a criminal court, that this claim is supported before you can reasonably demand a response to it.

Unless, of course, someone actually knows anything about flying. If they do, then seeing through the make believe of that statement is quite easy.

Again, another hollow claim.

Where is your evidence?

immediately rules out a large passenger aircraft

Again, another hollow claim

You have zero evidence of anything suggesting a missile.

Have you ever flown the same route? I have

I have airplane wreckage in the Pentagon, knowledge of flying, and have flown the same route the plane took.....while YOU have come up with a grand total of nothing.

Ringo:

You have zero evidence of anything suggesting a missile.

Because missiles don't exlode in massive balls of fire?

Hmmm...

Have you ever flown the same route? I have

LOL!

So..?

I have airplane wreckage in the Pentagon, knowledge of flying, and have flown the same route the plane took.....

Great.

Then please share.

while YOU have come up with a grand total of nothing.

Well, I guess if you ignore the fact that the person making the claim that an aircraft hit the Pentagon needs to come up with evidence for that first ...

Evidence has been provided, and you have failed to refute any of it.

You were the one making wild claims about evidence ruling out a plane, while simultaneously being unable to either A) back up your claims or B) refute any of the evidence for a plane

Ringo

there was also residue of explosives in the WTC. does that mean because its there explosives is what brought down the wtc???

for all I know they could of planted landing gear in the building....it proves nothing.....you do not think evidence has ever been planted?? how do we know that those pictures of the "inside" are truly from the pentagon?? because a witness said they did? oh really?? there have never been planted witnesses???

there are a thousand cameras in the area....and the fact that we do not have one video of a plane hitting the pentagon is enough for me to question the validity of any evidence presented. I must stress that it is the most heavily watched building in the world. you cant get within blocks of the pentagon without them seeing you.

also the visual damage to the outside is not consistent to a plane....period.....there was no damage to the building from wings.....nothing..not a scratch..not a broken windown...just a hole...and remember the roof was intact...it fell later...so the picuture that many see was post the roof collapsing.

if you look at pictures right after the incident...there is not even damage to the roof from where the tail would of been.

there are just too many questions...sorry.

for all I know they could of planted landing gear in the building

Oh yeah, nobody would ever notice tons of plane parts being hauled inside an office building.

Oh no, so the tail didn't magically grow taller and more substantial!!!

Sure, deception happens, but for this to be deception would require thousands of people to be in on the secret. Nothing else can be done with the secret that tightly kept, you think the first time would be a US government missile strike killing a bunch of Americans in the middle of the US? That's not very plausible.

they lied about the gulf of tonkin...that at one time people dismissed and said that thousands would of had to have known about it.

they kept it quiet.

they lied about the gulf of tonkin...that at one time people dismissed and said that thousands would of had to have known about it.

Any student of warfare at sea knows that confusion in a 'battle' against unseen opponents is nothing even remotely rare. World War II is full of similar incidents.

Do you recognize no difference between one captain embellishing a confused event and thousands of people deciding to partake in the murder of fellow citizens without anyone either not going along with it and telling or letting it slip later?

considering there was more behind it than the captain....no there is no difference.

There is video of this crash...you know there is....why do they not release it?? there is no reason not to....unless of course the video doesnt match the story presented.

there is no difference

There is a huge difference, you're just not recognizing it.

Second Tonkin incident was a mess (to include Maddox and Turner Joy nearly shooting at each other in the confusion). From looking at the accounts of the incident it seems obvious that 1) the crews thought they were in a genuine fight (especially coming a few days after an actual naval battle in the same area) and 2) In retrospect, there weren't any actual enemy present.

We may have sent the ships in with the intent of giving us a casus belli but I don't think many serious historians look at the Gulf of Tonkin Incident as a deliberate fake. The closest it gets to that is that President Johnson asked for the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution before all the details were known.

Ringo:

Evidence has been provided, and you have failed to refute any of it.

Is the reason you're not providing any evidence to support anything that you've claimed that you don't have any evidence to offer?

