This Is What Really Happened At The Pentagon On 9/11

[Terral]

Greetings to All:

The Pentagon was attacked on 9/11 by a rogue element inside our own military using a plan that almost failed at the very beginning. The inside-job bad guys used a retrofitted radio-controlled A-3 TNT-filled Jet to launch a missile attack (like this) at 9:31:39 AM (see FAA Timeline) on Column Line (CL) 14 using this flight path, but the complicated maneuvers caused the radio operator to lose control and altitude at the critical moment, which caused the starboard wing to begin clipping the five downed light poles. The radio operator panicked for fear that the painted up A-3 would crash into the Pentagon lawn, so he pulled back on the joystick to create what the CIT boys are calling the “Flyover Plane,” NOT at 9:38 AM, but at 9:31:39 AM when the famous Pentagon clocks stopped. The radio operator then began making a wide turn to the north that was witnessed by the C-130 pilot and many other people, until making the final attack strike on the Wedge One Wall between CL 9 and CL 15 at 9:36:27 AM just about 5 minutes later to create Terry Cohen's "Terrible Explosion" that took place 'after' the Original 9:31:39 AM attack.

News Video

The problem for our inside-job bad guys is that the Pentagon Limestone-clad masonry wall required the ‘inside’ explosion from the missile strike, in coordination with the A-3 Jet CL 9-15 massive explosion, to take down the E-Ring roof during the 9:31:39 AM attack run. This attack location was chosen far in advance because of the CL 11 control-joint that would bring down the E-Ring roof very efficiently and effectively. However, the A-3 Jet was forced over the E-Ring roof at 9:31:39 AM and also struck the second story concrete slab in the 9:36:27 AM attack, which means the E-Ring roof fell just one foot (look carefully at the control joint above the fire truck) to become wedged tightly against the northern side of CL-11. Our inside-job bad guys then had a terrible problem, because many explosive charges were needed to eventually bring the E-Ring Roof down at 10:15:16 AM about 45 minutes after the original missile attack.

Fox 5 News

This means the inside-job bad guys had to go around fabricating the many different “Official Timelines” that are filled with contradictions (ACAAR = Page 200) in order to give their fake “Flight 77” Cover Story the resemblance of credibility. The inside-job bad guys have been working everyday running their counterintelligence disinformation campaigns to cover their tracks from that time to today.

Lloyd England’s taxi was struck by Pole #1 during the 9:31:39 AM missile strike, which is the reason he saw a single smoke plume from the original small CL 13-15 entry hole (upper picture). While he and his partner were wrestling around with the light pole, then the A-3 Jet created the “Big Boom*” that knocked him down and almost killed him for the second time in just 5 minutes. :0) Many people think the light pole evidence was staged, because they are BLIND to the 911Truth that we have been looking at ‘two attacks’ all along. The second ‘Big Boom’ happened 5 minutes later at 9:36:27 AM, while Lloyd and his helper were removing the pole from his windshield. The next series of explosions started at 9:42 AM, which is event #20 on my Pentagon Timeline here.

The reason you have so much confusion and contradiction between all these Pentagon witnesses is because ‘some’ of them saw the 9:31:39 AM A-3 Flyover and others saw the actual Jet hit the Pentagon at 9:36:27 AM like these two witnesses:

Michael Kelly

Don Wright

The 9:31:39 AM witnesses saw the A-3 disappear into the single smoke plume on the ‘South-of-Citgo’ Flight Path, while the 9:36:27 witnesses saw the same painted-up Jet crash into the Pentagon wall using the “North-of-Citgo” Fight Path shown here. The 9:31:39 AM witnesses saw the light poles flying around, but the 9:36:27 AM people saw no signs of any light poles being hit along the North-of-Citgo Flight Path. That is the reason some so-called Pentagon Investigators think the light pole evidence is all staged. :0) We have small bits of Jet debris, because the A-3 was blown into a kazillion bits at impact. Nobody has ever found one piece of any real Boeing 757-200 Jetliner debris, because this damage and this damage was NOT created by any real 100-Ton Jetliner going any 530 miles per hour. :0) That is the reason no 'time-change' parts have ever been produced by the inside-job FBI/Bushie Administration bad guys in the first place. The damage pattern is consistent with a ‘three attack’ scenario from the 9:31:39 AM missile strike, the 9:36:27 AM Jet attack ‘and’ the subsequent Controlled-Demolition Explosions that eventually brought the E-Ring roof down at 10:15 AM.

This is The 911Truth that MANY so-called leaders of the impotent 911Movement do NOT want you to see. :0)

GL,

Terral

[Dok]

I havent heard the 3 attack scenario before. Interesting, thanks...

[Mr.Me]

This is The 911Truth that MANY so-called leaders of the impotent 911Movement do NOT want you to see. :0)

GL,

Terral

Leaders? There's no leaders. There's those that investigate, and those that spread the word.

This is a very interesting report. Although now, the details seem unimportant. Just looking at the events in the past year show how transparently evil our collective governments are, and how the system is fully corrupt. 911 was a warning, but we are all still under attack

[markshark4]

Where did you get this info from?


Who are you?

[Terral]

Hi Mark:

Where did you get this info from?

Who are you?

“This” Pentagon explanation came from years of a ‘real’ 911Truth Investigation weighing all the facts in the case and ‘no’ Alex Jones does ‘not’ know the 911Truth or he would be telling the same story. And no, I do not believe for one minute that Alex Jones has any interest in telling anyone ‘the’ 911Truth any more than the Loose Change Brats, Killtown or Webfairy or anyone else connected to the bogus and impotent 911Truth Movement Charade. These guys all have 25 theories and are happy to sell you the video and tee shirt . . . 

I encourage everyone here to try and find a single error or contradiction in the Opening Post using whatever you call credible evidence. I am the guy who ‘knows’ the 911Truth about the empty hole in Shanksville (link) and the nonexistent AA77 at the Pentagon (link) and the WTC cases (link).

