Shocking New Pentagon Evidence

[MelvinClerks]

Well, not really new.




See that piece of wreckage at the back with the big red 'C'? Look familiar?



So my question is, how can anyone doubt that an American Airlines jet hit the pentagon, when pieces of an AA jet are lying in front of it on a day where AA jets were hijacked and flew into buildings? Specifically when there's one whose whereabouts would be unknown... unless that was it lying on the ground in the picture?

It's time to give up on the Pentagon folks.

[Jackson Holly]

Gotta link for the pic?

[MelvinClerks]

http://i47.tinypic.com/29cy7o.jpg

Why, you gonna suggest it's a photoshop?

[MelvinClerks]

Some more wreckage:

[Georgiacopguy]

I wouldn't, but I would suggest, HOW do we know that picture was taken at the Pentagon? Also, HOW do we know if what hit the Pentago wasnt a modified military jet painted in Commercial livery? And how do we use that picture to prove that the govt story was true, how do we know it was not A)Remote controlled, or B) piloted by a suicide military/ patsy pilot?

http://i47.tinypic.com/29cy7o.jpg

Why, you gonna suggest it's a photoshop?

[Jackson Holly]

http://i47.tinypic.com/29cy7o.jpg

Why, you gonna suggest it's a photoshop?

The lighting is wrong .... next day?

If it WAS a big jet ... it is even MORE fantastic ... they are huge!

[maim]

its not hard at all to 'seed' the site with pre-mangled scrap metal.  show us some body parts, plane seats, engines, luggage, maybe the black box.  

[MelvinClerks]

I wouldn't, but I would suggest, HOW do we know that picture was taken at the Pentagon? Also, HOW do we know if what hit the Pentago wasnt a modified military jet painted in Commercial livery? ...how do we know it was not A)Remote controlled, or B) piloted by a suicide military/ patsy pilot?

How do we know it was these things you suggest?

Besides if it WASN'T the AA flight, where did the REAL jet and all the people go? Planes clearly hit the twin towers, so why is it hard to believe that the same thing happened at the pentagon?

[MelvinClerks]

its not hard at all to 'seed' the site with pre-mangled scrap metal.  show us some body parts, plane seats, engines, luggage, maybe the black box.  

"The official investigation ended on November 16, 2001, declaring that 184 of 189 of those killed in the Pentagon attack had been identified. 2   Officials claimed that the remains of all but one of the people on Flight 77 were identified. Human remains were shipped to the mortuary at Dover Air Force Base and to the DNA Identification Laboratory in Rockville, Maryland for identification by forensic pathologists and anthropologists. Two of the forensic scientists who were enlisted in the effort were Drs. Douglas Owsley and Douglas Ubelaker, both of whom were also involved in the identifying the mutilated remains of the victims of the Waco Massacre. 3  "

http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/evidence/bodies.html

Considering how spread out that wreckage was, and how most of it would be inside the part of the pentagon the plane crashed into, it'd be hard to get pictures of body parts.

And like I said, if that wreckage ISN'T the AA jet that went missing, where is that jet and those people? Did they fly the jet off somewhere and hide it and all the people before putting fake debris on the ground at the Pentagon? Did they get that fake debris there before the ton of rescue workers got there (which I'd imagine would be EXTREMELY quickly)? Fake body parts/DNA samples that coincided with the list of passengers for people to do DNA tests on? Or are the people who did the tests in on it too?

Grasping at straws people. Accept that a plane hit it and move on.

[Jackson Holly]

How do we know it was these things you suggest?

Besides if it WASN'T the AA flight, where did the REAL jet and all the people go? Planes clearly hit the twin towers, so why is it hard to believe that the same thing happened at the pentagon?

Well, I for one have never discounted an AA plane ... I just KNOW it wasn't piloted
by a rookie. And I know the Air Force stood down and let it happen.

If it was an AA plane fine ... it just makes the piloting even MORE ridiculously unbelievable.

 ... and if they did indeed find and identify human remains, fine.   

Then, the pilotless remote control scenario must be the case ... as is probable with the Twin
Towers as well.

