what are these flahses coming from the Pentagon after

[DemInDistress]

flight 11 crashed?

911.pentagon.bc.detonations.enl.x4.wmv

edit to add better link...

http://www.terrorize.dk/911/#pentagon

scroll down to fire and arson

[Kevin Fenton]

1. What flashes?

What flashes do you mean? At what point in the video?

The video is good in that it shows that the heliport control tower hasn't suffered much damage - the glass windows at the top are still in place.

[DemInDistress]

2. click the link and go to pentagon and detonations click

that link. Wish I could me it easier to get to those flashes,there are 3 flashes and some commentary. its a short clip (10 secs.) one of many and you need windows media player.

[Make7]

7. Here's the link:

http://www.terrorize.dk/911/pentagon4/911.pentagon.bc.detonations.enl.x4.wmv


If IChing sees this, perhaps we could get a translation of the following captions on that page related to this video:

Eksplosionerne (billedet viser den sidste) går nedefra og op. Den anes også at bevæge sig fra ydermuren og ind i rummet, men det er sværere at afgøre. Det er også som om vinduet (eller noget ved vinduet) følger trykbølgen. I videoklippene ses endvidere røg komme fra vinduet efter hver eksplosion, kraftigst efter den sidste. Det er ikke meget tydeligt, men det er der.

Indrømmet - billedet er utydeligt, men der ses røg ved og i venstre side af vinduet. Ved grænsen mellem kontroltårnets tag og bunden af vinduet anes en orange kant som kunne være den begyndende brand. Dette er dog ikke noget der kan fastslås udfra disse billeder. Se video for bedre resultat.

[IChing]

20. it is as follows

The explosion (picture shown of the side) goes down from and up.


WHY AM I DOING THIS FOR MAKE7?

anyone that wants a translation that is a member you can mail me.

Brand is fire
begydende brand

Dette er dog ikke noget der kan fastslås udfra disse billeder. Se video for bedre resultat.

See the video for better results the photos don't
let Make7 see the truth.

I swear it says that.

[Make7]

22. Why?

Did you not respond to one of my posts with the following:

 IChing (1000+ posts)

Sun Jan-08-06 09:28 PM 
Response to Reply #20 

 23. I can read Danish

if that will help

 

Well in your defense, I guess you never said that you would share the information with me after you read it. My mistake for assuming that that you would actually translate something after implying that you could in response to a post of mine about not being able to read the information on the www.terrorize.dk site. What was I thinking?

It is comforting to know that the pursuit of "truth" includes helping others in gathering information, unless of course they disagree with your opinion.

- Make7

[DemInDistress]

34. Thanks Make7 for linking those flashes..I found them at the

Site you linked me to. Great videos there and one can't say it a conspiracy site for everything is in Danish and the videos speak for themselves.. ^5 to you.

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rman]

3. most plausible seems

that those are detonations to prepare the collapse

[DemInDistress]

5. well.. I don't know..its awfully suspicious in light of what

happened on sept 11 2001. my guess and I want to believe its shaped charges prepared to blow after the missile struck the pentagon...but thanks for the feedback.

[rman]

8. i think we're essentially saying the same thing

what purpose would the shaped charges serve? i think it was to cause the collapse of that section of the pentagon.

[gbwarming]

4. ADA compliant fire alarm strobe? nt

[DemInDistress]

6. but why just 3 flashes if that is a strobe and why

did a fire break out just after the blasts? the pentagon is as suspicious as world trade 7 collapse. will we ever get all the facts regarding the 911 attacks? I'll keep digging and post my thoughts...
thanks again for the feedback.

[killtown]

9. Wow, never saw this before!

Adds more evidence that bombs were planted in the Pentagon which I believe happened:

► Gilah Goldsmith, personnel attorney at the Pentagon

"We saw a huge black cloud of smoke," she said, saying it smelled like cordite, or gun smoke." - Jewish News Weekly (09/21/01)



► Don Perkal, deputy General Counsel, Office of the Secretary of Defense

"The airliner crashed between two and three hundred feet from my office in the Pentagon, just around a corner from where I work. I'm the deputy General Counsel, Washington Headquarters Services, Office of the Secretary of Defense. A slightly different calibration and I have no doubt I wouldn't be sending this to you. My colleagues felt the impact, which reminded them of an earthquake. People shouted in the corridor outside that a bomb had gone off upstairs on the main concourse in the building. No alarms sounded. I walked to my office, shut down my computer, and headed out. Even before stepping outside I could smell the cordite. Then I knew explosives had been set off somewhere.