Is the reason you're not providing any evidence to support anything that you've claimed

You're confusing you and me.

I notice you still have nothing to support your wild " This evidence includes the near-impossible manouver any aircraft would have had to have made to have hit the front, as opposed to the top, of the Pentagon pursuant to its claimed flight path." claim.

truther

TRUTHER EVIDENCE? Isn't that an OXYMORON? "The sun rises in the east every day therefore the earth must be flat" type of evidence? "They" haven't shown any pictures of "pieces" so it must have been a missile" THAT type of evidence? (of course, the pictures and analyses are out there, just that some are so "dedicated" to the conspiracy CROCK that they just ignore them.)

Of course, it would take just SOOOOO much effort to google for them, eh?

watchbird:

Are you well?

WTC 7 is the LEAST compelling of ANY of it. Only an uneducated fool would ignore the pictures and data and choose to accept the conspiracy theory.

nosedive into the pacific. oops atlantic....sorry...west coast person here.....there is no other ocean but the pacific :)

but overall good question.

If it was a missile where is the 3rd plane and all the people that were on board?

You've heard of the Bermuda Triangle, no?

If it was a missile where did the fireball come from when it hit?

Good question. The explosive physics and effects are very different in a chemical explosive vs. a mechanical explosive. Not to mention the differences in the effects of an explosion on the exterior of a building vs. the interior...

Yep. A missile that was fuzed to detonate instantaneously upon impact might have created an impact hole the size of what happened to the Pentagon exterior wall; but if it was instantaneously fuzed, it could not have penetrated as far as parts of the the plane penetrated.

Conversely, a missile that was set for delayed-impact fuzing could have penetrated as far as the plane did, but would not have created the kind of impact crater (nor the blast scarring) that showed on the exterior wall.

In essence, the damage doesn't match a missile.

Combine this with credible witnesses who saw the plane (some of whom I know; I worked at the Pentagon in 2001, though I was not in the building when the plane hit), the presence of airplane parts (and thousands of witnesses among the Pentagon workers who evacuated as well as the emergency response personnel), and I have to conclude that the building was hit by an airplane.

Conversely, a missile that was set for delayed-impact fuzing could have penetrated as far as the plane did, but would not have created the kind of impact crater (nor the blast scarring) that showed on the exterior wall.

At which point the detonation would have sent parts of the pentagon outwards, rather than collapsing in on itself. Basic explosive physics...

And all of this "conspiracy" stuff can be put to rest by one simple act....that the Pentagon will not do. It's been how many years US Citizens have been asking for the tapes of what happened the moments prior to impact.? Analysis aside; one simple act and over with.

The FBI took the lead on the investigation and control all related information. The pentagon doesn't have them...

Regardless, the damage doesn't fit the missle claim anyway...

Ok whatever agency...one simple act to end this. I'm asking to see what did occur since I was not an eyewitness as most of the citizens of this country were not. Sooooo ok FBI release them please. It's simple...someone has them and someone is keeping them from being released for all these years. I'm not buying it that it is due to "national security issues" since they released pictures of the inside of the pentagon and areal views as well but not the plane hitting the building. I'm not claiming missle I'm asking to see the tapes to make an informed decision on who and what was behind this attack on our country. What is wrong with that?

one simple act to end this

Doubtful...because millions of people witnessed planes hitting the WTC and there's no bull@!$%# conspiracy theories about that, is there?

The gov't doesn't want to give you information? Oh darn...cry me a fuk'n river...

No tears here. Good deflection.

No deflection, I just think it's laughable that people think that the government owes them explanations and evidence for everything. While releasing a video of a plane hitting the pentagon will change your mind, ther are far too many others that have buried themselves in this conspiracy that won't change their mind. Again, everybody saw planes hit the WTC, and yet there is no limit to the theories.

The best evidence against any conspiracy is the people running the gov't. While there are plenty of smart people that work within the gov't, the people that run it are clueless. They can't even balance a budget but yet are somehow able to plan, organize and execute this thing and keep the thouands of people that would have to be involved from being caught or from talking?

