MIHOP guys: I want your knowledge.

[neverborn]

I'm firmly LIHOP, but trending towards MIHOP due to WTC7 and the "put" options on airlines.

I don't know enough to say yes or no.

If you believe MIHOP, why?

[DenverDem]

1. It couldn't have happened without complicity at the top.

Who stood down NORAD?

If the planes were ordered not to intercept, then it's not LIHOP, it's MIHOP.

There are a lot more huge holes in the official lie, but until someone answers why the most bad ass air defense system in the world couldn't intercept any of these planes, there is no answer but MIHOP.

[OneBlueSky]

2. my answer is "I honestly don't know" . . .

I don't want to believe that even people as evil as BushCo could actually plan something like this, but who knows what they're capable of? . . . for now I'm firmly LIHOP, for about 200 different reasons . . . there are HUGE unanswered questions about that day, and it seems no one wants to know the answers, because no one (save some of us internet crazies) are asking them . . . I still want to know why NORAD was stood down on that day, and only on that day . . . and about 199 other things . . .

[mot78]

9. NORAD standing down could easily be considered LIHOP

MIHOP means * was behind 9/11 (ie. controlled demolition of the Twin Towers, flying remote controlled planes into the towers, etc.) Keeping NORAD from doing anything doesn't mean * was behind 9/11.

[NecessaryOnslaught]

10. A good list of questions

http://www.philly.com/mld/dailynews/6742902.htm?1c

[gandalf]

22. More questions

perhaps the same, but I didn't bother to register to view your questions. On the page of the 9/11 victims families are some serious questions for Bush to answer. They hint at least at LIHOP, I think.

http://www.911independentcommission.org/

[Abe Linkman]

23. So-called "LIHOP" is something the Amin. can live with.

The Administration can live with a "finding" that certain of the events of 9-11 were allowed to happen. They can blame: CIA, FBI, bureaucratic snafus, incompetence, Bill & HILLARY! Clinton, ATC, NORAD, MOSSAD, etc.

LIHOP? No problemo. MIHOP? BIG Problemo.

[gandalf]

24. Maybe

"Everybody makes mistakes". Uhuh.
If Dave Frasca doesn't act on compelling reports -- a small mistake, what's the matter? Nothing to deny him a promotion.

However, I think, LIHOP is more than incompetence, because it means deliberation.

[RC]

3. Don't forget the FBI field investigations that were stymied,

The search warrants that were denied because chunks were stripped out of the request. Field reports that languished for months on someones Washington desk.
Our government did basically nothing till after the Pentagon was hit with whatever is was.
At the Pentagon there were no seats, no baggage found. Only parts of ONE engine, too small to be from a 757's fan jet. Yet they found DNA for 63 of the 64 people that were supposedly on that plane?

[Bolo Boffin]

4. What's the basis of this statement?

At the Pentagon there were no seats, no baggage found. Only parts of ONE engine, too small to be from a 757's fan jet.

Why do you say that?

[Abe Linkman]

5. My take on your question, bolo

You must believe the opposite. So, how about a little SHOW and TELL.
SHOW us the seats, baggage, TWO engines large enough to be from a B757
and then TELL (explain) how your theory of what happened at the Pentagon.

btw - not just an empty, unproven claim that FL 77 crashed there. You've said that it did and that it exploded upon impact. If so, then explain why there is no evidence of the above (seats etc.), and why there none of the eyewitnesses mentioned seeing any bodies or body parts "raining" down like confetti...or just strewn on the beaufiful lawn in front of the Pentagon.

Thank you, I look forward to your response.

[Bolo Boffin]

7. It's all been posted before, Abe.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=5620&forum=DCForumID43#49

Army Lt. Col. Adrian Erckenbrack
"He broke through jammed doorways, crawled through holes made by the plane's landing gear and came across walls of burning plane parts and body parts."
Roll Call, 22 July 2002, "Pentagon Rescuer Receives Medal for Bravery", p. 1

Lt. Kevin Schaeffer from the Navy Command Center
"He lurched down a pile of wreckage and saw that the smoke before him seemed backlit, and that it brightened further as he passed through a hole in the Command Center's back wall, into a room he'd never seen before, filled with overturned desks and smashed computers. He climbed over the desks and through another hole, and into the golden sunshine of a clear September morning. Shaeffer stood on a service road that circled the Pentagon between the B and C rings, a chunk of the 757's nose cone and front landing gear lay on the pavement a few feet away, resting against the B Ring wall."
http://www.pilotonline.com/special/911/pentagon3.html

Paul K. Carlton, Jr., U.S. Air Force surgeon general
"I thought it was a terrorist bomb. . . .But then I saw the landing gear. It was on the ground in the alley between the B and C rings. When I saw it there, not only did I realize an airplane had struck the Pentagon but it was clear that the plane had come through the E, D, and C buildings to get there."
September 11: An Oral History, ed. by Dean Murphy, p. 216.

"After helping establish a triage area in the Pentagon courtyard, Carlton walked into an alleyway between the second and third innermost rings of buildings. A set of landing gear lay about 20 feet away."
The Richmond Times-Dispatch, 9 September 2002, p. A-3.

