What did hit the Pentagon?

[Richard M]

http://www.freedomunderground.org/me...entagon121.swf

Interesting stuff...

[greencreeper]

There are more 9/11 questions unanswered than answered

[Chimaera]

That is scary! So - what are they trying to hide? Were the same people firing missiles - or was it someone else? Was it really a missile - or something else?
I don't suppose the truth will ever come out.

[etccarmageddon]

how do I access this SWF file?

what program is required?

[Tricky]

Originally Posted by etccarmageddon

how do I access this SWF file?

what program is required?

It should load up in your browser if you have www.macromedia.com flash components installed. Normally if they're not installed the site/movie should direct you to install them.

[darkangel]

perhaps it was ET escaping or the illuminati or even us

Oh dear, another paranoid conspiracy theory based on, well, nothing, really.

Starting with a recording of Hitler isn't the greatest beginning, then going into a bunch of quotes from "eyewitnesses" who reportedly saw "a small aircraft" or a "missile" (like they're not distinguishable!) and then claiming that their "it wasn't Flight 77" theory is backed up because a bunch of security camera videos *haven't* been realeased hardly offers any credible proof.

For a slightly less hysterical (and somewhat more believable) opinion see: http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm

Something deliberate hit it, does it really matter to us in the uk what it was ?

[andygrif]

Originally Posted by Graham

Oh dear, another paranoid conspiracy theory based on, well, nothing, really.

Starting with a recording of Hitler isn't the greatest beginning, then going into a bunch of quotes from "eyewitnesses" who reportedly saw "a small aircraft" or a "missile" (like they're not distinguishable!) and then claiming that their "it wasn't Flight 77" theory is backed up because a bunch of security camera videos *haven't* been realeased hardly offers any credible proof.

Exactly...have there been any official tapes of the WTC impacts released either? I don't think so, although I may be wrong - but as far as I know all the footage is from amateur cameramen or news crews - no CCTV.

Also the Pentagon is a unique building, the fact that an aircraft didn't come out the other side is not really surprising, given that it would have had to have entered and exited the equivalent of four buildings to do so. The building was designed to withstand missile attack, the windows at the start that are intact are likely to be bomb proof.

Honestly, I think is probably the weakest conspiracy theory I've seen about 9/11 - nice use of shockwave though!

The most compelling is that the goverment knew about it and let it happen (no one has benfited more from the attacks than bush, he was in deep problems, no majority behind him and now he is gonna win the election and got his iraqi war)

Although I dont believe that either

[Mal]

This was posted in another thread.

[TigaSefi]

Well apparently there are a lot of rumours on the internet and newsgroups that Bush did indeed chose not to chase the hijackers in the US so he can wage war against the offending nations.
There a lot of evidence that the CIA and FBI have said no actions needed when the surveillance ppl have said activities were going on. Also a lot of things that were intercepted in arabic were convienently translated AFTERWARDS.

[BBKing]

Considering that the 9/11 attacks were mainly carried out by Saudis, funded by Saudis and the result of a political and religious philosophy developed by Saudis, but Bush invaded Iraq, I don't think he wanted to wage war against the offending nations at all - he certainly wanted to boot out Saddam and overfocused on this to the detriment of the safety and security of the US and indeed the rest of the world.

Remember, every time you hear 9/11 mentioned, remind yourself that it was Saudi terrorism in the same way that the IRA attacks in London and elsewhere were Irish terrorism.

Anyway, aeroplanes and holes in buildings - that conspiracy 'theory' is indeed a pile of old poo - buildings are stronger than airliners, particularly steel-reinforced masonry buildings. There were bits of plane left, particularly the engines, which usually end up recognisable after accidents, often at the furthest extent along the wreckage path (cf. the crash of Vulcan VX770 at Syerston in 1958). The first eyewitnesses are usually the least accurate - they usually aren't looking in the right direction, have inadequate visual cues to judge size, and often confuse the timelines, often stating that aircraft are on fire in the air when the explosion was on the ground.

I thought the second plane that hit the WTC was an Airbus A320, even after several viewings - not being familiar with the WTC (although I'd been there once) I had nothing else to judge the size against, all I saw was a twin-jet-engined low-wing airliner.

Apart from anything else, the conspiracy theorists have to come up with an explanation of where Boeing 757-223 N644AA and 68 people are. Not easy to hide.

[TigaSefi]

hmmm true but have you SEEN any evidence to make u believe there was a plane in that place ? Also why didn't we see any CCTV cameras showin' the plane descent ? ALSO why did the FBI nick every camera's tape in the area ? It only luck that there was amatuers camera operators in NY catchin' the whole thing or we'd wouldn't have proof of that either.... and yes there were MORE THAN 3 bullets.....oooopp wrong conspiracy.....

[darkangel]

Originally Posted by TigaSefi

hmmm true but have you SEEN any evidence to make u believe there was a plane in that place ?

have u seen evidence to the say otherwise? plenty of people spotted the plane

Originally Posted by TigaSefi

ALSO why did the FBI nick every camera's tape in the area ?

hmm..FBI collecting tapes for evidence very odd

Originally Posted by TigaSefi

only luck that there was amatuers camera operators in NY catchin' the whole thing

what did they tape? always a good amatuer camera operator around when u need them