Ok so accept everything the the government tells you or decides to omit from your life. That works for you. I like how on the other hand you call them stupid. Notice how failing to balance a budget hasn't effected their personal lives...or pockets.

No, I don't accept or believe everything the gov't says...I just don't get my titties in a twist about it. In the long run, I determine what happens in my life, not the gov't.

My view may be skewed a little bit because I sat in on a briefing once by the lead invesitgator from the fbi that was in charge of the scene at the pgon as part of an anti-terrorism course. I also rely on my knowledge of explosives and effects and can assure you that the damage was not created by a high explosive, such as those that are contained in cruise missles. Oh wait, nevermind...you're not calling it a missle, you just want to see video of an airplane.

And disregard that stuff I just typed. I don't expect you to believe it...you can just fold it into the rest of the story and keep the conspiracy alive...

I just don't get my titties in a twist about it.

Now that was funny...LOL!!!

I don't presume to know what you know or believe. I'm certainly not going to care what actually gets your titties in a twist. But I will keep questioning what and why the gov does certain things or doesn't do certain things especially when it affected the entire US and other countries. Shall we now discuss what you think roasts my rump? LOL!

Shall we now discuss what you think roasts my rump?

Probably a fire about three feet high....

Am I wearing heels?

OK how about 18 inches?

Truthers are a segment of the population who would be better off taking their meds daily

Pretty challenging to stop that sort of attack, particularly one the IFF was turned off on the planes. We really don't have an air defense network in America (certainly not pre-9/11).

We got rid of all of our strategic surface-to-air missiles decades ago, we didn't have a networked IADS, and the old Cold War tactic of having hundreds of aircrew sitting alert waiting for an attack ended when the Cold War ended.

In addition, even though we'd known about the possibility of hijacked airlines being used as weapons since 1994 (the Bojinga plot in the Phillipines), there was no political will to really do much to plus up airport security. Given the pushback that the TSA gets now, can you imagine trying to push for the creation of the TSA (or something like it) in pre-9/11 days? No politician - certainly neither Clinton nor Bush was going to do that.

IFF? You mean transponder? IFF is for military use - the commercial aircraft weren't equipped for military ops

as to TSA - their only purpose is to keep explosives off commercial aircraft. other than that they are teats on a boar hog.

Release the ones showing the plane flying towards and impacting the Pentagon. I'm sure there is plenty since they were confiscated by the Pentagon. The links on snopes are no longer there. Plain and simple the Pentagon is not releasing any photos or video showing the evidence of what happened in the moments leading up to the impact. One of the most guarded buildings doesn't want us to see what happened leading up to impact? We are just supposed to rely on eye witnesses accounts when we know video exists? This adds to mistrust. Really it does. Many of the questions could actually be put to rest and no more myths arise...pretty simple.

Release the ones showing the plane flying towards and impacting the Pentagon.

They were released. Try using google/youtube video

Plain and simple the Pentagon is not releasing any photos or video showing the evidence of what happened in the moments leading up to the impact.

Freedom of information act had the release of all that data in 2006.

So the videos and pictures are there to supplement the eyewitness testimony for those that wish to know the truth. For those that only wish for some kind of conspiracy, no amount of evidence will suffice.

Grainy videos and not one clear shot...at the Pentagon?

Can you link one of the clear videos of the plane flying into the Pentagon that shows it in full view?

If it is classified the freedom of information act will not get all the info released. I looked for videos that were clear not grainy and blurred. Could not find one so if you have seen a clear one please let the rest of us know by providing it.

Grainy videos and not one clear shot...at the Pentagon?

Can you link one of the clear videos of the plane flying into the Pentagon that shows it in full view?