Navy Lt. Commander David Tarantino, U.S. Navy
"I was having trouble breathing, so I stepped into the open breezeway between C and B rings to get some fresh air. I saw these two holes where the aircraft had come through. You could see an aircraft tire that had come through three rings of the Pentagon, and there were charts and other stuff that was obviously from the aircraft."
http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0802/083002nj2.htm

"I went back in and found myself in the open air space between the B and the C Ring on the inner aspect of the C Ring between the 4th and 5th Corridors. There was a big exploded hole in the wall that was pouring out thick black smoke, and there was a big plane tire sitting there, and evidence of human remains."
navymedicine.med.navy.mil/med09h/NM%20Magazine/Nov-Dec01/webissue.pdf

"They found an area where fire surrounded a hole in a wall that was blown out. They heard cries from people who were trapped and saw a plane tire."
The Associated Press State & Local Wire, September 27, 2001.

Rep. Todd Tiahrt, Kansas
"In the C and B rings the plane had punched a hole you could a drive a truck around in, and I saw an airplane tire. It made it very real."
http://wichita.bizjournals.com/wichita/stories/2002/09/09/story1.html

Army Sgt. Maj. Tony Rose
"Rose returned to the roadway between the B and C rings, where he presented himself to FBI agents. They asked him to help bag the body parts already scattered about, and which now washed from the Navy Command Center on the streams created by broken water mains. At one point, Rose saw a severed foot and ankle lying beneath a piece of purple fabric. When he reached for the cloth to move it out of the way, he discovered that it contained a leg."
http://www.pilotonline.com/special/911/pentagon3.html

Lt. Col. Victor Correa
"This time, according to Correa, he found out what caused the horrific attack he survived earlier that morning; he saw the nose cone and the landing gear of the airliner."
http://www.army.mil/usar/news/2002/09-11anniv/herotellsall.html

Jerry Pipenger, PENREN construction worker
"Pipenger can stand in the Pentagon's inner drive and point out where American Airlines flight 77 came to rest with its landing gear protruding slightly above the roadway."
http://www.pal-item.com/news/stories/20020911/localnews/63205.html

Leo Titus, P.E., VATF-1 engineer
"A nine foot diameter exit hole was created in the wall of C ring and the remainder of the debris from the impact ended up in the alley between C ring and B ring known as A & E Drive."
http://www.aesvn.org/resources/Pentagon-Shoring.pdf

Chief Master Sergeant John Monaccio
"The plane's inertia carried aircraft remains all the way through the building coming to rest on the outside walls of our offices (in B-ring). We discovered cockpit wreckage at our feet while attempting to rescue people from a Navy operations area….You'll see a circular hole, that's the exit hole the cockpit and front tire assembly made through the Navy Operations Center."
http://www.geoffmetcalf.com/pentagon/pentagon-email_20020316.html
http://www.geoffmetcalf.com/pentagon/pentagon_20020316.html

April, Pentagon employee
"The nose of the plane just barely jutted out into A/E Drive (the street that runs around the inside of the building). It made a perfectly round, 5-foot hole in the wall. There was one set of landing gear (presumably from the nose) out in A/E Drive. But most of the plane's skin was in pieces not much bigger than a piece of notebook paper."
http://www.humanunderground.com/11september/comments-general.html

"Merwolf," EMS worker at the Pentagon
"We came to an opening between the rings. "Look", I was told and I followed the beam of light to a rather small perfectly round hole ... maybe 10-12 feet in diameter in the wall with a pile of rubble in front of it. At closer inspection, the rubble with littered with clothes, arms, and legs. "That's where the nose of the plane finally stopped", I was told. They had already removed the metal pieces ... all that was left was the hole."
http://www.merwolf.com/remember/PE3_Pent.html

http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=5585&forum=DCForumID43#6

Hasn't it occurred to you that out of respect for the dead, grisly photos of body parts were not released? How terrible logic it is to say that if I haven't seen a photo of something, it must not have existed? Are all these people liars?

Army Sgt. Maj. Tony Rose
Rose marveled as he recalled shouting orders at generals among the volunteers bagging body parts around the wreckage. "I sort of became the old sergeant major out there," he said. "People, regardless of rank, fell in and did what was needed."
http://cjonline.com/stories/091701/ter_training.shtml

After a minute he saw a hand jutting from the wreckage, fingers splayed. He grabbed it, and the fingers closed tight around his. He dug out a sailor, the first of seven he and McNair and their compatriots rescued. Later still, Rose returned to the roadway between the B and C rings, where he presented himself to FBI agents. They asked him to help bag the body parts already scattered about, and which now washed from the Navy Command Center on the streams created by broken water mains. At one point, Rose saw a severed foot and ankle lying beneath a piece of purple fabric. When he reached for the cloth to move it out of the way, he discovered that it contained a leg. So much water poured into the road that Rose and others positioned themselves in front of the storm drains, to keep body parts from sweeping away. He saw organs, in addition to limbs, and wondered whose they were.
The Virginian-Pilot, September 9, 2002.
http://www.pilotonline.com/special/911/pentagon.html

As the day wore on, the rescue efforts became instead, a grim search for body parts. “I picked up a child's hand. That was it. Just a child's hand and that's when I got angry. To wonder why someone could do this. You can come after me. I'm a soldier. I have sworn to protect and defend, but that wasn't right,” says Rose.
http://www.centrexnews.com/columnists/skousen/2002/0308.html

Army Lt. Col. Adrian Erckenbrack
Erckenbrack spent the rest of the day on stretcher teams, attempting to penetrate the inner court of the Pentagon to search for survivors. He broke through jammed doorways, crawled through holes made by the plane's landing gear and came across walls of burning plane parts and body parts. "The smoke was so bad you couldn't breathe and you almost involuntarily closed your eyes," Erckenbrack said.
Roll Call, "Pentagon Rescuer Receives Medal for Bravery," by John McArdle, July 22, 2002.

