Wednesday, November 29, 2006

Everything You Always Wanted to Know About The Pentagon Strike

9-11 Debunker has completed the analysis of the Pentagon attack. This is the most complete and up-to-date analysis of the Pentagon strike I've seen, even better than the famed Catherder post over at ATS.

45 Comments:

At 29 November, 2006 10:33, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Does anyone care to explain why the Pentagon, nor other Govt. agencies, seem to have video they would like to release to the public that clearly shows the plane?

 
At 29 November, 2006 10:41, Blogger CHF said...

Maybe cuz a 757 goin 500 mph wouldn't show up on a shitty security camera that takes a photo every second.

Maybe it wouldn't make sense for any cameras to be aimed at the Pentagon.

Or maybe cuz you twoofers NEVER BOTHER FILING REQUESTS FOR THE FOOTAGE!

Besides, you'd just claim it was fake anyway so what fuckin difference does it make?

 
At 29 November, 2006 10:45, Blogger CHF said...

Notice how twoofers think Flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon cuz there's no footage that clearly shows the plane.

WELL THERE'S NO FOOTAGE OF A CRUISE MISSILE OR AN A3 EITHER! Yet they have no problem believe that's what hit the Pentagon.

These morons insult logic at every turn.

 
At 29 November, 2006 10:47, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's a small point. I don't based any conclusions on the lack of video.

I simply find it odd and worthy of watching.

 
At 29 November, 2006 11:05, Blogger CHF said...

I don't based any conclusions on the lack of video.

Apparently you don't base any conclusions on 100 witnesses, 757 wreckage, black boxes, phone calls, or a missing 757 either...

What exactly DO you base conclusions on, BG? The voices in your head?

 
At 29 November, 2006 11:14, Blogger Swing Dangler said...

1. The video's that have been released do not show clearly what hit the Pentagon.

2. Judicial Watch has filed numerous FOIA's. 84 other tapes have yet to be released.

3. The biggest problem with the author's post this time is not accurate.

I want to know why the Flight Data Recorder does not match the flight path. See http://www.pilotsfor911truth.org/
This would be the tell tale evidence to shore up any questions, but it does the exact opposite.

In order for the FDR/Flight Path to match up, the light poles had to be 440 feet tall (+/- 75 feet) for this aircraft to bring them down. I think we can all agree the poles were not that tall, which begs the question, what happened to the light poles? And your Debunking Guide fails to address this issue.

4. Or it could be because of the lack of honesty this government has shown its citizens over the past several decades.

 
At 29 November, 2006 11:40, Anonymous Anonymous said...

chf,

Here's your answer (just one):
PDF: 9-11 and the IMPOSSIBLE

 
At 29 November, 2006 11:48, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

1. How do you know pilotsfor911truth are not in err with their calculations?

2. 84 tapes have not been released. The FBI agent in charge responded to the FOIA which asked for, specifically, any tapes that would show AA77 striking the Pentagon on September 11th (or something very close to that effect). The FBI agent replied that she had reviewed the tapes, and only 13 of them even covered the area in question. Of those, only one tape revealed any images that might show AA77 hitting the Pentagon, and that was the one previously released.

Go to the site

http://www.flight77.info/

Go to the all documents section and read the documents sent to them from the FBI agent in charge, and read what she says. She xplains it quite logically for me. Based on the FOIA request sent, she had the relevent info sent to them.

TAM

 
At 29 November, 2006 11:57, Anonymous Anonymous said...

TAM,

I acknowledge your points.

Thanks for debating the issue rather than attacking me.

 
At 29 November, 2006 12:03, Blogger CHF said...

and how many 9/11 crash investigators work for physic911?

How does your link account for 100 witnesses?

Oh right, it doesn't.

 
At 29 November, 2006 12:05, Blogger troy said...

Sorry Pat,

I spoke with Robert Balsamo Monday. He's a pilot for 9/11 twoof. His studies have concluded it's impossible for Flight 77 to have hit the Pentagon.

Here's a link to the brief conversation. Its from 11-27-06 during Hour 2. In the last 10 minutes. Mr. Balsamo seemed to get a bit testy when I said I thought Flight 77 hit the pentagon. Prove it, prove it!!

http://www.realradioarchives.com/sound-1.htm

 
At 29 November, 2006 12:09, Blogger CHF said...

A piece of advice BG,

rather than link someone to a massive document, why not just highlight the relevant parts?

Show me what is in the doc that convinces you that Flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon.

Show me what you DO think hit it.

 
At 29 November, 2006 12:24, Blogger Swing Dangler said...

Hey Mac!