If it is classified the freedom of information act will not get all the info released. I looked for videos that were clear not grainy and blurred. Could not find one so if you have seen a clear one please let the rest of us know by providing it

If I were to provide you with all that you requested, you would still dismiss it as grainy, not clear, altered, doctored, etc. You would not be satisfied until you have altered, doctored, clear and non grainy photos that show a missile or some other object that is not a plane. Of course, your only proof that it is not a plane, is that you disallow any evidence that it is. However, using your methodology, it was not whatever you claim it to have been.

The real conspiracy is the deflection away from real issues by the continuation of this missile myth.

How is show me the evidence that is known to exist deflection? LOL...and when did I say it was a missle? I said if they released the evidence it would put it to rest. It is some 85 tapes that exist according to some sources and yet the ones released show hardly anything. Can I sell you something else sight unseen? Trust me I have it but you just can't see it. I will show you evidence it is here but not the actual item (for security purposes that is).

Can I sell you something else sight unseen?

Which is precisely what the purveyors of your fantasy are attempting. Where is your proof? Oh wait... "they" won't release that information. Also, "they" won't release Obama's long form something or the other. "They", "they", "they", "if", "if","if".

"If" a frog had wings, it wouldn't bump its ass when it jumped and I could prove it if "they" would just release the information that substantiates my claim. lol

You claim fact...a plane crashed into the Pentagon. Fact the Pentagon has surveillance tapes of it doing so. And you talk about frogs' asses if they had wings??? "They" is the gov agency in possession of the tapes (FBI). No fantasy involved in that reality is there?

It actually isn't a fact that the Pentagon has surveillance tapes of it doing so. It's speculation. Fact: some local cameras had their tapes taken. That doesn't necessarily imply that those cameras actually saw anything of note.

The Pentagon doesn't have the video surveillance that you think it does (certainly, it didn't a decade ago). Heck, a guy got away with shooting a Pentagon window last year and they didn't catch him until months later when he was skulking around Arlington Cemetary with ammonium nitrate and a firearm.

The Pentagon doesn't have the video surveillance that you think it does

So my local bank and convenient store had more security than the Pentagon ten years ago? I was on surveillance all day today at work...but the Pentagon has just a few angles covered. Thanks for the info. Pssst the security at my place of employment was put in over a decade ago.

That you don't want to believe me doesn't change the facts of the matter. The building was literally falling apart pre-9/11. There's a reason we spent a decade renovating it. The electrical and plumbing was put in in the 1940s (updated a bit in the 60s), but grossly insufficient.

Pre-9/11, it was common to have pipes leaking water through the ceilings of bathrooms into the level below. The locker room walls in the gym were covered with mold in spots. We didn't even have a building-wide PA or alarm system until 2002.

The Pentagon is a 61-year old office building. It's not a magical fortress.

So the Pentagon lost 2.3 Trillion Dollars and it had no security and was in shambles? All the more reason to ask WTF. Thanks.

You claim fact...a plane crashed into the Pentagon. Fact the Pentagon has surveillance tapes of it doing so. And you talk about frogs' asses if they had wings??? "They" is the gov agency in possession of the tapes (FBI). No fantasy involved in that reality is there?

Hundreds of people placed their true identity, honesty and integrity on the line, yet you hide behind a screen name and call all of them liars with the expectation that everyone must believe you.

So my local bank and convenient store had more security than the Pentagon ten years ago? I was on surveillance all day today at work.

Do you work at bank or a convenient store? provide some proof.

I was on surveillance all day today at work.

Prove it.

How about one of the conspiracy theorists provide a link of the alleged missile hitting the Pentagon.....

I called no one a liar. I asked that the tapes be released that were confiscated by the FBI.

If revealing my identity and where I work would put this all to rest I would not hesitate but that has no consequence to the discussion of what happened at the Pentagon 9/11 now does it?

How are the frogs today?

I called no one a liar. I asked that the tapes be released that were confiscated by the FBI.

Dozens of witnesses said it was a plane. You have questioned their integrity and in effect... called them liars.

If revealing my identity and where I work would put this all to rest I would not hesitate but that has no consequence to the discussion of what happened at the Pentagon 9/11 now does it?