I was really hoping that someone here might want to challenge the thesis, claims, evidence and conclusions of the OP . . .

GL,

Terral

[so_Z]

How do you explain the bodies of the victims that were found and identified?

Evidence from the Moussaoui trial:

http://www.rcfp.org/moussaoui/


Photograph of a body found inside the Pentagon after Flight 77 crashed into the building.

[Terral]

Hi so_Z:

How do you explain the bodies of the victims that were found and identified?

Evidence from the Moussaoui trial:

http://www.rcfp.org/moussaoui/


Photograph of a body found inside the Pentagon after Flight 77 crashed into the building.

Before you can start hauling fully intact AA77 bodies from the Pentagon, then you must provide the explanation for how a real 125-feet wide and almost 50-feet tall 100-Ton Jetliner passed through an 18-feet 3-inch impact hole shown here:



Look at the massive cable spool standing above the heads of the firemen and tell us how a real 100-Ton Jetliner passed over the top of that cable spool and under the still-intact second floor. Look at the green grass on the pristine Pentagon lawn where Bush says a 100-Ton Jetliner just crashed going 530 miles per hour to completely vaporize out of existence. Note that the E-Ring roof remains standing during the supposed rescue operation like in this picture:



Then realize the distance from this standing E-Ring Wall to the rear C-Ring wall is only 220 feet and your 100-Ton Jetliner was supposedly moving at 530 miles per hour to make this tiny little 10-feet diameter exit hole.



Okay, so where did the two 6-Ton Rolls Royce Engines exit this standing C-Ring wall going 530 miles per hour in the required .39 seconds after entering the E-Ring wall? :0) Here are some better pictures of the victims (link). If the entire 100-Ton Jetliner vaporized into thin air in under .39 seconds, then how do you have dead victim bodies intact without a single broken bone? Your victim appears to be sitting in the reclined position like a typical passenger leaning backwards in his seat on a typical Jetliner flight. However, note that the burns are concentrated in the chest area with his lower body receiving only smoke damage. The muscles, ligaments and tendons are all contracted in the hands, forearms and upper arm segments from overexposure to the same heat source that was concentrated only in the chest region. To begin dispelling the many myths of the Official Cover Story, then the first thing to realize is that AA77 never even took off on 9/11 (link). There are no tail numbers and no actual departure times for AA11 and AA77 on 9/11, as both flights were cancelled. Anyone can go to the Bureau Of Transportation Statistics (here) and begin your own search for these two flights and obtain the very same results. Click on ‘Departures’ (link) and fill out the data for 9/11/2001, Washington, Dulles International and see what you get. The Official Cover Story includes two Jetliners (AA11 and AA77) that never even took off on 9/11, which gives you some idea of the magnitude of the Official Cover Story LIE that has been sold to We The People and the world. Then check out the NTSB Official Report (03/07/2006) saying that AA77 was ‘Destroyed.’  Again, if AA77 was completely “Destroyed”, then how do we have victims leaning ‘backwards’ in seats without a single broken bone in the first place? Even the casual reader to this thread should realize that the Official Cover Story makes no sense at all and that a LOT of people in authority are deliberately looking the other way. So, if you really want to know how these victims died, then here we go:

First of all, everyone should realize that the FAA grounded all flights on 9/11 and some of those flights landed Wright Patterson airport in Southern Ohio:

Cassiopaea.org Story

“As for the body parts identified by DNA analysis from the wreckage at the Pentagon, let's not fool ourselves. Any group that has the will and power to commit the destruction that occurred on 9-11 would have no problem fetching some real samples from the gassed bodies onboard Flight 77 after it was landed at Wright Patterson airport in Southern Ohio.”

 
The reason your victim has all bones intact and is leaning backwards in his seat is because a Jetliner was selected at random, pulled out of line, taken behind the aircraft hangers at Wright Patterson Airport for all the passengers and crew to be gassed unconscious. The inside-job bad guys then began creating their AA77 victim evidence by torching victims to simulate ‘burning’ from a fire in a Jetliner crash, even though they forgot to create the simulated ‘impact’ damage in their haste. The evidence was then shipped to the temporary morgue at the Air Force Base in Dover, Delaware (story). The inside-job bad guys purposely directed all of these victim remains to a single location, so the FBI/DoD Ops could mix and match DNA evidence to any story they created. The doctors had no idea if the remains came from the Pentagon, the Wright Patterson Airport or Timbuktu, which allowed Rumsfeld to invent any Cover Story from the accumulated evidence. This allowed the DoD inside-job rogue element to go around exterminating any key witnesses that stood in their way ‘and’ the DNA was simply tossed into the pile and these people had seats on the AA jetliners that never even took off on 9/11.

Everyone should be reminded that the FBI/DoD inside-job bad guys have never turned over a single time-change part from any of the four Jetliners that supposedly crashed on 9/11 (story). Then you should realize that these 110 military experts are all calling for a new 9/11 investigation starting with General Wesley Clark (story). Everyone should take the few minutes to review the 'expert testimony' video evidence that AA77 never crashed into the Pentagon (here) to realize the Official Cover Story makes no sense at all. Then you should think about waking up to the realization that the same people who own the privately-owned central bank (FED = money manipulators chapter) also carried out these 9/11 attacks ‘and’ they are orchestrating the current Global Financial Crisis in order to enslave you through their upcoming New World Order. The fourteen signposts to slavery are listed here.

GL,

Terral

[so_Z]

Okay.

