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

[agentbluescreen]

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

In the arcoiris.tv video it is the last frame before sync at Frame number 28 in the Ticketcam video (the one in the ticket dispenser that doesn't show the back of the parking ticket dispenser) This is called video "1 of 2", it is not the one tsken from the guard booth. The guard booth version of this frame (it's frame 27) doesn't show it because it has not wide enough view of the left field.

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

In the original Judicial Watch video 1 of 2 where it is (larger and) more visible, this frame occurs at 3:13

I use the term spikebeard because the smoke trails at this stage of the fire looks like a male Chinese/Oriental face with fine sharp-pointed beard.

The full explanation and proof of the Pentagon-Nazi "accessory to mass murder" criminal's  criminal frame editing perjury and obstruction of justice  chicanery is here

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=164982.msg1188300#msg1188300

This also makes the US FBI Director a knowing accessory to and willing accomplice in mass murder.

[agentbluescreen]

Correction - since I can't ask a mod

In the arcoiris.tv video it is the last frame before sync at Frame number 28 in the Ticketcam video (the one in the ticket dispenser that doesn't show the back of the parking ticket dispenser) This is called video "1 of 2", it is not the one tsken from the guard booth. The guard booth version of this frame (it's frame 27) doesn't show it because it has not wide enough view of the left RIGHT field. (further proof more frames were edited-out and replaced with (not enough) generic ones in the Ticket camera set -specifically the missing curlysmoke/fin frame on it, that also would have shown the tricked-out A3)

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

In the original Judicial Watch video 1 of 2 where it is (larger and) more visible, this frame occurs at 3:13

I use the term spikebeard because the smoke trails at this stage of the fire looks like a male Chinese/Oriental face with fine sharp-pointed beard.

The full explanation and proof of the Pentagon-Nazi "accessory to mass murder" criminal's  criminal frame editing perjury and obstruction of justice  chicanery is here

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=164982.msg1188300#msg1188300

This also makes the US FBI Director a knowing accessory to and willing accomplice in mass murder.

The key to analyzing the stolen/missing criminally deleted frames is that the smoke has a specific appearance that changes uniquely every second - therefore we know exactly what and when these criminals vainly tried to hide something. Which clues us in to what they were trying to hide.

[citizenx]

Crawled throught he last second of the JW video.  Didn't see this second "unidentified flying object", AB.

Can you post some stills?  If you can mark the "objects" in the frame or frames , it would really help.

Also, link for arcoiris.tv video not working -- or not working here in SK.  Do you have another link?

[agentbluescreen]

I'm sorry was really tired last night 1:36

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

the video is 3:16 LOL

[citizenx]

Is this the "second object" at 1:36 coming in at the very right end of the frame.



I had never noticed it before.

WTF!??

Okay.

Whatever the first obeject was, even the anti-no-plane-at-the-pentagoners have to explain what the hell that is.

Unless the entire JW video is invalid, one has to explain  how a plane could have been omitted and what the hell this second object is.

Personally, I had never given creedence to suggestions that more than one missile/object hit  the Pentagon that day, but this looks incontrovertible.  It was for that reason, that I was always skeptical of the flyover theories, but what the hell is this second object whihc appears to be moving toward the site of the explosion which has already taken place.

 

[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.

Umm...yeah unless there were two jetliners that crashed into the Pentagon that day.

So, I think if we are supporting the official version of the Pentagon attack, we should really call ourselves, "Five-Planers".

That's it, I'm finally on board the official version.  I am a "five-planer".

 

Not.

[agentbluescreen]

Is this the "second object" at 1:36 coming in at the very right end of the frame.



I had never noticed it before.

WTF!??

Okay.

Whatever the first obeject was, even the anti-no-plane-at-the-pentagoners have to explain what the hell that is.

Unless the entire JW video is invalid, one has to explain  how a plane could have been omitted and what the hell this second object is.

Personally, I had never given creedence to suggestions that more than one missile/object hit  the Pentagon that day, but this looks incontrovertible.  It was for that reason, that I was always skeptical of the flyover theories, but what the hell is this second object whihc appears to be moving toward the site of the explosion which has already taken place.

 

Well all the "wreckage", 600 feet away has already just landed, and That shure ain't a C 130

[citizenx]

Unless there's evidence of a C-130 hitting the Pentagon right after the, oh, first "object/missile" er...um jetliner.

Five plane theory.

(whistles)

[agentbluescreen]

Once again look at the 26 foot wide "green line" damage bottleneck, which is under the nose of this imaginary, illusory, gigantic "pretend-Flight 77-crash" vehicle.

Beyond the terminal, first "blue pillar splat-line" there is ONLY one red broken/missing column between two intact, slightly bent green ones! All others beside them are untouched and fully intact. Any shredded splattering outward remaining thing, that penetrated further than this  had to pass through that 26 X 10 foot bottleneck. Surely no 757 engines nor gear did, since the gear alone are by now certainly far more than their original 26 feet apart. A 757's engines are 38 feet apart.