[Georgiacopguy]

...and they ssaid they identified them using DNA...Super. But they made the report, THEY can say whatever they like about who they identified. The pilot could have been a veteran pilot, and they said he was some guy from the middle east, with little flight experience, but pulled off a set of manuvers you dont simply learn from Flight Sim 2001 and a few weeks at a flight school. But since they control the information flow, they control the outcome.

So was your whole purpose to come here and troll about 9/11 or do you have something more succinct to get to?

[phosphene]

Faces Of Death
The 1978 cult classic!
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5590832799604062499&ei=i_RWS8rwFpWUqAOzmfzEAw&q=faces+of+death&hl=en&view=3&dur=3&client=firefox-a#


check at 1hr 36 mins to see what a real plane wreck looks like. There's a lot more than a few scraps of metal in the grass.

[MelvinClerks]

...and they ssaid they identified them using DNA...Super. But they made the report, THEY can say whatever they like about who they identified. The pilot could have been a veteran pilot, and they said he was some guy from the middle east, with little flight experience, but pulled off a set of manuvers you dont simply learn from Flight Sim 2001 and a few weeks at a flight school. But since they control the information flow, they control the outcome.

So was your whole purpose to come here and troll about 9/11 or do you have something more succinct to get to?

Yada yada ya, he could've been an alien from Mars too, but until you show evidence it's just speculation.

Trolling about 9/11? Showing evidence that completely contradicts your theory is trolling?

Phosphene - that is a plane crashing into the ground, not a building. Why would the majority of the wreckage be on the ground and not INSIDE the building? You're gonna need much more than "well, this other plane crash produced a wee bit more wreckage that the pentagon one" to make the HUGE assertion "it wasn't a plane crash".

Clearly none of you are actually willing to think though. You give the 9/11 truth movement a bad reputation.

[phosphene]

the evidence of what happened at the pentagon that day IS from the dozens(hundreds?) of cameras surrounding the building. The upper echelons know exactly what happened, because they have seen the tapes. And they choose not to show you or me. That's why all this photo scrap bickering is a waste of energy....release the video.

[Jackson Holly]

Yada yada ya, he could've been an alien from Mars too, but until you show evidence it's just speculation.

Trolling about 9/11? Showing evidence that completely contradicts your theory is trolling?

Phosphene - that is a plane crashing into the ground, not a building. Why would the majority of the wreckage be on the ground and not INSIDE the building? You're gonna need much more than "well, this other plane crash produced a wee bit more wreckage that the pentagon one" to make the HUGE assertion "it wasn't a plane crash".

Clearly none of you are actually willing to think though. You give the 9/11 truth movement a bad reputation.

Well, Mr. Thinker ... what do you think happened?

[MelvinClerks]

Flight 77 was hijacked and someone slammed it into the Pentagon?

[Jackson Holly]

  Good One!

[Georgiacopguy]

Yes trolling. In your short time here, you've made it abundantly clear WHY you are here, which is to discuss this, and only this, and your agenda is clear. You do this KNOWING that it is the contrary view amongst a vast majority of members here. So yes, that would be trolling. The only evidence you purport is that thrust upon us by a government which has every reason to lie due to their culpability, either through their failures to stop that event, or their duplicity in helping plan it.

But I do recall, you were asked a specific question, WHY were only  several small frames of one camera showing impact shown, why no others, where is the rest of the film. If hte government you thrust so much trust into is NOT culpable, where is their proof of their findings? I guess you'll cite that timely and oh so accurate report again yes?

Yada yada ya, he could've been an alien from Mars too, but until you show evidence it's just speculation.

Trolling about 9/11? Showing evidence that completely contradicts your theory is trolling?

Phosphene - that is a plane crashing into the ground, not a building. Why would the majority of the wreckage be on the ground and not INSIDE the building? You're gonna need much more than "well, this other plane crash produced a wee bit more wreckage that the pentagon one" to make the HUGE assertion "it wasn't a plane crash".

Clearly none of you are actually willing to think though. You give the 9/11 truth movement a bad reputation.