Have you considered Jim Hoffman's analysis of the Pentagon attack?

http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/index.html

 9  -  1  1    R  e  s  e  a  r  c  h    essays
The Pentagon Attack:
What the Physical Evidence Shows
by
Jim Hoffman
Version 0.9, March 28, 2006
Introduction

brief excerpt:
The theory that the Pentagon was not hit by a Boeing 757 (the kind of plane that Flight 77 was) is promoted by the most widely distributed books, videos, and other media challenging the official account of the 9/11 attack. The no-Boeing theory forms the central thesis of Thierry Meyssan's books L'effroyable Imposture (The Frightening Fraud), and Le Pentagate; is featured by the videos Painful Deceptions, 9/11 In Plane Site, and Loose Change; and is the subject of the Flash animation 9/11 Pentagon Strike. These pieces have been distributed worldwide in quantities reaching into the millions, thanks to a combination of excellent production values, entertaining and captivating styles of presentation, and expert, well-financed marketing. The work of 9/11 researchers who do not embrace the no-Boeing theory has been eclipsed in every medium except the web.

In late 2004 I wrote The Pentagon No-757-Crash Theory: Booby Trap for 9/11 Skeptics . In it, I examined the no-Boeing theory from several perspectives including analysis of its:

    * psychology
    * history
    * evidentiary support
    * propaganda
    * misinformation

That essay presents a cumulative argument against the no-Boeing theory using each of these perspectives. Critics of this essay failed to acknowledge this and instead zeroed in on one point or another to highlight it as if the entire case against the no-Boeing theory hinged on that point. For example, several critics have misstated my position as relying exclusively on the accounts of eyewitnesses, ignoring my detailed examination of the 'physical evidence case' for the no-Boeing theory.

In this essay I look exclusively at the physical evidence of the Pentagon attack -- post-crash photographs and verifiable information about the building, the Boeing 757-200 aircraft, and the physics of aircraft crashes based on case studies. In some cases I mention elements of eyewitness accounts, but only to frame my analysis of what the photographs show about the crash. I show that the physical evidence is consistent with the crash of a 757, noting flaws in popular arguments to the contrary.

The many eyewitness accounts of the Pentagon attack constitute a rich body of evidence that strongly supports the conclusion that the attack plane was either a Boeing 757 or a very similar aircraft. The physical and eyewitness evidence are thus mutually corroborating, a fact that is obscured by common errors in evaluating the physical evidence. Many researchers have dismissed the body of eyewitness evidence out of hand, primarily for two reasons:

    * Allegations that the body of witness evidence as a whole is plagued by bias, contamination, and unreliability (addressed here) have been widely promoted and have not been effectively countered, apparently because the ponderous volume of the witness reports discourages analysis.
    * Assertions that physical evidence trumps witness evidence in any crime investigation have fostered a reflexive disdain for witness evidence while lending a false sense of infallibility to arguments based on photographs.

Factors such as these have contributed to the creation of a false dialectic, which has eyewitness evidence supporting the Boeing theory and physical evidence supporting the no-Boeing theory. By focusing on the physical evidence here, I hope to sidestep that dialectic and clarify what conclusions the physical evidence actually supports.
Contents

    * Debris is Consistent with a Jetliner Crash
    * Pentagon Facade Damage Fits a 757
    * Interior Damage is Consistent with a 757 Crash
    * Damage to Surroundings Fits a 757
    * Specific Debris Matches a 757
    * The Attack Plane's Approach Is Consistent With a 757
    * Suppressing Evidence of the Crash Serves the Cover-up

[Terral]

Hi so-Z:

Okay.

Have you considered Jim Hoffman's analysis of the Pentagon attack?

If you want to use Hoffman disinformation to support an argument against anything in the Opening Post, then please be my guest. There is no evidence to support Hoffman's Official Cover Story claims in the article you pasted to this thread, so good luck trying to prop up his bogus conclusions about anything.

GL again,

Terral

[PplVsNWO]

How do you explain the bodies of the victims that were found and identified?

Evidence from the Moussaoui trial:

http://www.rcfp.org/moussaoui/


Photograph of a body found inside the Pentagon after Flight 77 crashed into the building.

Not that I support this guy's theory but why would airline passengers be wearing orange jump suits?

[Terral]

Hi PplVsNWO:

Not that I support this guy's theory but why would airline passengers be wearing orange jump suits?

You can see the same jumpsuit on victim #83 in This Picture. The point is that all of this evidence is FAKE having no basis in reality whatsoever. Therefore, speculating on the clothing specifics of planted evidence really serves no purpose at all. The evidence in the OP of this thread says no 100-Ton Jetliner crashed into the Pentagon, so the fact that we have a 'destroyed' Jetliner and intact clothed bodies speaks volumes against the Official Cover Story. Maybe the Official Cover Story includes prisoners in transport or something along those lines . . .

GL,

Terral

[phigsy]

 “This” Pentagon explanation came from years of a ‘real’ 911Truth Investigation weighing all the facts in the case and ‘no’ Alex Jones does ‘not’ know the 911Truth or he would be telling the same story. And no, I do not believe for one minute that Alex Jones has any interest in telling anyone ‘the’ 911Truth any more than the Loose Change Brats, Killtown or Webfairy or anyone else connected to the bogus and impotent 911Truth Movement Charade. These guys all have 25 theories and are happy to sell you the video and tee shirt . . . 


I was really hoping that someone here might want to challenge the thesis, claims, evidence and conclusions of the OP . . .

I can't challenge the thesis, claims, evidence and conclusions because I've not studied it enough, but I will challenge your attitude.

You're saying that while you've been involved in the 'real' 9/11 truth investigation, anyone else who's taken an interest in the meantime with a view to keeping the subject alive is a fake, brat, or mercenary who's part of a bogus & impotent movement? After seven years, I don't care if you know what really really happened down to the last minute detail (you may well, but that would be ever so slightly suspicious in itself don't you think? - seeing as your free & able to tell us all about it here).

Don't get me wrong, if this is accurate then it's a lot of time and effort well spent, but that still doesn't give you the right to come on here and start giving abuse.

