See other 9/11 Articles
Title: The 9/11 conspiracy plots thicken
Source:
Seattle Times
URL Source: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/ht ... /2003250424_911conspire09.html
Published: Sep 09, 2006
Author: Michael Powell, wapo
Post Date: 2010-07-19 22:23:35 by Dakmar
Keywords: None
Views: 15258
Comments: 989
They are politically diverse and include academics, ex-officials and Web surfers. All share a belief that the Bush administration played a role in the 9/11 attacks. Their numbers seem to speak to Americans' innate distrust of their government. The Washington Post NEW YORK — He felt no shiver of doubt in those first terrible hours. He watched the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon and assumed al-Qaida had wreaked terrible vengeance. He listened to anchors and military experts and assumed the facts of Sept. 11, 2001, were as stated on the screen. It was a year before David Ray Griffin, an eminent liberal theologian and philosopher, began his stroll down the path of disbelief. He wondered why Bush listened to a child's story while the nation was attacked and how Osama bin Laden, America's Public Enemy No. 1, escaped in the mountains of Tora Bora. He wondered why 110-story towers crashed and military jets failed to intercept even one airliner. He read the 9/11 Commission report with a swell of anger. Contradictions were ignored and no military or civilian official was reprimanded, much less cashiered. "To me, the report read as a cartoon," Griffin said. "It's a much greater stretch to accept the official conspiracy story than to consider the alternatives." Such as? "There was massive complicity in this attack by U.S. government operatives." If that feels like a skip off the cliff of established reality, more Americans are in free fall than you might guess. There are few more startling measures of American distrust of leaders than the extent of belief that the Bush administration had a hand in the attacks of Sept. 11 to spark an invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq. 36 percent suspicious A recent Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll of 1,010 Americans found that 36 percent suspect the U.S. government promoted the attacks or intentionally sat on its hands. Sixteen percent believe explosives brought down the towers. Twelve percent believe a cruise missile hit the Pentagon. Distrust percolates more strongly near Ground Zero. A Zogby International poll of New York City residents two years ago found 49.3 percent believed the government "consciously failed to act." Establishment assessments of the believers tend toward the psychotherapeutic. Many academics, politicians and thinkers left, right and center say the conspiracy theories are a case of one plus one equals five. It's a piling up of improbabilities. Thomas Eager, a professor of materials science at MIT, has studied the collapse of the twin towers. "At first, I thought it was amazing that the buildings would come down in their own footprints," Eager says. "Then I realized that it wasn't that amazing — it's the only way a building that weighs a million tons and is 95 percent air can come down." But the chatter out there is loud enough for the National Institute of Standards and Technology to post a Web "fact sheet" poking holes in the conspiracy theories and defending its report on the towers. Motley crew The loose agglomeration known as the "9/11 Truth Movement" has stopped looking for truth from the government. A cacophonous and free-range a bunch of conspiracists, they produce hip-hop inflected documentaries and scholarly conferences. The Web is their mother lode. Every citizen is a researcher. Did you see that the CIA met with bin Laden in a hospital room in Dubai? Check out this Pakistani site; there are really weird doings in Baluchistan ... Peter Knight, senior lecturer in American studies at the University of Manchester and editor of the 2002 book "Conspiracy Nation: The Politics of Paranoia in Postwar America," called the movement "a strange beast, an amalgam of elements. You've got the anti-Bush, anti-Iraq war crowd — you know, if they lied about the war, maybe they lied about 9/11. Another part is people merely interested in the anomalies, with no preconceived political agenda. "Then you have the more traditional right-wing conspiracy part of the continuum that believes a vast cabal has taken over the United States, the mega-conspiracy of the right's new world order. To them, all of these things are connected. Each group inserts 9/11 into its pre-existing conspiracy model." The academic wing is led by Griffin, who founded the Center for a Postmodern World at Claremont University; James Fetzer, a tenured philosopher at the University of Minnesota; and Daniel Orr, retired chairman of the economics department at the University of Illinois. Professor suspended The movement's de facto minister of engineering is Steven Jones, a tenured physics professor at Brigham Young University who has studied vectors and velocities and tested explosives and concluded that the collapse of the twin towers is best explained as controlled demolition, sped by a thousand pounds of high-grade thermite. Jones has been placed on paid leave while the Mormon-church-owned school investigates his claims, it was announced Friday. The physicist published his views two weeks ago in the book "9/11 and American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out." Former Reagan aide Barbara Honegger is a senior military-affairs journalist at the Naval Postgraduate School in California. She's convinced, based on her freelance research, that a bomb went off about six minutes before an airplane hit the Pentagon — or didn't hit it, as some believe the case may be. Then there's Morgan O. Reynolds, appointed by George W. Bush as chief economist at the Labor Department. He left in 2002 and doesn't think much of his former boss. "Who did it? Elements of our government and M-16 and the Mossad. The government's case is a laugh-out-loud proposition. They used patsies and lies and subterfuge and there's no way that Bush and Cheney could have invaded Iraq without the help of 9/11," Reynolds asserts. They are cantankerous and sometimes distrust each other — who knows where