You have called into question the integrity of sworn testimony and thereby the individuals that have provided evidence that it was a plane. Therefore your integrity can be questioned. BTW.. are you a mall cop?

Oh yes... here is debris. Of course I am sure you will state that either the debris was planted as part of the plot or the photo was masterfully doctored after the fact.

Hollywood wouldn't exist if not for people that love their fantasies. So keep kissing those frogs and maybe someday you will find your prince. lol

Still waiting for the video to prove the missile conspiracy.....

You have called into question the integrity of sworn testimony and thereby the individuals that have provided evidence that it was a plane. Therefore your integrity can be questioned. BTW.. are you a mall cop?

No...I asked for the release of the confiscated tapes of flight 77 flying into the Pentagon.

Not a mall cop. But I see you understand surveillance systems are in malls too.

Oh yes... here is debris. Of course I am sure you will state that either the debris was planted as part of the plot or the photo was masterfully doctored after the fact.

Made no such claims. Asked for the release of the confiscated tapes of flight 77 hitting the Pentagon to actually put the conspiracy theories to rest. Good try though. Liked the mall cop thing. Shows you have a sense of humor :)

Hollywood wouldn't exist if not for people that love their fantasies. So keep kissing those frogs and maybe someday you will find your prince. lol

Hollywood is also commissioned by the gov for propaganda war films and so are musicians...can you tell me what this song is about?

It was their answer to the request.

Look up that history while you are still uncensored to do so.

Still waiting for the government to be transparent. Cold war was over...we needed a new boogie man to justify the Trillions spent...and disappeared funds too.

Asked for the release of the confiscated tapes of flight 77 hitting the Pentagon to actually put the conspiracy theories to rest.

They released tapes. What tapes do you want released? The ones that don't exist or the ones that you just think must be there because well... you know about these things. Exactly how many tapes were confiscated? Do you even have an answer to that question?

Witnesses reported what they saw. Videos were released that support those statements. Pictures were released that support those statements.

But NO, some doofus in France (sometimes referred to as frogland), thousands of miles away, makes outrageous claims that the entire 9-11 was just a conspiracy by the U.S. Government and away we go into lala land.

From different sources it is believed that 84 were confiscated by the FBI. But I bet it is lost in the red tape of "protecting America." ?

One clear one would have sufficed. I like how you lumped me into some "crazy conspiracy group."

Why is it so important to you that I believe the Pentagon had more security than a mall did? Or that a Citgo gas station had? Or a bank? Or a Casino? Or a hotel? Or a laboratory that holds confidential information? If the Pentagon didn't have adequate security something is really wrong. Look at their budgets. Ok even look at their budget oversights of missing funds or over payments etc.

Sorry I'm not going to put my trust into anyone agency that cannot account for itself. I believe despite all your frog and hollywood rhetoric that there is more to this than we are being told. As a US Citizen I have the right to know what the gov is doing. The "We are keeping secrets for your own good/protection" is right out of the pages of Animal Farm.

So it wasn't ok for Russia but it is for the US because we are the Good Guys?

The only enemy we have are the ones we can conceive. Those enemies can be manufactured. (see hollywood link) It's an old game.

Now's the time for all ya'll to bring out the fears for me. What if it is keeping you and your family safe? What if it is keeping your kids from living in sharia law? What if all their secrecy is the only reason you are still here? Blah blah blah....

I don't make decisions in fear. Do you?

From different sources it is believed that 84

Please list some of these sources, so we can debate the sources integrity.

The only enemy we have are the ones we can conceive. Those enemies can be manufactured. (see hollywood link) It's an old game.

The government is capable of many things, but when something as outlandish as this myth is perpetrated, then the motives for continuing that myth must be questioned. Therefore, I am questioning you.

I don't make decisions in fear. Do you?

Well, Barney I believe it was FDR who stated that we have nothing to fear, but fear itself. But I understand that some people are so afraid of their own government and other such bogeymen, that they must spread their fear around so they can feel safer in a group. Good luck with that. lol

Google the sources yourself and discredit them.