You obviously value the network of infowars & prison planet or you wouldn't feel the need to get this information on here. Oh and I've seen a few of your other posts and am aware you don't seem to mind stirring up enmity just for the sake of it.

There's ways of communicating and then there's playing the big I am, you might want to bear it in mind.

[Terral]

Hi Phigsy:

I can't challenge the thesis, claims, evidence and conclusions because I've not studied it enough, but I will challenge your attitude.

Please try again when Phigsy is better informed on the Topic, but after all these years, then what are the chances of that happening? :0) No. I have no reason to believe AJ knows ‘the’ 911Truth about this Pentagon Case, and no, I have no reason to believe he will anytime soon. That is not abuse of anything, but a simple recognition of reality. This thread will join the other one (link if not deleted) in the archives and the PrisonPlanet population will remain very much sound asleep. Again, no offense intended, but I simply call them like I see them . . .

GL,

Terral

[phigsy]

Please try again when Phigsy is better informed on the Topic, but after all these years, then what are the chances of that happening?  Again, no offense intended, but I simply call them like I see them . . .

You're right, the chances are slim. Why would I spend forever researching it when I've got someone like you to do it for me? I'll admit to being intrigued as to how they pulled off the whole scam of 9/11 and it's in the minutiae that a lot of interesting speculation is to be found. You have certainly provided more food for thought here. But it seems you're bitter about the fact that this thing hasn't given you the same level of recognition as others who you clearly think are undeserving.

If that's what you're in it for then you could probably do a better job of winning friends & influencing people.   

[so_Z]

Hi so-Z:

If you want to use Hoffman disinformation to support an argument against anything in the Opening Post, then please be my guest. There is no evidence to support Hoffman's Official Cover Story claims in the article you pasted to this thread, so good luck trying to prop up his bogus conclusions about anything.

GL again,

Terral

I'm not arguing against your analysis by posting Hoffman's analysis, I'm just providing a different POV on what happened.

What makes you think that Hoffman is a disinformation agent?

[Terral]

Hi Phigsy:

You're right, the chances are slim. Why would I spend forever researching it when I've got someone like you to do it for me?

People with that attitude have already accepted a counterfeit from charming people willing to spoon-feed you just about anything. Competent 911Truthers gather the information for their own investigations allowing the chips to fall where they may.

I'll admit to being intrigued as to how they pulled off the whole scam of 9/11 and it's in the minutiae that a lot of interesting speculation is to be found.

In other words, Phigsy is here for the entertainment value. :0) My view is there is ‘one’ and only ‘one’ 911Truth and everything else is A LIE. Either you ‘know’ the 911Truth, or anyone with an explanation is passing off something else. 

You have certainly provided more food for thought here. But it seems you're bitter about the fact that this thing hasn't given you the same level of recognition as others who you clearly think are undeserving.

Please . . . I already ‘know’ the 911Truth on these related inside-job topics and have come to this Board to present my views told by the evidence. I heard of this place (from your critics) and after coming here felt a little let down at the lack of concern for these 911Topics. 

If that's what you're in it for then you could probably do a better job of winning friends & influencing people.

I do not come to these Boards to make friends, but to speak ‘the’ 911Truth for you guys to advocate or oppose my interpretations of the evidence using your own explanations one way or the other. Can anyone point out a single error in the Opening Post, or provide us with a counterproposal for something else from your evidence? Does anyone here even have one shred of evidence to add or take away from the OP thesis in any shape or form? This ‘friends’ bullony is the reason that some of my posts are deleted and sent into hyperspace, because your friends running this joint have no regard for member content whatsoever in their attempts at ‘influencing people.’ This is likely the reason that ‘serious’ writers on these 911Truth topics find the door all by themselves and we end up with a bunch of people reading these topics for the entertainment value . . . if you are catching my drift . . .

GL,

Terral

[Terral]

Hi so_Z

I'm not arguing against your analysis by posting Hoffman's analysis, I'm just providing a different POV on what happened.

What makes you think that Hoffman is a disinformation agent?

In other words, your reply to the Opening Post explanation is to spend a minute pasting Hoffman’s nonsense to this thread ‘and’ my job is to offer you a line-by-line rebuttal. Go start a “Hoffman Is Right!” thread and perhaps someone will offer rebuttals. Let’s suppose that this is your thread and I am looking at Hoffman’s Cover Story Propaganda and feel like pointing out ‘his’ errors. This is what I would like to see from anyone here (link is to your post above):

9  -  1  1    R  e  s  e  a  r  c  h    essays
The Pentagon Attack:
What the Physical Evidence Shows
by
Jim Hoffman
Version 0.9, March 28, 2006
Introduction

brief excerpt:

The theory that the Pentagon was not hit by a Boeing 757 (the kind of plane that Flight 77 was) is promoted by the most widely distributed books, videos, and other media challenging the official account of the 9/11 attack.

Always be wary when ANYONE begins spouting off about what ‘did not’ hit the Pentagon. This is right out of the DoD/FBI Counterintelligence/Disinformation Manual and Disinfo 101. If you want to talk about what ‘did not’ hit the Pentagon, then that includes Santa Claus and Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer, Bozo the Clown and a herd of wild elephants . . . And I smell a Loyal Bushie Disinfo Agent already . . .

The no-Boeing theory forms the central thesis of Thierry Meyssan's books L'effroyable Imposture (The Frightening Fraud), and Le Pentagate; is featured by the videos Painful Deceptions, 9/11 In Plane Site, and Loose Change; and is the subject of the Flash animation 9/11 Pentagon Strike.

So what? This guy is filling the reader’s head with nonsense and stupidity with his no-Boeing garbage. 

These pieces have been distributed worldwide in quantities reaching into the millions, thanks to a combination of excellent production values, entertaining and captivating styles of presentation, and expert, well-financed marketing. The work of 9/11 researchers who do not embrace the no-Boeing theory has been eclipsed in every medium except the web.