the double agents lurk? But unreasonable questions resonate with the reasonable. Colleen Kelly's brother, a salesman, had breakfast at the Windows on the World restaurant on Sept. 11. After he died she founded September Eleventh Families for Peaceful Tomorrows to oppose the Iraq war. She lives in the Bronx and gives a gingerly embrace to the conspiracy crowd. "Sometimes I listen to them and I think that's sooooo outlandish and bizarre," she says. "But that day had such disastrous geopolitical consequences. If David Ray Griffin asks uncomfortable questions and points out painful discrepancies, good for him." Griffin's book, "The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11," sold more than 100,000 copies and became a movement founding stone. Last year he traveled through New England, giving speeches. One evening in West Hartford, Conn., 400 mostly middle-aged and upper-middle-class doctors and lawyers, teachers and social workers sat waiting. Griffin took the podium and laid down his ideas with calm and cool. He concluded: "It is already possible to know beyond a reasonable doubt one very important thing: The destruction of the World Trade Center was an inside job, orchestrated by domestic terrorists. The welfare of our republic and perhaps even the survival of our civilization depend on getting the truth about 9/11 exposed." The audience rose and applauded for more than a minute. No patience Chip Berlet, senior analyst at Political Research Associates, a Boston-based left-leaning think tank, is no fan of the 9/11 Commission. He believes a serious investigation should have led to indictments and the firing of incompetent generals and civilian officials. But he has no patience with the conspiracy theorists. "They don't do their homework; it's a kind of charlatanism," says Berlet. "They say there's no debris on the lawn in front of the Pentagon, but they base their analysis on a photo on the Internet. That's like analyzing an impressionist painting by looking at a postcard. "I love 'The X-Files' but I don't base my research on it. My vision of hell is having to review these [conspiracy] books over and over again." In the days after Sept. 11, experts claimed temperatures reached 2,000 degrees on the upper floors. Others claimed steel melted. Nope. What happened, says Eager, the MIT materials-science professor, is that jet fuel sloshed around and beams got rubbery. "It's not too much to think that you could have some regions at 900 degrees and others at 1,200 degrees, and that will distort the beams." The truth movement doesn't really care for Eager. A Web site casts a fisheye of suspicion at the professor and his colleagues. "Did the MIT have prior knowledge?" notes one chat room. "This is for sure another speculative topic ... " Professsor Jones' suspension was reported Friday by The Associated Press. Peter Knight was quoted by McClatchy Newspapers.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-401) not displayed.
.
.
.
#402. To: AGAviator (#401)
Somehow it seems appropriate that you would be a dope smoker.
"One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator
lol.....your 911-Research link where you copy and pasted that article supports the following 911 TRUTHERS: 9-11 Research recommends the following organizations for their rational and science-based analysis of the attack. See the Architects & Engineers and Scholars sites for regularly updated listings of educational events. Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth Journal of 9/11 Studies That means your source recommends Prof. Stephen Jones and Architect Richard Gage, both of whom I have submitted information inwhich you attempt to berate the messenger. Perhaps, you should research your own sources more fully. Enjoy your fatty while you check out the recommened Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth who call bovine excrement on those buildings falling from fire. LOL!!!
"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. ... We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of." Edward Bernays, Father of Public Relations
LOL........read this article from your link: 9/11 - Acceleration Close to Free Fall [PDF] by Frank Legge (Ph D)
"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. ... We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of." Edward Bernays, Father of Public Relations
People such as you have planted those sorts of stories across the web, fooling otherwise rational people into believing such crap. In order to cover the very obvious fact that NO WING FROM A 757 HIT THE PENTAGON, since there was NO FUEL FIRE WHERE THE WING SHOULD HAVE HIT THE WALL, and there is NO HOLE FOR THE WING TO HAVE PENETRATED THE WALL, you folks have played the part of "concerned researchers" literally IGNORING ALL THE EVIDENCE, and claiming that those who see the obvious are DISINFO AGENTS. How ingenious of you, it's rather sad that people actually fall for it. The fact is, Hanjour would NOT and COULD NOT have had even the REMOTEST chance of flying that alleged 757 the way it was flown that day, and the damage to the Pentagon doesn't match that of a Boeing 757. You can't change those facts, all you have is spin.
lol......here's another great article from your link with support for Stephen Jones and his work on this issue. Steven E. Jones A Physics Professor Speaks Out on 9-11: Reason, Publicity, and Reaction by Victoria Ashley Version 1.0, Jan. 14, 2006
"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. ... We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of." Edward Bernays, Father of Public Relations
And yet another gem from your source: NIST Data Disproves Collapse Theories Based on Fire [PDF] by Frank Legge (Ph D)
"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. ... We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of." Edward Bernays, Father of Public Relations
lol.......and yet another "Truther" debunking your theories from your source: WTC 1 Collapse - The First Moments by Wayne Trumpman This paper examines the first few seconds of the North Tower's collapse after a detailed review of the fires based on NIST's data, and shows that collapse progressed far too rapidly to be explained without the involvement of demolition.