[Michal Ptacnik]

Well, I am not completely convinced that 9/11 was an inside job, but why was the hole so small, and how come the lawn was so perfectly spared any and all scaring? And the lamps stayed in their places? Please give me a satisfactory answer to these questions and I am all for admitting that the Pentagon was hit by a plane. The NORAD exercise could be a coincidence, etc., but this is a physical evidence that points to something fishy having happened there.

[MelvinClerks]

Yes trolling. In your short time here, you've made it abundantly clear WHY you are here, which is to discuss this, and only this, and your agenda is clear. You do this KNOWING that it is the contrary view amongst a vast majority of members here. So yes, that would be trolling. The only evidence you purport is that thrust upon us by a government which has every reason to lie due to their culpability, either through their failures to stop that event, or their duplicity in helping plan it.

But I do recall, you were asked a specific question, WHY were only  several small frames of one camera showing impact shown, why no others, where is the rest of the film. If hte government you thrust so much trust into is NOT culpable, where is their proof of their findings? I guess you'll cite that timely and oh so accurate report again yes?

Why do I have to prove that the official story of Flight 77 is true? It's not like it not being proved 100% beyond doubt gives any credence to your theory.

You haven't shown jack shit evidence for why a missile or drone plane or some other shit crashed. All you can say is "well the video is sorta lacking" and then ignore the CLEAR AMERICAN AIRLINES wreckage on the ground.

I believe 9/11 was an inside job. I just don't believe a missile or some other shit hit the Pentagon, and claiming that it did makes us all look like retards.

[Mike Philbin]

American Airlines has a FLEET of planes, some big and some not so big...

[Michal Ptacnik]

You haven't shown jack shit evidence for why a missile or drone plane or some other shit crashed. All you can say is "well the video is sorta lacking" and then ignore the CLEAR AMERICAN AIRLINES wreckage on the ground.

The problem is that the debris could have been planted easy as a pie - and the surroundings actually suggest this was what happened (the small hole, the lawn). Where did they get the debris? Well from the plane for starters, there must have been a plane destroyed somewhere, and if you look at the pieces, they are almost not charred at all, so it would be absolutely no problem, if you had the plane (as the Big Bad Govt) to cut it into pieces and scatter them all over the place later. The area was closed, no eyewitnesses, no camera feed, all taken by the feds, a perfect scene for a coverup.

I mean, look, I am not a fan of far-fetched conspiracy theories, but in this case the evidence against the official version is so stacked that it makes me a bit *curious* as to what really happened.

[EvadingGrid]

Were is the extensive Security Camera films ?

Why are they hiding the evidence ?

[Georgiacopguy]

Well, I'm not saying a missile hit it either, my mind is still open to possibilities though, maybe you'd be better suited if you took the same stance. I just think it would not be difficult to seed the crash site with debris. It looks like no other plane crash in history. I also did not state the video was sorta lacking, I inferred it is hidden from public scrutiny. Thats a bit more than 'lacking.' If you realllly are a truther, then you coming here and verbally chastising those you allegedly agree or partially agree with is NOT a good way to get a good foot in the door here. You might want to try a more civil approach, and you might actually get something from this place. But this whole "angry truther" thing you've got going on.... It might work at a rally, or trying to set up a youtube video, but here, you are among friends. IF you are who and what you say you are.

I'm not a big fan of far fetched theories either, as many here will tell you, and as others have used in an effort to alledge that I'm COINTELPRO recently. You dont have to buy every theory, or every aspect of a theory. But the more we collaborate, the more we think it out, the closer to the ultimate truth we get.

 

Why do I have to prove that the official story of Flight 77 is true? It's not like it not being proved 100% beyond doubt gives any credence to your theory.

You haven't shown jack shit evidence for why a missile or drone plane or some other shit crashed. All you can say is "well the video is sorta lacking" and then ignore the CLEAR AMERICAN AIRLINES wreckage on the ground.

I believe 9/11 was an inside job. I just don't believe a missile or some other shit hit the Pentagon, and claiming that it did makes us all look like retards.

[Michal Ptacnik]

Were is the extensive Security Camera films ?

Why are they hiding the evidence ?