Are we noting the ‘double negatives’ that this guy uses to say nothing at all? :0) Now we have the “work of 9/11 researchers who DO NOT embrace the no-Boeing theory . . .”. Lord-Have-Mercy . . .

In late 2004 I wrote The Pentagon No-757-Crash Theory: Booby Trap for 9/11 Skeptics . In it, I examined the no-Boeing theory from several perspectives including analysis of its:

    * psychology
    * history
    * evidentiary support
    * propaganda
    * misinformation

In other words, let’s explore the psychology, history and whatnot and forget all about what really hit the Pentagon at 9:31:39 AM on 9/11. :0)

That essay presents a cumulative argument against the no-Boeing theory using each of these perspectives. Critics of this essay failed to acknowledge this and instead zeroed in on one point or another to highlight it as if the entire case against the no-Boeing theory hinged on that point. For example, several critics have misstated my position as relying exclusively on the accounts of eyewitnesses, ignoring my detailed examination of the 'physical evidence case' for the no-Boeing theory.

This guy is talking about another essay as a cumulative argument, because he cares NOTHING about what really hit the Pentagon on 9/11 or any other day.

In this essay I look exclusively at the physical evidence of the Pentagon attack -- post-crash photographs and verifiable information about the building, the Boeing 757-200 aircraft, and the physics of aircraft crashes based on case studies.

What is wrong with this picture? The focus for this paper is the ‘physical evidence’ of the Pentagon attack with pictures and information about THE BUILDING. These retards talk for hours about the size of the E-Ring entry hole, because they have no evidence that any 100-Ton Jetliner ever crashed at the Pentagon, except for “Because Senor Bushie and Rummy told me so . . .”.  This guy here is going to talk about the physics of ‘aircraft crashes’ in general, because of his lack of evidence here at the Pentagon for any serious thesis paper at all. This guy could not debate me in person one-on-one for five minutes and remain on the stage, because he would be laughed out of the place.

In some cases I mention elements of eyewitness accounts, but only to frame my analysis of what the photographs show about the crash. I show that the physical evidence is consistent with the crash of a 757, noting flaws in popular arguments to the contrary.

In other words, get ready for a lot of BS about the little empty hole. :0)

The many eyewitness accounts of the Pentagon attack constitute a rich body of evidence that strongly supports the conclusion that the attack plane was either a Boeing 757 or a very similar aircraft.

The Official Cover Story says AA77 hit the Pentagon at 9:38 AM (Page 200 PDF), so this guy either agrees with the Cover Story or has a conspiracy theory of his own based upon some kind of evidence. 

The physical and eyewitness evidence are thus mutually corroborating, a fact that is obscured by common errors in evaluating the physical evidence. Many researchers have dismissed the body of eyewitness evidence out of hand, primarily for two reasons:

    * Allegations that the body of witness evidence as a whole is plagued by bias, contamination, and unreliability (addressed here) have been widely promoted and have not been effectively countered, apparently because the ponderous volume of the witness reports discourages analysis.
   
* Assertions that physical evidence trumps witness evidence in any crime investigation have fostered a reflexive disdain for witness evidence while lending a false sense of infallibility to arguments based on photographs.

Bullony. ‘The’ 911Truth says exactly what ‘all’ the evidence says without creating a single contradiction, once you have waded through and discarded the disinformation. The eyewitness testimony is required to establish any credible timeline for carrying out any serious investigation.

Factors such as these have contributed to the creation of a false dialectic, which has eyewitness evidence supporting the Boeing theory and physical evidence supporting the no-Boeing theory. By focusing on the physical evidence here, I hope to sidestep that dialectic and clarify what conclusions the physical evidence actually supports.

This guy is guilty of creating his own ‘no-Boeing theory’ lingo to start this bogus paper. :0)

Contents

    * Debris is Consistent with a Jetliner Crash
    * Pentagon Facade Damage Fits a 757
    * Interior Damage is Consistent with a 757 Crash
    * Damage to Surroundings Fits a 757
    * Specific Debris Matches a 757
    * The Attack Plane's Approach Is Consistent With a 757
    * Suppressing Evidence of the Crash Serves the Cover-up

Bull, bull and more bull on a stick. Where is the evidence for any of these statements? :0) A real Boeing 757-200 Jetliner includes over 60 tons of high grade aluminum/titanium alloy for the frame and two 6-ton Rolls-Royce engines that were NEVER found at the Pentagon. If anybody here has that kind of evidence (none exists), then go right ahead and paste that to this thread. I have already shown you expert military witnesses saying that real Boeing 757 DID NOT hit the Pentagon (6 minute video). This guy is talking about building ‘damage’ like that is going to produce 100 tons of Jetliner wreckage and squeeze all of that inside a tiny little 18-feet 3-inch hole (pic) above those 7-feet tall cable spools. :0) You want to talk about interior damage? Okay. Here is a look through the C-Ring Hole back across the 220 feet C-E ring section under the single roof:

 

Does someone want to explain how one of these 100-Ton Jetliners (pic) going 530 miles per hour (heh) blasts through the E-ring wall ON THE FIRST FLOOR, without touching this green SUV:

 

A man can stand on the top of that SUV and reach up to the elevation of that second story slab that is STILL THERE. The two windows to the left of the little impact hole are not even broken and no windows on the third floor are broken either (damage schematic). You want us to believe that an almost 50-feet tall 125-feet wide 100-ton Jetliner just passed right over the cable spools (pic) and the green SUV (another pic), when this Hoffman guy has not even shown us one bit of evidence to support any explanation at all. Here is the deal in a nutshell if anyone is paying attention: Anyone who believes a real 100-Ton Jetliner (like this) with these massive wing sections and massive landing gear assemblies (pic), and over 200 seats, really crashed into the Pentagon (heh) has been DUPED by Senor Bushie and the inside-job bad guys with the help of their little helpers like Hoffman right here with his ridiculous Disinformation Propaganda.