Captain Jane F. Vieira, CHC, USN
Since most bodies were charred beyond recognition and some were just body parts, we did not know for whom we were praying. Many were totally indistinguishable. Some had missing limbs and other bags had just limbs.
http://navymedicine.med.navy.mil/med09h/NM%20Magazine/Nov-Dec01/webissue.pdf

DC Matthew
Anyway, today I went in with the engineers, to clear a path through the debris on the ground floor, toward the center of the impact area. We were told to leave any body parts, flesh, clothing, etc. as we found it, for removal by the FBI.
http://pub6.ezboard.com/foldmenonlinewhatdoyouthink.showPrevMessage?topicID=957.topic

Cindy Álvarez (NCIS)
Álvarez said she and her fellow workers sorted through debris from collapsed Pentagon walls and pieces of the hijacked airplane. They found the box cutters used by the hijackers to commandeer the plane, identification papers, money, jewelry, and body parts. "These pieces of bodies, we treated like precious treasure," Álvarez said. "We knew this was somebody's family member. We knew they were waiting for the bodies to be returned so they could bury them properly and begin the healing process." Álvarez said one of the disturbing aspects of her job was recovering the items of children who had been on board the plane. "It was upsetting to find children's shoes, their little suitcases and their stuffed animals," she said. She also recalled participating in the recovery of the body of a friend of hers. "I entered the Pentagon once. The one person we pulled out whose body was intact was a friend of mine. His uniform was perfect. His ribbons, his belt and his shoes were clean. I thought, 'How befitting a hero.' I said a prayer over him, and then they zipped up his body bag." Picking up body parts, and pieces of aircraft at the Pentagon, Álvarez said she would pray, "Help me Jesus. Please don't let me cry yet, because I will never stop, my mask will fog up and I have a lot of work to do here."
http://www.cathstan.org/news/09-05-02/3.shtml

Arlington County Board
Neither the depth of the incursion nor the massive devastation inside the building was readily apparent as flames burned behind blast-proof windows. Huge heaps of rubble and burning debris littered with the bodies and body parts of 188 victims covered an area the size of a modern shopping mall.

The ACPD provided three 20-person teams that worked a 12-hour shift on alternating days supporting the FBI’s evidence recovery sifting operation in the North Parking Lot. This was physically exhausting work that was also psychologically stressful. These officers raked through the debris searching for evidence, body parts of victims, and classified materials. The sifting operation produced about 70 percent of the body parts processed at the morgue.
http://www.co.arlington.va.us/fire/edu/about/pdf/after_report.pdf

Sally Horwat, Red Cross emergency worker
And now here is my transforming experience. I talked to the Rescue Workers.... the “Grunts” who go in and put the broken bodies in the blue bags....who are now sifting, by hand, through all the debris searching for personal effects and body parts.
http://www.division42.org/MembersArea/IPfiles/IP_Wtr_02/articles/SpecSection/ss_redcross.html

Nelson Gracia-Cruz, mortuary affairs specialist in the U.S. Army Reserve.
I remember I was wearing my white Tyvex suit, my gloves, my mask. The place was still smoking. The stench was horrible. You could smell burning fuel and human flesh. I was sifting through a big pile of rubble that the guys with the heavy equipment had pulled out of that huge, stinking scar in the building. I reached into the pile, and the first thing I pulled out was a finger. Not burned, not shredded. Just an entire finger that used to belong to a human being. I couldn't stop shaking. I found a lot of horrible stuff afterward. Skin, hair, bits of clothing. Baby pictures. Wedding bands.
Los Angeles Times, September 11, 2002, Part S; Page 11

An AFCD EMS worker
Looking down at my feet was a body part. Parts of bodies, plane debris, and luggage littered the ground. Twisted, melted pieces of plane were evidence of the extreme heat and force that had been thrust into the building.
http://www.merwolf.com/remember/PE3_Pent.html

bolo adds: Is that enough, Abe, or do you want more? The link to the old forums is right here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=list&forum=DCForumID43&mm=5760&archive=yes

Have fun storming the castle.

[demodewd]

12. question.

Were all the body parts found located in just the building? I have not heard or read reports that body parts were found outside on the lawn or scattered across the highway. The reason why I bring this up is that there are a number of eye witnesses who observed larger parts of the plane being blown beyond the length of a football field,including an oxygen bottle...this would intimate that fuselage interior parts were scattered on the highway.

[Abe Linkman]

8. You must have been overcome by all that smoke you posted.

You must believe the opposite. So, how about a little SHOW and TELL.
SHOW us the seats, baggage, TWO engines large enough to be from a B757
and then TELL (explain) how your theory of what happened at the Pentagon.

When might we expect to see answers, bolo? About the time you conduct that poll DD suggested to you?

Kindly remove the smoke machine before try this again. Thank you.

