What actually hit the Pentagon: an old stone apparently left unturned

[iks83]

I also wonder why in this day and age we always see poorly scanned, highly compressed pictures that look so fuzzy it is a joke.

[jimd3100]

Never say never!!

GUESS WHAT I FINALLY FOUND!

On this one saizdat911 Photobucket "Pentagon Crash Photos" album appears this one notable private statement:

The Greatest Lie Ever Sold

I have long wondered where JimD's "Magic Tent" was locaed on the Pentagon lawn early that morning which was later photographed being hustled off back into the building from the edge of the lawn early that morning within 20 minutes after the supposed "757 CRASH" as depicted in this favorite suspicious photo of mine of the PEGASYS JPADS airdrop missile launcher.




Well LOOKIE LOOKIE WHAT'S UP COOKIE!

Kindly explain what the "blue tent thing" is on the highway, in the middle on the left hand side of this early morning aerial photograph, as shown in the middle of the road with a cop and angle-parked-truck barrier hastily erected in front of it, well before the wall even collapsed (within 20 minutes of the "crash")? ? ?



Did they "put up" this "blue tent" earlier that morning there on that highway, pointing that way as a "sunscreen" to protect them while they sat inside waiting to watch the "crash"?

I am about to rest my case

All you do is post lies, you are a waste of time. And the wall has already collapsed in the picture, if you can't even see that....oh right I forgot, you lie and are a waste of time. On 9-11 planes flew into buildings. Not missiles. Missiles= No Planer. No Planers have nothing to do with the truth.

[agentbluescreen]

All you do is post lies, you are a waste of time. And the wall has already collapsed in the picture, if you can't even see that....oh right I forgot, you lie and are a waste of time. On 9-11 planes flew into buildings. Not missiles. Missiles= No Planer. No Planers have nothing to do with the truth.

When I private messaged you to delete the second part of this post, it was because as soon as I had looked more closely (enlarged enhanced) at the photo in Photoshop I realized that what I had falsely misconstrued (due to the bluish tint of the photo) to be the "tent" in the roadway was actually just the back of the VDOT highway sign. I asked you to delete it then (which you apparently belligerently refused to do) because I was concerned that I had posted it and a mistaken analysis of it that was incorrect. I was concerned someone else might mistakenly jump to the same conclusion I had for the wrong reasons.

I am also here apologizing to you for having referred to it as "JimD's "Magic Tent" ", that was somewhat rude.

You (doubtless out of some old grudge against me which I do not share in) chose instead to repost it and use it to call me a liar. Had I wished to be a liar I wouldn't have asked you to remove it since my description of what I had thought I had finally seen in it was incorrect and in error.

However, upon closer examination, I have since noticed much more clear evidence of a suspicious clearly white-topped bluish structure  next to the first (top) ambulance, beneath the lamp standard by the tree on the lawn, so let it stand. This "tent thing" came from somewhere, and the state of collapse at the time of the photo is largely immaterial.

So I apologize for "lying", there's still something fishy here. I'm not here to lie, I'm here to seek the truth.

It really doesn't matter what they hit the Pentagon with or how, we know they were involved in it, and the coverup - just not exactly what it obviously IS that they are so desperate to hide. I will readily admit to you now that after looking at thousands of photos I still tend to think it looks a lot like a plane hit it. But still, "looks" can be very deceiving.

I'm still not sold, simply because I don't believe what "liars with things to hide" say.

[agentbluescreen]

[iks83]

When I private messaged you to delete the second part of this post, it was because as soon as I had looked more closely (enlarged enhanced) at the photo in Photoshop I realized that what I had falsely misconstrued (due to the bluish tint of the photo) to be the "tent" in the roadway was actually just the back of the VDOT highway sign. I asked you to delete it then (which you apparently belligerently refused to do) because I was concerned that I had posted it and a mistaken analysis of it that was incorrect. I was concerned someone else might mistakenly jump to the same conclusion I had for the wrong reasons.

So you admit making up crap by roughly looking at things and anything that cant be comprehended by your underdeveloped level of understanding is spun into some theory.

[Kilika]

jimd3100 and iks83,

What's with you two? You attack agent like he's the enemy or soemthing, when in fact he's posted some excellent stuff, and is even openly trying to be honest about it, and all you do is have nasty things to say to him. I don't get it. Well, I do get it. I know exactly where that kind of hate comes from. It's a defense mechanism when backed into a corner.

What's a shame though is that the very moderator of the 9/11 section is badmouthing people for trying to present evidence to get to the truth. Isn't a moderator suppose to be objective? Particularly on such a "truth" website as this. I guess it depends on who's truth!

Agent openly admitted to a mistake, and you attack him, accusing him of intentionally making stuff up, and that is flat out wrong. It's one thing to counter with your own position, but to resort to childish trash-talking is immature at best.

I think agent deserves an apology from both of you for being such asses towards him.

[iks83]

jimd3100 and iks83,

What's with you two? You attack agent like he's the enemy or soemthing, when in fact he's posted some excellent stuff, and is even openly trying to be honest about it, and all you do is have nasty things to say to him. I don't get it. Well, I do get it. I know exactly where that kind of hate comes from. It's a defense mechanism when backed into a corner.

What's a shame though is that the very moderator of the 9/11 section is badmouthing people for trying to present evidence to get to the truth. Isn't a moderator suppose to be objective? Particularly on such a "truth" website as this. I guess it depends on who's truth!

Agent openly admitted to a mistake, and you attack him, accusing him of intentionally making stuff up, and that is flat out wrong. It's one thing to counter with your own position, but to resort to childish trash-talking is immature at best.

I think agent deserves an apology from both of you for being such asses towards him.

Yes we should be thankful for him posting the same disinfo and deceptive crap over and over and over again.

[agentbluescreen]

So you admit making up crap by roughly looking at things and anything that cant be comprehended by your underdeveloped level of understanding is spun into some theory.

No I admit to having long been looking for more "crap" and having been a bit too hasty at having my long held suspicions about that mysterious blue tent suddenly more or less confirmed by having finally located an overall picture of the lawn and roadway (footpath) flightpath from whence whatever hit the building travelled across/came from.

Now, why are all those ambulances and emergency vehicles parked on the grassy edge of the lawn so far way, over there by the trees so far away from the rescue area? Why, after hotfooting air crash victims such a distance (at least 200' more than necessary) from the building, wouldn't they pop them straight into the well-equipped ambulances for immediate transfer to emergency rooms? What was it there that attracted all that emergency attention to that area of the lawn? Where they already getting hungry over there and needed a camp-kitchen tent?

What is all that brownish-grey confusion going on under the streetlamp next to that blue and white "tent"?

Why weren't ambulances driven right across the lawn right up to the heliport?

They must have all assumed that something more important-looking was going on there, immediately upon their arrival. Lotsa questions here.