Now, someone please go back up to the OP and ‘quote >>’ anything that appears off to provide these readers an explanation for SOMETHING, so I can begin drafting my defending arguments. :0)

GL,

Terral 

[markshark4]

I wasn't trying to start a fight Terral, I was honestly curious about who you are, because you seem to know a lot.

Here are some links that agree with you about an A-3 skywarrior hitting the pentagon:

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/05/318250.shtml

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/01/307126.shtml




Terral - what do you think about the plane that hit the South Tower?

Was "Flight 175" really a drone?

[Terral]

Hi Mark:

I wasn't trying to start a fight Terral, I was honestly curious about who you are, because you seem to know a lot.

I have spent years running my own 911Truth Investigation and likely know more about these cases than the average bear or park ranger. :0)

Here are some links that agree with you about an A-3 skywarrior hitting the pentagon:

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/05/318250.shtml

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/01/307126.shtml

Thank you for posting the links for those yet to figure out that a painted-up A-3 Jet hit the Pentagon at exactly 9:36:27 AM (lower pic).

Terral - what do you think about the plane that hit the South Tower?

Was "Flight 175" really a drone?

The WTC case and the controlled demolition of those skyscrapers have NOTHING to do with any crashing Jetliner, kerosene (Jet fuel is kerosene) or anything remotely related to any Jetliner at all. My interpretation of the evidence says that Flight 93 (my Loose Change thread) was supposed to hit WTC-7, but the ‘Inside-Job Plan’ went haywire and the inside-job bad guys had to improvise. Was WTC-7 (my Loose Change thread) hit by any jetliner? No. And yet, the 47-story skyscraper collapsed at freefall speed like WTC-1 and WTC-2. :0) Do the math . . .

GL,

Terral

[markshark4]

I was really hoping that someone here might want to challenge the thesis, claims, evidence and conclusions of the OP . . .

Hi Terral

PLEASE post your OP on this forum where I also post:

There are PLENTY of people there who still believe the official story, they will definitely challenge your conclusions!!!!!

http://forums.mmaweekly.com/showthread.php?t=12832&page=3

[Terral]

Hi Mark:

Hi Terral

PLEASE post your OP on this forum where I also post:

There are PLENTY of people there who still believe the official story, they will definitely challenge your conclusions!!!!!

http://forums.mmaweekly.com/showthread.php?t=12832&page=3

D'oh! I posted the other two OP's (Flight 93 and WTC-7) on 'this' Prison Planet Forum in this 9/11 room, before realizing that your request is to take these things elsewhere. :0) No thank you. I really do not spend much time writing on these 911Truth topics anymore, but you are welcome to post links to my work on that Board if that makes Mark happy. :0)

GL,

Terral

[pcc]

Hi PplVsNWO:
 

You can see the same jumpsuit on victim #83 in This Picture. The point is that all of this evidence is FAKE having no basis in reality whatsoever. Therefore, speculating on the clothing specifics of planted evidence really serves no purpose at all. The evidence in the OP of this thread says no 100-Ton Jetliner crashed into the Pentagon, so the fact that we have a 'destroyed' Jetliner and intact clothed bodies speaks volumes against the Official Cover Story. Maybe the Official Cover Story includes prisoners in transport or something along those lines . . .

GL,

Terral

I don't think its an orange jump suit.. look at the military insignia on the collar.. this is no passenger, most likely one of the pentagon officers who was killed that day..

[donnay]

Excellent research Terral!  Bravo!

I had always thought it odd, within minutes of the alleged flight 77 hitting the Pentagon the FBI went to the Citgo gas station confiscating the CCTV videos then proceeded to go to the Double Tree and grab theirs.

Also the other thing that I never believed, for one second-- we are suppose to believe that one of the most highly secured areas, like the Pentagon, had no other CCTV photos of the plane hitting the building.  Nor were there any missiles defending the pentagon because an intruder had entered their airspace.

Then I found it even more discrediting-- the Ted Olson recollection of talking to his wife Barbara. 

Nevertheless, what you put together is outstanding!

[wikipeidiaisnotFACT]

Greetings to All:

The Pentagon was attacked on 9/11 by a rogue element inside our own military using a plan that almost failed at the very beginning. The inside-job bad guys used a retrofitted radio-controlled A-3 TNT-filled Jet to launch a missile attack (like this) at 9:31:39 AM (see FAA Timeline) on Column Line (CL) 14 using this flight path, but the complicated maneuvers caused the radio operator to lose control and altitude at the critical moment, which caused the starboard wing to begin clipping the five downed light poles. The radio operator panicked for fear that the painted up A-3 would crash into the Pentagon lawn, so he pulled back on the joystick to create what the CIT boys are calling the “Flyover Plane,” NOT at 9:38 AM, but at 9:31:39 AM when the famous Pentagon clocks stopped. The radio operator then began making a wide turn to the north that was witnessed by the C-130 pilot and many other people, until making the final attack strike on the Wedge One Wall between CL 9 and CL 15 at 9:36:27 AM just about 5 minutes later to create Terry Cohen's "Terrible Explosion" that took place 'after' the Original 9:31:39 AM attack.

News Video

The problem for our inside-job bad guys is that the Pentagon Limestone-clad masonry wall required the ‘inside’ explosion from the missile strike, in coordination with the A-3 Jet CL 9-15 massive explosion, to take down the E-Ring roof during the 9:31:39 AM attack run. This attack location was chosen far in advance because of the CL 11 control-joint that would bring down the E-Ring roof very efficiently and effectively. However, the A-3 Jet was forced over the E-Ring roof at 9:31:39 AM and also struck the second story concrete slab in the 9:36:27 AM attack, which means the E-Ring roof fell just one foot (look carefully at the control joint above the fire truck) to become wedged tightly against the northern side of CL-11. Our inside-job bad guys then had a terrible problem, because many explosive charges were needed to eventually bring the E-Ring Roof down at 10:15:16 AM about 45 minutes after the original missile attack.