Two explosions, a few minutes apart, prompted me to start walking." - McSweeney's Internet Tendency: The Works of Humankind (09/19/01)

http://killtown.911review.org/oddities/911.html#Pentagon_cordite

What caused this fire so far and away and at different floors than the crash?





And why aren't the floors where the collapse happend on fire also as the same floors are a ways away?

[DemInDistress]

10. thank you killtown,,you made my day....

one person says,its a strobe light,another says,shaped charges to bring down the section but I don't accept that. I feel they are shaped charges planted to maximize the damage.The smell od cordite permeated the air.
This site,terrorize.dk is the best I seen,you might want to explore the many videos available,many angles not shown on MSM. Some vids clearly show molten metal dripping from the 80th floor of WT2,other vids show puffs,squibs of blasted material blown out,I been at this site a week now and I thank Make7 for putting me on to it.
killtown your reaction is what I was looking for...thanks again DemInDistress

[killtown]

11. Yes, terrorize.dk is a great site

Rock on! :toast:

Remember, here is why the Pentagon was hit where it was hit.

[Kevin Fenton]

12. Accuracy

This is a quote from your post (taken from USA Today):
The renovation was "meant to bolster it against attack. That significantly limited the damage and loss of life by slowing the plane as it tore through the building and reducing the explosion's reach."
Given that the first part is misleading (the strengthening part of the renovation was meant to bolster the Pentagon against a truck bomb - it was next to useless against the plane) and the second part is completely untrue (it did not slow the plane as it tore through the building - the inside of the building was not reinforced - or reduce the explosion's reach - much of the jet fuel was already inside the building when it exploded) why do you bother to quote it?

Here is another quote (taken from some army bigwig):
"...the plane struck the building almost in the middle of the space where the renovation had been completed."
This is also completely untrue. The plane struck the Pentagon at the join of a renovated section and an unrenovated section, not in the middle of the renovated section. So why do you quote him?

[killtown]

13. Hey, it's the "official story"

take it up with the officials. I'm just reporting what they are telling us.

Btw, where's your evidence this "plane" struck at the "join"?

[Kevin Fenton]

15. You can't pick and choose

which official statements to accept unquestioningly and which not to - you
have to subject all of them to the same degree of scrutiny, whether they fit
your ideas or not.

Here is a (not particular great) diagram of the impact:


Here is a picture of the damaged area:


This picture shows the unreinforced section in blue:


The middle of the reinforced section (wedge 1) would be the SW corner. If
the plane really was aiming at this corner, then it missed by a long way.

[killtown]

16. All the news reports say the same thing

that the area hit was being renovated to be more "bomb proof". Where did I "pick and choose"?

As for what exact part was being renovated, I've never seen exactly where the renovating began and ended and your diagram doesn't show it either. You are assuming that entire wedge was renovated and it's not clear that it was, so all I can go by is what the officials tell us and one of them said the crash happened "almost in the middle" of the renovated section.

If the officials were wrong on this part of the story, what other parts of the story have they been wrong about???

[Kevin Fenton]

18. Wedge 1 was being renovated, not the west side

This is what Lee Evey, who managed the renovation project said:

"On September 11th, 2001, of course, an aircraft crashed into the west face of the Pentagon. This diagram shows the approximate route of that aircraft into the building. It entered the building on the first floor, on the west side, what we call the heliport side of the building, but the edge of the first wedge, it's the first one million square feet of the building that we were accomplishing renovation in. We were approximately five days away from total renovation of that first one million square feet in the building. We were in the process of moving people out of the second wedge, that second one million square feet of the building, into that wedge one in anticipation of them doing renovation in wedge two.

"The aircraft hit at the edge of wedge one and passed at approximately a 45-degree angle through the building on the first floor level, passing through the edge of wedge one and into the unrenovated wedge two area."