Now if we use the WTC as an example we know that a massive titanium-steel 550 mph 757's jet engine (and even some aluminum wing) can easily cut clean through just two solid steel walls and 220 feet of building and keep right on going (at a hundred or so miles an hour) for a couple more city blocks, to say nothing of the two massive 6 wheeled landing-gear Cat-scale hydraulic dump-truck chassis next to them. We also know that a modest, not too deep concrete-rebar and "steel-pillar forest" core stops them dead.

There is no explanation that allows us to infer that the soft, central, largely empty, crushable and shreddable "pop-can" fuselage could penetrate further than those four powerful massive objects on either side of it.  In fact physics dictates that those four massive objects must continue to move straight and parallel to one another (or be randomly deflected outwards spreading sideways like pinballs) not converging inward into other splattering-together wreckage in a single ever-narrowing penetration 'cone' towards any single-end target-point.

You look at any impact crash and bouncing broken things hit each other dispersing each-other's forces and wreckage outwards, like the way a bullet mushrooms. You look at a bullet penetrating multiple barriers and each successive penetration creates a wider splatter of subsequent deeper damage field in the next layer behind it until the final, widest-splatter. The A3 shreds were done moving after taking out a whole forest of 16 tightly spaced pillars under the plane right at the blue line.

In fact the A3-decoy's engines and fuselage stopped right after/at the two pairs of blue line posts, and/or most of it's fuselage and engines apparently stopped at furthest at the second red post and blue line.

The larger scale superficial (limestone calcinating) outdoor "second white flash" damage and pinpoint penetration damages (2 more) just at and far beyond this point was caused afterwards by a smaller BROACH-MWS penetrating missile. The diagonal green-red-green "bottleneck" barrier was the extent of the A3 air crash damage, beyond which there should only have been fuel fire and/or maybe two more distinct engine/gear paths slightly further.  All of any A3-scale "plane-crash" wreckage had to have stopped, exactly just short of the orange-second incendiary detonation block damage.

The (remaining) two shaped pillar-blowing explosions and penetrations there and past there were the work of an AUP-MWS penetrating missile.

And the arching, nearby-launched 1:36 UFO was the "follow on" delayed flight of that missile, from that "tent" launcher.

The secondary DU-incendiary BROACH FLASH is also very, very important. By subsequently wetting the calcinated lime blocks afterwards with foam the firefighters caused them to release their whitish now-"slaked"-lime stored energy (from the missiles first 1000+ degree DU incendiary flash) releasing their stored heat into them, (hydrated lime) expanding and blowing many more of them off the exterior walls without the adjacent windows breaking. This simple chemical effect-trick quickly made it look afterwards like there were more-wider heavy exterior "impact points" (with no clear sliced masonry damage beneath).

[Jackson Holly]

Really ... come on ... one of you math whizzies ... compute it for us.

Just what are the chances that on 9/11 that dazed and confused cave

dweller perfectly flew that 757 into the Pentagon, with the Armed Forces,

backed by a greater outlay of investment over the past decades than

the rest of the world combined, standing by ... flew directly OVER the most highly

guarded airspace IN THE WORLD and put the nose point blank in the front door.

What, 100 Billion to One maybe? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?  Didn't happen!


HOWEVER! Now compute the fact that the PARTICULAR, EXACT area of impact

had been recently "Enforced" / "Reconstructed" by our military ... THAT particular

spot that Hanjour SPECIFICALLY risked the entire operation by doing a loop-de-loop,

impossible seat-of-the-pants maneuver to hit!

A million quadrillion to ONE?   

They massaged the area, set explosives, put everything incriminating there
and blew it the hell up.

[citizenx]

Any way you slice it, the Pentagon was complicit and (at least partly) responsible.

[mr anderson]

http://i1010.photobucket.com/albums/af223/dacitizen/JWUFO.png

Well all the "wreckage", 600 feet away has already just landed, and That shure ain't a C 130

You've got to be kidding right? That's 100% inconclusive! A little blips from a crappy rendered youtube video. It spawns a whole new avenue for theories about 9/11 & UFOs. Blips, blips everywhere... It must be part of the conspiracy, it has to

Anymore youtube videos with tents or blimps you want to admit as evidence for your pre-determined conclusion that it was a missile?

Seriously I've yet to hear you question the bonafide questions; Missing $2.3trillion (If you have, that should be your focus, along with why the Pentagon was hit to begin with). Forget WHAT hit it, you DON'T KNOW, I do NOT know BUT I KNOW that it shouldn't of been hit to begin with!

Apologies for the tone.. 'tis a passionate subject.  

[citizenx]

I don't think agentbluescreen or myslef are suggesting the second "unidentified flying object" for lack of a better word is an alien spacecraft, but maybe the "five planers" could use that as a sort of backup explanation.

