I read lots about plane not really hitting pent. But what about all of

[rainy]

the passengers? What about the loved ones on that flight? How could this be such a big event with so many involved and not really happening?

[DrWeird]

1. Basically, they're nutjobs.

Mostly good people, like numberologists, and homeopaths, etc. but nutjobs just the same.

I say just leave them alone. They're not hurting anybody.

[RC]

2. Don't you want to know the truth?

Or do you buy the administration lies about 9/11?

[DrWeird]

5. Yes.

And no.

In that order.

[King_Crimson]

79. What I find odd...

is that Ted Olson,(current Solicitor General) whose wife Barbara was on that plane, and she was loved on this board about as much as Ann Coulter, Olson never really showed much remorse!:shrug:

[DemLikr]

61. Truth is often found only because "nut jobs" on the outside edge...

...were "crazy" enough to ask the "unaskable" questions, many of which turn out to be nearly as looney as our Resident in Chief.

Good Doctor, your post rings too close to "shut up and don't ask questions" for my comfort. But then, you don't post for my comfort, so that's ok, too.

There are hundreds of unresolved mysteries regarding 9/11. They remain mysteries only because our supposedly free press refuses to ask tough questions. And part of their excuse for not asking them is the chorus of "conspiracy nut" shouting at them as soon as they open their mouths.

The more questions the better. Some answers in return would be a nice change for the better too.

[DrWeird]

63. Not really.

The big important things are rarely found by nutjobs. Some of these people can be a little eccentric, but hardly nutjobs.

Nutjobs are more interested in ridiculous things. They have no sense for Occam's razor, or most any other kinds of logical tools. Often they believe they are the only ones who know the "truth" and that everybody else is out to get them. More often then not, when confronted, they fly off the handle and act irrationally.

If you disagree, please let me know what "truth" is often found out by nutjobs.

And I never told any nutjob to shut up, and never would. I just advised the original author not to waste his time with them, as they are incapable of reasoning.

[DemLikr]

66. You miss my point, good Doctor.

Nutjobs are vital in that they ask the really insane, crazy questions on the leading edge; a process which often makes way for more reasoned, though difficult, questions which follow on their heels.

In a like manner, Janet's exposed boobie at the Super Bowl made the standard eye-popping cleavage favored by talentless pop stars seem more tame or reasonable by comparison.

Think of questions about a missile hitting the Pentagon as Janet's mammary; followed by questions about why no Air Force jets showed up to intercept the actual plane. These secondary inquiries are the equivalent of Britney's see-through sequined Vegas show-bra.

If this doesn't work for you, simply consider the contours of Janet's breast for its own sake, and forget all this other bullshit.

:)

But...I still want to know where the wings of the plane went, and where are any of the human remains, and why did Dumbya sit in the classroom for 20 minutes while thousands died, and where was Dumbya the rest of the day, and why did the Saudi royal family get to leave the country two days later...and on and on and on...?

I thank goodness for the nutjobs.

[BattyDem]

78. "But...I still want to know where the wings of the plane went"

EXACTLY! I've been thinking that since day one. I've looked at countless photos and videos ... where the f*ck are the wings???

I've seen sites that compared the size of the hole in the Pentagon and the wingspan of the plane and concluded that the hole wasn't big enough. (Google "Pentagon crash" and you'll find a ton of them.) I have no idea if that's true or not, I never actually researched it ... but one of those sites has always intrigued me because it has two pictures which I can't explain.

http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pentagone/erreurs_en.htm

Scroll to Question 7. There are links to large versions of the photos next to the bottom photo if you want a closer view. The upper floors are still intact! Seriously, it looks like the "plane" only took out the bottom floors.

Listen, I'm not gullible and I certainly don't believe every conspiracy theory I see on the net, but I've never been able to come up with any kind of a rational explanation for those photos. If someone has one or if I'm looking at it wrong or if you have any other info about those photos, please tell me because it's driving me nuts! :)

[Th1onein]

72. One person's nutjob is anothers' truthfinder........

I was once hailed as a nutjob for believing that laymen could find out more about how to treat cystic fibrosis than credentialed scientists. Now, the vision that I and my fellow "nutjobs" gave birth to is considered cutting edge in this area of science.

[Streetdoc270]

80. Well...

Somebodies 'nutjob' is another's genius

Galileo
Columbus
Darwin

all labeled 'nutjobs'

[RandomKoolzip]

3. No, a plane really did hit the pentagon.

too many people saw it happen for that to be in doubt.

However, there are a LOT of fishy things about 9/11, and my mind will continue to remain open about it indefinitely, even for the most outlandish of conspiracy theories. I don't dismiss anything just because it's impossible.

[Serenity-NOW]

4. Don't have to be a nut job or a gardener to wonder how come

all the grass in front of the spot where a huge jet incinerated/vaporized was still green right after it happened. I have no explanation but questions aplenty. How come that hole is so small? why no wreckage, seats, parts, bodies etc?

How come they didn't intercept it when they saw it coming? It is the freaking Pentagon for gosh sakes. NO DEFENSES? Holy smoke.

It is at least a little bit strange.

[mr_hat]

6. The theory is that the plane was flown over the Atlantic and shot down.

[Wickerman]

8. I hadn't heard that one

makes as much sense as anything I have heard, I guess. So, what made the big hole in the pentagon?

[DrWeird]

10. That would be a bomb, apparently. Or maybe a wormhole.

Just like the WTC. The planes shot missles into the WTC, a split second before crashing into it. That, apparently, does a lot more damage.


As for the witnesses, it was just mass hallucination.

[NecessaryOnslaught]

12. Not just a big hole..

but large, symmetrical, circular holes that punched through 4-5 reinforced concrete rings of the pentagon. Aluminum? No F'in way.

[WoodrowFan]

22. another lie

It punched through the outer two rings only. 9-11 conspiracy crap relies as much on lies as any RW story we hear fromt he freepers.

[librechik]

26. punched through and left the wings on the ground outside the Pentagon?

er...no!

no wing or engine wreckage on the lawn in front of the hole. I can't explain it, but I suppose you can, since it's just NOT POSSIBLE that the President would lie to us.


http://no757.batcave.net/

[HFishbine]

68. ...

[frylock]

54. actually, it penetrated the inside wall of the 'C' ring..

6 walls total.

[BlueStateGirl]

9. But why wouldn't they just use the plane? Why fly it over the

Atlantic, shoot it down, and crash another plane or missle into the Pentagon?

I have seen the pics and they do raise legitimate questions, but I am still trying to figure out the why.

[doni_georgia]

14. Some think it was a missile that hit the Pentegon -

perhaps a misfire that shot the plane down. CNN did a story on how the French are buying into a conspiracy theory on 9/11. Thiery Meyssan wrote a book about it, and there are plenty of web sites both touting and refuting his theory.

There are some serious inconsistencies with a 757 hitting the Pentagon. For one - where's the wreckage? Why no wing damage on the windows next to the entry hole? Why wasn't the lawn damaged?

If you have seen the security camera video from the Pentagon, it does look like a missile, but who knows if these were doctored. You be the judge:

Scroll down about 2/3 way to see video footage from parking lot of Pentagon

http://www.freedomfiles.org/war/pentagon.htm

[bahrbearian]

59. Thanks for link

[BlueStateGirl]

23. I have been to his website, and those that refute it.

But my fundamental question is still never answered.

Why?

Why the elaborate scam? If it was MIHOP, why not just use an actual high jacked plane? Why bother attempting to mask a missile with a hologram? Esp. with so many potential witnesses?

If a missile hit the Pentagon, and it was an errant missile, meant to shoot down Flight 77, it missed. So what happened to the plane?

It seems to me , that if one wanted to orchestrate something like 911 , one would want to jeep it simple.Something like train Arabic hijackers, have them high jack the planes and crash them into buildings. All under the guise of some evil organization called Al Qeada. This, I could believe. But holograms, and missiles, and thermadite used to melt steel, it all seems so over the top, and begging to be exposed. Have you ever tried to keep a secret among four or five people? It's damn near impossible. Never mind something this huge and complicated, with the potential to have hundreds of witnesses.

I completely believe in the possibility of LIHOP. And am willing to entertain a logical explanation of MIHOP. But some of this stuff... it seems like science fiction to me.

[Sterling]

37. Babs Olsen?

Maybe some of the people the on that flight were part of the plot? Babs Olsen is one of the key "witnesses" that "confirm" Arab hijackers on the flight. Her phone call that might not even have been possible to her husband is one of thje key links to who the attackers were.


If you know who the Olsens are then you know they are part of the inner circle of Bushbot loyalists.

I don't believe one way or the other about the DC attack. In fact I think it misses the real point which is DC should not have been attacked at all given the amount of time they had to defend it.

[BlueStateGirl]

39. I have read that she was planted to get the scoop.

I agree with your point about why was DC even attacked at all, given the amount of time they had to stop it.

Which is why I lean LIHOP.

[Sterling]

44. I can imagine her in a witness protection type of situation

Her and Ted are true believers and I have no doubt if their is a plot involving Bush and 9-11 they would be willing to take part.

[BlueStateGirl]

45. But what about everyone else on the plane?

I am honestly just trying to make sense of a bunch of conflicting theories.

I have heard the playas got played theory. Which in my mind discounts the hologram, missile theory.

That one being that Bush & Co. just expected a bunch of traditional high jackings, hence Condi's statement about who knew they would use planes, and Barbra Olsen's presence on the plane.

But then I go to other sites and read that there were no Arab men on any of those flights and infact there weren't any highjackersat all.

[Sterling]

48. Making sense of this mess is pretty hard.

I have not seen the ful passenger list for the DC plan. It is possible the whole flight which was pretty empty was full of full on promise keeper Bushbot fundie left behinders? Maybe they are all laying low?

Maybe the passenger list was fake? Maybe some were murdered? Who knows?

What we can say for sure is that we are being lied to by the government and there is no way the attack should have succeded period.

That in my mind is reason enough to explore all the possibilities and debunk and dismiss them as the evidnce dictates.

[Th1onein]

73. I've been studying this for a while.........

And I'm the LAST person who would subscribe to a conspiracy theory. BUT, I do believe that those planes were remote controlled. I believe that there were hijackers, but that they had no real idea of what the mission really was. I think they got on that plane, took it over, and then the CIA took it from there and flew those planes into the WTC and the Pentagon. The fourth plane, that crashed in PA, was shot down after it looked like the passengers were going to break into the cockpit. The engine of that plane was found MILES away from the crash site (which complies with what you would find with a plane shot down by a heat seeking missile) and five separate witnesses said that they saw an explosion of the plane and shortly after a military jet fly by.

I also believe that there were explosives planted in WTC North and South Towers and in WTC7, all of which collapsed in upon themselves on that day. All of which were steel buildings, and only two of which were hit by planes.

[r_u_stuck2]

46. Surely

It would be Impossible for BABS to keep her trap shut longer than 10 minutes. No way this could be possible.

[Sterling]

49. Maybe not.

Maybe the call was a lie Ted told? There are many possibilities. All should be investigated given who and what we are dealing with.

[PaDUer]

75. Witness protection program--very possible..

And, if you check out the blondes on Faux, take a GOOD look...wouldn't surprise me at all...Also, Ted's "new" girlfriend who emerged...Didn't someone say she was blonde also? Don't forget these people are "right in your face" with what they do..

[frylock]

53. btw.. apparently she was the only one on that plane to make an..

outbound call. Could it be that nobody else on that plane had a phone? Why wouldn't the other passengers call their loved ones?

[Rex]

65. I've asked that question too, why?

The only probable answer I can come up with is that during simulations, it was found that no human being could control a plane at such high speeds and/or maneuver it in the manner that it was to have it hit at near ground level and at the approach it came in at.

Just my 2cents.

[Beam Me Up]

47. Here's "why":

9/11 was a very sophisticated military operation carried out by special forces who left absolutely NOTHING to chance. What is difficult for us to wrap our heads around is that the entire operation was a SHOW; a very deadly, powerful show, but STAGED nonetheless. Its entire purpose was to QUICKLY drive US domestic and foreign policy to precisely where it is now.

The next event, I believe, will leave no living witnesses at all. However, the devastating horror of the aftermath will circle the globe 24/7 for weeks--media as weapons of mass deception--and close the book on anything approaching descent and reasonable questions. I prey I am wrong.

[PaDUer]

76. RIght about the media...

remember the article about Ridge meeting w/ reporters in NYC about "how" they would report the story if another attack occurred. As I said, they're "right in your face" with what they do. Everything's been carefully planned & ready to roll upon cue, IMO.

[Beam Me Up]

81. That's the way I see it, too.

What do any of us really KNOW about anything? It all comes pre-packaged for us by the corporate owned media. We were hearing stories about Osama and his gang years before 9/11. We'd been primed to believe that an attack by Muslim fundamentalists was likely to occur. When these catastrophic events DID occur, we were very quickly given the 'answer' to the question of what happened. Some of us were suspicious right from the get go. As time has gone on, more and more people have moved from shock and horror to asking questions about the many many discrepancies that surround, permeate, presage and follow from the events of that day.

Now the stage has been set for the next event. We're being told it will be bigger and more devastating and that martial law may be declared. Just the thought of it is terrifying; how much more so will be the actual event when it occurs?

[rman]

64. no, theory is it landed at Reagan airport,

which is like 1 or 2 miles from the Pentagon, a distance covered in just seconds at the velocity of the fligh-over.

[rucky]

7. then you must have lots of sources to share

this is first I've heard it.

[rainy]

11. check out thepowerhour.com

I don't know how to make it a real link in this message.
thepowerhour.com has info about the pentagon and the plane.

[renegade000]

13. one of my classmates lost a parent on that plane

so...

[BeFree]

16. So..

It is of the utmost importance that the coverup and obfuscation of the facts be stopped, yesterday. No one has any FBI details except for the "19 caveman did it" conspiracy theory. Why is that? What is the FBI hiding, and why are they hiding it?

[WoodrowFan]

21. 19 Cavemen??

If you're going to be racist why not just call them "camel jockies" or "sand n****s" and be done with it.

[BeFree]

28. Your president called them cavemen, not me

The conspiracy goes that it was 19 men who hide in caves, caused 9/11. I did not anything about mention race, or color. It is you and your "19 cavemen did it theory" which implies your racism. Not me. I don't think those 19 were responsible for 9/11, but you do, eh?

[renegade000]

58. i agree

i'm just saying that if people are going to make alternate theories...at least they should include a plane hiting the pentagon.

[Beam Me Up]

62. FBI = FBO: Federal Bureau of Obfuscation

Have State secrets you want hidden from the people? No problem, just have the FBI investigate and abscond with all the significant evidence.

Most of it doesn't really 'disappear' of course. It is kept as evidence should the need ever arise for it.

But we're not expecting any significant litigation to arise out of this, are we?

[bearfartinthewoods]

30. and a friend of mine worked there.

i gess it doesn't matter how many people actually saw the plane though does it........:crazy: :crazy: :crazy:

[frylock]

56. there are also a number of witnesses who claim to have seen..

an aircraft far smaller than that of a 757. Should their accounts be dismissed? Could it be that an aircraft flying that low and that fast could have been mistakenly identified?

[lumpy]

71. My neighbors

lost their son, who was at work in the Pentagon, as a result of the attack.

[truth_seeker]

15. 9-11 Air Defense Stand Down

No one really knows what did happen to those planes, some speculate that the passengers from the Pentagon flight were unloaded at a nearby airforce base onto the plane that was shot down over Philadelphia and a drone and missile was fired into the Pentagon.

Unfortunately we will never know the truth as the government is being so secretive about the tragedy. I don't see why they won't release the information that will disprove any of these theories so we can move on. Anyone with half a brain and not completely brainwashed by the right-wing media can see that there are too many things that don't add up, many standard operating procedures were not followed before and after the tragedy. Here is some new information that you won't read in the mainstream news as well as a website that is guaranteed to raise more questions than answers. It's up to each American whether or not they want to be kept in the dark... I prefer to seek the truth and hope the government will one day come out with information that will fill in the unanswered questions.

"Jim Hoffman has discovered a document which I believe may be very important to the 911 skeptic movement. This document superseded earlier DOD procedures for dealing with hijacked aircraft, and it requires that Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld is personally responsible for issuing intercept orders. Commanders in the field are stripped of all authority to act. This amazing order came from Vice Admiral, S.A. Fry US Navy, Commander Joint Chiefs of Staff. So failure to intercept an attack on the Pentagon fourty minutes after the World Trade Center was first crashbombed falls directly on the CJCS and Rumsfeld.

There is not good reason for changing standing Air Force procedures that have served the nation for over fifty years -- just prior to the 9-11 attack.

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction CJCSI 3610.01A (dated 1 June 2001) was represented as "guidance to the Deputy Director for Operations (DDO), National Military Command Center (NMCC), and operational commanders in the event of an aircraft piracy (hijacking) or request for destruction of derelict airborne objects." This new instruction superseded CJCSI 3610.01 of 31 July 1997.