"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. ... We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of." Edward Bernays, Father of Public Relations
Well, I've certainly ***smoked*** you, Half Truther Dope, on this thread and several others from beginning to end. Now where's that proof of the Mother of All Conspiracy Bean Counters being offed on 911 Pentagon crashes. Who were they, why couldn't they be kept on reservation, and who did the dirty deeds. And where's your evidence other than your big mouth. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- As usual you cannot comprehend anything other than a minute fragment of what I post. I clearly am noting that the "No plane hit the Pentagon" theory is so wacky and divisive that even a CT'er won't get near it. That does not translate into my endorsing or buying anything else he states. It simply means that CT's buy into the most extreme positions which marginalizes them and makes them unable to get any traction because they are seen as such fringe characters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Pentagon No- 757- Crash Theory: Booby Trap for 9/11 Skeptics by Jim Hoffman People such as you have planted those sorts of stories across the web, fooling otherwise rational people into believing such crap I already told ya I'm gonna sit this one out. The CT'ers take such extreme positions, as I note in my sig line every post I make, that no normal people can consider them seriously. Hofman recognizes this point at least in the Pentagon crash.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Here's one of the fliers you can download and make copies for distribution: You see your site link supports the "conspiracy theory" that all three buildings were taken down by controlled demolition. From the source: Frequently Asked Questions: Controlled Demolition 9-11 Research provides abundant evidence and analysis concerning the total destruction of the Twin Towers and Building 7. See this directory. We think that the evidence strongly supports the conclusion that all three buildings were destroyed by planned demolitions, and were not the result of plane crashes and fires. The following questions are frequently asked by people encountering the idea of the controlled demolition of the World Trade Center buildings. Other questions are addressed in other FAQs. How could the Twin Towers, with so many tenants, and so many columns (240 perimeter columns, and 47 core columns) be wired for a controlled demolition without the operation being noticed? How could charges have been pre-positioned in the Towers in such a way that the plane crashes and fires wouldn't have set them off? Supposing that Building 7 was brought down by controlled demolition. Doesn't the fact that the Twin Towers came down in such a different fashion prove that they were not destroyed by controlled demolition? Even if the Twin Towers were destroyed by explosives, is it correct to call them controlled demolitions when they don't look anything like cases previously seen? And what was controlled about the Towers being exploded? Does the controlled demolition of the Twin Towers by insiders necessarily mean that the attack was an inside job? Is is possible that the Towers were prepared for demolition years in advance as part of a contingency plan to bring the towers down symmetrically should a terrorist attack threaten to topple them? How could the Twin Towers, with so many tenants, and so many columns (240 perimeter columns, and 47 core columns) be wired for a controlled demolition without the operation being noticed? This question assumes that the demolition of the Twin Towers would have to be set up like a conventional commercial one, with fuses and large numbers of cutting charges. First, note that the demolitions could have been controlled using wireless detonators, which have been commercially available for decades. Attack Scenario 404 describes how the charges could have been activated via radio signals in a precise fashion controlled by a computer. Second, the demolitions may have been achieved without accessing the perimeter columns. The fact that the Twin Towers exploded into vast clouds of pulverized concrete, hurling steel assemblies up to 500 feet in all directions shows that they were destroyed with much more energy than a conventional demolition -- perhaps two orders of magnitude more. That gave the planners much more leeway in the placement of charges required to totally destroy the buildings. The core structures contained the building services such as elevators, and plumbing and cabling shafts. It would have been easy for people who controlled building security to surreptitiously install devices in hidden portions of the cores. Any such job would have been far simpler than the structural retrofit of the CitiCorp Tower in New York, carried out unbeknownst to the building's very tenants. 1 Third, explosive devices could have been disguised as or concealed within legitimate equpiment, such as smoke alarms or ceiling tiles, and installed by workers oblivious to their surreptitious function. Numerous such possibilities are afforded by the properties of energetic materials. How could charges have been pre-positioned in the Towers in such a way that the plane crashes and fires wouldn't have set them off? There are several possible answers to this. First, some charges may indeed have been set off by the crashes but masked by the huge fireballs created by the combustion of aerosolized jet fuel. Second, explosives can be engineered so that heat alone will not detonate them. The high explosive RDX, for example, requires the simultaneous delivery of high heat and pressure to induce detonation. 