It has no bearing on my life.

My motive is simple I would like people to stop living fear based lives. Good decisions are not made in fear. Live in the what is not the "what if's." I'm not afraid of my gov or any other gov. Funny how I keep getting told I have enemies though. I keep getting told that information is with held from me for my own good as "if" we'd all self destruct if it wasn't for the agencies that keep us in the dark.

Take a good look at the what is of the DOD and our entire government for that matter and tell me these are the people you want deciding what is best for you to know or not know.

Google the sources yourself and discredit them.

I did. It shows a plane crashing into the pentagon. From how many more angles does one need to understand that.

I'm not afraid of my gov or any other gov.

Then what is this all about...

Take a good look at the what is of the DOD and our entire government for that matter and tell me these are the people you want deciding what is best for you to know or not know.

Someone that can look at a video and can't see an airplane crashing into the pentagon would probably have difficulty looking into a mirror and seeing the fear in themselves. lol

Ok so put your head in the sand and let the government do all it wants without question,

What plane in the Pentagon videos did you see? It was told to you not shown to you. There is a shiny blurr that kinda looks like it could be a plane.

seeing the fear in themselves.

Did I ask for protection? The DOD's protection is too costly and according to another poster the Pentagon was not secure. Lost Trillions but could not afford to protect itself and is going to protect me and my family if only I trust them and not question it. It must be for my own good...it must be for my own good...LOL!

What plane in the Pentagon videos did you see? It was told to you not shown to you. There is a shiny blurr that kinda looks like it could be a plane.

Then there was the debris from a plane, plus witnesses that described a plane. (Of course the loonies will say that the witnesses are lying, the debris field was staged and the video completely inconclusive.)

You have decided to discount all the evidence, sworn testimony, etc. because someone told you it just wasn't so and your paranoid fear allows you to easily believe this nonsense.

according to another poster the Pentagon was not secure. Lost Trillions but could not afford

Nothing like just making up stuff on the fly to support something that has no merit. This is just going off the deep end.

Ok so put your head in the sand

My head is not in the sand and if you pulled your head out of your ass long enough to look around, you could easily see that. lol

It was Rumsfeld that said the Pentagon lost 2.3 Trillion and my head is up my what? LOL

You want to believe I made stuff up? Ok...Did I or did Rummy make stuff up and gee the records were where? If the records were not at the Pentagon in that area where the plane flew into then we should be allowed to investigate the missing trillions right? Or is that part of the Vital to national security-for our own good you believe in? LOL!

It was Rumsfeld that said the Pentagon lost 2.3 Trillion and my head is up my what?

And when did he say that?? huh? When? Trying to lump that into the 9-11 conspiracy, when Rumsfeld gave that speech a day in advance AND refers to the cumulative effect of overspending, is someone having their head up their ass.

I do not fear the government, because I keep my eyes on the government, while paying close attention to what they say and do AND not listening to every jackass that has some conspiracy theory that cannot be supported. Otherwise I would think the government is keeping Obama's real birth records secret, keeping secret that aids was started by some airline pilot sleeping with monkeys and other such stuff as you find on the front page of the national enquirer and newsvine.

Oh so you do know he said that. Good. Ok the cumulative overspending is ok with you and not accounting for it?

You sure are interested in my head and ass. Are you trying to get an emotional response back? Don't have one for ya. Monkeys and jackasses now?

I can support Rumsfeld said that and I see you agree. I have more questions the government doesn't like to answer and it has to do with accounting for their actions. No conspiracy needed. Who did what, when and why is what the questions are.

Why do you get so upset with that?

Its clear that Walk'n Dead believes that all the witnesses were liars, the pictures were fakes and the videos were inconclusive. When attempting to add further to their favorite conspiracy... is perfectly willing to use statements out of context, etc. Will use vague terms as some sources, etc. but never willing to provide any linked verification from a reputable source.