[agentbluescreen]

You've got to be kidding right? That's 100% inconclusive! A little blips from a crappy rendered youtube video. It spawns a whole new avenue for theories about 9/11 & UFOs. Blips, blips everywhere... It must be part of the conspiracy, it has to

Anymore youtube videos with tents or blimps you want to admit as evidence for your pre-determined conclusion that it was a missile?

Seriously I've yet to hear you question the bonafide questions; Missing $2.3trillion (If you have, that should be your focus, along with why the Pentagon was hit to begin with). Forget WHAT hit it, you DON'T KNOW, I do NOT know BUT I KNOW that it shouldn't of been hit to begin with!

Apologies for the tone.. 'tis a passionate subject.  

The 'curly smoke with the fin' and a little "white cone" in exactly the same two government evidence videos in exactly the same parts of the photos and (proportional-scale) size of those two frame-corners of these evidence recordings have been cited by the government and all of us "planers" as certain, uncontrovertibly conclusive proof that a passenger-looking airplane, as described by the shocked witnesses, both near and far, hit the upgraded wall of the Pentagon Auditor's offices.

Those two barely identifiable flying objects, at their size position and scale in the evidence photographs have both been publicly cited and conclusively proven to have been certain evidence of the first aircraft by virtue of those two frames of duly captured, recorded and displayed government video evidence. I have no argument whatsoever with those two officially proven government facts of evidence shown in these two official government evidence video recordings.

However, unlike "Zapruder film" you don't EVER get such things as "scratches" on closed circuit evidence videos. The captured and recorded evidence frame is either there, complete and unaltered by retouching or it is not.

Here, below, I have proven that at least three evidence frame-photos were edited-out and removed from the Ticket Dispenser evidence camera's version of it's recorded government video evidence. The proof of that is plain, obvious and incontrovertible. First it strongly infers that most probably the corresponding "curly-smoke/fin" frame from the forward Ticket Dispenser camera (as we would suspect if something was amiss with the appearance of the fully visible airplane unmasked) had to have been removed from the Ticket Dispenser camera's frame set.

But far more damning indeed, is that it also establishes that two more frames from the official US government video evidence recording, 7 and 9 seconds after the first impact were also DEFINITELY deleted from the Ticket Dispenser evidence camera's frame set. Since the government evidence cameras are around 500 feet away, we have also seen that all of the evidence of airborne crash-debris things tossed in the air by the first aircraft collision settled to the ground in front of these government evidence cameras 500 feet away in under 5 seconds time. Yet, exactly 9 seconds later, the one unedited "spikebeard" government evidence frame-photo left in that Ticket Dispenser evidence camera frame set shows clear evidence of yet another flying projectile now riding into town! (shown at 1:36 above)

I dunno if you've ever been in a radar room, but "dude, we've got a second bandit!" here. I have not concluded that the Pentagon was hit by any one aircraft, it was in fact hit by two aircraft 9 seconds apart, as the evidence proves.

The proportional position, size and shape of the duly captured, duly recorded and duly displayed second flying aircraft shown in the government's evidence is unmistakably the aerial form of a Cruise or Harpoon missile, traveling airborne at a distance, speed and position that is on the same flight path as the aircraft before it was.

Only a second crash detonation outdoors could have produced the second blinding FLASH in the second clearly "extra frame-photo" of the Guard Booth evidence-camera's video frame set that is missing from (edited or removed out of) the Ticket Dispenser evidence-camera's video frame set.

And this government evidence is undoubtedly how that second aircraft got there:



As to why "some of the (disbursement auditing) Host of the Stars' had to be "struck down" in "the pleasant lands to the south and the east" I'd suggest you pose that question in the "KJV ONLY?" thread, to some Tory-Zionist more familiar with Daniel Chapter 8.

[citizenx]

I dunno if you've ever been in a radar room, but "dude, we've got a second bandit!" here.

Precisely.

[iks83]

Seriously agentbluescreen why are you posting the long ago debunked picture of the people carrying that emergency tent? Over and over and over again the same BS as if any new information doesnt reach you.

[agentbluescreen]

Seriously agentbluescreen why are you posting the long ago debunked picture of the people carrying that emergency tent? Over and over and over again the same BS as if any new information doesnt reach you.

LOL

I'd suggest you review this old section of the thread where your "tent" debunking is thoroughly and completely debunked.

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=164982.msg984497#msg984497
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=164982.msg986178#msg986178

The only thing I was wrong about then was the "Pegasys air drop" (Honest John tactic scenario) presumption derived from seeing the fat guy in the baggy grey coveralls in back of it. I was subsequently proven 100% accurate about where this smoking gun front-swing-door singed-skirt missile launcher had been planted on the lawn earlier that morning, to have been later photographed being hastily removed, however!




It's all as plain as the nose on your face, bud.

That's the sloped lawn, that's the guardrail, that's the "blue tent', that's the tree, those are the ambulances, that's the lamp-pole, and those are the guys in white shirtsleeves, standing around the area near where they had first, already, quickly moved that suspicious "tent" over to the pole from..