Fox 5 News

This means the inside-job bad guys had to go around fabricating the many different “Official Timelines” that are filled with contradictions (ACAAR = Page 200) in order to give their fake “Flight 77” Cover Story the resemblance of credibility. The inside-job bad guys have been working everyday running their counterintelligence disinformation campaigns to cover their tracks from that time to today.

Lloyd England’s taxi was struck by Pole #1 during the 9:31:39 AM missile strike, which is the reason he saw a single smoke plume from the original small CL 13-15 entry hole (upper picture). While he and his partner were wrestling around with the light pole, then the A-3 Jet created the “Big Boom*” that knocked him down and almost killed him for the second time in just 5 minutes. :0) Many people think the light pole evidence was staged, because they are BLIND to the 911Truth that we have been looking at ‘two attacks’ all along. The second ‘Big Boom’ happened 5 minutes later at 9:36:27 AM, while Lloyd and his helper were removing the pole from his windshield. The next series of explosions started at 9:42 AM, which is event #20 on my Pentagon Timeline here.

The reason you have so much confusion and contradiction between all these Pentagon witnesses is because ‘some’ of them saw the 9:31:39 AM A-3 Flyover and others saw the actual Jet hit the Pentagon at 9:36:27 AM like these two witnesses:

Michael Kelly

Don Wright

The 9:31:39 AM witnesses saw the A-3 disappear into the single smoke plume on the ‘South-of-Citgo’ Flight Path, while the 9:36:27 witnesses saw the same painted-up Jet crash into the Pentagon wall using the “North-of-Citgo” Fight Path shown here. The 9:31:39 AM witnesses saw the light poles flying around, but the 9:36:27 AM people saw no signs of any light poles being hit along the North-of-Citgo Flight Path. That is the reason some so-called Pentagon Investigators think the light pole evidence is all staged. :0) We have small bits of Jet debris, because the A-3 was blown into a kazillion bits at impact. Nobody has ever found one piece of any real Boeing 757-200 Jetliner debris, because this damage and this damage was NOT created by any real 100-Ton Jetliner going any 530 miles per hour. :0) That is the reason no 'time-change' parts have ever been produced by the inside-job FBI/Bushie Administration bad guys in the first place. The damage pattern is consistent with a ‘three attack’ scenario from the 9:31:39 AM missile strike, the 9:36:27 AM Jet attack ‘and’ the subsequent Controlled-Demolition Explosions that eventually brought the E-Ring roof down at 10:15 AM.

This is The 911Truth that MANY so-called leaders of the impotent 911Movement do NOT want you to see. :0)

GL,

Terral

Can I ask what your area of expertise are?  I presume if this research is valid you must have a team of researchers all with specific areas of expertise.  Can you tell me what their areas of expertise are? thanks

[Terral]

Hi Donnay:

Excellent research Terral!  Bravo!

I had always thought it odd, within minutes of the alleged flight 77 hitting the Pentagon the FBI went to the Citgo gas station confiscating the CCTV videos then proceeded to go to the Double Tree and grab theirs.

We agree. Consider the fact that the FBI have never turned over a single ‘time-change part’ (story) to prove they are even in possession of ANY 9/11 Jetliner, then you realize this has been an inside-con-job all along. The Government is lying and Bush/Rove/Cheney are trying to get away with murdering innocent Americans.

Also the other thing that I never believed, for one second-- we are suppose to believe that one of the most highly secured areas, like the Pentagon, had no other CCTV photos of the plane hitting the building.  Nor were there any missiles defending the pentagon because an intruder had entered their airspace.

We agree. There are “five extremely sophisticated anti-missile batteries in place to protect the Pentagon from an airborne attack” (story), but the inside-job bad guys disabled the system under Cheney’s ‘stand down’ order (short Norman Mineta video).

Then I found it even more discrediting-- the Ted Olson recollection of talking to his wife Barbara. 

The inside-job bad guys carried out assassinations (Carol Valentine’s story) for days after these 9/11 attacks ‘and’ certain victims were assigned seats on these bogus Jetliners part of their counterintelligence/disinformation cover up campaign. Barbara Olson had a big mouth and paid the price for being someone who could possibly blow the inside-job bad guy’s cover.

GL,

Terral 

[Terral]

Hi Wikiguy:

Can I ask what your area of expertise are?  I presume if this research is valid you must have a team of researchers all with specific areas of expertise.  Can you tell me what their areas of expertise are? thanks

Here is the deal: Wikiguy can ‘quote >>’ anything from my Pentagon thesis, claims, evidence and conclusions to make a case for anything he likes from whatever he calls credible evidence. The 911Truth says exactly what all the ‘real’ evidence says without creating a single contradiction. If you see any contradictions in ‘my work,’ then please highlight those things and show us your evidence for something else.

GL,

Terral

[wikipeidiaisnotFACT]

Hi Wikiguy:
 

Here is the deal: Wikiguy can ‘quote >>’ anything from my Pentagon thesis, claims, evidence and conclusions to make a case for anything he likes from whatever he calls credible evidence. The 911Truth says exactly what all the ‘real’ evidence says without creating a single contradiction. If you see any contradictions in ‘my work,’ then please highlight those things and show us your evidence for something else.

GL,

Terral

ok i'll make this quick.

You obviously have some research into aviation and specifically plane parts found in the wreakage.  Who in your team of researchers is an aviation expert?

I noticed you have some experience as a demolitions expert.  Can you exspand on this please. 