At the beginning of this thread... post #18, I provided information. The balance of this thread has been Walk'n Dead using all manner of unsupported allegations to tear down the fact that ALL the evidence proves that a plane crashed into the pentagon.

There is really nothing more to be gained from continuing this conversation, as the only thing being further proved... is Walkn' Dead's inability to see in the dark (monitor the government) and is therefore afraid of the bogeyman (the government).

Who did what, when and why is what the questions are.

That was a typical question from someone that is unwilling or unable to gather credible information on their own and must be spoon fed along the way. It does seem to reflect the problem that ails society in general.

If Walk'n Dead wishes to have the last comment on a thread I started, he/she can feel free to have the last word.

: )

gee walk - adjust the metal beanie for optimum radio wave reflectance and try again - you are severely disadvantaged in this discussion...the radio waves must be penetrating your cloak of invisibility, eh?

Gee just like when I questioned the church. Cloak lol...now we are on to Harry Potter? I liked the tittie thing better from another poster. Frogs came in second...

Why is it wrong to question 9/11 official reports? Pentagon lost 2.3 Trillion but was in shambles and didn't have surveillance or will not release it because it is vital to national security? Really expect people to buy that?

I asked for the conspiracy theories to be put to rest by releasing the info...not joining it.

George Carlin believed in questioning everything, so do I. The government is a political organization.

Politics is " The singular politic first attested in English 1430 and comes from Middle Frenchpolitique, in turn from Latinpoliticus,^[5] which is the latinisation of the Greek πολιτικός (politikos), meaning amongst others "of, for, or relating to citizens", "civil", "civic", "belonging to the state",^[6]"

^{Last time I checked the State was us. If we question something, you better show the proof. The people rule in a democracy, no matter the definition.}

Lastly, being that the Pentagon is the hub of the nation's defense, wouldn't you think the military folks and the government WOULDN'T want to release the image of the impact if there could possibly be a clue to any structural vulnerabilities that might be revealed to a smart terrorist?

They released pictures of the structure inside and out and all about but the actual footage of the plane lining up and hitting the Pentagon. So that doesn't hold water as a good reason. Plus they released pictures of the reconstruction during the reconstruction. Future terrorists got a birds eye view then of possible structural vulnerabilities.

That's not what I'm referring to. Have you ever seen those slow-motion automobile crash tests? They perform those so that they can see how the automobile actually crunches during an actual crash. I wasn't talking about the available photos and the video footage of the damage, but the actual impact may reveal something that the military doesn't want any terrorists to know.

Besides, you didn't answer my other question. WTF happened to Flight 77?

may reveal something that the military doesn't want any terrorists to know.

Stretching for a justification. It could also be that the military doesn't want the citizens to know.

I think inside pics of the pentagon gives away more potentially useful info to terrorists. I question the motive you don't. That's fine.

Besides, you didn't answer my other question. WTF happened to Flight 77?

According to the gov's official version it hit the Pentagon. Now show me the actual plane hitting the Pentagon and I will not question it. It is that I don't have the answers that make sense that I question why the gov will not show at least one clear picture of this event. You on the other hand don't question the gov's version but question people who do not whole heartedly agree with the official gov reports of events.

If it was a missile.....then what happened to Flight 77?

I question lots of things about that day and the aftermath, but whether or not a plane hit the Pentagon isn't one of them.

I want to know why the tapes were confiscated and kept from the public.

I want to know why you feel entitled to see this video. What if it reveals something that could put American lives at risk? What if it reveals something that experts and officials in the military consider sensitive to national security?

once we have an answer to that question walk'n dead then we will know everything about 9-11

I wouldn't be terribly surprised if there aren't any useful videos.

The Citgo station orientation is perpendicular (more or less) to the flight path (and the camera is under the overhang at the pumps.

The entrance to the Sheraton is masked by the hill (and the Navy Annex) from the impact point. Plus, I'd imagine that their cameras are looking at their parking lot/hotel entrance rather than down the hill toward the Pentagon.