[jimd3100]

Agentblankscreen- as for your PM to me I didn't even read it when I made my comment, and after I did read it, it was hard to make any sense of it(as usual) so I spent about 10 seconds on it. A missile did not hit the pentagon. A plane did. You've posted BS over and over on this board that isn't true, and I do not owe you or anyone else the rest of my life writing the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over. You use pictures from Russel Pickering's site and lie about them and what they mean. Russel is one of many that no longer have anything to do with the so called "truth" movement because they are honest and tell the truth. Russel Went with Dylan Avery after Dylan made loose change. Dylan got lots of flak(from serious researchers) for saying a missile hit the pentagon when there is NO EVIDENCE FOR IT NOR A SINGLE WITNESS. So they both went to Arlington to talk to as many people as they could and try and figure out what happened. What they found was a passenger jet hit the pentagon. That is why pieces of a PASSENGER jet was found at the pentagon. That is why the c 130 pilot reported that he watched the passenger jet as approached the pentagon, that is why the rescue crews went in and picked up the pieces of the bodies that were in the pentagon and found the luggage in the pentagon. But no planers hounded Russel and anyone else in the so called truth movement who "supported the official story" because they are assholes who can't get rid of the stupid theories and admit they were wrong and move on. Truth is not real high on the priority list. So I don't give two shits what any no planer thinks, I've watched you willfully misinformed do enough damage. You agentbluescreen babble on and on about your missile that no one saw and also post links to a movie by a couple of con artists that say a passenger jet flew over the pentagon. No missile, a passenger jet that flew over the pentagon and "fooled" everyone. Keep making the so called truth movement look retarded, but don't expect me to assist you in that.  So what is it? A missile? A flyover? How about some common sense? The planes were being used as missiles, and it was broad daylight. When Russel and Dylan went to Arlington a couple of idiots who are just like you folks who refuse to admit planes flew into buildings insisted they go to. They were working for you. You folks that refuse to face reality. They didn't want the truth movement to tell the truth that would be terrible, we want no plane at the pentagon. And so they have no choice. They have to admit a passenger jet APPEARED to hit the pentagon. But it flew over and fooled everyone. See? No plane at the pentagon. YAY! Guess what? They were already babbling that nonsense since 2005. This trip happened in Aug 2006. Final Cut was released shortly after and Russel was gone, tired of being harassed and called an "Operative".  No--he was honest and telling the truth, just like I've been trying to do except I'm going to tell you no planers to f*&k yourself. He's nicer than I am. We have the evidence we don't need your kook BS. Now these losers with their fly over are actively trying to get an old cab driver killed. It would be good for them. It will give them attention. They will never ever ever admit they are lying frauds. They want attention and are willing to put innocent people's lives at risk to get it. You and other no planers also will never ever admit a passenger jet hit. It doesn't matter that the plane parts recovered were from a passenger jet...yes they all were. It doesn't matter that the witnesses saw a passenger jet. It doesn't matter that a passenger jet is missing. Well, it matters to people care about what happened and want the truth. You agentbluescreen try and say Jim Hoffman is a friend of George Soros  another lie and say certain sites that tell the truth are "bootlicking disinfo". I deleted that post because Jim Hoffman is telling the truth about the pentagon and has nothing to do with soros. Yes, when you tell blantant lies about other people and good sites I will delete it. The No Plane theory started at the pentagon. It is a hoax. No one is stopping you or anyone else from posting your kook BS, but I get to post too. No planes at the WTC and CIT disinfo will not be posted on this forum. I'm not going to help you no plane fruitloops endanger INNOCENT people and slander them. If you want to post any other nutty theory you have go ahead and make 9-11 truth look as nutty as you want. You are all free to do what you want to make 9-11 truth a laughingstock, but I would advise you to think twice about bringing let's roll forum no victims/911 actors disgusting BS on here.
BTW-have you folks considered the evidence for the fly under and the 9-11 happened on 9-12 theories? It's certainly something worth looking into don't you think?.......

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=164982.msg1165479#msg1165479

[jimd3100]

The goal I had when I joined this forum was to do my little part to keep the 9-11 truth movement truthful and keep it from becoming the 9-11 kook movement which was an obvious goal for some.
I could show witness after witness after witness describing a passenger jet. But it wont matter. All it takes is one person who thought it was a missile and that is the only witness that matters to the 9-11 kook movement. Well, I'm sorry but we can't even find 1 witness that said that. So LBR decides that a witness that saw a plane out of the corner of his eye is a good witness for a missile. LOL! Amazing!

But not as amazing as his pathetic attempt at trying to show there was even reporting that day that no plane crashed at the pentagon.....

Yea, I could point out that the video he posted has been debunked long ago. That it is actually an edited clip edited by no planer disinfo frauds to deceive you. The reporter was asked a question. Someone said it crashed near the pentagon. No...it crashed at the pentagon. The unedited clip exposes all this but I've already done that about 100 times including on this very thread, so obviously it just doesn't matter. We want kook not truth.

In this very thread...


However I'm tired of showing how you keep getting duped and go to kookville, so I'm thinking of not only joining you but performing a 9-11 coup.

My plans for a 9-11 kook/truth movement coup:

I've been posting and showing all the people who were at the pentagon, some who nearly died from Jet Fuel in their lungs, tons of witnesses, on and on. I now realize what a waste of time it all is. Because no one cares about these people. They "support the official story".  I'm thinking  I might abandon my goal, and not only join you but be the leader/expert/grandpooba of the kook movement.

Pay no attention to this subversive.......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kOhaIg4e_k


The 9-11 kook movement has always pointed out that they have asked one person who was there. April Gallop. And I think we can all agree that if we were sitting in an office on the first floor and a huge boom happened we would naturally think a plane flew into our office. But not so with April. She assumed it was a bomb, and while grabbing her kid and getting out she noticed no plane parts. What more would a kook movement need for obvious evidence that it was a bomb and the plane parts were planted? There is also more good news, for my coup. Being a kook movement member I don't just love videos, but celebrities. That's what separates me from the sheeple. They put celebrities before videos. What fools! And I believe April will be up for a best supporting actress nomination in a conspiracy show after the excellent performance shown just before the 27 minute mark of the show......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrZ14NRbT-s

Add one more celebrity to the kook movement.

I will soon unleash my coup and be ruler of the 9/12 kook movement!

9/12? You ask? Yes, for years we kooks have been putting up with "fake truthers" supporting the "official story" with "planes hitting buildings" and "9/11 happened on 9/11" and so on. This "supporting the official story" nonsense will cease. I will not only proclaim 9/11 happened on 9/12 I will have videos that prove it. One of them the beloved pentagon video the "fake truthers" fell for.
This is proof..see for yourself...