In fact the three of them on the walkway seem to be looking back over at it in this photo

[iks83]

Wow what you can see in a total blurry, bad quality picture is amazing! Still following your links I couldnt find anything that would debunk the tent that is carried around by people. Now you have tents there, you have people carrying those tents so tell me how exactly turn those tents into missile launchers.

[agentbluescreen]

Seriously agentbluescreen why are you posting the long ago debunked picture of the people carrying that emergency tent? Over and over and over again the same BS as if any new information doesnt reach you.

Perhaps you cannot tell from the smaller image that this lightweight front swing-up door erector-tube-launcher thing with the distinct heat-bulged burn marks on it's rear-lower skirts on the Pentagon lawn by the guardrail that morning, built on a wooden palette, is definitely no modern steel-sectional form of any sort of a standard 16' X 16' (+4' extras) military Korean War Era Tent Frame Insulated Sectional M-1948 Jamesway Hut. (which has an optional loose, layed-out on the dirt packing crate-pieces floor that's (without such weak flooring) big enough to park a Ford Expedition in)  Here is a better copy of the photo for your records:



It appears obvious it was out on the outer, worn brown patch by the walkway for firing (so it wouldn't leave a new burn mark on the grass, lined up with the decoy plane's flightpath), then dragged over to the first lamp pole, and then, when they noticed helicopters taking aerial pics it was dragged over under the two trees by the other lamp pole and finally we catch it being (finally) spirited off the lawn from there later in this photo. This contraption is no M-1948!

[mr anderson]

Seriously agentbluescreen why are you posting the long ago debunked picture of the people carrying that emergency tent? Over and over and over again the same BS as if any new information doesnt reach you.

Because genuine questions like the 'missing $2.3trillion / why the Pentagon was hit to begin with' isn't disinformation and speculative inconclusive b/s.

[iks83]

Because genuine questions like the 'missing $2.3trillion / why the Pentagon was hit to begin with' isn't disinformation and speculative inconclusive b/s.

Yeah that seems to be it. But his statemens are hilarious.... "It appears obvious it was out on the outer, worn brown patch by the walkway for firing (so it wouldn't leave a new burn mark on the grass, lined up with the decoy plane's flightpath), then dragged over to the first lamp pole, and then, when they noticed helicopters taking aerial pics it was dragged over under the two trees by the other lamp pole and finally we catch it being (finally) spirited off the lawn from there later in this photo. This contraption is no M-1948!"

Amazing... no proof no nothing but enough to keep the crazy conspiracy creationists running for miles. That BS is the same type of stuff we hear from the hologram no planers and tv fakery people... well it appears obvious that there was no plane at the WTC cause look how that one wing vanishes on this 10x processed crappy youtube vid.

[roganvilla]

Seriously agentbluescreen why are you posting the long ago debunked picture of the people carrying that emergency tent? Over and over and over again the same BS as if any new information doesnt reach you.

Well, it is screened off with a big blue....blue screeny thing.

[lamourlady]

Yeah that seems to be it. But his statemens are hilarious.... "It appears obvious it was out on the outer, worn brown patch by the walkway for firing (so it wouldn't leave a new burn mark on the grass, lined up with the decoy plane's flightpath), then dragged over to the first lamp pole, and then, when they noticed helicopters taking aerial pics it was dragged over under the two trees by the other lamp pole and finally we catch it being (finally) spirited off the lawn from there later in this photo. This contraption is no M-1948!"

Amazing... no proof no nothing but enough to keep the crazy conspiracy creationists running for miles. That BS is the same type of stuff we hear from the hologram no planers and tv fakery people... well it appears obvious that there was no plane at the WTC cause look how that one wing vanishes on this 10x processed crappy youtube vid.

Wow, you guys all sound just like everyone in this world when they speak or think of all of us here on Prison Planet Forum.  So condescending and snooty.  We are all here seeking the truth and so is Agent.  If you don't like his theories fine, but no reason to put him down.  This forum is for discussion and none knows the final truth including you, so allow him the freedoms he is entitled to to speak his mind...ignore him if you must, but geez, treat him with some sort of dignity and respect.

[Jackson Holly]

Wow, you guys all sound just like everyone in this world when they speak or think of all of us here on Prison Planet Forum.  So condescending and snooty.  We are all here seeking the truth and so is Agent.  If you don't like his theories fine, but no reason to put him down.  This forum is for discussion and none knows the final truth including you, so allow him the freedoms he is entitled to to speak his mind...ignore him if you must, but geez, treat him with some sort of dignity and respect.

+1


We ALL know they faked the Hani Hanjour/757 story ... that is

WAY MORE outrageous than anything I have seen from Bluescreen.

I don't have the stomach nor time to pour over pix and vids, etc,

to try and figure out exactly HOW they faked it ... but more POWER

to anyone out there trying!