This CJCSI states that "In the event of a hijacking, the NMCC will be notified by the most expeditious means by the FAA. The NMCC will, with the exception of immediate responses as authorized by reference d, forward requests for DOD assistance to the Secretary of Defense for approval."

Reference D refers to Department of Defense Directive 3025.15 (Feb. 18, 1997) which allows for commanders in the field to provide assistance to save lives in an emergency situation -- BUT any requests involving "potentially lethal support" (including "combat and tactical vehicles, vessels or aircraft; or ammunition") must still be approved by the Secretary of Defense. So again, the ability to respond to a hijacking in any meaningful fashion, is stripped from the commanders in the field."

http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/analysis/norad/docs/intercept_proc.pdf

http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/d302515_021897/d302515p.pdf

http://www.propagandamatrix.com/endless_fake_terror_alerts.html

[BlueStateGirl]

17. Plane shot down over Philadelphia?

[truth_seeker]

20. 9-11 Site

This website makes a good presentation of what may have really happened.... let me know what you think.

http://www.911closeup.com/

Also, a good movie to check out about the unanswered questions about 9-11 is called Painful Deceptions. It goes into quite lengthy scientific analysis on the Pentagon and the collapse of all three towers (the third is Building 7 with wasn't even hit by a plane but had fires in it and collapsed as well - suspicious in itself).
www.erichufschmid.net/ThePainfulDeceptionsVideo.html

Good Luck.

[BlueStateGirl]

27. Sorry. I was confused. Fligth 93. Shot down over SomersetCo.

Pa. Not Philadelphia.

I read the 911 close up article. And here is the thing. Ellen Saracini is a 911 widow. Her husband Victor died on Flight 175 when it crashed into the WTC. She lives not too far away from me and I know people who were friends with her husband.

He wasn't a hologram. And he did actually exist.

So, if planes didn't hit the WTC what happened to him? And the others on that plane? And the other planes? There seems to be all this 'solid' evidence for holograms, and missiles, and what not, so why can't anyone produce solid evidence for what happened to the passengers on those planes?

[truth_seeker]

35. Planes and WTC

I still think that the planes did hit the WTC, I hadn't heard anything to the contrary. What's suspicious is that evidence seems to suggest that planes alone could not bring those buildings down, in fact when the firefighters were up in them, one radioed down saying everything was ok. Do you have information that it wasn't planes at all? If so, please share because I haven't heard this one. The only crash that I think wasn't a plane was the Pentagon and I believe the passengers may have been moved onto Flight 93 that crashed into the field and some believe was brought down by a missile.

[BlueStateGirl]

38. Let me be clear... I have no information at all. I am merely curious and

questioning.

I don't think it is unreasonable to believe that the fires caused by the jet fuel could have caused enough structural damage to bring those buildings down.

Honestly, why would they move passengers from Flight 77, to Flight 93?
Why not keep the passengers on the plane?

Where is the plane?

[BeFree]

19. AA 77 fact from NORAD

AA 77 disappeared from radar somewhere over OHIO. In other words, it was lost from radar and it's transponder was turned off. Then AA77 re-appeared on radar, heading east now and traveled all the way to DC without interception. This information can be found on the 9/11 commission website.

All this after the first WTC attack.

[truth_seeker]

25. AA77 Theory

If you check out the video called Painful Deceptions it lays out a very interesting explanation of what may have happened to this plane. There is an airforce base very close to where AA77 went off the radar. There is speculation that AA77 landed at this base, and the passengers were loaded onto the plane that was shot down over Philadelphia, afterall neither plane was full to capacity. A global hawk or some other type of drone then took off from this air force base and being designed in a way to not be detected by radar, made its way to the Pentagon, eventually crashing into it with the help of a missile.

Sounds crazy I know, but the witness testimony does not add up, the debris found on the site does not add up nor does the damage to the Pentagon. Why would our government do something like this is the question. If this isn't true, then why doesn't the government put this all to rest by releasing videos of the crash to disprove these theories but they won't - why? They do have it on tape as they did release 5 frames... why only 5, and these 5 show nothing but a fire ball and actually raise more questions than they answer.

[BlueStateGirl]

29. Philadelphia???? Do you mean Flight 93? I work in Philly,

I was in Philly that day, and as far as I know there was no plane shot down over Philly?

Flight 93 was shot down over Somerset County in Western Pa, about 300 miles away.

[truth_seeker]

33. correction - thanks

Yes I meant Flight 93.. sorry.

[JohnOneillsMemory]

77. How many know that CIA and Norad were rehearsing for what actually

happened on 9/11 AS IT WAS HAPPENING. It's even mentioned in Richard Clarke's book as Operation Vigilant Warrior in the first few pages and the Associated Press reported this as a stunning coincidence in 2002.

http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/cia-simulation.htm

The National Reconnaissance Organization (satellite and electronic intercept specialists for the CIA) was also involved and their command center was damaged at the Pentagon and some of their people were killed.

9/11 was also the first day on the job for the new head of the FAA
and the head of the FBI was also brand new on the job.

How many know that many pilots in the air saw TWA800 shot down by a surface-to-air missile off NYC? That 'friendly fire' incident's coverage was controlled pretty well by the Clintonites.

How many know that the Fox Channel showed a movie in March 2001 (filmed a year earlier) that depicted a jetliner hijacked by the Pentagon and flown by remote-control in to the WTC to get a bigger military budget?

Just goes to show ya, what folks dont know can hurt you...

[WoodrowFan]

18. idiots

It's only a handful of idiots that make up crap like "there's no wreckage". Actually, there's a lot of wreckage, and a number of the survivors suffered from inhaliation of burning aviation fuel.

I've said it before, there are HUNDREDS of eyewitnesses (I am friends with one who was on a construction crew nearby) and the Pentagon is in between several highways that were filled with car loads of people, all of which are now eyewitnesses.

I have ZERO respect for the intellect of anyone who denies the plane hit the Pentagon, any more than I respect creationists.

[BeFree]

24. A theory

Whatever plane was seen approaching the pentagon is said to have fired a missle at the pentagon, then the plane everyone saw flew through the smoke over the pentagon landing at the airport just miles away seconds later.

Mr. fan, If you have photographic proof of pentagon wreckeage from a craft similar to AA 77, there are a lot of researchers who'd like to see it. Maybe you can get some from the FBI?

[BlueStateGirl]

31. So there were no actual people on that plane? All the victims are

invented?

[BeFree]

34. There is no publically known proof of human remains

at the pentagon. There is a report or two of some examinations but no airplane seat pictures, or luggage, or clothing, or for that matter a black box from AA 77. If you know of any such evidence..........

[truth_seeker]

36. Read AA77 Theory post for the answer to your question.

[Beam Me Up]

40. Not "invented"

The fundamental point is that once you scratch the surface and begin to look at the "strangeness" of all the evidence (and there is a lot of it), it is inconsistent and inconclusive.

WE DO NOT KNOW WHAT REALLY HAPPENED ON 9/11.

That is the most important point. It isn't having a "theory" about what DID happen, it is acknowledging that we do not know and that what we are told happened isn't consistent or verifiable with the evidence available. The point is we need a thorough and transparent investigation that has teeth to subpoena these witnesses and the FBI and the CIA and the ONI. If there is evidence that would clarify these issues, and if this evidence CONFIRMS the government's explanation of events, why isn't it made public?

Just one example: The five frames from the Pentagon security camera...why were not ALL the frames made available? Why are the frames that were made available ambiguous at best, at worst not only not supporting the official story but actually CONTRADICT it. What the hell is that ccorkscrew "contrail" at ground level? Jets do not leave contrails at ground level. Ever. ROCKETS DO, though.

The missing frames could clarify this issue. OTHER footage from security cameras from the Pentagon (and you KNOW there has to be others, right!) could also help clarify this issue. But, to date, none has been made publicly available.

WHY NOT?

If it could support the government's claim, where is there a National Security interest in denying their existence or keeping them classified?

[BlueStateGirl]

43. I have been scratching the surface. And I am willing to consdier

almost any theory or evidence. But this is a key component for me. What happened to the passengers? And another key for me is as I said above, why create such an impossibly elaborate cover up? If it is MIHOP why no just crash a plane into the pentagon. Why use a missile and create the need for such a huge cover story?

I am not discounting anything, and I don't any evidence of my won. Just questions.

[Beam Me Up]

52. see my post #47 and. . .

I've noticed that whenever I speak of the anomalies at the Pentagon almost invariably people say, "But what happened to the plane and the people on it?"

This is a very natural, human question. We want to know what happened to those people. And, as difficult as it is to accept that they may have been murdered by terrorists in a way none of us want to even imagine, how much more difficult is it for us to consider that their deaths may have been part of a much deeper, darker conspiracy? This latter is more difficult because it leads to the realizations that the victims of 9/11 were not only those who perished, but every one of us. It leads to the consider that everything we believed was real and true, may in fact be an illusion and a lie. Who among us can face this?

I do not know what happened on 9/11. However, personally I have no doubt that this was a very sophisticated "black" operation. What is this based on? Well, for one thing, years of following the covert history of this country--and international goings on around the world. We want to believe that we--or at least a government that represents us--is in control of what is going on. It is comforting, reassuring, to think that. Evidence, however, indicates that this is nothing but a "working hypothesis" or, as Noahm Chomsky calls it, a "necessary illusion."

Not everyone wants to take the red pill.

BMU

[RedEagle]

70. Where is the Rest of the Video an Important Point

Pentagon plane, or not Pentagon plane, I'm not speculating on that.

But it is a little odd that there has been so much play of the planes hitting the WTC, yet no willingness to produce video of a plane hitting the Pentagon.

If one were after effect, the Pentagon video wouldn't be surpressed, it would be used.

If the point is to scare the country into stampeding away our constitutional rights, one would think a third video would be all the more useful.

Just offering that as a thought to add to the debate.

[HFishbine]

69. Photographic evidence?

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

[truth_seeker]

32. Wreckage

There is no doubt that something blew up and there was a lot of smoke that will cause smoke inhalation, also, whatever did hit the Pentagon was flying about 400 feet off the ground so there were people that saw something, some said a plane, others weren't so sure. So I don't doubt your friends story. The thing is, if you look at the photographs taken right after the crash of the wreckage, you can not see any human remains, any strewn luggage, any large parts of the plane.

In fact, there are pictures of men in business attire carrying pieces of "plane" in one hand, and another of several men holding a huge box over their head and some holding it with their fingertips, not appearing strained at all. A large piece of plane to fit in this box from an AA would be very heavy. This leads one to think that something much lighter, like a global hawk or another drone crashed into the Pentagon. Flying fast overhead, people could mistake it for a plane, although it wouldn't be as loud. Also the exhaust from the pictures in the 5 video frames released by the Defense Department is not that of a standard jet airplane, its more consistent with a missile. I challenge you to check out these links.

5 photos
http://www.cnn.com/interactive/us/0203/pentagon.crash.gallery/content2.html

in depth analysis
http://alberta.indymedia.org/news/2002/10/4578.php

This is only a few of many many sources..

[Sterling]

41. Take into account the side of the building that was hit

And the oddly specific route it took to get there and it gets even spookyer.

[outinforce]

74. I Don't Understand.

Perhaps you could elaborate?

[bobbyboucher]

42. I sure wish someone had taken a photo, one single photo

of that plane. I mean, there's even video of the first plane hitting the tower.

Allegedly, this huge plane does a high G, banking loop around our nations capitol, on a beautiful fall day with undoubtedly thousands of tourists walking around, and crashes into arguably the most highly valued/protected peice of military real estate in the world, all this AFTER two hijacked planes have crash into the WTC, and there's not a single frame of it anywhere?

Whatev.

[salonghorn70]

50. It Would Be A Great Party

All of this reminds me of the right wing nuts who call the local talk shows and talk about the unmarked black helicopters that hover around their houses. Come to think of it, if some of you ever got together at a party with them,you would sure have a lot to talk about.:)

[Sterling]

51. People who had "friends" who "saw" or were "on" the plane

or "in the building" who show up in these discussions have to understand in order to be taken seriously you have to offer more than just scoots honor to have any meaning attached to their statements.

[John_H]

55. Lee oswald flew the plane to a trilateral commission's secret island

[RafterMan]

60. " Lee oswald flew the plane to a trilateral commission's secret island"

That's what THEY want you to think.

Sucker.

[kskiska]

57. You mean Barbara Olson is still alive???

Whether she's alive or not, the books have stopped.

[theboss]

67. They were identified

http://www.dcmilitary.com/army/stripe/6_48/national_news/12279-1.html