They might be doing it for any number of reasons, you know how sensitive govts are to any info, that's not such a big problem, to ask why snoops try to do coverups - they do so because they are snoops, because they can. Mostly because "it is safer to keep the info than to release it to the masses," or just "more convenient," or "it is just what they did, period."

The lawn and the small, wingless hole, and no wings outside, that is the true problem.

[Jackson Holly]

Melivn:

You haven't shown jack shit evidence for why a missile or drone plane or some other shit crashed. All you can say is "well the video is sorta lacking" and then ignore the CLEAR AMERICAN AIRLINES wreckage on the ground.

We knew from day one that there was some wreckage laying around ... lots more reportedly
inside the compound. So why did we never see this:


The wreckage of the plane was carefully laid out in a Denver warehouse, helping investigators solve the case.

http://www.fbi.gov/libref/historic/famcases/graham/graham.htm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

If it was truly an AA hijacked plane, why did they not treat it like every other
plane crash? Why did they not assemble the wreckage as usual?

Was this a crime scene or not? 

[Georgiacopguy]

They not once in either New York or the Pentagon followed their own evidenciary procedures properly. They did not conduct the usual dog and pony shows with their evidence, electing to hide it from the light of day. I simply ask why?

[Mike Philbin]

Jackson & Georgia,

EXACTLY why the 'conspiracy theory' about who did 9-11 and why.

They USUALLY rebuild those plane crashes from nose to tail to assess what might have gone wrong...



oh, I KNOW what some joker's gonna respond to this, "WE KNOW WHAT CAUSED THE ACCIDENT - THE PENTAGON HIT IT." but there's still a need to a) go through the proper investigative procedures and not just shovel away evidence for resmelting and b) ensure the public that all surveillance was working well to keep us safe (that's what it's for, right?    Right?).

On this subject, "WHERE'S THE f**kING SCHIPOL AIRPORT FOOTAGE OF 254 BOMBER?". It only works until it don't work, case in point 7-7 London (bus surveillance camera didn't work on the day). Cell phones went down on the day.

[agentbluescreen]

the evidence of what happened at the pentagon that day IS from the dozens(hundreds?) of cameras surrounding the building. The upper echelons know exactly what happened, because they have seen the tapes. And they choose not to show you or me. That's why all this photo scrap bickering is a waste of energy....release the video.

The problem is that the debris could have been planted easy as a pie - and the surroundings actually suggest this was what happened (the small hole, the lawn). Where did they get the debris? Well from the plane for starters, there must have been a plane destroyed somewhere, and if you look at the pieces, they are almost not charred at all, so it would be absolutely no problem, if you had the plane (as the Big Bad Govt) to cut it into pieces and scatter them all over the place later. The area was closed, no eyewitnesses, no camera feed, all taken by the feds, a perfect scene for a coverup.

I mean, look, I am not a fan of far-fetched conspiracy theories, but in this case the evidence against the official version is so stacked that it makes me a bit *curious* as to what really happened.

Melivn:
We knew from day one that there was some wreckage laying around ... lots more reportedly
inside the compound. So why did we never see this:


The wreckage of the plane was carefully laid out in a Denver warehouse, helping investigators solve the case.

http://www.fbi.gov/libref/historic/famcases/graham/graham.htm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

If it was truly an AA hijacked plane, why did they not treat it like every other
plane crash? Why did they not assemble the wreckage as usual?

Was this a crime scene or not?  

It's NOT a "crime scene" UNLESS the psychopaths that run the "government" are NOT "the criminals".

In such case whatever happened is thus "a matter of security"...

Lacking any other available explanations or evidence we have to stick with the OBVIOUS.

[jack_2002]

god damn co-intelpro garbage!

[agentbluescreen]

What do we need of "evidence" they've already quite clearly and obviously confessed to it...

[Southern Patriot]

http://i47.tinypic.com/29cy7o.jpg
Why, you gonna suggest it's a photoshop?

Nope.  I suggest that that piece of aluminium you see in the pic is not from a 767. It is way too small. The "C" from a 767 is about 6 feet tall. The "C" in the pent-a-con pic is barely 3 feet. As a mater of fact, all the pent-a-con wreckage is too small to have come from a jumbo jet.