2 Third, the charges could have been arranged so as to avoid the regions that the attack planners expected to take direct hits from the aircraft, given that the planes may have been flown by GPS-equipped autopilots providing targeting accuracy to within a few meters. Fourth, it is relatively easy to design casings for explosives that would allow them to survive even the most violent assaults. The casings of jetliners' black boxes protect their contents from impact accelerations of 3,400 Gs and from temperatures of 2,000ºF for up to 30 minutes. The first and second possibilities are probably what happened. Prior to 2001, the national laboratories and Pentagon contractors had developed advanced energetic nanocomposites which, in addition to providing much higher energy densities than conventional high explosives, were engineered to be very stable and require highly specific conditions for detonation. Supposing that Building 7 was brought down by controlled demolition. Doesn't the fact that the Twin Towers came down in such a different fashion prove that they were not destroyed by controlled demolition? Controlled demolitions can be engineered in many different ways. Normally, the purpose of a controlled demolition is to remove a structure while avoiding damage to adjacent structures, and to do so economically. Typically, a tall building is demolished by placing thousands of cutter charges adjacent to columns throughout the building, then detonating them in a precise order, starting with interior structures, and progressing outward and upward. Destroying the interior columns allows unsupported weight to pull the exterior inward, and destroying the building from the ground up allows the weight of the building to be harnessed to do much of the destruction. The result is an implosion, producing a vertical collapse and a consolidated rubble pile. The objective of controlled demolition applied to the Twin Towers was the decidedly different one of producing collapses that could be explained as having been caused by the aircraft crashes and fire damage. Hence, the destruction was started around the crash zones and then moved downward. Even if the Twin Towers were destroyed by explosives, is it correct to call them controlled demolitions when they don't look anything like cases previously seen? And what was controlled about the Towers being exploded? The "collapses" were, in some respects, very chaotic events which don't look very controlled. However, they must have been carefully engineered. In addition to having to determine the quantities and placement of explosives necessary to achieve the total destruction of the Towers, the planners had to plan the timing of their detonations with some precision. It is clear from photographs and videos of the Towers' destruction that the zones of destruction moved downward at about the same rates as the exploding rubble clouds descended, so that these zones remained concealed by the clouds. If these zones of destruction moved either too quickly or too slowly, they would have become visible below or above the rubble clouds, blatantly contradicting the official account of gravity-driven collapses. More on this topic can be found in the FAQ: Controlled Demolition With Aluminothermics, which is part of the essay Explosives Found in World Trade Center Dust -- an exposition describing the discovery of active thermitic materials in small chips in the dust. LOL!!!!!!!! Your source SUPPORTS what the lot of us "truthers" have been stating. This is YOUR source AG. OMG.......this is TOO funny. In a very precise and scientific manner they debunk a truck load of the idiocy you have been claiming on these 911 threads.
"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. ... We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of." Edward Bernays, Father of Public Relations
Oh if your source is so great, why cherry pick? Why is one little article solid information and facts and not all the others from the SAME SOURCE. These are the people you are basing all of your debunking upon. Come on now, how can the fellow be credible in one area and not in another. That right there is crazy talk. lol
"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. ... We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of." Edward Bernays, Father of Public Relations
It's obvious from the conflicting witness testimony that there were TWO aircraft converging on the Pentagon at the same time that morning, and it's obvious there was "evidence" sprinkled onto the scene. It's obvious that Hanjour couldn't have flown a 757 in the manner exhibited, and it's obvious that there should have been 10,000 or so gallons of jet fuel splashed all over the front of the Pentagon wall, yet wasn't. So all you have are ad hominems and disinfo, and lots of spin.
The damage to the pentagon doesn't match any plane IMO. I still think it was explosives planted inside. With the top brass in the Pentagon at the time, it would be way too risky to have a plane hit the Pentagon or even a missile. The first reports to those that work in the Pentagon said it was a bomb that went off. No plane was mentioned to them. If a plane, any plane, hit the Pentagon it could be blamed on the terrorists and they could release the video. They insist it was a plane that hit the Pentagon, but yet they refuse to release the video tapes. It doesn't add up at all. They would have no reason to keep these tapes from the public if it was a plane as they said it was. Explosives planted in the Pentagon would be much less risky and would control the damage to a limited area. It just makes the most sense to me that they tried to time the bombs to go off as flight 77 made its fly over of the Pentagon to give the illusion that it crashed for witnesses.
God is always good!
From the source: You simply don't get it. The only statement I am making by quoting 911 Research.com, is the "no plane" theories for the Pentagon attack, which all you Half Truthers have been working yourselves into a lather about, are so wacky that even a full on CT'er will not get anywhere close to them. That's it. I don't have to buy into anything else he says, or even his reasons for taking his position(s).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It was a missile.
The only problem with that theory is that there are two sets of witnesses. One group witnessed an aircraft approach from north of the Citgo station, whereas another group witnessed an aircraft approach from south of the Citgo station, and both groups claim the aircraft they saw hit the Pentagon. The official story clings to the southerly path, and the damage reflects that approach as well. If so, then what came from the north? Chances are it was in fact Flight 77, and a sleight of hand was performed where the plane passed over the Pentagon just after the other aircraft, approaching from the south hit.
Yes there were. One was the hijacked 757 piloted by Hanjour. The other was a C-130 vectored by ATC to see what the hijacked plane was up to. The C-130 got there about 30 seconds too late and reported "Sir, the 757 has crashed into the Pentagon." He likely then flew over the crash and some witnesses may have confused his flight path with the 757's flight path. I would have to do more research on that matter to come to any additional conclusions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- One was the hijacked 757 piloted by Hanjour. The other was a C-130 vectored by ATC to see what the hijacked plane was up to. The C-130 got there about 30 seconds too late and reported "Sir, the 757 has crashed into the Pentagon." He likely then flew over the crash and some witnesses may have confused his flight path with the 757's flight path. I would have to do more research on that matter to come to any additional conclusions. You know damn well that's not what the witnesses reported, nor what I'm talking about. The official story, the one you cling to, requires the aircraft to have approached from south of the Citgo station. HOWEVER, there are more than a few witnesses who state that they saw an American Airlines jet fly an approach from NORTH of the Citgo station. I've posted this video for you more than once, here it is again... More than likely, the C-130 was sent up as a diversion, and that ploy is EXACTLY what you are trying to sell here.
This theory is well supported by interviews of employees in the Pentagon at the time of the attacks. from: 911caper.com/2010/07/07/the-pentagon-attack-papers/ Converging Lines of Evidence of a 9:30-to- 9:32 a.m. Violent Event at the Pentagon on September 11, well before the Official Story says anything hit the building: Multiple standard-issue, battery- and/or electric-operated wall clocks on the walls of the area of the Pentagon attacked on 9/11—including one in the heliport just outside the west wedge—were stopped between 9:30 and 9:32-1/2 by a violent event, almost certainly a bomb or bombs inside the building and/or in a truck or construction trailer parked right outside the west face. The first Associated Press report, in fact, stated that the Pentagon had been damaged by a “booby trapped truck.” The Navy posted the stopped heliport clock on an official website and another of the stopped clocks was in the 9/11 display at the Smithsonian Institution.2 These are just some of the west-section Pentagon clocks – as well as an inside-the-building victim’s wrist watch (see below) – that were stopped between 9:30 and 9:32-1/2 on September 11. April Gallop, an Army employee with a Top Secret clearance, was at her desk in the Army administrative offices in the west section of the Pentagon on 9/11, the area of the building most heavily destroyed and with the most casualties, when what she said sounded and felt “like a bomb” went off. “Being in the Army with the training I had, I know what a bomb sounds and acts like, especially the aftermath, and it sounded and acted like a bomb,” Gallop told the author in an under-oath videotaped interview.2A “There was no plane or plane parts inside the building, and no smell of jet fuel.” In those two hours of under-oath videotaped testimony, Gallop states that the explosion went off at the precise instant she hit the ‘power on’ button on her computer in the Army administrative area, to which she had just returned that morning after months of pregnancy and childbirth leave, and that the explosion stopped her wrist watch just after 9:30 a.m. 2B She has kept the stopped wrist watch in a safe deposit box as evidence of the exact moment of the initial explosion. The FAA’s [Federal Aviation Administration] Timeline document “Executive Summary—Chronology of a Multiple Hijacking Crisis––September 11, 2001” includes: “0932: ATC (Air Traffic Control) AEA reports aircraft crashes into west side of Pentagon.”3 The time is the critical fact here, not the claimed cause, which was taken from the official story and not the result of any ATC eyewitnesses. Denmark’s soon-to-be Foreign Minister Per Stig Moller was in a building in Washington, D.C. on 9/11 from which he looked out, heard an explosion and saw the smoke first rise from the Pentagon. He immediately looked at his wrist watch, which read 9:32 am. He gave radio interviews in Denmark the next morning in which he stated that the Pentagon had been attacked at 9:32.4. On August 27, 2002, then White House Counsel and now Attorney General Alberto Gonzales gave an audiotaped Secretary of the Navy lecture at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, Calif., a DoD educational institution, in which he clearly and explicitly states that “The Pentagon was attacked at 9:32”. A tape of this segment of his talk was played at the 9/11 Emergency Truth Convergence at American University in Washington, D.C. in July 2005, and is on the public record. The Pentagon was attacked by bomb(s) between 9:30 and 9:32 a.m., possibly followed by an impact from an airborne object significantly smaller than Flight 77, a Boeing 757. We have already seen that Army employee April Gallop, whose watch was stopped by the violent event at the Pentagon shortly after 9:30, says that her military training and experience led her to immediately determine the source of the initial explosion was a bomb. I have interviewed an Army auditor from Ft. Monmouth, New Jersey, who was on temporary duty assignment at the Pentagon before, on and after 9/11. He was in the Army financial management spaces only minutes before the Pentagon explosion on the morning of 9/11. He had just returned to his temporary office on the ground floor of the adjacent south side of the Pentagon by the cafeteria when he heard an explosion and felt the building shake. Immediately afterwards, he said, hundreds of panicked Pentagon personnel ran by him down the corridor just outside his office and out the South Entrance, yelling “Bombs!” and “A bomb went off!” The witness has requested that his name not be used in this summary, but is willing to testify to a grand jury or independent official investigation. This Army financial management/audit area is part of, or contiguous to, the Army personnel offices, which was one of two main west section offices heavily destroyed in the Pentagon attack, the other being the Naval Command Center. The day before 9/11, September 10, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld held a press conference at which he acknowledged that the Pentagon was “missing”—could not account for and needed to “find”—$2.3 Trillion dollars (other reports said $2.6 Trillion). Were the auditors who could “follow the money,” and the computers whose data could help them do it, intentionally targeted? It is worth noting that the Pentagon’s top financial officer at the time, Dov Zakheim, who also acknowledged the “missing” trillions, had a company that specializes in aircraft remotecontrol technology. As remnants found in the Pentagon wreckage have been identified as the front-hub assembly of the front compressor of a JT8D turbojet engine used in the A-3 Sky Warrior jet fighter,5 and as Air Force A-3 Sky Warriors—normally piloted planes—were secretly retrofitted to be remote-controlled drones and fitted with missiles in a highly compartmented operation at an airport near Ft. Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport in Colorado in the months before 9/11,6 the question further arises as to whether Pentagon auditors and their computerized data were intentionally targeted on 9/11.