395 blocks the view of any street-level cameras in the Pentagon City hotels/businesses.

And as to the Pentagon itself. Well, as much as people like to think of it as a big dramatic fortress, it really isn't; security is MUCH better now than it was on 9/11, but let's not forget that it pre-9/11, you didn't encounter your first layer of security until you were actually inside of the building (you could go right up escalators from the Metro right into the Pentagon).

I'll agree that if any tapes that show anything exist (or even tapes that don't show anything) it would be nice to release them. There's a percentage of people who would be swayed by their release. On the other hand, there's a certain percentage who are convinced that the Pentagon was hit by a missile; for them, any video that shows anything else would be reflexively dismissed.

spikeevans

how could a commericial jet flying into a building be dangerous to national security??

I don't know, Marshall. Maybe there's something revealed by the trajectory of the aircraft. Maybe the folks at the Pentagon don't want to release the footage for the same reason they didn't want to release the footage known as "Collateral Murder" that was provided to Wikileaks by Bradley Manning. There could be something either damaging to someone in power who is trying to protect it, or it's a matter of national security and it can only be released via subpoena.

makes no sense as they have already published the supposed trajectory of the aircraft.

the only reason its not released is because it proves their story false.

that is it.

I didn't say that I knew the answer. I was simply speculating.

the only reason its not released is because it proves their story false.

....but I don't believe that you can logically jump to that conclusion, sorry.

I didn't say that I knew the answer. I was simply speculating.

Why speculate? We as American citizens are supposed to be able to question our gov and what they do. But thanks for speculating on why the gov keeps us in the dark on certain issues. Some want to know the events and you evidently don't. Why should that stop me from asking?

as Ron Paul has stated.

the purpose of the government is for the protection of the individual...not the protection and secrecy of government.

Some want to know the events and you evidently don't.

No.....I just don't believe that Flight 77 disappeared and was sucked into a wormhole and a missile that no one witnessed or has claimed to have seen is the device that exploded into the Pentagon that day. The Pentagon sits right next to a major highway. I believe there were hundreds, if not thousands of eye witnesses to the fact that it was an aircraft that slammed into the Pentagon that day. And just because the government won't release, or had cut out of the footage of the split second where the aircraft was in the frame of the camera, doesn't prove it was a missile.

You have the perfect right to make all sorts of wild conjectures about the events of that day. Ask away, but don't accuse those who attempt to shine the light of reality upon your assertions that we don't want to know what "really" happened.

Why don't you take your inquisitive mind and apply the exact same standard toward the events depicted in the Bible. Oh, that's right. There isn't any video footage of any of that stuff. So, how can millions of people believe it?

And as for your statement Marshall.....Ron Paul has a bit of a Truther streak in him as well.

You have the perfect right to make all sorts of wild conjectures about the events of that day.

Show me where I made wild conjectures? I didn't even say it was a missle.

You are the one trying to justify what the gov does without knowing why....

There could be something either damaging to someone in power who is trying to protect it, or it's a matter of national security and it can only be released via subpoena.

What if it reveals something that could put American lives at risk? What if it reveals something that experts and officials in the military consider sensitive to national security?

but the actual impact may reveal something that the military doesn't want any terrorists to know.

Hmmm could that be conjecture?

I just don't believe that Flight 77 disappeared and was sucked into a wormhole and a missile that no one witnessed or has claimed to have seen is the device that exploded into the Pentagon that day.

Wormhole? LOL! I certainly didn't conjecture that? Even if I did...there are tapes that can prove it didn't!! and the FBI has them. Amazing huh?

The comments today about "wormholes" (your comment), " frog asses" (#18.6) and my favorite "titties in a twist" (#15.2). What is this thread about? Oh yeah...Pentagon 9/11.

Why don't you take your inquisitive mind and apply the exact same standard toward the events depicted in the Bible. Oh, that's right. There isn't any video footage of any of that stuff. So, how can millions of people believe it?

HUH? Yep...let's throw the Bible in now. ?