[agentbluescreen]

They not once in either New York or the Pentagon followed their own evidenciary procedures properly. They did not conduct the usual dog and pony shows with their evidence, electing to hide it from the light of day. I simply ask why?

And their answer to us was "A-Ha Ha Ha! What're you gonna do about it? Ha Ha Ha!"

TWILIGHT OF THE PSYCHOPATHS  by keven barrett

The greatest fear of any psychopath is of being found out. As George H. W. Bush said to journalist Sarah McClendon in December, 1992, "If the people knew what we had done, they would chase us down the street and lynch us."

This way, we just know that they've admitted that they did it. Any court on earth would construe the available evidence to all solidly point to that solitary conclusion.

[kushfiend]

god damn co-intelpro garbage!

thank you I don't know why so many waste their time debating co-intel.  This was my thought process:

1-Started to Read the post

2-thought, wow, why would this guy come on the Prison Plant Forum, just to post a stupid, easily debunkable attempt to confirm the "official story"

3-looked and saw he had less than 30 posts .... Immediately thought possible Co-Intel

4-Continued to read post, and now I am certain of this guy being co intel.

I have a question for you, stupid fed OP!!  Why were all the live camera shots of whatever hit the Pentagon snatched and hidden by the FBI within hours of the strike?

Why did they release some grainy 2 second clip that shows nothing and claim that it showed a 747 barreling down on the Pentagon?

What happened to the rest of the plane, besides the tiny section with a 'C' on it that they could've attained at any airplane scrap yard? What about the wings?  The engine?  The seats?  What about bodies?  How come the lawn was completely undamaged after the strike?


The answer is you are a fed and a gatekeeper OP.  Screw you.

[jimd3100]

god damn co-intelpro garbage!

No, that would be what you pentagon no planers push. On 9/11 planes flew into buildings.

[jimd3100]

thank you I don't know why so many waste their time debating co-intel.  This was my thought process:

You don't know what cointel is

2-thought, wow, why would this guy come on the Prison Plant Forum, just to post a stupid, easily debunkable attempt to confirm the "official story"

Planes flew into the WTC. That's also the "official story"

3-looked and saw he had less than 30 posts .... Immediately thought possible Co-Intel

30 posts is more than you had when you first signed up, so you were cointel?

4-Continued to read post, and now I am certain of this guy being co intel.

Are Jim Hoffman and Michel Wosley cointel? Is anyone who isn't a silly no planer cointel? Get a grip

The answer is you are a fed and a gatekeeper OP.  Screw you.

Am I also a fed and gatekeeper? Planes flew into buildings on 9/11. Melvin gave you links to Jim Hoffmans site. Is Hoffman cointel? Were you there at the pentagon on 9/11? So anyone who doesn't go along with preposterous no plane BS(like you)cointel?
Since you weren't there lets take a look at what people who were there said.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1ihc1_pentagon-eyewitness-isabel-james_news

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PTRsuRao7A

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzBmgsjC6Nc&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_H8CinIWltY&feature=PlayList&p=6FA2A860385F97EC&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dE25srBooWM&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IURJBJ6tnC4&NR=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXq6H2kCtEU&feature=related

I believe 9/11 was an inside job. I just don't believe a missile or some other shit hit the Pentagon, and claiming that it did makes us all look like retards.

Yea, pretty much.

On 9/11 planes flew into buildings. Melvins right. Now call me a fed and see how long you keep posting.

[Viper]

IMO it was a global hawk that hit the pentagon.

[trailhound]

the evidence of what happened at the pentagon that day IS from the dozens(hundreds?) of cameras surrounding the building. The upper echelons know exactly what happened, because they have seen the tapes. And they choose not to show you or me. That's why all this photo scrap bickering is a waste of energy....release the video.

AMEN!

[Georgiacopguy]

Cruise missile would have caused more damage, and damage consistent with what we saw.

IMO it was a global hawk that hit the pentagon.

[Viper]

Cruise missile would have caused more damage, and damage consistent with what we saw.

Could have been G, only cause we seen them carry something away under wraps and the little plane wreckage makes me think it was one of those.
I'd say it was a cruise missile before i'd say it was a jumbo though fo sho.