God is always good!
Thanks for the info Ricky. I had read years ago that at least some of the parts appeared to be from a Sky Warrior or something similar, is there confirmation of that? Good info on the bomb claims too.
The JT8D & A3 Skywarrior I'll smoke to that. ;-)
Thank you.
LOL!!! Hoist with his own petar(d). LOL! Now that right there is funny.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. He (Gordon Duff) also implies that forcibly removing Obama, a Constitution-hating, on-the-down-low, crackhead Communist, is an attack on America, Mom, and apple pie. I swear these military people are worse than useless. Just look around at the condition of the country and tell me if they have fulfilled their oaths to protect the nation from all enemies foreign and domestic. As I told you when you tried to insult me in a private message - I worked with a person who was in Bethesda MD with her husband at the time for Oracle Training and who on their way to the Pentagon Mall observed the plane strike the Pentagon. I think I'll take her word over your government disinformation/propaganda.
Your argument seems to be, well you know somebody who was there, and yeah, there was a big boom, so it HAS to be like the TV tells you. You remind me of war, who insisted it HAD to be those crazy 19 arabs that did it, because he was in New York City that day it happened. Again, yes, there were aircraft, TWO aircraft actually, one which was probably Flight 77, and the other, something else. BTW, do YOU believe 19 angry arabs were behind it all? And what part of HANJOUR COULD NOT FLY don't you understand?
Oh and BTW, what happened to the jet fuel from the left wing of the aircraft, if Flight 77 did indeed hit the Pentagon? If the wing had hit the Pentagon, the 5000 or so gallons of fuel from that wing would have sprayed all over the Pentagon wall in the section of the building, yet there WAS no fuel fire there outside the building. Forensic evidence, and the testimony of 100 impartial eyewitnesses, trumps testimony of 2 witnesses even if they happen to be police officers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- One last thing. IF you truly question the official 911 legend, you are doing yourself a disservice by closing your mind to the abundant evidence, in fact smoking gun evidence related to the Pentagon attack. It's a victory for the REAL disinfo artists, in that they have tricked you and convinced you that there's nothing to see here, move along... If you have ever followed my posts starting from FreeRepublic, then LibertyPost, and now here, you should know that I've presented reports and articles that shed light on various controversial topics, 9/11 being one of those topics. I've never seen much of anything you've posted, although on LP you did appear to be somewhat of a open minded poster from what I can rememember. If you truly are the open minded poster I thought you were, take the time to consider the evidence presented here, and don't dismiss it just because your friend thought she saw something hit the Pentagon. Of COURSE something hit the Pentagon, but WHAT hit it is open for debate, and the evidence indicates it was NOT a 757, and even IF it were, it was not Hani Hanjour piloting that aircraft.
You can't change those facts, all you have is spin. Once again you make assertions with no proof or rebuttals of your own. Denying existing facts is not sufficient for evidential conclusions. You must supply your own independent verifiable facts to withstand equal or greater scrutiny.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- There were more than just those two police officers that witnessed the aircraft approach from north of the Citgo station. Besides, those two officers were NOT at the same location, and they saw the northern approach independently of each other. Just because the evidence points to something other than what you're selling doesn't mean it can be easily dismissed, it means what you're selling isn't what really happened.