I will show my credentials for being a 9/12 kook movement leader with my amazing and scientifically proven Fly Under theory(which I will refuse to call a theory)

The Fly Under Theory-this proves the plane flew under the pentagon and fooled everyone:
1. No one saw a plane fly over the building-this alone proves the Fly Under since we know it couldn't fly into the building so Under is where the evidence leads us.
2. Plane parts were found which proves they were planted
3. Work crews just finished working on the same place the plane hit-working on the super duper secret tunnel that the plane flew into and fooled everyone.
4. Several people saw the plane go so low just before "impact" that they thought it hit the lawn-proof it flew into the secret tunnel and fooled everyone.
5. The plane was not seen on radar by ATC after it reached the pentagon, which proves it flew under the pentagon through the super secret tunnel.
6. The light poles were planted to create a fake flight path to fool everyone just for fun.
7. A CIA agent gave the signal to an undercover agent disguised as a cab driver to push the garage door opener to open the secret tunnel at the perfect moment. The sign was a brick thrown through the cabs window. You might ask "why not just have the CIA agent open the super secret tunnel door?" The answer: "To cause confusion."
8. The c130 pilot did not see the passenger jet fly over the pentagon. Duh- Because it flew under it.
9. No one in the high rises or roof tops saw the passenger jet fly over the pentagon. Duh- because it flew under the pentagon.
10. Every witness at the scene supports the Fly Under because they all saw the plane fly into the pentagon which proves they were fooled. No one saw it fly over. Duh -it flew under.

I will have my 9-12 kook movement site set up and able to take orders for my Fly Under DVDs(which is a scientifically proven fact based on independently confirmed interviews and research) I already have on the record several endorsements and will banish naysayers to the fake truthers/enemies list.

With my Fly Under videos and 9-12 website I will make at least $100 a year which is approximately $100 more a year than I'm making now. I will finally get the money I deserve. And when I proclaim anyone using the term 9-11 is supporting the official story everyone will either go along with this or be outed as an agent who supports the official story. I will then finally get the attention I have so desperately wanted all these years. My coup will then be complete and I, Jimd3100 will be ruler of the 9-12 Kook Movement. I will have attention and make hundreds of dollars in the process.
 
I thought the Fly Over was funny at first, but Jesse Ventura showed the joke was on me.

Jimd3100 future grand pooba of the 9-12 kook movement

9-11 theories are fun and entertaining, especially if they are offensive

"911 Actors?"
http://letsrollforums(DOT)com/911-actors-flight-11-t20996.html

The (.) in the links have been replaced with the word "DOT" in order to not link directly due to the top secret advanced kook research that needs to be protected.

Here are some quotes from kook researcher Phil Mayhem/The PodFather, from his Let's Bowl forum:

"The 9/11 Passenger stories are all lies -
This is really some excellent information. How the passengers missed scrutiny over the last 9 years is a testimony to their brainwashing and how it works on us through so many levels." - Phil Mayhem- Let's Bowl forum
http://letsrollforums(dot)com/911-actors-flight-11-t20996.html

"The main thing to remember about this story is that it is just that. A made for TV story, lies and fictions. There is no disrespect at all when saying this because it never happened." - Phil Mayhem- Let's Bowl forum

Phil Mayhem then points out one of the Actors involved is "Plane Hugger" Mike Rivero from whatreallyhappened.com who plays a victim of the 9-11 attacks:

"9/11 Passenger Mystery Unraveling? Is Mike Rivero, John Wenckus of Flight 11?"
1. Rivero believes a commercial plane with passengers hit the pentagon, and those who say otherwise are disinformation.
2. Rivero believes commercial airliners with passengers & hijackers hit the WTC, and those who say otherwise are disinformation
Obviously anyone who is part of 9/11 and is so wrong on the issue of a passenger plane hitting the Pentagon as well as being wrong about commercial planes hitting the WTC, simply cannot be trusted. -Phil Mayhem Let's Bowl Forum

"So is this Mike Rivero and did he play the part of one of the passengers on 9/11?
There needs to be a real investigation into this to get to the bottom of it once and for all. Someone needs to verify that all these people really existed." -- Phil Mayhem

"Could it be that Mike Rivero had a vested interest in preaching the lie that a plane hit the Pentagon? Or the lie that commercial airliners with people and hijackers aboard crashed into the world trade center? It does indeed appear that Mike Rivero now had a vested interest in this limited hangout of obfuscation and thwarting Justice for the crimes of 9/11." - Phil Mayhem/The PodFather Let's Bowl Forum

"And at this point Mike Rivero needs to prove he ISN'T John Wenckus. And John Wenckus's family needs to come forward to clear this up." - Phil Mayhem

"CNN started taking down hundreds of pictures on the CNN memorial within a few weeks of me publishing the Mike Rivero, John Wenckus look-a-like thread." - Phil Mayhem Let's Bowl forum

Of course Ted and Barbara Olson are a favorite target of the Kook Movement, Phil Mayhem has discovered that saying Barbara Olson died on 9-11 supports the official story, so you know what that means. They are still married after she had plastic surgery and is now another "actor" playing his new wife......

"Is Barbara Olson of Flight 77 and Lady Evelyn Booth the same person?
I guess this information regarding Barbara Olson is even more relevant now, in light of this latest look-a-like contest between Mr. Rivero and John Wenckus." -Phil Mayhem

"The similarity between the two wives of Ted Olson is remarkable. Is Lady Booth really Barb Olson after plastic surgery?" - Phil Mayhem

A Mod at Phil Mayhem's site points out that the NWO by skimping on plastic surgery on B Olson's lower earlobe exposes the charade....

"I think they're both pretty hot! check out what little you can see of her earlobe. they are IDENTICAL!" -Kook Mod at Let's Bowl Forum
http://letsrollforums(DOT)com/barbara-olson-9-11-t20525.html

Phil Mayhem applauds this excellent discovery:

"Ya, I agree. Lady Booth is a 'dead-ringer' for 'Babs Olsen'" - Phil Mayhem

Simon Hack and his Kook research dovetails with the Kook research of Phil Mayhem and the "Actors" not Victims "evidence":

911 ACTORS - Posted by Simon Hack
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6aPvJSQtmoE

Of course all this destroys the official story, but that would mean the Naudet brothers documentary which captured 9-11 as it happened at the WTC is nothing more than an elaborate Hollywood production. And we all know who runs Hollywood. Is there any evidence of this? We Artists at CON put aside our jealousy and decided to look into this and have uncovered proof that it was indeed a production and that actors were involved. In fact we will now reveal one of those actors.



Famous Actor Joe Pesci plays the part of an FBI agent. You can see him at the 15:00 mark of the following clip, and then hear his classic line of "This aint f**king Disneyland let's go!".   (it takes a little while to load but it's worth it)
http://www.veoh.com/search/videos/q/9%252F11+%5BPart+3%5D#watch%3Dv155759313JTf3QH7

Also this Naudet Brothers Hollywood production exposes the lie at the pentagon. I know what you are thinking...."How can you bring pentagon "research" into the Naudet Brothers movie...they were at the World Trade Center?" Ahhh, you underestimate the obsession of true Kook research.....check it out....