[demodewd]

11. body transfers

How long would it take those conspiring to transfer the gassed bodies of #77 onto another plane rigged with bombs and shaped charges and then guide it into the Pentagon by remote? It is a possibility however crazy it may seem. A crew of ten men could do it ...in what ten minutes? And what a perfect cover that would present. That plane exploded upon impact due to shaped charges. A study of the fire caused by the fuel,its penetration(or lack of it) will further substantiate my claim.

[Bolo Boffin]

13. Listen to yourself, demodewd...

transfer the gassed bodies of #77 onto another plane rigged with bombs and shaped charges and then guide it into the Pentagon by remote

Q: Why go to all that trouble when the "gassed bodies" are already on a plane?

A: The conspirators need them on a plane rigged with bombs.

Q: Why do the conspirators need bombs on the plane?

A: To hide the fact that it's not Flight 77 anymore.

Is there another answer to this question? You might say, "To make the explosion as horrific as possible." I submit to you that if Flight 77 had not exploded or penetrated the Pentagon, the results would have been horrific enough as is.

There is no plausible motivation for this switching of planes.

[Abe Linkman]

14. Listen to YOURSELF, boloboffin. You're flip-floppin' again.

"if Flight 77 had not exploded or penetrated the Pentagon"


A few days ago, you said that FL 77 crashed at the Pentagon and exploded.

You can't keep flip-flopping on this. Which is it? Is your position
that Fl 77:

1.) Crashed INTO the Pentagon?

2.) Crashed AT the Pentagon?

3.) Crashed and exploded AT the Pentagon?

4.) Crashed, exploded, AND penetrated the Pentagon?

5.) A little of this and a little of that.

Then, kindly answer the very straightforward questions you've been avoiding here recently.

[demodewd]

15. re:plausible motivations

Plausible motivations for the possible switching of planes

1.To absolutely insure that the plane(via remote control) would hit the most fire proof area of the Pentagon far removed from the major command centers.

2.To minimize the number of Pentagon casualties.

3.To eliminate the possibility of gross human error which presents itself in a human hijacking scenario.

4. The use of explosives(which is apparent with its initial whiter/yellow coloration) minimizing the level of West Wing destruction by initiating the explosion at the very front of the building.

5. The use of a bomb creating a jet stream that punched out the hole into the A-E drive thus giving the impression that this was done by the plane's nose.

6.To create a thouroughly obliterating explosion to mask its forgery.

[Abe Linkman]

16. Excellent points, demodewd.

After a while, all these supposed coincidences are gonna take on so much weight, the whole "Cave People Did It" Conspiracy Theory is going to collapse...into its own bad footprint.

[Bolo Boffin]

17. re: plausible motivations

1.To absolutely insure that the plane(via remote control) would hit the most fire proof area of the Pentagon far removed from the major command centers.

Well, they messed up this one. The plane did hit the recently reinforced section of the Pentagon, but it then proceeded almost immediately into the unimproved Wedge 2 of the Pentagon. The destruction on the inside of the building was masked by the walls outside.

And why couldn't Flight 77 have been rigged for remote control? It's being claimed on these boards that Flight 175 (which was tracked from takeoff to crash on radar, by the by) was modified with a missile pod or two. These conspirators could attach a missile pod to the belly of one plane, but they couldn't hotwire a remote control device to another one?

And who says that the pilot was aiming for what he hit? Perhaps he descended too low and was unable to hit his real target - the center of the Pentagon. If the plane had been just 150 feet higher in the air, it would have sailed over Wedge One and slammed down into the courtyard and the interior rings of Wedge 3.

What's in the interior rings of Wedge 3, demodewd? Well, on the third floor of Ring E (the innermost ring), you'll find the Eisenhower Corridor. This is where the offices of the Secretary of Defense are located. Is that a major enough command center for you, demodewd?

2.To minimize the number of Pentagon casualties.

If this was a factor, then why didn't they just sail the plane over the Pentagon and crash into the Potomac? Again, I assure you that this implied attack on the Pentagon would have been just as horrific on that day, with the added bonus of no damage to a recently renovated section of the Pentagon.

3.To eliminate the possibility of gross human error which presents itself in a human hijacking scenario.

To cut down on error, you cut down on components of your plan. Using Flight 77 has one plane hijacked, one plane crashed, and gassing the passengers is unnecessary. Your scenario has two planes, the gassing of passengers, the transferring of gassed passengers, the coordinated missile strike/plane crash, and the lifelong silence of the "crew of ten" that carried out the transferring, the pilot(s) who flew the remote control device, and the ATCs who assisted the planes landing and taking off in the transfer site.

I submit that your scenario is the one fraught with the possibility of gross human error.

4. The use of explosives(which is apparent with its initial whiter/yellow coloration) minimizing the level of West Wing destruction by initiating the explosion at the very front of the building.

Again, the plane immediately travelled into an unrenovated wedge of the Pentagon. The damage was tremendous.

5. The use of a bomb creating a jet stream that punched out the hole into the A-E drive thus giving the impression that this was done by the plane's nose.

Why would they want to do this? You've reasoned this one backwards - you're presented with some evidence and you've reasoned a possible sequence of events to explain how the evidence looks like it does. But since your explanation requires exquisite planning as to the details, you've neglect to tell us why it was necessary to mimic a plane nose hole.