[Terral]

Hi Wiki:

ok i'll make this quick.

You obviously have some research into aviation and specifically plane parts found in the wreakage.  Who in your team of researchers is an aviation expert?

The Topic is “This Is What Really Happened At The Pentagon” presented in the Opening Post of this thread using all kinds of evidence from a variety of sources. You are welcome to try and find any errors in my case and to offer up your own evidence for something else if that seems a good thing to you. However, the Wiki guy seems far too interested asking many questions about the OP ‘writer’ than anything to do with this Pentagon Case for some reason. I do not want anyone to believe ‘the’ 911Truth from my work because I am an expert about this or that. I do want everyone to recognize ‘the’ 911Truth in my work, because this is what all the real evidence has been saying since day one. The Pentagon was attacked at exactly 9:31:39 AM, by a rogue element inside our U.S. military that is still at work right this minute running their counterintelligence/disinformation cover up operation. If you have any questions about my OP interpretations of the evidence, then I am happy to spend some time going over the evidence from my years of running my own 911Truth Pentagon Investigation.

GL,

Terral

[plantop14]

Good work Terral! I believe no jetliner what so ever hit the Pentagon instead it was hit by a missile and possibly the building could have been previously wired with explosives such as what happened on that same morning in Manhattan! The immediate confiscation of all surveillance camera tapes, without a doubt, stinks of guilt and is a definite indication of a f--king cover-up! Your work is interesting and when I get the chance I will look into all of your links on your initial post!

[wikipeidiaisnotFACT]

Hi Wiki:

The Topic is “This Is What Really Happened At The Pentagon” presented in the Opening Post of this thread using all kinds of evidence from a variety of sources. You are welcome to try and find any errors in my case and to offer up your own evidence for something else if that seems a good thing to you. However, the Wiki guy seems far too interested asking many questions about the OP ‘writer’ than anything to do with this Pentagon Case for some reason. I do not want anyone to believe ‘the’ 911Truth from my work because I am an expert about this or that. I do want everyone to recognize ‘the’ 911Truth in my work, because this is what all the real evidence has been saying since day one. The Pentagon was attacked at exactly 9:31:39 AM, by a rogue element inside our U.S. military that is still at work right this minute running their counterintelligence/disinformation cover up operation. If you have any questions about my OP interpretations of the evidence, then I am happy to spend some time going over the evidence from my years of running my own 911Truth Pentagon Investigation.



GL,

Terral

You really are a turd.

I checked your first link expecting it to link to some reputable source and it just linked to some other joker who does not show his sources either. 

very poor effort im afraid. 

[EvadingGrid]

You really are a turd.

I checked your first link expecting it to link to some reputable source and it just linked to some other joker who does not show his sources either. 

very poor effort im afraid. 

Dear wikipdeiaisnotFACT,

Would you like to enlighten me as to what happend in your opinion at the Pentagon on 911 ?

[wikipeidiaisnotFACT]

Dear wikipdeiaisnotFACT,

Would you like to enlighten me as to what happend in your opinion at the Pentagon on 911 ?

stop dodging answering why you have no sources. 

Its seriously weak research i'm afraid.

I will believe the official story until I see evidence that suggests otherwise.

[Terral]

Hi EvadingGrid:

Dear wikipdeiaisnotFACT,

Would you like to enlighten me as to what happend in your opinion at the Pentagon on 911?

The guy is here to harass the topic starter without any intentions of addressing ‘the topic’ of this thread. There is no evidence to support the Official Cover Story LIE, so this guy calls people names and hopes that nobody will notice. :0)

What has Wikiguy ‘quoted >>’ from the Opening Post to prove wrong using his evidence? Nothing. :0)

GL,

Terral

[EvadingGrid]

Hi EvadingGrid:

The guy is here to harass the topic starter without any intentions of addressing ‘the topic’ of this thread. There is no evidence to support the Official Cover Story LIE, so this guy calls people names and hopes that nobody will notice. :0)

What has Wikiguy ‘quoted >>’ from the Opening Post to prove wrong using his evidence? Nothing. :0)

GL,

Terral

I agree with you Terral, wikipediaisnotaFACT fails to answer any real questions. I wonder who wikipediaisnotaFACT really is ?

[jimd3100]

Hi so-Z:

If you want to use Hoffman disinformation to support an argument against anything in the Opening Post, then please be my guest. There is no evidence to support Hoffman's Official Cover Story claims in the article you pasted to this thread, so good luck trying to prop up his bogus conclusions about anything.

GL again,

Terral

Jim Hoffman has done more for 9/11 research than you will ever dream of doing, and you have the nerve to call him disinformation? This from a disinfo queen who has been tossed off of every board they've ever posted on, including this one.

Hoffman is right, and you are wrong.

[New World Hitler]

I checked on www.bts.gov to see the flight details...

AA - 09/11/2001 - 0077 - UNKNOW - LAX - 08:10 - 00:00 - 0326 - 0000 - 0 - 00:00 - 0000

AA - 09/11/2001 - 0011 - UNKNOW - LAX - 07:45 - 00:00 - 0374 - 0000 - 0 - 00:00 - 0000 

That's actually pretty interesting, don't know why they're listed as having no actual departure time, especially since...

UA - 09/11/2001 - 0093 - N591UA - SFO - 08:00 - 08:01 - 0374 - 0000 - 1 - 08:28 - 0027

UA - 09/11/2001 - 0175 - N612UA - LAX - 08:00 - 07:58 - 0376 - 0000 - -2 - 08:23 - 0025

That's interesting to know, not sure on the credability and accuracy of the website, but that's deffinately interesting to see...

Edit:  What's even more interesting is that when you check the flights a few days later, you'll find that both flight 11 and flight 77 were still in the system untill September 20th, at which point they're gone frome the list.  Flight 93 and flight 175 on the other hand, were gone September 12th...