"Once again you make assertions with no proof or rebuttals of your own. Denying existing facts is not sufficient for evidential conclusions. You must supply your own independent verifiable facts to withstand equal or greater scrutiny." "AGAviator posted on 2010-07-26 10:43:10 ET"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Once again you make assertions with no proof or rebuttals of your own. Hanjour's instructors have stated that he was an extremely poor pilot, that he lacked the basic skills required to pilot an aircraft, in fact, one said "he could not fly at all". I'll take their observations over your unfounded allegations any day of the week. Denying existing facts is not sufficient for evidential conclusions. Yet that is the crux of your argument. You deny existing facts, ignore highly credible eyewitness testimony, and then insist that proves you're right. You must supply your own independent verifiable facts to withstand equal or greater scrutiny. Besides your unfounded asssertions, what sort of "verifiable facts" have YOU presented? All evidence related to Hanjour's abilites indicates he could NOT have piloted a 757 at all, never mind manuevering it as the alleged Flight 77 was observed to have manuevered the morning of 9/11. Hell, you won't even acknowledge the OFFICIAL account of how that jet was flown, since it shoots your "he was a bad pilot yet managed to pull it off" story right out of the water. The lack of jet fuel in the vicinty where the left wing should have struck the Pentagon wall indicates it was NOT a 757 that hit the building. Yet you INSIST it was, because you say so. Sorry, but I never did believe in faerie tales, not even when I was a kid.
Oh, and as far as "tying to insult you in a PM", you had already tried to publicly insult me here on this forum. I was rather polite to you, all things considered.
This is what that would look like: [Not really] New Re-released Pentagon Video : [but] watch it all [anyway]
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
deleted
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one.
Forensic evidence, and the testimony of 100 impartial eyewitnesses, trumps testimony of 2 witnesses even if they happen to be police officers. Actually no it doesn't. It means that it is an anomalous unconfirmed datum which should be explored, evaluated, and understood in its context compared against the other data. I do not pretend to know the ultimate answer. However, one thing I do know is that there are enough contrary datums to make the "Official Cover Legend™" seem untenable. So, sound reasoning simply requires that we look at the data in its totality without assuming we know the final answer before we look
"One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator
lol....oh, but now James, he doesn't believe in all that his great debunking source has to say or even the site, just one cherry picked little piece of data. I find it hysterically funny. He has no problems with using TRUTHER sites to support some little aspect of the government fairy tale while ignoring the mountain of information presented to call BS on the bulk of the government theory. Oh, but he doesn't want to read any of that information, written by scientists, architects and engineers.......hey, it's okay to cherry pick around and within while believing that the lot of us bother to put even an iota of credibility to his posts. Wouldn't want any FACTS to disrupt the fairy tale.
"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. ... We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of." Edward Bernays, Father of Public Relations
I think that is a nice summation of the credibility of the "Official Cover Legend™" In looking at the entire problem globally the first thing that comes to mind is the old axiom of logic: There are simply too many apparently contradictory datums for the "Official Cover Legend™" to be true. Therefore we are left trying to reconstruct, from an artificially (by suppression of information) limited data set. (As well we cannot rule out the possibility that false data was planted to mislead.) Just given the FBI confiscation of all the videos from surrounding cameras we can infer that they contained, or were likely to contain, images which would have been directly contradictory to the "Official Cover Legend™". We know from his training record and the testimony of his instructors etc., that Hani Hanjour/Hanjoor had never evidenced the level of piloting skill or knowledge to have taken flight 77 through its apparent flight path and into the Pentagon wall. This particularly applies to the ability to navigate the aircraft from Ohio to the Pentagon, several States away, locate and close on a target, the Pentagon, put a Jumbo Jet through maneuvers that would tax the skills of a Master Pilot, and then make a theoretically impossible final approach at 460 Knots (530 M.P.H.) 20 fee above the ground (leaving about a 2.5 foot clearance above ground for the engine cowlings) for a mile, to precisely impact the Pentagon on the first floor of a 71 foot high wall. We also know from the accounts that apparently Flt. 77 disappears from Radar somewhere over Ohio only to miraculously reappear on its final approach to the Pentagon. I am not sure what to make of that datum. I could speculate, but it would be speculation based on incomplete data. We know that the impact occurred on the side of the Pentagon directly on the opposite side, as far as it could be, from the offices housing all of the Brass despite the fact that the initial approach would have made that the easiest target, afforded the largest target, based on the angle of approach, and the one most likely taken by a suicide pilot of very limited skill who was just trying to hit the building anywhere. Also "coincidentall" the one spot chosen is the one most convenient to any cover up of the missing 2.3 TRILLION dollars that had been reported unaccounted for just the day before. Then we have the data of conflicting reports on the final approach path of the aircraft to its impact point. There is the testimony of the two officers as well as witnesses claiming to see a plane continuing low over the other side after the supposed impact of flight 77. The C-130 does not credibly account for this as it its closest approach was a couple of miles and too high. So as we see we have a data set with conflicting and apparently mutually contradictory datums. So, the first thing we can reasonably conclude is that the official story is false or incomplete, and that the data necessary to resolve the conflict, the 32 videos confiscated and hidden by the FBI the afternoon of 911 (How did they know where ALL the videos were just hours after the event?) is being held under lock and key 9 years after the event.