He also said that there were 2,600 people in the area of the immediate impact. The improvement which he talks most about as having an effect in the renovated section is the sprinkler system.
http://fpc.state.gov/fpc/13250.htm

[killtown]

19. So you are saying that Army official is wrong then?

If so, what else have the officials been wrong on?

[Kevin Fenton]

21. Where would you like me to start?

WMD, invading Iraq, the Pentagon video stills, the Twin Towers falling over just like that, etc.

[killtown]

23. You'll have to excuse me

It's hard to know who believes what. If I understand you correctly, you believe:

1) WMD's were made up
2) Invasion of Iraq was warrantless
3) Pentagon video was fabricated
4) Bombs were in the twin towers

Is this correct? Btw, I believe all that too. What are your beliefs on:

1) Did Flt 77 hit the Pentagon?
2) Did Hanjour fly this plane?
3) WTC 7 imploded too?
4) Did Flt 93 crash at Shanksville?
5) Was Flt 93 shot down?

My answers to those are:

1) NO
2) HELL NO
3) Yes
4) No
5) Maybe, but more of a distration from Flt 93 not crashing at Shanksville

[Kevin Fenton]

24. Answers

(1) Yes.
(2) Yes.
(3) Yes.
(4) Yes.

(1) It was definitely a 757 (or very similar plane) and it was very probably American 77.
(2) Not as the main pilot with the skills he was reputed to have. Was he even aboard?
(3) Yes.
(4) Yes.
(5) Yes.

[killtown]

25. Ok you're MIHOP too

We only really disagree on Flight 77 and 93.

Clarifaction on the Pentagon:

1) Do you think the gov't knew/made it crash into the Pentagon?
2) Who was flying this plane?
3) It could have been a drone 757 or similar in your opinion?

I don't think Hanjour was onboard from the news article reports and question if Flt 77 even existed from not being listed on the early BTS report.

[Kevin Fenton]

26. I'm not really MIHOP

I think the WTC was destroyed with explosives, but not as part of a false flag operation. This post sets out some of my reasons for that:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x60799
To some extent, it was a screw-up.

There's obviously some reason the hijackers weren't rounded up before 9/11, because the US intelligence community had heard of them on multiple occasions, but I don't know what it is. My current opinion is that they thought those in pilot training would go back to Afghanistan and they could follow them there and somehow get to Osama, but I change my mind on this every couple of weeks.

There is a false dichotomy between the "conspiracy theorists" and the "official theory apologists" that the Bush adminsitration started to manipulate events either before 8:14 on 9/11 (for example by letting it happen on purpose) or after 10:06 on 9/11 (by attacking Iraq, which had nothing to do with it). That leaves a gap of 1 hour and 52 minutes. I really doubt even Cheney would have LIHOP, but, perhaps, when it started, they started to realise the possibilities (invading lots of countries) and dangers (explosives in the WTC that would be discovered) and that might have affected their judgement. I don't have a big problem with the official air defence of New York, but nobody realising Washington could be a target is stretching it a bit.

Anyway, to answer your questions:
(1) I think the air defence of Washington was not optimal and I strongly suspect this was accidentally on purpose, but I doubt they knew it was specifically heading for the Pentagon;
(2) A terrorist with better flying skills than the FBI are letting on;
(3) I think the plane really was American 77.

[killtown]

27. Well that's an interesting theory to say the least

What about the WTC 7 then, you think they had bombs preplanted in there in case of an emergency too?

Also, you consider yourself LIHOP then, no orchestrated, but that 9/11 was still an inside job?

[Kevin Fenton]

28. WTC 7

I doubt they were pre-planted. Whereas 1 and 2 were the world's number one terrorist targets (the 1993 plan was to topple the North Tower on to the South Tower, which would then fall itself), 7 paled by comparison. There was plenty of time to rig them on 9/11. If pushed to come off the fence, I would say it was like Silverstein said - the building looked like it might fall, so they took it down. I don't really have a problem with it - nobody got killed, so what?

I wouldn't say it was an inside job, because that implies there was direct help from the administration and LIHOP means somebody had direct foreknowledge there would be some sort of attack and looked the other way. But the administration (and the previous one) is, at least, complicit in a cover up of what really happened and its illegal actions greatly increased the loss of life.