At the 12:22 mark of the following clip of the Naudet Brothers Production the Clock says 9:30 And the Rookie Firefighter is talking about the pentagon being on fire. Well, the pentagon according to the official story was hit at 9:37 - 9:38. His clock says it's 9:30 and he already knows about the pentagon strike. This information alone should keep the kook movement busy for 7-10 years.
12:22 mark clock says 9:30
http://www.veoh.com/search/videos/q/9%252F11+%5BPart+2%5D#watch%3Dv15575930PaXFz5yX

Just trying to help 9-11 truth!/kook

[jimd3100]

Theories that destroy the official story? I've got tons of them, The WTC downed by nanothermite? Not hardly...it was huffed and puffed and then P Diddy knocked them down. Proof from a legal document that P Diddy "knocked down" the WTC......

Page 11/20.......



http://www.radaronline.com/sites/radaronline.com/files/Sean%20John%20P%20Diddy%20Combs%20TROu.pdf

thanks to a tip from SHURE

[agentbluescreen]

BTW-have you folks considered the evidence for the fly under and the 9-11 happened on 9-12 theories? It's certainly something worth looking into don't you think?.......

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=164982.msg1165479#msg1165479

That's not fair Jimd3100, you left out the well-known "Secret Boeing XTReme-720˚ contest won by Hani Hanjour Theory":

[iks83]

yup the disinfo artists always equate a plane at the pentagon with Hani actually did it... doesnt get more retarded and obvious that they dont give a hoot about the truth.

[ghost hacked]

yup the disinfo artists always equate a plane at the pentagon with Hani actually did it... doesnt get more retarded and obvious that they dont give a hoot about the truth.

One day it's going to slap you so hard in the face you won't have any choice but to wake up.  Hopefully you will wake up before that happens. Because then it will be to late.

[shure]

yup the disinfo artists always equate a plane at the pentagon with Hani actually did it... doesnt get more retarded and obvious that they dont give a hoot about the truth.

.

[agentbluescreen]

"I mean it was like a Cruise missile, with wings.
It went right there, and slammed
right into the Pentagon.

Huge explosion, great ball of fire
smoke started billowing out"

CNN live on-air witness, 9/11/2001

So knowing all that we now know about the depth of field, field dimensions, scanning rate and air velocity calculations and the two exclusionary masks of each camera within the field and assuming we both do assume a 155 foot or a 20 foot (or other) object to be hidden by editing within known frame rates let's go back to the Italian arcoiris.tv investigation video and see if/how they determined which frames were missing and or counted the missing frames:

First before making this I also went back to the originals on youtube for a closer look
1of2   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L75Gga92WO8
2of2   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAaP4Z3zls8

aside from resolution there are no differences between the originals and the arcoiris.tv frame samples.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhkQDXlSdMY

Second, lets discuss standard old analog (not modern digital) NTSC surveillance frame rate technology. The NTSC STANDARD is 30fps so both the camera would capture and any attached monitor would display frames each 1/30th of a second. Scientific fact establishes that this would (conservatively) capture 14-18 frames of a 450' distant horizontal object moving on that axis across a 450' half-width visual aperture at 500+ mph. Any regular VCR WOULD ALSO record that frame rate, but a surveillance recorder, in order to hold more data on the tape would use both the slowest possible tape speed, the longest tapes AND perhaps also an analog divider TO SAVE FEWER FRAMES. There are limited inline-analog electronic processing choices in this regard. They would (and many did) have to choose either a somewhat jerky divide by 2 = 15fps or a very lousy double-divided, divide by 4 = 7.5fps .  At 7.5fps you lose things at 50-some mph which is slower than any pitchers arm so we can rule that out, no security officer would find any rate lower than this acceptable for investigative/evidentiary purposes, so these recordings are certainly doctored.

The "video" frames in this nearly useless "Edison Girly Slide Show" Judicial Watch release are 1 frame per second, so this is closest to a divide by 32 or 0.9375 fps rate augmented by a "replaced" /16 or 1.875 fps missing "delayed" frame-error "fill frame". This results in one missing frame being half-off-time once in every 30 seconds=frames. The result of digital "time-window" downsampling system would be the same, so somewhere we should note a frame half out of sequential time/distances, with it's alternately, accurately timed compliment if the two cameras are not timebase H-locked (studio-mixer synched together -no way) and it is identifiable.

The other obvious fact is that one camera caught two distinct frames of smoke filled flightpath, which means that the overall size of the data object(s) were still far, far longer and more persistent than even any lousy, uselessly slow 1 second interval could hide!  

The corollary to that simple fact establishes that since one cannot choose exactly WHICH 1/64ths of a minute (.9ths second) that the camera will capture and show one STILL has to delete frames showing any unwanted object in front of that smoke,(and the smoke with them) OR OTHER UNWANTED EVIDENCE.

The other unfortunate corollary to my earlier somewhat lame "visible masks" hypothesis is that at this slow of a frame rate you could hide a 500 foot long aircraft moving at 250 mph in a 450' half-aperture. But, strangely, that is not what these criminals did - they wanted it to "show something", and this turns out to have been their most incriminating mistake!

So let's draw out a frame table spreadsheet to see if we can get a better analysis of the missing or added images in these two (likely) doctored videos, (using the arcoiris.tv document as the reference from timestamp 3:55 to timestamp 4:25), I'll also include the frames that the later arcoiris team (oddly) designated as "missing" (in both?) to try to resolve the loss of time synchronization and debunk their theory, alleging that both videos were chopped.

For data identification I'm using a "smoke Rorshark test" method, describing the appearance of the smoke cloud to identify each photographic sample interval.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhkQDXlSdMY

SEC	Ticketcam (A)	Boothcam (B)	Sync A:B	Notes A	Notes B	Conclusion	arcoiris:
00	delayed	advanced	-2 : 0	2 frames missing	2 frames ahead	car wrong pos	A-ok : B-ok
01	delayed	advanced	-2 : 0	"	"	car wrong 2 frames	A-ok : B-ok
02	delayed	advanced	-2 : 0	"	"	car wrong 2 frames	A-ok : B-ok
03	delayed	advanced	-2 : 0	"	"	car wrong 2 frames	A-ok : B-ok
04	delayed	advanced	-2 : 0	"	"	car wrong 2 frames	A-ok : B-ok
05	delayed	advanced	-2 : 0	"	"	car wrong 2 frames	A-ok : B-ok
06	delayed	advanced	-2 : 0	"	"	car wrong 2 frames	A-ok : B-ok
07	delayed ?	advanced ?	-2 : 0 ?	generic	generic	possible dupes-nondescript	A-ok : B-ok
08	delayed ?	advanced ?	-2 : 0 ?	generic	generic	"	A-ok : B-ok
09	delayed ?	advanced ?	-2 : 0 ?	generic	generic	"	A-ok : B-ok
10	delayed ?	advanced ?	-2 : 0 ?	generic	generic	"	A-ok : B-ok
11	delayed ?	advanced ?	-2 : 0 ?	generic	generic	"	A-ok : B-ok
12	delayed ?	advanced ?	-2 : 0 ?	generic	generic	"	A-ok : B-ok
13	delayed ?	advanced ?	-2 : 0 ?	generic	generic	"	A-ok : B-ok
14	delayed ?	advanced ?	-2 : 0 ?	generic	generic	"	A-ok : B-ok
15	delayed ?	advanced ?	-2 : 0 ?	generic	generic	"	A-ok : B-ok
16	delayed ?	advanced ?	-2 : 0 ?	generic	generic	"	A-ok : B-ok
17	delayed ?	advanced ?	-2 : 0 ?	generic	generic	probable added generic frame(s) in A	A-ok : B-ok
18	delayed ?	advanced ?	-2 : 0 ?	generic	generic	21A should be HERE! (error sample)	A-ok : B-ok
19	delayed ?	curly smoke/fin 180'	-2 : 0 ?	generic	data	B is 200' advanced	A-ok : B-ok
20	delayed ?	FLASHcone/smoke	-2 : 0 ?	generic	data	B is 450' advanced	A-ok : B-XX
21	nose 80'	firecone	-2 : 0	1/2 data	data	possible fin = deleted frame in A	A-ok : B-XX
22	FLASHcone/smoke	blacklick	-2 : 0	data	data	unsynched	A-XX : B-ok
23	firecone	blackbeard	-2 : 0	data	data	unsynched	A-XX : B-ok
24	blacklick	blacknosebeard	-2 : 0	data	data	unsynched	A-ok : B-ok
25	blackbeard	blackmount	-2 : 0	data	data	unsynched	A-ok : B-ok
26	blacknosebeard	blackhorn	-1 : 0	data	odd original frame	blackhorn = deleted frame in A	A-ok : B-ok
27	blackmount	spikebeard	-1 : 0		data	unsynched	A-ok : B-ok
28	spikebeard	FLASH	0 : 0	missing blackhorn next:	odd original frame	FLASH = deleted frame in A	A-ok : B-ok
29	same	same	0 : 0	data	data	all synched thereafter	A-ok : B-ok

The only conclusions we can draw from this comparison are:

Arcoiris.tv were correct about an error but failed to note that the cop car is unsynched by two frames, perhaps assuming that the camera was hidden, behind, outside the ticket box. It's far more usual to contain it behind a window in the same box which gives us an obvious two frame starting error at -29 seconds.

Arcoiris then simply deleted two frames from each later to get the tally back, ignoring the "blackhorn" and second "FLASH" frame errors!

Our two frame error means the Ticket-cam frameset is missing two frames and the Booth-cam frameset has two extra frames. There's no obvious nor verifiable reason to assume that they are both missing two frames as arcoiris did. This does not explain the cop-car error, nor line-up (synch) the 5 remaining frames.

The elusive (but expected somewhere) 1 error in 30 frames caused by 1/32 division (1/16th delay-replacement) appears to occur at Booth-cam frame 21 which has no equivalent in the other frameset sequence. This shows us the (smoke?) "cone" at field edge. It is shine, cockpit window and horizontal-band colorless. Some have noted a "dark blue" object in front of it, from higher res PBPR .pdf stills. Since this is the first "data frame" in the Ticket-cam frameset it's compliment could easily have been replaced by a generic frame in the Booth-cam set or simply have been an opportune "error frame" (one in 30 downconversion) half-delay frame. (more likely).

In addition we have a third obviously missing but easily replaced frame at the beginning of the data sequence on A missing exactly where we would expect it to be. (the curlysmoke/fin 180') Even more frames of the beginning events could easily also be missing since all before them are generic.

After all of this painstaking analysis it is astounding to clearly show that this leaves us with two more clearly missing yet totally unexpected frames in very, very strange places. these frames could only have been deleted to disguise or hide the nature of the explosions!

In any examination of Cruise missile multi warhead systems (MWS) aside from the three depth "penetration" explosions by high-incendiary DU hardbacked-isolated "core" warhead (1 out front and then 2 more deeply inside of the "high value" target structure) there is also a lesser know advance-flack system that deploys smaller propelled detachable flack munitions either at smaller ground targets, earlier en-route or terminally at the target itself, preceding arrival to soften it up.

So, the famous slightly darkened "fin" may just have been a touch-up of that frame, designed to make the flack appear as the plane and the initial ground-wave cone may well have been the generator and chemicals storage sheds blowing up out in the yard in front of the building before the missile arrived where more frames are deleted before the second FLASH.

Nothing else explains any need to cut out frames 6 to 10 seconds after the "plane crash", unless there were bombs planted there that detonated ahead of time! - and the "aircraft" arrived later!




V

[Jackson Holly]

At the risk of being excoriated as a complete dumbass ... and I readily admit that I
am not nearly as informed as the other posters on this difficult topic ... and thanks
to all for a great thread!

Just in case you may have missed this:

http://rinf.com/alt-news/911-truth/flight-77-black-box-data-analysis/19/#

~~~
Flight 77 – Black Box Data Analysis
"Calum Douglas is an engineering student at Oxford Brookes University. An active 911 Truth researcher and lecturer, he is working with pilotsfor911truth.org. In a recent breakthrough using the ‘Freedom of Information’ act he has gained access to raw Black Box data from the flight recorder of Flight 77, that allegedly struck the Pentagon. It has subsequently been decoded and analysed. Here Calum presents his findings."
~~~

Now this is from 2007 but will be important if you have never seen it. After viewing this and considering the E-4B over DC at crash-time, I now think 77 was remotely controlled - probably (but not necessarily) from the E4-B.

http://www.rense.com/general76/missing.htm

[citizenx]

Could these aerial maneuvers be performed even (or, perhaps, especially) remotely?

Could the plane have performed them?  Do they violate the flight characteristics of the plane?

By computers?  At the time?

I am still deeply skeptical, and I don't believe pilots for 9/11 truth are necessarily disinfo artists.

I still have big doubts about all this.

NOTE:  Again, I am speaking specifically of the Pentagon "plane" and not the planes at the WTC or Shanksille.

[agentbluescreen]

In spite of having become much more interested in the clear plausibility of the missile theory, I have not/never abandoned the plane theories. It's just that the plane theory is simply impossible "good"(sic) luck, beyond any hope of being reasonable.

Virtually every pilot and engineer on earth views it as being as possible (as stated) as winning a lottery without a ticket.

Of course Cruise missile guidance electronics fitted to a dummy (smaller) plane (at slower speed) is a whole other thing.

I'm just more certain than ever that something stinks very badly with the Likudnik Pentagon Theory, thats been hidden in plain view.

[Kilgore Trout]

Could these aerial maneuvers be performed even (or, perhaps, especially) remotely?

Could the plane have performed them?  Do they violate the flight characteristics of the plane?

By computers?  At the time?

I am still deeply skeptical, and I don't believe pilots for 9/11 truth are necessarily disinfo artists.

I still have big doubts about all this.

NOTE:  Again, I am speaking specifically of the Pentagon "plane" and not the planes at the WTC or Shanksille.

You saw some sort of plane at Shanksville?

[citizenx]

You saw some sort of plane at Shanksville?

 

[Jackson Holly]

Ooops ... sorry that video I posted has been taken down:

quote:

Just in case you may have missed this:

http://rinf.com/alt-news/911-truth/flight-77-black-box-data-analysis/19/#

It was the original presentation ... here is another vid that reports the
same info from the 77 Flight Data Recorder:

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/

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


I believe it would have been too risky to hit the pentagon with anything other than a plane ...
eyewitnesses, possibility of someone getting photos/vids and of course the emergence of
black box data. (This data could have been planted dis-info but I doubt it.)

It is much more logical and safe on their parts to fly an especially rigged plane via remote.
Why was the E-4B in the air over DC that morning if not to provide guidance service etc,
for the operation?

One other simple thing lends real credence to there being a plane ... there WERE plane parts
on the scene, on the lawn and at point of impact. We have to believe that they were planted
very quickly right after impact to believe 'missile' theory ... and this is not plausible/logical/believable.

[jimd3100]

Agentbluescreen posts lies. Nearly every post he makes is filled with lies and disinfo. It's obvious at this point it is done on purpose. Like this one just recently posted where he quotes a witness who seems to have seen a missile.

"I mean it was like a Cruise missile, with wings.
It went right there, and slammed
right into the Pentagon.

Huge explosion, great ball of fire
smoke started billowing out"

CNN live on-air witness, 9/11/2001

What he did was edit words from a live witness on air on the day shortly after it happened. What this person saw was an American Airlines jet. Not a cruise missile. He used the cruise missile part as an analogy. Obviously agentblankscreen knows this because that is the part he leaves out of the quote("I saw an American Airlines jet") so this is a deliberate attempt to deceive anyone reading his quote and proves agentbluescreen deliberately posts no plane disinfo and is a liar. Here is the actual video of this witness as it happens and proves what I just wrote, and proves agentbluescreen posts deliberate lies:

Here is where agentbluescreen got the quote-so you all tell me-is this person saying he saw a plane or a missile-and did agentbluescreen edit his words to deliberately deceive?
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1jqaz_pentagon-eyewitness-mike-walter_news

Flight 77 – Black Box Data Analysis
"Calum Douglas is an engineering student at Oxford Brookes University. An active 911 Truth researcher and lecturer, he is working with pilotsfor911truth.org. In a recent breakthrough using the ‘Freedom of Information’ act he has gained access to raw Black Box data from the flight recorder of Flight 77, that allegedly struck the Pentagon. It has subsequently been decoded and analysed. Here Calum presents his findings."
~~~

This is not recent and there were problems with the raw data, probably deliberate. However Frank Legge a scientist at the Journal of 9-11 studies with help from others have now fully decoded the data. A passenger jet hit the pentagon just as the data shows and the people saw and the rescue crews confirmed and the physical damage confirms and the plane parts confirm. At some point it would probably be best to accept reality and the reality is planes flew into buildings on 9-11. These planes were passenger jets.

Their paper can be read here.....

A new paper by Dr. Frank Legge and Warren Stutt has been published at the Journal of 9/11 Studies. This is entitled “Flight AA77 on 9/11: New FDR Analysis Supports the Official Flight Path Leading to Impact with the Pentagon.”
http://911blogger.com/news/2011-01-08/new-paper-journal-911-studies

Here is Frank Legge's website...
http://www.scienceof911.com.au/

Warren had found that the FDR file had not previously been fully decoded because there was a deficiency in the decoding software.
http://www.scienceof911.com.au/pentagon/rebuttal

quote:
It was the original presentation ... here is another vid that reports the
same info from the 77 Flight Data Recorder:

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/

The reason the group pilots for 911 truth exists is not to tell you the truth. They exist to convince you a plane did not hit the pentagon. If they admit a plane hit the pentagon they would be out of business. This group is a waste of time to anyone that has seriously looked into them. They are basically a joke. There are people in the so called truth movement who are charlatans and have self interests and other motives other than the truth. It is an unfortunate fact that there are many lies told in the name of "9-11 truth"
and anyone would be wiser to be aware of this fact.

A recent Frank Legge post on 9-11 blogger:

Randy, I couldn't help noticing you included the assertion by Pilots for 9/11 truth that the plane could not have withstood the final pull-up, and you also referred to ground effect and the hole in the wall. These questions have proven answers.

The fact that you listed these three issues shows you have not done your homework yet. Pilot's calculation has been shown to be grossly out by several researchers. In fact the pull-up does not stress the plane severely at all. The maths required to prove that is simple. You can easily work it out for yourself. The fact that Pilots have not retracted that assertion is a disgrace.

Similarly ground effect is a non-issue. The faster a plane goes the less is the ground effect. Who is still pushing that theory?

Similarly the hole in the wall was estimated to be 96 feet wide, considerably wider than enough to admit all the heavy parts of the plane. You would not expect the light parts to penetrate such a heavy wall. The debris outside, small pieces, appeared to be quite sufficient, as shown in numerous photographs and videos. Who is still saying the hole was not big enough?

These issues have been raised and discussed many times on 9/11 Blogger. You should not be surprised to be voted down when you bring up such tired old disproved arguments.
http://911blogger.com/news/2011-01-21/victoria-ashley-joins-911blogger-moderation-team#comment-244961

The no plane at the pentagon is a hoax. The No Plane theory started at the pentagon. It is a hoax. Planes flew into buildings on 9-11, they were passenger jets.

[citizenx]

The no plane at the pentagon is a hoax. The No Plane theory started at the pentagon. 

But why would you say this?

There were people saying this before Stubblebine.

I'm honestly just trying to understand.

What are the earliest instances of this theory and how are they connected to the Pentagon?

I would really like to hear what you have to say on this, and will at least pay it the respect of trying to confirm it myself.

[agentbluescreen]

Planes, Missiles, Bombs - I don't give a damn what it was they used!  
I do give a damn about what they have to hide 7-10 seconds after whatever "hit it" hit it.

The reason you are so rabidly and hatefully intent on desperately continuing to make it look like "bin Ladin hijackers" killed US servicemen and women in the Pentagon attack on 9/11 COULD ONLY BE INTENTIONED to stifle all honest independent investigation of them SPECIFICALLY TO maintain criminal "discipline in the ranks" to mass murderous war criminals and traitors and to continue to prevent our military from defending us against this traitorous-brass-mangecake criminal dictatorship.

V

[Dig]

Planes, Missiles, Bombs - I don't give a damn what it was they used!  
I do give a damn about what they have to hide 7-10 seconds after whatever "hit it" hit it.

The reason you are so rabidly and hatefully intent on desperately continuing to make it look like "bin Ladin hijackers" killed US servicemen and women in the Pentagon attack on 9/11 COULD ONLY BE INTENTIONED to stifle all honest independent investigation of them SPECIFICALLY TO maintain criminal "discipline in the ranks" to mass murderous war criminals and traitors and to continue to prevent our military from defending us against this traitorous-brass-mangecake criminal dictatorship.

V

HEY MONKEY...

PLEASE DROP THE BANANA!

http://www.foundationsmag.com/banana.html


jimd3100 does no such thing and exposes the truth in a way that makes it impossible to believe that "bin laden hijackers" killed US servicemen. You know this to be true, yet you continue to distort his stand in the matter. Just drop the banana already, it is a trap.

[Ruth]

You saw some sort of plane at Shanksville?

There were probably 2 at Shanksville.  One was a passenger jet that they were trying to hijack remotely (and failed to do so) and the other was the one sent to shoot it down.

That's why there was so much 'aircraft confetti' about the place.  I.e.: blown to smithereens at a great height and spread over a great distance.

[Dig]

There were probably 2 at Shanksville.  One was a passenger jet that they were trying to hijack remotely (and failed to do so) and the other was the one sent to shoot it down.

That's why there was so much 'aircraft confetti' about the place.  I.e.: blown to smithereens at a great height and spread over a great distance.

shanksville seems to be confirmed shoot down by Happy Hooligans who even got a metal for the patriotic action.

[Ruth]

But why would you say this?

Surely you can guess?

The Pentagon Attack is a major Achilles Heel of the whole 9/11 thing.  Right throughout the following years there have been any number of disinformation artists and people who have a specific agenda.  Why shouldn't those people be on this forum as well? Its just that some of them are a little more obvious than others    Sorry, but that's just life!

[citizenx]

Ruth,

I was referring to the idea that the "no plane at the Pentagon" idea started at th Pentagon, which I have seen no proof of, though definitley more-than-suspicious Pentagon figures (such as Stubblebine) have been championing the "Penta-con" theory -- whether their help was wanted or not.

But, no disrespect, Ruth I wanted to hear jim's answer in his own words, and (no) I'm honestly asling a question, and I'm willing to accept jim's response as long as I can confirm it independently.  I actually would like some closure on this one aspect of the 9/11 investigation on which many of us around here (not just agentbluescreen) have questions.

And I'd really like to tone down the rhetoric a notch.  I'm quite willing to start with my own. It's never too late for people that are all basically on the same side to have a collegial and clear conversation about this relatively minor yet important piece of the puzzle (and it is a puzzle, on that I think we can all agree).

So, I'm kinda shooting for a do-over, and I hope my questions will be taken in the spirit in which they are intended.

Peace out.

[agentbluescreen]

But why would you say this?

There were people saying this before Stubblebine.

I'm honestly just trying to understand.

What are the earliest instances of this theory and how are they connected to the Pentagon?

I would really like to hear what you have to say on this, and will at least pay it the respect of trying to confirm it myself.

The reason the Cointelpro artists always claim "it came out of the Pentagon" is because of their desperate, rational, guilty, hateful fear of and certainty that exposing the criminality of the noble elite warlords is the only way that this evil beast of their Skull and Bones tinpot-brass-mangecake tyranny will ever be easily "decapitated" from the troops that they so desperately need to defend themselves from the people with.

Anyone who thinks this change to "Glasnost and Perestroika" in the UZSR will come about by genteel political change is daydreaming in 5D. This "Joint Chiefs Mob" ARE professional, nuclear-armed terrorists, you have to toss these sorts into brigs or chase them out of the country.

Look at the USSR, Greece, Tunisia and now Egypt - it's decapitating the military-fascist command that is ALWAYS the "coup" that overthrows corrupt regimes.

[citizenx]

Anyone who thinks this change to "Glasnost and Perestroika" in the UZSR will come about by genteel political change is daydreaming in 5D

Well, I'm definitley a dreamer.  Always have been.  In grade school I got straight A's and skipped a grade and still teachers had the gall to say "X is a day-dreamer."  Bastards.

Anyway, I'm just trying to turn over a new leaf.  I haven't changed my opinions at all, just my language.

And, really, I still want to hear jim's answer. I've heard almost everybody else's.

[agentbluescreen]

Yeah I know more often than not "revolutions" almost never work.  "Meet the new boss - same as the old boss."

Still anyone who thinks they'll win a revolution without the troops on "their side" is doomed.

Sorry to butt in. 

[agentbluescreen]

Calling people stupid names is not discussion, intelligent debate nor research..

All I did was copy the witness statement from the arcoiris.tv video which, if either of you had watched it or even bothered to glance at or even dare comment about my thorough debunking of it, (the main substance of the post) you should have easily realized.

I haven't EVER called JIM anything. I merely pointed out how counterproductive this sort of a malicious, intransigent and brainwashed, single-minded, closed-minded, name calling attitude is, and what a devastating impact such repugnant, immature and inconsiderate misbehavior has on supportive discussion, the evaluation of research, constructive investigation and the battle to obtain deliberately hidden truth in the face of concealment by an obscure and heavy web of coerced and planted lies.

I have no bias against any theory, just because I suggested that a missile or advanced guided aircraft system is a likely explanation for the deleted frames doesn't mean that I said that there was "no plane" if you had bothered to read the post you'd notice I also suggested bombings ahead of it - it is you who won't put down your bananas for any second to see any other points of view nor possibilities.

I don't want to hold on to the word of any witness that they control, or any flight recorder they've handed out or any video or animation cartoon  they've produced without a full and formal, normal NTSB INVESTIGATION - it's you who do.

Col. George Nelson, MBA, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Former U.S. Air Force aircraft accident investigator and airplane parts authority. Graduate, U.S. Air Force War College. 34-year Air Force career. Licensed commercial pilot. Licensed airframe and powerplant mechanic. Essay:

"In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft -- and in most cases the precise cause of the accident. ... The government alleges that four wide-body airliners crashed on the morning of September 11 2001, resulting in the deaths of more than 3,000 human beings, yet not one piece of hard aircraft evidence has been produced in an attempt to positively identify any of the four aircraft. On the contrary, it seems only that all potential evidence was deliberately kept hidden from public view. … With all the evidence readily available at the Pentagon crash site, any unbiased rational investigator could only conclude that a Boeing 757 (or at least AA 77) did not fly into the Pentagon as alleged."

The flight recorder data that was handed out that shows perfect adherence to a flightpath that many regard as impossible to fly and that disagrees with what many witnesses saw shows that the plane it came from's Cockpit Door was never opened once during the flight.

I want a full and thorough, deep and painstaking investigation and Justice.

And Truth and Justice, are a bunch of bananas none of us had better ever lose a taste for.

What was shown on the three missing frames of that other video?

[Jackson Holly]

^ ^ ^

Good post ABS ... and if I am reading you correctly you are saying that the evidence shows that it was probably a rigged plane flown by remote?

That, as I say, has been my own conclusion. I know we must consider that the black box data might be dis-info ... but it was a hard-fought battle over about six years to get the data via FOIA. It was raw 'encrypted' data and it was very difficult to decipher ... but does show the near-impossible loop-de-loop approach and killer dive into the 'reinforced' area of the pentagram. And I believe it is consistent with the radar data. The data stream stops, however, a few seconds before impact, leaving open the possibility in some people's minds of a missile being fired from the plane and a pull-up and fly-over. There is a lot of discussion that such a fly-over is impossible ... and I tend to buy that assertion.

I believe the data is real ... why would the conspirators release the loopy, time wasting, impossible dive data? Wouldn't they take more pains to make it look a little more plausible that their boy, Hanjour, was piloting?

It only makes sense to me that they flew the AA 757(?) into the rigged area of the pentagram via remote control from the E4B ... and most of the damage to the building was from pre-set explosives.

[agentbluescreen]

^ ^ ^

Good post ABS ... and if I am reading you correctly you are saying that the evidence shows that it was probably a rigged plane flown by remote?

That, as I say, has been my own conclusion. I know we must consider that the black box data might be dis-info ... but it was a hard-fought battle over about six years to get the data via FOIA. It was raw 'encrypted' data and it was very difficult to decipher ... but does show the near-impossible loop-de-loop approach and killer dive into the 'reinforced' area of the pentagram. And I believe it is consistent with the radar data. The data stream stops, however, a few seconds before impact, leaving open the possibility in some people's minds of a missile being fired from the plane and a pull-up and fly-over. There is a lot of discussion that such a fly-over is impossible ... and I tend to buy that assertion.

I believe the data is real ... why would the conspirators release the loopy, time wasting, impossible dive data? Wouldn't they take more pains to make it look a little more plausible that their boy, Hanjour, was piloting?

It only makes sense to me that they flew the AA 757(?) into the rigged area of the pentagram via remote control from the E4B ... and most of the damage to the building was from pre-set explosives.

With 2.3 trillion dollars in hand to finance your deception and 10+ trillions more at stake anything, including the most deceptive-ever custom built phony "scaled-down plastic 757" decoy is possible. Elementary intuition tells me that the one thing they would never tolerate risking was a massively destructive EL AL chemical weapons tanker-style crash, with plenty of plane left over, like the one in Amsterdam, that would have massively destroyed and completely obliterated the whole building area it hit and disturbed the pictures in Rumsfeld's office. Neither would they ever risk allowing any crazed, inexperienced radical-Muslim yahoo to pilot a real hijacked AA Flight 77 757 into their golden goose, even merely to whack some auditors - he could all too easily have "missed" or gone down through the roof on any one side and really done a really colossal amount of real damage, starting a conflagration of fires that could not even be accessed by fire crews to be put out on that stupidly, idiotically ill-designed inaccessible-core donut-building.

You want to tell me that one of these (and all that monstrous landing gear and whole wing in the sky above it):



only did that? (hole next to column




and they only find one rim, no landing gear, no wings or tail, two engine parts and a few scraps small enough to carry by hand? Then there's a later huge demolition quality explosion among the shoestringed wreckage, deep inside the single floor affected well past the only severed column in the back of E ring, under the beginning of D ring that deflects the ceiling upward and takes out 6 more columns? Then there's yet another punch out detonation beyond intact pillars again under C ring that takes out 2 plus 4-5 more columns?

and the small diameter thing that comes out the other side looks like a cruise missile hardback chassis with a bent wing?



I now most strongly suspect that a controlled demo penetrator missile (and/or bombs) preceded a harmless dummy R/C plane. How much would it cost to trick-out an old A3?

Else why edit-out frames 7 seconds later?

[agentbluescreen]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L75Gga92WO8

Guess what? A second "unidentified flying object" actually appears on the left horizon in the "spikebeard" frame of this video folks...

and it definitely doesn't look like a jet.

[agentbluescreen]

In summation, after all this backbiting and justifiable controversial disagreement over the available evidence it appears that this is the logical conclusion that most accurately describes "What actually hit the Pentagon", based upon all the currently available hard physical evidence and witness statements. It is the only explanation that accommodates all points of view and obvious conjectures about all the criminal's motives and the discrepancies between the plane and missile points of view, and the abundantly missing evidence of recoverable 757-scale wreckage quantities or visible 757-scale impact damage. It also explains why the lost-757 airframe VIN has never been forensically identified. (and why all other evidence has been and remains concealed)

It seems apparent that despite upgrades to the side of the Pentagon building intended to be hit by the third "horn of the Ram" in phase two of the ZioNAZI's "Daniel Chapter 8 Show" it was still predetermined that a hit by the real "hijacked" Flight 77 Boeing 757 was simply out of the question. The Amsterdam accident had already established the vast destructive power of such an accelerated vehicle and payload and this was simply too devastating to countenance for this small, secondary "feature" of their planned charade. A smaller, lighter, purpose-built, much more maneuverable remote controlled, extensively camouflaged and modified A3 was commissioned for the task.

While this "safer" strategy would produce a much lesser, "controlled" level of damage to their headquarters with obvious secondary benefits, (exterminating mostly only the hated civilian auditors and their collected evidence) it also created a new problem, that of there not being anywhere near enough "deep" physical damage or wreckage for the scheme to be fully convincing. The solution to this was either to plant extra explosives in the building during construction or finishing or to augment the A3-decoy "air crash" with a secondary follow-on penetrator missile attack to simulate a much higher-energy 757 crash, while still keeping resulting damage within tightly controlled parameters.

The former "bombs and parts planting strategy" was simply unworkable since tight military security, civilian renovations contractors, managers, inspectors, engineers and contract workers would surely come upon or detect such obvious chicanery in the highly secured building. Only a secondary missile attack would accomplish the goal and it could not be (obviously) air launched from the A3 decoy which was intentioned as witness-bait nor by/from any other nearby plane creating a similar witness-problem.
 
The missile would have to be launched from the lawn.

Swapping the planes required a departure from the biblical-fascist script necessitating Flight 77 to be taken far off course, "lost" out west and it's clone "re-acquired" and shepherded back into the "host of the stars" headquarters by Cheney.  

The Judicial Watch videos clearly show us that they both were sloppily edited.

A) first, at before the A3 decoy impact (Ticketcam missing curlysmoke/fin) to hide the size of the A3 decoy, and

B) again at 7 seconds (Boothcam missing the blackhorn) after the A3-decoy's impact to hide ejected A3 decoy debris in it's unmasked blackhorn frame to detract from any 'missile' suspicions, and

C) edited again at 9 seconds to hide the depiction of that missile's transit across or arrival in the unmasked left field of view in the initial outdoor penetrator missile explosion missing-FLASH frame of the Boothcam set.

A missile arriving afterwards explains the deep damage and two deeper explosions on the first floor past the only missing pillar in the E ring and the cordite smell and high DU radiation readings and "decontamination" necessity.

[citizenx]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L75Gga92WO8

Guess what? A second "unidentified flying object" actually appears on the left horizon in the "spikebeard" frame of this video folks...

and it definitely doesn't look like a jet.

What do you mean by "spikebeard frame" and can you give a time for that?

[shure]

Guess what? A second "unidentified flying object" actually appears on the left horizon in the "spikebeard" frame of this video folks...

and it definitely doesn't look like a jet.

Shape shifters???