6.To create a thouroughly obliterating explosion to mask its forgery.

This is the circular part, demodewd. They used a second plane with a bomb to cover up that they were using a second plane with a bomb. Why not just use the first plane?

[demodewd]

18. and a response

Well, they messed up this one. The plane did hit the recently reinforced section of the Pentagon, but it then proceeded almost immediately into the unimproved Wedge 2 of the Pentagon. The destruction on the inside of the building was masked by the walls outside....I don't want to diminish the destruction to the inside but it was definitely reduced by being in the reinforced section.

And why couldn't Flight 77 have been rigged for remote control? It's being claimed on these boards that Flight 175 (which was tracked from takeoff to crash on radar, by the by) was modified with a missile pod or two. These conspirators could attach a missile pod to the belly of one plane, but they couldn't hotwire a remote control device to another one?... I've considered the possibility that #77 could have been taken over by remote but it doesn't stand up to the charges/bomb/fire characteristics of the crash.And that is a missile pod on that plane. It shows up on many different photographs.

And who says that the pilot was aiming for what he hit? Perhaps he descended too low and was unable to hit his real target - the center of the Pentagon. If the plane had been just 150 feet higher in the air, it would have sailed over Wedge One and slammed down into the courtyard and the interior rings of Wedge 3......Who says they(by remote) weren't aiming for the first floor of the west wing...perhaps homed in? If it were manned by real hijackers the logical maneuver would have been a nose dive into the center of the building.

What's in the interior rings of Wedge 3, demodewd? Well, on the third floor of Ring E (the innermost ring), you'll find the Eisenhower Corridor. This is where the offices of the Secretary of Defense are located. Is that a major enough command center for you, demodewd?....The third floor of the E(A)wing..on the reverse side of the building facing the Potomac...right?

2.To minimize the number of Pentagon casualties.

If this was a factor, then why didn't they just sail the plane over the Pentagon and crash into the Potomac? Again, I assure you that this implied attack on the Pentagon would have been just as horrific on that day, with the added bonus of no damage to a recently renovated section of the Pentagon.....Was there some data held by Navy intelligence that needed destroying...I don't know...crashing into the Potomac? hmmm. too much chance for recoverable parts belying that its a #77 imposter?

3.To eliminate the possibility of gross human error which presents itself in a human hijacking scenario.

To cut down on error, you cut down on components of your plan. Using Flight 77 has one plane hijacked, one plane crashed, and gassing the passengers is unnecessary. Your scenario has two planes, the gassing of passengers, the transferring of gassed passengers, the coordinated missile strike/plane crash, and the lifelong silence of the "crew of ten" that carried out the transferring, the pilot(s) who flew the remote control device, and the ATCs who assisted the planes landing and taking off in the transfer site....Once the plane is recovered the transfer and lift off would be cup cake city. The Arab hijacking scenario is fraught with human error...how do you predict the response of the crew and passengers? Wouldn't it have been possible for the Captain to tilt the plane and put the "hijackers" on their keesters? I could go on...and on...

I submit that your scenario is the one fraught with the possibility of gross human error.

4. The use of explosives(which is apparent with its initial whiter/yellow coloration) minimizing the level of West Wing destruction by initiating the explosion at the very front of the building.

Again, the plane immediately travelled into an unrenovated wedge of the Pentagon. The damage was tremendous...... How do you explain the initial light yellow cast to the explosion and witness reports of that "light" and the smell of cordite?

5. The use of a bomb creating a jet stream that punched out the hole into the A-E drive thus giving the impression that this was done by the plane's nose.

Why would they want to do this? You've reasoned this one backwards - you're presented with some evidence and you've reasoned a possible sequence of events to explain how the evidence looks like it does. But since your explanation requires exquisite planning as to the details, you've neglect to tell us why it was necessary to mimic a plane nose hole..... why not mimic a plane hole..easily done as that is the characteristic of shaped charges with its "jet stream" effect.

6.To create a thouroughly obliterating explosion to mask its forgery.

This is the circular part, demodewd. They used a second plane with a bomb to cover up that they were using a second plane with a bomb. Why not just use the first... Because its too technically chancy. Better to program a plane to navigate and hit an exact spot,making it in essence a guided missile that homes in at an exact location.

[Bolo Boffin]

27. Re: and a response

1.To absolutely insure that the plane(via remote control) would hit the most fire proof area of the Pentagon far removed from the major command centers.

Well, they messed up this one. The plane did hit the recently reinforced section of the Pentagon, but it then proceeded almost immediately into the unimproved Wedge 2 of the Pentagon. The destruction on the inside of the building was masked by the walls outside....I don't want to diminish the destruction to the inside but it was definitely reduced by being in the reinforced section.

As I said, the plane proceeded beyond the reinforced section and destroyed a section that was not the "most fire proof area of the Pentagon." If they were aiming for Wedge 1, then they screwed it up. Any thoughts on that?

And why couldn't Flight 77 have been rigged for remote control? It's being claimed on these boards that Flight 175 (which was tracked from takeoff to crash on radar, by the by) was modified with a missile pod or two. These conspirators could attach a missile pod to the belly of one plane, but they couldn't hotwire a remote control device to another one?...I've considered the possibility that #77 could have been taken over by remote but it doesn't stand up to the charges/bomb/fire characteristics of the crash. And that is a missile pod on that plane. It shows up on many different photographs.