[killtown]

29. How did they take WTC 7 down on 9/11 then?

Are you suggesting that they ran in when it was on fire and planted explosives real quick and planted them so accurately that they imploded the 47-building so perfectly in such a short amount of time?

You know the tallest building demo'd before 9/11 was less the 30 stories.

[Kevin Fenton]

39. That's exactly what I'm suggesting

What's 130 feet when you can clear the area? It was pretty neat, but do we really know that not one chunk of the building was thrown from its footprint?

Given that the team had just demolished two of the tallest buildings ever conceived, I guess they would have managed it.

[rman]

30. plenty of time to rig "them" on 9/11

Which "them"? The 3 buildings that collapsed on 9/11?

Even if just WTC7 - how the f can an entire building be rigged in a matter of hours? Such a thing typically takes days, including planning and preparations.

If the official version is that WTC7 was taken down on order of Silverstein, then why is that not being acknowledged in the MSM.

Not to mention that building 7 did anything but "look like it might fall". Other WTC buildings were damaged far more extensively - but remained standing. Other steel frame buildings have suffered much more severe fires without "falling".
Photographs of the WTC7 fires and of the damage to other WTC buildings have been presented in this forum. Same for the 'Madrid building'.

[Kevin Fenton]

31. Them

"Them" means the explosives in WTC 7.

Most of the time taken by controlled demolition is used up knocking out supporting walls and stripping stuff out of the building. Putting the actual charges is is relatively fast.

"If the official version is that WTC7 was taken down on order of Silverstein, then why is that not being acknowledged in the MSM?"
Maybe because it would indicate the other two were, as well.

"Not to mention that building 7 did anything but "look like it might fall". Other WTC buildings were damaged far more extensively - but remained standing. Other steel frame buildings have suffered much more severe fires without "falling"."
The other WTC buildings were not as high, so they wouldn't have done much damage if they fell. I guess the fire department was jumpy after two skyscrapers fell on top of them. Hell, it'd make me jumpy.

[rman]

32. So you say 7 was rigged by the fire department -

who do you think rigged 1 and 2 - and when were they rigged?

[Kevin Fenton]

36. The "government"

After the 1993 bombing, to prevent one tower collapsing on the other (that was the 1993 bombers' plan) in the event of a successful repeat.

What several eyewitnesses said indicates that the explosives were in the elevator shafts. I had a look at the elevator service company and there were some very strange goings on starting in 1994. More details here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x60799

[DemInDistress]

33. Kevin,,,what you say is absurd....there was no flight 77 that

struck the pentagon..where is the evidence? No 125' or longer, with a wing span of (guess) 100' or wider is going through a 16' hole. Absolutely ludicrous and besides the 5 time lapse pics leaked show the pentagon is already collapsed before the missile strikes the building,.
Secondly,you evidently haven't seen Confronting the Evidence released by folks at Reopen911.0rg. in chapter 7 you can clearly see on the North side of WT7 at least 50 explosions,small black puffs,squibs clearly a signature of controlled demolition. as for the Twin Towers, you also haven't viewed Eyewitness to 911. I saw and heard all 3 parts. What struck me was the massive explosions picked up on videotape. Blasts so loud so troubling it defy's credulity. Why didn't Tom Ludicrous Kean include any explosive testimony in the official 911 Whitewash report? This MURDEROUS administration sent out henchmen/women to make us believe twas fire that killed the towers so I beg to differ with you and recommend you check out those mentioned videos and get back to be..
BTW, are you LARED the DU 911 debunker? or do you debunk on your own
another thing,if larry silverstein did order firemen to demolish WT7.,why no public explanation...the 911 cover up stinks to holy heaven if there is such a place...

thanks

[Kevin Fenton]

35. Size of hole

The claim that the hole is only 16 feet is fictional. It was actually 90 feet. 911 Review says:
"The most thorough analysis of the extent of impact punctures in the Pentagon's facade was produced by the anonymous author "guardian". It shows that region of breached walls spanned approximately 90 feet on the first floor and 18 feet on the second floor."
http://www.911review.com/errors/pentagon/smallhole.html
It's worth reading the whole thing.

The video stills are faked and, in any case, do not show the building is collapsing.

I am not LARED. Whatever made you think that?