"One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator
Comments (443 - 989) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestThink I'll roll me a fattie and watch this one from the sidelines, LOL.
#403. To: AGAviator (#401)
Think I'll roll me a fattie and watch this one from the sidelines, LOL.
#404. To: AGAviator (#401)
#405. To: AGAviator, buckeroo, turtle, Original_Intent, bush_is_a_moonie, ALL (#401)
The Pentagon No- 757- Crash Theory: Booby Trap for 9/11 Skeptics by Jim Hoffman
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#406. To: AGAviator (#401)
#407. To: AGAviator (#401)
#408. To: AGAviator (#401)
#409. To: Original_Intent, buckeroo (#402)
Somehow it seems appropriate that you would be a dope smoker.
One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work....Noam Chomsky
#410. To: abraxas, buckeroo (#403)
That means your source recommends Prof. Stephen Jones and Architect Richard Gage, both of whom I have submitted information inwhich you attempt to berate the messenger
One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work....Noam Chomsky
#411. To: FormerLurker (#405)
One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work....Noam Chomsky
#412. To: AGAviator (#401)
#413. To: AGAviator (#410)
That does not translate into my endorsing or buying anything else he states
#414. To: AGAviator (#411)
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#415. To: FormerLurker (#405)
(Edited)
#416. To: abraxas, buckeroo (#412)
You see your site link supports the "conspiracy theory" that all three buildings were taken down by controlled demolition.
One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work....Noam Chomsky
#417. To: RickyJ (#415)
We're alien hybrids - the apex of my learning
#418. To: RickyJ (#415)
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#419. To: Original_Intent, christine (#416)
(Edited)
We're alien hybrids - the apex of my learning
#420. To: FormerLurker, Buckeroo, turtle (#414)
It's obvious from the conflicting witness testimony that there were TWO aircraft converging on the Pentagon at the same time that morning,
One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work....Noam Chomsky
#421. To: AGAviator (#420)
Yes there were.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#422. To: FormerLurker (#418)
(Edited)
#423. To: RickyJ (#422)
It is worth noting that the Pentagon’s top financial officer at the time, Dov Zakheim, who also acknowledged the “missing” trillions, had a company that specializes in aircraft remotecontrol technology. As remnants found in the Pentagon wreckage have been identified as the front-hub assembly of the front compressor of a JT8D turbojet engine used in the A-3 Sky Warrior jet fighter,5 and as Air Force A-3 Sky Warriors
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#424. To: FormerLurker, RickyJ (#423)
Pentagon Theory
What is it and where did it come from?
#425. To: Original_Intent (#402)
Somehow it seems appropriate that you would be a dope smoker.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams 
#426. To: Rotara (#333)
#427. To: abraxas (#403)
Perhaps, you should research your own sources more fully. Enjoy your fatty while you check out the recommened Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth who call bovine excrement on those buildings falling from fire.
Lord Acton
OsamaBinGoldstein posted on 2010-05-25 9:39:59 ET (2 images) Reply Trace
#428. To: FormerLurker (#405)
#429. To: bush_is_a_moonie (#428)
(Edited)
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#430. To: bush_is_a_moonie (#428)
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#431. To: FormerLurker, turtle, bucker00 (#421)
I've posted this video for you more than once, here it is again...
One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work....Noam Chomsky
#432. To: bush_is_a_moonie (#428)
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#433. To: FormerLurker, Bush_Is_A_Moonie, buckeroo, turtle (#405)
The fact is, Hanjour would NOT and COULD NOT have had even the REMOTEST chance of flying that alleged 757 the way it was flown that day, and the damage to the Pentagon doesn't match that of a Boeing 757.
One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work....Noam Chomsky
#434. To: AGAviator (#431)
Forensic evidence, and the testimony of 100 impartial eyewitnesses, trumps testimony of 2 witnesses even if they happen to be police officers.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#435. To: FormerLurker (#434)
Just because the evidence points to something other than what you're selling doesn't mean it can be easily dismissed, it means what you're selling isn't what really happened.
One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work....Noam Chomsky
#436. To: AGAviator (#433)
(Edited)
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#437. To: bush_is_a_moonie (#428)
(Edited)
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#438. To: Eric Stratton (#260)
B, it was a Boeing 757 in the video
#439. To: GreyLmist (#438)
#440. To: AGAviator, FormerLurker, wudidiz, Rotara, IRTorqued, abraxas, all (#431)
I've posted this video for you more than once, here it is again...
#441. To: James Deffenbach, AGAviator (#427)
(Edited)
#442. To: Eric Stratton, GreyLmist, FormerLurker, wudidiz, abraxas, christine, all (#439)
The official theory is built for morons and sheep, plain and simple. Those are the people that believe it, morons and sheep.
"If two datums are mutually contradictory the first thing we many know with certainty is that one, or both, are false."
.
.
.