Alright. You've been forced to an even more outlandish theory because of what you believe to be evidence. I can't do anything about that. At least you see my point there.

Re: the missile pod. You're going to say it's there, and I'm going to say it's an optical illusion due to the angle of light and the far-from-flattened bottom of a large jet airplane. So be it. It's not going to do any good to note that the NIST investigation had been able to recreate the initial fireball in a computer modelling without any need to include the explosion of a missile in the mix, is it? Didn't think so...

And who says that the pilot was aiming for what he hit? Perhaps he descended too low and was unable to hit his real target - the center of the Pentagon. If the plane had been just 150 feet higher in the air, it would have sailed over Wedge One and slammed down into the courtyard and the interior rings of Wedge 3......Who says they(by remote) weren't aiming for the first floor of the west wing...perhaps homed in? If it were manned by real hijackers the logical maneuver would have been a nose dive into the center of the building.

I've got to get a copy of Logical Maneuvers for Hijackers. It seems to be all the rage.

And what I'm describing is different from a nose dive into the center of the building...how?

What's in the interior rings of Wedge 3, demodewd? Well, on the third floor of Ring E (the innermost ring), you'll find the Eisenhower Corridor. This is where the offices of the Secretary of Defense are located. Is that a major enough command center for you, demodewd?....The third floor of the E(A)wing..on the reverse side of the building facing the Potomac...right?

Oops. My bad. This still would have ruined Rummy's whole dang day. He wouldn't have a desk to put a plan to invade Iraq on.

2.To minimize the number of Pentagon casualties.

If this was a factor, then why didn't they just sail the plane over the Pentagon and crash into the Potomac? Again, I assure you that this implied attack on the Pentagon would have been just as horrific on that day, with the added bonus of no damage to a recently renovated section of the Pentagon.....Was there some data held by Navy intelligence that needed destroying...I don't know...crashing into the Potomac? hmmm. too much chance for recoverable parts belying that its a #77 imposter?

What did they need to destroy that a shredder wouldn't have done the job?

You have read the testimony of a flight attendant who usually flew Flight 77 helping out at the crash scene, correct? She identified many different parts of the plane on which she had worked, including her fellow crew members. If they wanted to keep the imposter plane under wraps, wouldn't they have kept this woman as far from the crash site as possible?

http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/JohnJudge/f77FoF.html

I thought that day when Flight 77 and its Dulles/LAX route were announced that a fellow researcher and dear friend had died because she rides that flight all the time as an airline attendant for American. As fate would have it she was home caring for her dying father that day and survived. But her friends did not. She was taken, with other attendants and ground crews who had worked that route into the crash site to view the wreckage. She clearly recognized parts of the plane she had ridden in hundreds of times and identified items. She was also shown autopsy photos and forensic evidence photos which included a severed arm. From the bracelet on the arm she knew it was the remains of her best friend at work.

Continuing on...

3.To eliminate the possibility of gross human error which presents itself in a human hijacking scenario.

To cut down on error, you cut down on components of your plan. Using Flight 77 has one plane hijacked, one plane crashed, and gassing the passengers is unnecessary. Your scenario has two planes, the gassing of passengers, the transferring of gassed passengers, the coordinated missile strike/plane crash, and the lifelong silence of the "crew of ten" that carried out the transferring, the pilot(s) who flew the remote control device, and the ATCs who assisted the planes landing and taking off in the transfer site....Once the plane is recovered the transfer and lift off would be cup cake city. The Arab hijacking scenario is fraught with human error...how do you predict the response of the crew and passengers? Wouldn't it have been possible for the Captain to tilt the plane and put the "hijackers" on their keesters? I could go on...and on...

Cup Cake City? I beg to differ. How do you ensure that the gas is dispersed evenly and in the correct amount on the plane? What if someone saw people slumping over and managed to find refuge in a bathroom? What if they fought back? What if some people woke up when they hit the fresh air? Five pairs of men running up and down the aisles, dragging along limp dead-weight bodies, having to stop and regas the ones that wake up...maybe they had cupcakes after the mission was accomplished.

Pre 9/11, imagine this scenario: you're on a plane, and sudden four or five men have stood up, sliced open a flight attendant's neck, and demanded that everyone else head for the back of the plane. What would you do? What would I do? What would anyone do? Comply. What's the pilot going to do, when his passengers are being held prisoners by murderers? Comply. That's what happens when your plane is being hijacked. The only reason the passengers fought back on 93 is because they received clear word from several sources that the hijackings were ending in suicide attacks on US buildings.

It happened four times out of four. I think predicting the reactions of the passengers and crew isn't the stumper you're positing it to be.

I continue to submit that your scenario is the one fraught with the possibility of gross human error.

4. The use of explosives(which is apparent with its initial whiter/yellow coloration) minimizing the level of West Wing destruction by initiating the explosion at the very front of the building.

Again, the plane immediately travelled into an unrenovated wedge of the Pentagon. The damage was tremendous....How do you explain the initial light yellow cast to the explosion and witness reports of that "light" and the smell of cordite?

I haven't looked at that evidence yet...I don't know. But I do know that you've once again missed the point I was making: minimizing destruction isn't something that was on the minds of the people who crashed the plane. If it was, then they screwed it up, because they only barely hit the reinforced wedge. The plane, explosion and all, roared into an unrenovated, unreinforced wedge. You must consider this evidence.

5. The use of a bomb creating a jet stream that punched out the hole into the A-E drive thus giving the impression that this was done by the plane's nose.

Why would they want to do this? You've reasoned this one backwards - you're presented with some evidence and you've reasoned a possible sequence of events to explain how the evidence looks like it does. But since your explanation requires exquisite planning as to the details, you've neglect to tell us why it was necessary to mimic a plane nose hole.why not mimic a plane hole..easily done as that is the characteristic of shaped charges with its "jet stream" effect.

Are you going to answer this question or not? Why mimic a plane nose hole with shaped charges? In either your or my scenario, a plane was being used. Why mimic a plane nose hole when they could just let the actual plane nose do what it was going to do? Why this added level of complexity to the plane (raising the specter of even more gross human error - how many tests do you conduct to get it right on 9/11? What if the charges don't go off as planned and some of the bomb survives?

6.To create a thouroughly obliterating explosion to mask its forgery.

This is the circular part, demodewd. They used a second plane with a bomb to cover up that they were using a second plane with a bomb. Why not just use the first plane?... Because its too technically chancy. Better to program a plane to navigate and hit an exact spot,making it in essence a guided missile that homes in at an exact location.

Okay, hijacking one plane and flying it into the Pentagon into the first available part that presents itself is more "technically chancy"...

...than seizing control of one plane, gassing its passengers and crew into submission, landing it, transferring the deadweight passengers to the new plane equiped with nose-hole mimicing shaped charges, taking off, flying it to the Pentagon by remote control, and guiding it into a specific spot, while the shaped charges and/or missiles explode and create the illusion of Flight 77 having hit the Pentagon?

Can I quote you on that?

[medienanalyse]

19. Bolo - you are really good when you stick to quotes and facts, but

when you try to be logic you fail somehow.

Impossible to answer all your mistakes - you just forget that there was a 270 degree turn of AA77. If not it would have slammed into Rummys offices which are as much as I know in the 4th floor overlooking the Potomac, so in the e-Ring which is the outside one. Your claim is false:
>>>>third floor of Ring E (the innermost ring),<<<

Third floor is Wolfowitz.

Anyway: they avoided to hit there although it would have been free sight, free way, good for orientation (Potomac)

They took the reinforced wedge and missed it a little bit in the inside. The odds were 1:5. Curious, isnt it?

Again to make it clear: it was AA77. I agree to that. But it was NOT Hani Hanihour and not the pilot who made that happen.

There is proof for AA77. There is no proof for Hanjour. There is proof for possibility of remote control, There is no evidence for remote control. There is evidence of foreknowledge and circumstantial evidence for Rumsfeld and Bush being involved. There is evidence for them lying.

[Bolo Boffin]

25. Oops.

E Ring is the outermost ring, and A Ring the innermost. My bad.

Let's back up a bit: most assume that Wedge 1 was the intended target. What evidence do we have that Wedge 1 was the actual target?

The only reason to think that is if you're already assuming Bush Administration complicity. I can't deny the attractiveness of the idea that they hit the only renovated facade on purpose, but that's the only reason to accept it as a theory.

But it's just as compelling to see that the flight path of the plane, if it hadn't crashed into the outer wall, would have taken it into Wedge 3 from the inside. If we're going to assume that the hijackers had a specific target, why wouldn't it have been this area of the Pentagon? This would have made for maximum confusion - the Pentagon would have been in utter chaos. Even though Rummy's office wasn't where I thought it was, extensive damage to Wedge 3 from the inside would have screwed up his whole day.

But this target was missed - which finds support in the idea of Hani Hanjour not being the greatest pilot in the world. He did manage to hit the Pentagon, but he fell far short of this target.

There's just as much evidence for Wedge 3 being targeted as there is for Wedge 1. Both depend on who you see the hijackers as being.

However, my personal opinion is that the pilot simply descended in a wide circle around the Pentagon until he had reached an altitude low enough to hit the building. At that point, he leveled off and flew into the Pentagon. That's a one in five chance of hitting any single wedge, and Wedge 1 was just the one it happened to be.

There is proof for AA77. There is no proof for Hanjour. There is proof for possibility of remote control, There is no evidence for remote control. There is evidence of foreknowledge and circumstantial evidence for Rumsfeld and Bush being involved. There is evidence for them lying.

I almost agree totally with these statements. I think there's some circumstantial proof for Hanjour. There's no real evidence for actual foreknowledge of the actual event, but plenty of evidence that they knew something was coming down the pike and did a remarkable job of letting it happen. That's the only two places I would quibble about.

[medienanalyse]

28. The target was the target

all other theory is speculation.

The wedge that was hit was hit was the target was meant to be hit, same as the WTC towers. Precise operations. I have no idea why I should speculate about any other targets. I take the facts. And again: Your facts, bolo, are not correct:

>>>"The only reason to think that is if you're already assuming Bush Administration complicity. I can't deny the attractiveness of the idea that they hit the only renovated facade on purpose, but that's the only reason to accept it as a theory."<<<

It is not a facade renovated. The facade was just the same as before. It was
a) steel beams inside
b) blast resistant windows (each with a weight of half a ton! )
c) kevlar on the panels
and some more equipment.