[DemInDistress]

37. Thanks Kevin for not taking my head off...

I tried the site and its not responding. I'll try again later anyway,it sounds like you saw neither video I mentioned.
1. Eyewitness to 911...massive explosions heard prior to each collapse,was troubling and disturbing because it received no coverage from MSM.. also
2. Confronting the Evidence.. a masterpiece of facts unexplained by the bush crime family spinmeisters., Kevin
I count 50 explosions (puffs,squibs) clearly the signature of a controlled demolition. You can't have a separate attack on the pentagon without including the WTC attacks..so I ask you,why no follow ups regarding the demolition of WT7? Please reach out to Reopen911.org and request a dvd. also, see the trailer of the blasts caught on tape at Eyewitness to 911.com....its worth a look,hell 3,000 innocent people died there..
Why I thought you might be LARED, its because you seem to want to debunk any notions 911 was an inside job...

Thanks again for being cordial...

[Kevin Fenton]

38. I haven't seen the DVDs

and they wouldn't play on my machine anyway. I've had a look at the Reopen site and I didn't like it. For example, I just took a look at there core evidence and the first thing is that they say is that the towers collapsed in "8.4 seconds (10 floors per second)". However, that would mean the towers had 84 floors (26 less than they actually had). In addition, the collapse took about twice as long. The best analysis of the collapse times can be found here:
http://www.911research.com/wtc/analysis/collapses/freefall.html

Yes, the towers were demolished by explosives, but no, it wasn't an inside job in the proper sense of the phrase.

[DemInDistress]

40. come on Kevin did you spend any time on this site

http://www.911research.com/wtc/analysis/towers.html also. eyewitness to 911.com go watch the trailer..
you didn't like reopen911.org because it debunks the official ludicrous report..

view the aforementioned videos and get back to me otherwise I can't help but believe your LARED's brother,friend or plant.

Just 2 possibilities exist.
1. arabs hijacked a jet...jet crashed into the Twin Towers and 3 (3) buildings collapsed....or
2. 911 WAS AN INSIDE JOB...perpetuated by a sinister group of corporate MURDERERS HELL BENT ON PROMOTING AN AGENDA....PNAC !!!!

NO MIDDLE GROUND HERE KEVIN

[DemInDistress]

14. that's one good blogsite killtown..do you work alone?

reasons for the attack on the pentagon makes perfect sense. Missing billions,accountants,bookkeepers,others connected to the destroyed paperwork. Dov Zakheim zionist,wow..Clinton left the D.o.D. working within a balanced budget these greedy powerful people couldn't live like that hence the attack in DC..but NYC is a different animal. There are 4 money angles that concern me for the WTC.
1. On or about Sept.11 1991 Poppy Bush,Cheney,Rumsey and others floated a 240 billion dollar loan. Counterfeit
gold Brady bonds were used as collateral. These bonds were housed in the safes of Cantor Fitzgerald,located on upper floors of WT1,h'm. Cantor/Fitz was hit square in the face. Those bonds had a due date of Sept.11 2001.
2.Its reported somewhere that bush/cheney during the summer of threat had stuffed our banks will deliveries of
extra cash (tons),far beyond the normal summer cash deliveries,were they expecting a run on the bank?
3.unusually large put options place before the attacks. I'm sure your aware of that.
4.Larry Silverstein upon closing the lease for the WTC triples the insurance on the building complex.Was Larry
expecting bad news?
A guy named Eisenberg head of Port Authority (or director) was a Zionist as was Silverstein and his partner.
Frank Lowy (Lowy was a Golani Brigader)and an avid Zionist. Larry and Frank had close ties to Ariel Sharon.
For we 911 researchers with limited information have already painted this Bush Crime Family with shadows of involvement with the Sept.11 attacks. I'd like to know how our countrymen would feel if key documents are stolen and leaked to the public.
Keep pounding away killtown for we are closing in and may yet still get a new 911 investigation.
Glad that 911 debunker LARED hasn't weighed in....


:toast: :toast: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :woohoo:

[killtown]

17. Mostly a one man show!

Thanks for the kind words. I do communicate with a bunch of fine researchers. Thanks for those points you mentioned. I would like to further investigate this angle in the future. ps - I don't care what Lard thinks. ;)

Rock on! :headbang: