That's for an investigation to determine. A proper investigation, where expert witnesses and other experts in the relevant fields are called. But that hasn't happened. Unless you think the Commission did its job properly, in which case you would be severely deluded. Besides, physical evidence can be tampered with, planted etc. Or are you so naive to think that the guvmit would never do such a thing? The 'wreckage' on the lawn was obviously planted. And Jamie Mcintyre, CNN's senior Pentagon correspondent at the time, was at the Pentagon shortly after it was hit. Here’s what he reported: “From my close-up inspection, there is no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the Pentagon… The only pieces left that you can see are small enough that you could pick up in your hand. There are no large tail sections, wing sections, a fuselage, nothing like that anywhere around which would indicate that the entire plane crashed into the side of the Pentagon and then caused the side to collapse. Even though if you look at the pictures of the Pentagon you see that the floors have all collapsed, that didn't happen immediately, it wasn't until almost about forty-five minutes later that the structure was weakened enough that all of the floors collapsed.” Scroll down for that: https://consciouslifenews.com/911-p...gon-major-general-albert-stubblebine/1145271/ Refer to my previous post: if an event happens so quickly that a person’s senses are unable to capture all its details, to make their perception more complete and coherent their brain might replace a poorly received sensation with another from acquired memory. So, if Pentagon witnesses heard on the news about planes hitting the WTC and later heard that it was a 757 that hit the Pentagon, they might then report that they did indeed see Flight 77 there, when in fact what they saw occurred too fast for them to say with certainty that it was a Boeing rather than a smaller aircraft. Yes I saw those photos but you didn't give a source. So how did those photos get in the public domain? Were they released by the White House? The Pentagon? Who was the photographer? As for the rest, what source(s) are you using there? The Commission's report? See here, where the Commission changed the most critical aspects of Mineta’s testimony (emphasis added):
Well, 23 years on and the same lies and deception are going on, from "911 truthers"! @undertheradar has posted a witness account and by doing so has given his approval of their authenticity and their content. So this deceptive piece of quotation DELIBERATELY omits the previous part of his report! https://www.politifact.com/factchec...ok-post-shares-misleadingly-edited-version-c/ "But the clip shared on Instagram was edited to truncate McIntyre’s remarks. In the original broadcast, just before the 5:41 mark, the anchor says eyewitnesses said it appeared that Boeing 757 might have landed short of the Pentagon, and she asked McIntyre how much of the plane struck the building. McIntyre answered, "It might have appeared that way. But from my close-up inspection, there’s no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the Pentagon. The only site is the actual site of the building that’s crashed in." " In the years since the CNN report aired, McIntyre has addressed conspiracy theories that misuse the footage numerous times. He wrote in a 2010 post for his “Line of Departure” blog on news site Military.com: “What the 9/11 deniers intentionally misrepresent, is that I was answering a question about an earlier report that the plane crashed SHORT of the Pentagon, nearby. I was explaining there was no sign of a crash anywhere BUT at the Pentagon.” There are also multiple photographs of debris from American Airlines Flight 77 found at the Pentagon crash site, including images released by the FBI." MORE: https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-911-pentagon-attack-footage-415983695442 "In the clip, then-CNN anchor Judy Woodruff says: “Jamie, you got very close to where that plane went down,” and McIntyre, at the time the network’s military affairs correspondent, responds: “That’s right Judy, a short while ago I walked right up next to the building as firefighters were still trying to put out the blaze that — the fire, by the way, is still burning in some parts of the Pentagon — and I took a look at the huge, gaping hole that’s in the side.” In the real footage, after McIntyre mentions the “huge, gaping hole,” he continues: “I can see parts of the airplane that crashed into the building — very small pieces of the plane — on the heliport outside the building. The biggest piece I saw was about three-feet long. It was silver and it had been painted green and red, but I could not see any identifying markings on the plane. I also saw a large piece of shattered glass that appeared to be a cockpit windshield or other window from the plane.” And the rest of that post? What a joke! That's just hogwash. The "if I ran the zoo fallacy" - They should have actually ignored that a damn plane hit and interviewed people who mistakenly got it wrong? Pathetic. Hmmm, 23 years and all we've got is bare assertion.Instead of simply crashing the extremely the big plane at top speed, they chose a massive list of ludicrous proportions to do instead, fraught with exposure and with no extra gain whatsoever! When was the wreckage "planted"? That is a ludicrous claim, people darting around dropping plane parts, whilst the real plane was invisibly disposed off, the passengers murdered, their DNA mashed up and sprinkled all over the crash area. Months later and we still get evasion! That mixed with deliberately deceptive quoting. Are you going to pretend that Mcintyre was NOT completely and deliberately taken out of context!?
Jesus... The best he can do is misquote a CNN reporter on the day who had literally just spoken about seeing aircraft parts on the Pentagon lawn. 4:10:40 mark. Oh dear. I guess googling must be too hard as well. July 24 2015, NARA (National Archives and Records Administration) released 356 photos of 9/11 taken from Dick Cheney's photographer at the White House David Bohrer. Here's the link to all 356 photos. If you want more info on NARA's release I'm sure you can google with the information I've provided. Christ. Why are 9/11 deniers the world's laziest researchers?
never mind research, they won’t even look at information handed to them on a silver platter … oh but the Joos! …
Speaking of what happened at the Pentagon, a lady working there named April Gallop, who actually walked through the debris to get out of the building, and carrying her son who had been in day care there, reported seeing nothing in that debris looking like an airliner. No seats, no baggage, no airplane parts, nothing. April Gallop: Eyewitness at Pentagon on 9/11 Says There Was No Plane Debris | Winter Watch
Her comments are irrelevant for several reasons; 1. She was inside the Pentagon when it was hit, so she would not have been able to see what hit. 2. She would not have been able to see the debris inside the Pentagon because the area where most the debris piled up was burning at several hundred degrees. If she was in a location to see debris, she wouldn't be alive anymore. 3. The overwhelming evidence, include photo's of RB211 of engine parts and other recognisable debris, show that AAL77 hit the Pentagon. Source - https://therightbloggerbastard.blogspot.com/ 4. I've commented about witnesses before in this very thread. Witness statements are heavily impacted by stress, memory, suggestion, and of course the specifics of where they were, how long they were there for, whether the actually specially looked for certain detail or are just trying to recall post-event etc etc etc. Witness Statements Do Not Trump Physical Evidence. And the physical evidence is overwhelming. Do you have any actual evidence to present or just cherry-picked witnesses?
I think the evidence that a 757 didn't hit the Pentagon is overwhelming. http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/9-11con-the-pentagon.598106/page-16#post-1074307600
No it is not There is no evidence of one not hitting the pentagon. Your claim was disproven years ago
What is the physical evidence it was something else? In doing so, provide evidence for how the following was carried out: Witness testimony - for the Pentagon crash there is a considerable number of accounts confirming a plane, a 757 and the provider American Airlines. Air Traffic Control - monitored the take-off of the flight and noted its later activity prior to crashing. National Guard - a plane spotted the inbound flight and subsequent crash. Security camera footage - though blurred, significant factors in the image demonstrate the exact shape expected. Lamp posts - knocked over during the approach, including an impact with a taxi on the highway prior to crash. Passengers and staff - DNA identified many onboard. Black box - recovered. Phone calls - 2 calls received from the plane. Plane pieces - strewn all over the Pentagon lawn, mangled and burnt deep into the building. This was a scheduled flight that strayed off course, pilot contact lost. observed into its target after a hijack. Now, what would NO PLANE entail, previously posted and no serious response made: Now we have to involve countless numbers of people to dispose of the actual plane! Burn it up and distribute parts all around the lawn and building! We have to fabricate the ATC involvement. We have to coerce all the eye-witnesses. We have to have explosions to knock out lamp posts etc. We have to fabricate the National Guard plane witness accounts. We have to involve a team to blow up the building/launch the missile/other plane whichever batshit alternative is suggested! Now we have to dispose / murder all the passengers, dismember some of them and scatter their DNA all over the crash site! How many to get all the luggage and scatter this around the area? Now we have to get actual passengers to fabricate(really!) their audio transcripts and phone calls! We have to fabricate the black box data and/or coerce the analysts who view it.
still hectic for you ? … it’s okay, I understand… you don’t want to watch anything that interferes with your beliefs … please dont watch it … I wouldn’t want it to upset your balance …
I am severely disappointed that not a single truther has watched the Coste/Chandler video … Bob was the original poster of the vid and he uploaded after only watching the intro which confirmed his bias … the intro had duck all to do with Coste’s analysis … why so scared of the truth, truthers ? I am disappointed…
I literally link it in the post you've just replied to. Clearly such an eye for detail you must have. Here, to make it so it's unmissable; CLICK HERE See the link above? You take your mouse, and click on the words "CLICK HERE" and it will take you to another website. Just in case you missed that one: CLICK HERE INSTEAD Click above where it says "CLICK HERE INSTEAD" and it will take you to the exact same page as was linked above, just in case you missed the first time.
That blog is a total slam-dunk of evidence. Poor April Gallop is obviously attracted by the limelight given to her by "911 truthers".
CJ Old buddy old pal, you don't know a wrecked airliner from a wrecked Cessna, and I don't expect you to. You are a credulous person of the highest order, always believing the BS line of known liars. asiana airlines flight 214 - Search Images (bing.com) Go through these images of the Asiana Airlines Boeing crash at SFO 5 years back. Compare them to the pictures at the Pentagon that fateful day. You're an honest man, and I'm sure you're recognize huge differences in the debris field. Or not?
Wait.. Hang on.. Did Eleuthera just compare an airliner skidding to a stop along a runway at 150mph, to an airliner being deliberately rammed into a concrete building at 520mph? It appears my only error was taking you seriously. Welcome to the block list. Good riddance.
It's very strange how anyone can "wonder" about pieces of aircraft when it hit a reinforced brick wall at 500mph. The video showing how the jet crash test disintegrates should surely be evidence enough of what happens. Even if there were just a fire, that takes care of most of the plane! It's all so very bizarre. Over 20 years later and we are still getting the same useless arguments. NOBODY has ever addressed the substantial elephant in the room! http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/9-11con-the-pentagon.598106/page-19#post-1074608985 It's also odd comparing a passenger plane landing "well below the target landing speed of 137 knots per hour, or 157 mph" "We're not talking about a few knots," (from all accounts close to stall speed) clipping a seawall, with one at maximum speed fully impacting a reinforced structure.
My time is quite limited so if there's a transcript I don't bother with the vid. Like I said, that's for an investigation to determine. A proper investigation, that is, where expert witnesses and other experts in the relevant fields are called. Or do you you think the Commission was a proper investigation?
There are hours of vids there. Who's got time to watch them all? Not me that's for sure. So just say which one shows the wreckage of a Boeing, like the tail section, passenger seats and luggage, wings etc. And don't bother with vids that only show damage to the building. We all know it was hit by something. BTW, there was a vid going around which showed a military-type aircraft slamming into a concrete slab and then disintegrating. This was trotted out by OCT supporters as 'proof'. But that's an invalid comparison. Such an aircraft is not a Boeing, and to be anywhere near valid the thickness of the wall it slammed into would have to be exactly the same as the Pentagon and made from exactly the same materials. Unlikely.
When everything the American people believe is false, we will know the success of our misinformation efforts.
make some time to look at real info … you obviously have time to research batshit conspiracies…look outside your box and get educated …