[agentbluescreen]

Yeah that seems to be it. But his statemens are hilarious.... "It appears obvious it was out on the outer, worn brown patch by the walkway for firing (so it wouldn't leave a new burn mark on the grass, lined up with the decoy plane's flightpath), then dragged over to the first lamp pole, and then, when they noticed helicopters taking aerial pics it was dragged over under the two trees by the other lamp pole and finally we catch it being (finally) spirited off the lawn from there later in this photo. This contraption is no M-1948!"

Amazing... no proof no nothing but enough to keep the crazy conspiracy creationists running for miles. That BS is the same type of stuff we hear from the hologram no planers and tv fakery people... well it appears obvious that there was no plane at the WTC cause look how that one wing vanishes on this 10x processed crappy youtube vid.

FYI this investigation of this evidence has had a lot of false starts, has borne me a lot of thankless, humiliating and embarrassing criticisms, has gone down a lot of false rat holes, and pursued a lot of wild goose-chase assumptions, but finally, thanks to a couple of lucky photos and the Judicial Watch "second bandit" evidence clearly outlined below has born fruit that for all intents and purposes finally presents as complete, logical and reasonable a picture of what most likely transpired before and during the inside job at the Pentagon as anyone has ever put forward.

Virtually all the other available evidence also fully supports this rather surprising, photographic evidence proven "Two Strikes Conclusion" as well. To refute it, we will need a genuine, new, and thorough legal investigation.

I've nearly got myself kicked off this forum and bit a lot of tongue at Jimd playing Devil's advocate for Dylan Avery, Korey Rowe, Jason Bermas, Alex Jones, William Lewis and now, Jesse Ventura here, working to substantiate our honest reasonable convictions with further proof here, and I still haven't stopped asking even more questions and looking even deeper into this disgusting arch-criminal charade.

Seeing all the "Screw Loose Change" bullshytte and hateful divisive cointelpro "hay" that was successfully being made by agents of the Pentagon neocon ZioNAZI "brass" against anyone who dared suggest that they were direct co-conspirators and mass murderers of their own troops in their own headquarters, I immediately realized that THIS battle to expose THIS truth was and has always been the Achilles Heel of both sides. Only when we have the troops on our side will we ever have any chance in hell of overthrowing this elite-noble tyranny of corruption that is the sickening cancer that is destroying all of our futures. This is the battle that we must win at all costs!

The WTC Inside Job is a foregone conclusion, but it, after all is merely a very serious "civilian crime and corruption" matter. It doesn't directly treasonously implicate, other than by negligence and hubris, our public national defense establishment. This does.

Seeing also, this forlorn and very important topic, having been unceremoniously banished to the derogatory, hated "Faux Controversies and (nut)Case Studies" section of the forum here, immediately made it a friend of mine. There had to be an answer. Although I originally pretty-much accepted the 'official propaganda' about the Two Pentagon Strikes, I was always very uncomfortable with the obviously stinky Barbara Olsen fairytale. How could her knowing husband let her be killed? I was also uncomfortable with the overall building damage evidence, the spent-missile thingy they'd hauled out of that damning symmetrical-target "Punch Out" hole and the lack of any positive, official, investigatively certified lost-airframe identification of the AA Flight 77 aircraft by the NTSB.

That is and has always been my only intention here, to put some meat on the old bones of endless back-and-forth divisive, backbiting arguments about the Pentagon that have become an epic stumbling block and source of rancorous division to all truthers.

My nickname is just an old Windoze "user-agent" crash-joke about the famous "blue screen of death" that plagued those old primitive Microsoft OS systems. An ex-Catholic dual citizen who is a proud Canadian as well, I have never worked for any government.

[mr anderson]

Wow, you guys all sound just like everyone in this world when they speak or think of all of us here on Prison Planet Forum.  So condescending and snooty.  We are all here seeking the truth and so is Agent.  If you don't like his theories fine, but no reason to put him down.  This forum is for discussion and none knows the final truth including you, so allow him the freedoms he is entitled to to speak his mind...ignore him if you must, but geez, treat him with some sort of dignity and respect.

That's no excuse for accepting blatant theories without any shred of evidence. Seeking truth, who's truth? (It seems these days).

If putting him down means casting a critical eye on the "information" posted means "putting him down", then I stand guilty. Otherwise I have not at all personally attacked him...

Too often we accept obvious disinformation as "seeking the truth". What a cop-out.. I've come to the conclusion that it's in-fact the debunkers that keep us honest and conscious of our research and not those within the so called movement.

The debunkers, for the most part, probe the right avenues, whilst on Facebook and on multiple forums we are led down so many dodgy avenues of "research" that it makes a mockery of the victim's families, researchers etc.

We deal with what we can prove - and FFS these questions still aren't the focus and never will be.

Where's the missing $2.3Trillion? Why was the Pentagon hit AT ALL? < That questions perfectly caters for AgentBlueScreen  (those who toss up between missile / plane) and myself (those who, from the evidence believes a plane hit the Pentagon BUT wants to a) Know definitively that a plane hit the Pentagon and b) Why was it hit to begin with), this however is almost totally ignored.

[Scootle]

To AgentBS and others who keep asking 'why withhold videos if there's nothing to hide?', just look at all these pointless debates on this forum... There's your answer!

And I find it funny how people like me who believe a plane hit the Pentagon get accused of blindly accepting what we've been told, when most of us were originally no-planers who then questioned the no-plane truther dogma.

[citizenx]

No disrespect fellas, but if I am going to be accused, with agentbluescreen, of spreading traitorous disinfo it is going to have to be by a fellow American, and even then they will be wrong.

Five planers, what the hell is the second flying object?

Why don't you answer that before playing your typical debunker games against agentbluescreen's hypothesis/theory/model etc...

It is easy to be one of jim's parrots -- not so to actually attempt to analyze the evidence on your own or you are labeled, ridiculed, accused, and generally degraded.

Look, I am an American and I take 9/11 very personally.  If you are a German, or a Brit, or an Australian, let me ask you one simple question:  have you been to ground zero? What did the deaths of those 3,000 or so souls really mean to you?  Are you really ready to question a fellow truther's commitedness, or sincerity because they have a minor disagreement on HOW the crime was commited that day?  Ought you?  Should you dare?  Or what kind of gall does that take?

If you think the JW video was doctored even more than we know it was (missing frames), and you have forensic evidence that the second flying object, the "second bandit" is not a real object with what appears to be a trajectory toward the site of the explosion, let's hear it or better yet, see it.  If you have evidence the entire video was fake, let's hear that, too.  I have yet to see incontrovertible evidence for either.

Yes, the tone of those attempting to answer gentbluescreen's model has been at times very personal and accusatory and anything you are accusing him of, I guess you are accusing me of, because in the absence of other evidence, I believe what I see and not what you tell me.

"Are you gonna believe your lying eyes, or are you going to be a team player?"

That's the vibe I'm getting from many of you.

[agentbluescreen]

The answer is simple, the Pentagon was hit by an airplane - first! The videos also show us as much of the second strike as they do of the first. Who would have noticed such a thing a few seconds later? I'd say we had a pretty major diversion of attention going on.

That focussed conical destruction path, queer, distinctive punch out hole and extensive tertiary C ring damage is impossible without what was on the missile-chassis they dragged out through it afterwards. Instrumentation is not screwed to the outer walls of big aircraft, it's on panels or in racks. You only shape and pack circuit boards tightly inside tubes in missiles. All that got blown through that huge shaped charge hole in that double brick masonry wall originally was a bunch of studs, chairs, garbage pails, junk, wires and drywall.



Gimme a break, what makes a perfectly round smoking hole like that in the side of a bank and nothing but junk comes out?

This pulverized garbage isn't even burning

[citizenx]

Gimme a break, what makes smoking hole like that in the side of a bank and nothing comes out?

Precisely.

Another excellent question for would-be debunkers.  Where's the plane that punched that hole, or even bits of one (but there should be something relatively solid or compacted that did that, IF IT WAS A PLANE THAT MADE THE HOLE.)

[agentbluescreen]

If any part of the plane made that hole, the fuel would have also come out, right along with whatever the hell made it.

We're only talking 220 feet here, the same depth as WTC 1 & 2.

[agentbluescreen]

If any part of the plane made that hole, the fuel would have also come out, right along with whatever the hell made it.

We're only talking 220 feet here, the same depth as WTC 1 & 2.

We're not only talking the same depth as the WTC but all of the airplane is mysteriously all on one floor, and there's no elevator shafts nor basement. So how is it that no fuel, no fireball nor anything even toasted, smoking nor burning comes out of that hole, supposedly made within only "an extra a second or two" (at most), directly on axis with the path of the crash?

[mr anderson]

No disrespect fellas, but if I am going to be accused, with agentbluescreen, of spreading traitorous disinfo it is going to have to be by a fellow American, and even then they will be wrong.

Five planers, what the hell is the second flying object?

Why don't you answer that before playing your typical debunker games against agentbluescreen's hypothesis/theory/model etc...

It is easy to be one of jim's parrots -- not so to actually attempt to analyze the evidence on your own or you are labeled, ridiculed, accused, and generally degraded.

Look, I am an American and I take 9/11 very personally.  If you are a German, or a Brit, or an Australian, let me ask you one simple question:  have you been to ground zero? What did the deaths of those 3,000 or so souls really mean to you?  Are you really ready to question a fellow truther's commitedness, or sincerity because they have a minor disagreement on HOW the crime was commited that day?  Ought you?  Should you dare?  Or what kind of gall does that take?

If you think the JW video was doctored even more than we know it was (missing frames), and you have forensic evidence that the second flying object, the "second bandit" is not a real object with what appears to be a trajectory toward the site of the explosion, let's hear it or better yet, see it.  If you have evidence the entire video was fake, let's hear that, too.  I have yet to see incontrovertible evidence for either.

Yes, the tone of those attempting to answer gentbluescreen's model has been at times very personal and accusatory and anything you are accusing him of, I guess you are accusing me of, because in the absence of other evidence, I believe what I see and not what you tell me.

"Are you gonna believe your lying eyes, or are you going to be a team player?"

That's the vibe I'm getting from many of you.

Self-righteous indignation and invoking nationalism aren't substitutes for meticulous constructive criticism of what we do know about the Pentagon incident.

It matters not where I come from, whether I've visited 'Ground Zero' or my feelings for those lost. I'm concerned about documented, empirical and scientific methodology.  

All I'm hearing is speculative opinions.

* Do I know what happened conclusively? No  

* As a non-expert in physics, aeronautics, engineering do I speculate with the limited information available what happened? No.

* What do I know? Questions often and almost always bypassed for harder to prove theories. Such questions include; Missing $2.3trillion, why was the target the newly reinforced west face of the building, occupied primarily by accountants that were tracing down what happened to the missing trillions of dollars announced just a few days earlier, 84 surveillance tapes, Stand-down order, the fact the Pentagon was hit AT ALL.

Instead what are we doing? Fly-over theory, missile theory, Skywarrior theory, blue tents, punch-out hole theory. We don't know enough, therefore it's not provable or disprovable, yet. It's highly irresponsible to leap to conclusions based on your already ingrained distrust for the official story.

It's responsible to stick to what we can effectively challenge the official story with.

The lack of evidence showing something's existence is taken as proof of its non-existence

What's more convincing to an average person; missiles and fly-over or the 84 withheld surveillance tapes, missing $2.3trillion and the fact the most powerful military installation on this planet was attacked?

I'm not saying don't investigate other theories but the latter questions above warrant a more reasoned approach. It will answer ALL the theories presented in this thread.

They won't release the tapes, report on the missing $2.3 trillion you say? I won't hold my breath and here's why:

The Pentagon is a purposeful honeypot to become the genesis of self-fulfilling theories naturally manifesting from distrust of the official story of 9/11. The omission of key evidence has continually over the years sustained multiple theories that conveniently mask the very answers to the questions that could forever destroy the cover-up at the Pentagon.

Why and where and for what purpose was the missing $2.3Trillion for? Why was the Pentagon hit to begin with and how it is linked exclusively with the 84 Surveillance tapes proving conclusively what did happen.

To add, I have not personally attacked anyone. I'm not falling for the multifaceted methods of the honeypot and one such example is dealing with people who can't handle their method of "research" and theorising being criticised, assuming it's a personal attack.

That's the goal of the omission of key evidence and the ultimate creation of the honeypot. Sew questions upon questions, make them run around in circles and construct elaborate theories with string-width information whilst ignoring the crucial, critical and obvious key points in shattering the cover-up.

Continue on your path if you wish or self-evaluate what avenue of research is more effective in engaging the general public with. They are afterall the eventual jury for said evidence.

The strategy I follow is simple. If asked "What hit the Pentagon?" I avoid answering and turn the discussion to the far more fundamental question "How did it come about that the Pentagon was hit?".1 It should not have been. It should have been well defended. American Airlines flight 77, a Boeing 757, was the third plane hijacked that day, so there was ample time to confirm that information received was about real hijackings, not parts of war games, and not accidents. There was ample time to send up fighters to intercept, as is the normal procedure.2 Crucial to this debate is the video testimony of the Secretary for Transportation, Norman Mineta, to the 9/11 Commission. He entered the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC) under the White House and saw that the Vice President, Dick Cheney, was already there. A young man came in and said to Cheney "The plane is 50 miles out", then "The plane is thirty miles out", and when it got down to 10 miles out the young man also said "Do the orders still stand?" and Cheney angrily confirmed that they did. Shortly after this something catastrophic happened at the Pentagon, causing many deaths. There is little doubt that Cheney had it in his hand to block this attack but had a reason not to do so. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDfdOwt2v3Y

The words used by the young man indicate that those who were following this object on radar did not think it was anything other than a plane.

What Hit the Pentagon? Misinformation and its Effect on the Credibility of 9/11 Truth
Frank Legge (BSc, PhD)
flegge@iinet.net.au
15 February 2010

http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2009/WhatHitPentagonDrLeggeAug.pdf

[citizenx]

Self-righteous indignation and invoking nationalism aren't substitutes for meticulous constructive criticism of what we do know about the Pentagon incident.

It matters not where I come from, whether I've visited 'Ground Zero' or my feelings for those lost. I'm concerned about documented, empirical and scientific methodology.  

All I'm hearing is speculative opinions.

* Do I know what happened conclusively? No  

* As a non-expert in physics, aeronautics, engineering do I speculate with the limited information available what happened? No.

* What do I know? Questions often and almost always bypassed for harder to prove theories. Such questions include; Missing $2.3trillion, why was the target the newly reinforced west face of the building, occupied primarily by accountants that were tracing down what happened to the missing trillions of dollars announced just a few days earlier, 84 surveillance tapes, Stand-down order, the fact the Pentagon was hit AT ALL.

Instead what are we doing? Fly-over theory, missile theory, Skywarrior theory, blue tents, punch-out hole theory. We don't know enough, therefore it's not provable or disprovable, yet. It's highly irresponsible to leap to conclusions based on your already ingrained distrust for the official story.

It's responsible to stick to what we can effectively challenge the official story with.

What's more convincing to an average person; missiles and fly-over or the 84 withheld surveillance tapes, missing $2.3trillion and the fact the most powerful military installation on this planet was attacked?

I'm not saying don't investigate other theories but the latter questions above warrant a more reasoned approach. It will answer ALL the theories presented in this thread.

They won't release the tapes, report on the missing $2.3 trillion you say? I won't hold my breath and here's why:

To add, I have not personally attacked anyone. I'm not falling for the multifaceted methods of the honeypot and one such example is dealing with people who can't handle their method of "research" and theorising being criticised, assuming it's a personal attack.

That's the goal of the omission of key evidence and the ultimate creation of the honeypot. Sew questions upon questions, make them run around in circles and construct elaborate theories with string-width information whilst ignoring the crucial, critical and obvious key points in shattering the cover-up.

Continue on your path if you wish or self-evaluate what avenue of research is more effective in engaging the general public with. They are afterall the eventual jury for said evidence.

The lack of evidence of something that punched out that hole is not evidence that it was a jetliner.

A missile on the other hand, tipped with DU might have penetrated the wall and collapsed a portion of it.

This would explain why there is not a big ass smushed-in jet liner nose poking through that hole.

That is not magical thinking.

To belive a jetliner punched that hole though it clearly isn't there, and though there is no evidenc of it ever having been there and penetrated the hole seems to me to be the very epitome of magical thinking.

I don't think you have to be Albert Einsteint to understand that.  I certainly am not either.

How do you expain this, Mr. Anderson?

I am all ears.

[agentbluescreen]

What do we have here, a counter with no drawers or countertop, a busted urinal, some garbage can, some office chair legs with casters and a bunch of 2X4s, bricks and busted drywall? WHERE'S the fireball? How could this stuff not be burning?



This has gotta be the 5th most damning "pretend 757 plane crash picture" I've ever seen.

Who the hell pretended to ever have seriously "investigated" this nonsense?

I could pee in the wind further than that jet fuel obviously never went!

[agentbluescreen]

Missing $2.3trillion, why was the target the newly reinforced west face of the building, occupied primarily by accountants that were tracing down what happened to the missing trillions of dollars announced just a few days earlier, 84 surveillance tapes, Stand-down order, the fact the Pentagon was hit AT ALL.

You don't need to question why anyone would steal 2.3 trillion dollars, any ten year old could tell you. Same goes for hiding things and lying about it and killing the detectives who were on your trail, where they work.

What we do have to do is specifically prove that they've been specifically lying and expose exactly what they are lying about, and that is what I'm doing. It doesn't matter what else they're hiding if you can prove that they are lying in what they haven't been adept at hiding.

The evidence we have accumulated now is overwhelming and once we are on the right track we shall easily corner them like rats with a noose of truths they cannot slip out of..

[mr anderson]

You don't need to question why anyone would steal 2.3 trillion dollars, my ten year old could tell you. Same goes for hiding things and lying about it and killing the detectives who were on your trail, where they work.

What you do have to do is specifically prove that they've been lying and exactly what they are lying about, and that is what I'm doing.

I did not pose the question "why" it was stolen. From where to where and whom is the question...

[citizenx]

By Dov Zakheim.

To Israel via Switzerland.

That would be my guess.

Anybody got a better one?

[lamourlady]

I did not pose the question "why" it was stolen. From where to where and whom is the question...

That is something you may never know, Anderson, ever, but we do have 'some' video, pics and testimony that we can investigate.  I think that is what is being said by those you don't agree with.  It's like a cold case file, yes it's been over with a fine tooth comb, but years later something can be seen that wasn't seen or some new technology can detect something that couldn't be before.  Why not as it seems everyone is still as passionate about it as they were when it happened, neither has a definitive answer and it is still denied by the scum who did it.  These are all the more reason to continue throwing around ideas.  Government thugs can be corrupt, everyone already knows this, but to imagine these same thugs actually doing what they did on 911, well we all know that is the one thing the masses cannot fathom, even if we do.  Pointing out missing monies to them will affect them the same way that being in debt by the trillions does...it does not even phase them.  But, show them video proof of those they believe are their saviors and they may actually listen.  Believe me, I am not saying don't continue looking for where the money went and to whom, no, but let's not silence all other possible paths to the truth either, like that will get you to those answers any better or quicker.

[agentbluescreen]

By Dov Zakheim.

To Israel via Switzerland.

That would be my guess.

Anybody got a better one?

Who knows, they probably held a yard sale in Tel Aviv and kept the money to start Blackwater. The 2.3 was just what that cost us. No different than a marine selling rpg's to the Mexicans.