And so, demodewd and bolo I do not wonder about windows that did not shatter. And when I take aluminium, fuel, steel and ram it together in fire I expect a picture like firework. It is aluminium like the skin of a plane that enlightens our hearts in the fireworks. It is aluminium that gives the bright light. Ask any fireworker.

I am so damn tired of all the conspiracy theories.

[demodewd]

29. re: "so tired"

If you're are "so damn tired of conspiracy theories" why do you bother participating on this forum? At any rate,lets move on to this photograph...


"How could a fireball be visible through the walls ? Instead, it seems that the red light comes from the air itself, like if it was heated by something. Heated by what ? How did that fireball manage to heat the air behind the heliport control tower ? Maybe the explosion shockwave did it because a shockwave is a sound wave and sound can get through walls" http://eric-bart.net/iwpb/inv3.html

Do fireworks penetrate walls???

[Abe Linkman]

30. Very good point.

I've always thought something seemed odd about the fireball but couldn't quite articulate what was bothering me about it. You just did.

Thank you.

[demodewd]

31. Huge heat

Huge heat http://eric-bart.net/iwpb/inv3.html

High explosives and shaped charges generate huge amounts of heat.

"The firemen were appreciative, as the heat inside the building was, in their words, "unbelievable." It was reported that at least three of the fireman had to be given IV fluids due to the extreme heat" Terry Morin
"We're having a lot of trouble in there. It's about 3,000 degrees inside" Willis Roberts
"The ground was on fire. Trees were on fire. He was with the hospital corps in Vietnam when mortars and rocket shells dropped on the operating room near Da Nang -- but he had never witnessed anything of this devastating intensity" Alan Wallace
"the whole back of the fire truck had melted" William Yeingst
"The fire was so hot that firefighters could not approach the impact point itself until approximately 1 P.M." Patriotresource
"The fire was so intense it cracked concrete" USA Today
"The fire was so hot, Evey said, that it turned window glass to liquid and sent it spilling down walls into puddles on the ground" Walker Lee Evey
"that heat and fire, it could eat you alive in three seconds" Washingtonpost
"It was still burning 18 hr. later" CBS News

[medienanalyse]

32. Yawn. Still tired. Conspiracy theorists ARE NOT INVESTIGATING .

So you know how much heat a plane with tons of fuel, with aluminium, paint, plastic seats and bags and whatever "normally" produces?

I am really impressed.

Next time take some firework and hold it in your hand. It feels like a warm candle. Believe me.

To everybody else: in this discussion you can see a wonderfull example of a "no-discussion" and of pure fiction and theories just to talk physics instead of responsibility for 9/11.

The outcome is all: "it is a mystery" or "something odd" and so on. These people DO NOT HAVE ANY INTEREST IN SOLVING 9/11!

The "WHO WAS IT" is obviously completely uninteresting for them. It is a shame for the victims and their families that these people try to occupy all discussions and investigations.

[k-robjoe]

33. I appreciate

your other postings so much, that I don´t want to start arguing with you on this. (Keep you occupied with this.)

But the idea that for example Eric Bart, which demodewd has referred to in his latest postings, is a "Yawn" and "do not have any interest in solving 9/11" is just...

Seems almost like you´re bored, and just provoking, for the hell of it...

Hope to see some more of your really good postings.

[demodewd]

34. attn: yawner

Who was it? Good luck in proving that. Show me where aluminum particles cause soundwaves that penetrates through brick. A good start is proving that the official line is nonsense. Sorry I don't have the inside scoop on David Rockefellers covert associations,or the Massads,or the CIAs. What are the Rothchilds up to these days? If you're dissatified with the contents of this forum do your own investigating. Let us know when you come up with something substantial. I'll be interested.

[demodewd]

26. attn: medienanalyse

Hi medienanalyse...I have trouble convincing myself that it was #77 because of the blast characteristics and fire location(s). What is that bright light that initiates the blast? Is it caused by charges? That's what I think.



Why is the fire center apparently located at the very front of the building spilling out onto the yard?



Wouldn't the plane explode after it had penetrated the wall and at least through the E and D ring similar in effect of the WTC 1 & 2 explosions? Why the explosion onset right at the front of the building?

[k-robjoe]

35. " The odds were 1:5 "

If you take pure chance, you end up with the result that the odds were 1:5.

BUT :

Here we are told that this was a suicide attack by islamic terrorists. And then the question arises : Would not these guys do some checking before their attack, to find out where the offices of the top brass and Rumsfeld were to be found?

If they did any checking at all, they would surely find out that one of the wings would be pretty much empty? ( Because of the work being done.)

[Abe Linkman]

20. Wow! This is the kind of "logic" I'd expect from a 9-11 commissioner.

"Fascinatin' Rhythm" --- you go, bolo.

[NecessaryOnslaught]

6. Check the old DU threads

http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?forum=DCForumID43&az=list&archive=yes

I think the better demolition theorists have simply gotten tired of arguing something that has become so obvious.

[gandalf]

21. Take a look at the research of Kupferberg

google for

chaim kupferberg trues lies 9/11.

He wrote an very long (60 pages) articles, analyzing the news items regarding Bin Laden and the paymaster of the 9/11 attacks. There are so many odd coincidences that you might want to explain them by an invisible helping hand.