Pentagon debunking

[Wibble]

Private members club, not public property. No rights here, only privilege, and you signed the contract when you joined

If its not a deal you are happy to have made, you don't have to come here

In here in lies the problem

[bill withers]

The only witness from the road who claims a lightpole is struck is our friend the taxi driver (by the way you are still avoiding the details of that little incident) and there is nobody on that supposedly busy road who can confirm the event happened.

So it requires specifically a witness actually on the road?

""The sound of the engines came so quickly I thought it was another helicopter landing. I looked left to see a large plane barely clear the I-395 overpass. Instantly I knew what was happening, and I involuntarily ducked as the plane passed perhaps 50 to 75 feet above the roof of my car at great speed. Street lights toppled as the plane barely cleared the Interstate 395 overpass. ... Gripping the steering wheel of my vibrating car, I involuntarily ducked as the wobbling plane thundered over my head. Once it passed, I raised slightly and grimaced as the left wing dipped and scraped the helicopter area just before the nose crashed into the southwest wall of the Pentagon. The impact was deafening. The fuselage hit the ground and blew up. I could see office walls through the broken outer walls, then smoke and flames engulfed the west wall. Perhaps 10 seconds had passed since I first saw the plane. At first no one moved. Then debris began falling over the cars." *

Or is that the wrong road for you?

Wreckage?

"The full impact of the closeness of the crash wasn´t realized until coworkers noticed damage to Bell´s work vehicle. He had plastic and rivets from an airplane imbedded in its sheet metal"*

KP50 - your theory requires no aircraft impact, right? How come so many witnesses see the plane actually strike the Pentagon? Including at least some of the NoC witnesses?

"the aircraft crossed about 200 yards in front of me and impacted the side of the building"*


*just examples

Sorry for the delay, work is too busy.

A witness on the same physical road as the taxi driver is lacking - any idea why that would be when there seem to be a dozen travelling the other way, a lot of whom happen to be journalists. And please explain how the taxi driver's story can be believed, I have waited a while for it.

Your long quote is from the only witness account that appears to come from someone who witnessed the poles being hit rather than deducing it later. I believe CIT have tried to interview this witness without success so far. The account appears to be somewhat flowery in a slow-motion sort of way as we know it would only have been a couple of seconds at most.

A lot of the people who claim the plane hit the Pentagon, could not clearly see the Pentagon from their location.

Do you mean this guy that the CIT have "tried to interview" ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISwWfCGy ... re=related

[zimboy69]

one thing i dont guess anyone has said

if you was the most secure building in the world and you had some really top secret defence would you tell people about it

lets say they had a death ray a plane is flying in they ask mr acting president if he wants to do somthing about it but he knows the death ray is there so he say nah lets wait (as he knows its a really big secret and dont want to tell low level staff about it)

then the plane is death rayed
its blast it to bits but a few things get through like the engine but thats about all

what can they say to the press oh yeh we death rayed a plane full of civillians but we are ok

and would they tell future attackers about there death ray nah this would all be kept secret but they do have a problem

people saw a plane but there is nothing left to show so they have to make up some fake story to cover the evidence

i mean common they have talked for years about the most secure building in the world

wouldnt they be worried about a suprise attack to lop of the head of goverment

by the way insert mini gun rocket launcher or anything else you want instead of deathray

but my main point is if they had some top secret defence they just wouldnt tell anyone about it

[roscoe]

Easily the best debunking of Pentagon "planted evidence" CT (especially relevant to the North of Citgo theory) comes from a CTist, Russel Pickering.

It's here:
http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Chang ... opic=15013

Well worth a read before that particular forum shuts down. The images still open if clicked. Here's a sample, where he's considering the (subtle) damage to the VDOT (traffic monitoring camera) mast :





"WHO projected the dimensions of a 757 from up on the hill or back at the Pentagon into the mass of poles and trees and decided what would be "hit" and what would not?

WHO actually scuffed the pole, removed the climbing peg and broke the glass?

WHY did they decide to do such a subtle damage that was actually never noticed or discussed until 5 years after 9/11 here in this forum? It was never used to convince the general public of the validity of a plane impact.

HOW did they do it? Did black ops VDOT workers bring in a lift bucket? Did a guy take sandpaper or a grinder to rough the metal up? Did they use a hammer to smash one of the alternating climbing pegs off? If the bucket wasn't tall enough did they climb up the pole anticipating that this would somehow be more authentic if the camera glass was also shattered emulating the vibration of the strike?

DO YOU REALLY BELIEVE THIS WAS AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE OPERATION?

DO YOU REALLY BELIEVE A HUMAN BEING CREATED THIS SCUFF ON PURPOSE TO FAKE YOU OUT?

WHY DIDN'T THEY FLY THE PLANE OVER THIS DAMAGE?

Scuff a pole with hand tools but miss the damage path with a highly sophisticated plane and navigation systems? "

WHO actually scuffed the pole, removed the climbing peg and broke the glass?

They didn't - PHOTOSHOP

See Pilots for 911 truth. Aircraft data from black box shows the plane was at 400ft when it went over the light poles.

NEXT?