1.Do I know for sure they are done without error? Yep. Both sets of data are from the federal government. Is the data wrong? I can't answer that question. It is what the government has released.
You could do the analysis as well because you are an intelligent person. It isn't that difficult to determine the altitude and other various factors of the FDR and match it to the official flight path.

2. The point still stands MAC that 84 give or take a couple haven't been released. As part of the historical record, they should ALL be released for historical and avionic analysis. I would enjoy seeing post impact videos of the event as well as those that don't show the actual impact.

3. I'm sure he claimed that because of the errors with the FDR and the flight path. If the FDR doesn't match the flight path, then something strange is afoot at the circle K.

4. Hey Troy, are you a pilot?

 
At 29 November, 2006 12:25, Blogger Stevew said...

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread79655/pg1

http://debris.0catch.com/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVDdjLQkUV8&mode=related&search=

 
At 29 November, 2006 12:32, Blogger James B. said...

This cracks me up. Apparently witnesses hearing explosives proves demolitions (like fires aren't noisy on their own) but when hundreds of witnesses say they saw a 767 hit the Pentagon (hardly an event open to subtlety or interpretation) we have to completely ignore them. The number of people who have reported a UAV, missile, A-3 Skywarrior, fly-over, or any other alternative theory, ZERO. Yet they grasp onto that theory as the likely one.

Bizarre.

 
At 29 November, 2006 12:38, Blogger Dog Town said...

Hit CS with this as well.
Don't have time to play today, but I thought everyone should see this!Saw it at JREF, screen shot done !

PD'oh looking for love, pictures and all! Looks like I had imagined, a skin head! FLMAO!

http://manchester.flirtbox.co.uk/dating/pdoherty76.html

Sorry off topic, but ya just gotta laugh!

DT

 
At 29 November, 2006 12:41, Blogger Swing Dangler said...

James, 100's of witnesses? Wasn't it around 80 or so? Which is it according to your debunking site?

So if we ignore those that see something other than the OS, we throw those out as well? Based upon that logic, shouldn't we throw out all of the eyewitness surrounding the Pentagon crash?

Is it unreasonable to ask for the FAA and the Military to release the radar data in regards to the Pentagon?

Oh and lets not compare the two events to justify your reasoning. You of all people know you can't compare the two to support your statements. Complex question fallacy I believe.

The point is if all of the eyewitnesses described the plane as such, if all of the data matched, if all of the video was conclusive, and if the track record of the Federal Government wasn't littered with lies, we wouldn't have an issue with the Pentagon now would we?

 
At 29 November, 2006 12:43, Anonymous Anonymous said...

ROFL!

I just watched that file you linked to BG and the picture where u see a clock that says 9:31 instead of 9:38 is just hilarious :D
Yeh thats some real proof that the government is lying, because we have a damaged clock that says 9:31 instead of the official time of 9:38! CONSPIRACY!

 
At 29 November, 2006 12:45, Blogger James B. said...

James, 100's of witnesses? Wasn't it around 80 or so? Which is it according to your debunking site?


80 or so in the media. Do you think every single person who saw a 767 managed to get interviewed on CNN? Was there any marginal value for the media to keep on reporting people saying the exact same thing?

 
At 29 November, 2006 12:50, Anonymous Anonymous said...

CHF said,

The Pentagon crime scene is one of my weakest areas. I would appreciate it if you would turn your volume down a notch.

There has been what I consider "disinfo" about what hit the Pentagon, and I'd rather steer clear.

I'm not attempting to solve the crimes of 9/11. Never said I was. I would appreciate it if you'd give me a break. Yes, I'm aggressive in calling some of what shows up on "SLC" as bullshit. Does that mean I have the knowledge of what really happened?

That's the problem: we don't know because we haven't had the luxury of a real investigation.

 
At 29 November, 2006 12:53, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Also nice to see he recreated the pentagon from old shoe boxes :D

On page 36 he shows 2 combuster sections, 2 bad he mislabeled them, because the one on the left is from a RR engine and the one on the right is from a GE engine.

 
At 29 November, 2006 12:55, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jay said...

Also nice to see he recreated the pentagon from old shoe boxes :D

On page 36 he shows 2 combuster sections, 2 bad he mislabeled them, because the one on the left is from a RR engine and the one on the right is from a GE engine.


Wow, Jay, now that you've pointed out that error, my whole doubt about whether we've been told the truth about 9/11 has dissolved.

 
At 29 November, 2006 12:55, Blogger James B. said...

Yes, I'm aggressive in calling some of what shows up on "SLC" as bullshit.

Actually you aren't. I have asked you dozens of times to point out specifically what we are posting that is factually incorrect and/or misleading, and you never respond. You always just go off some tangent and tell us to read some book or watch some video.

 
At 29 November, 2006 13:02, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oops, i just blundered there :D the right one actuially is a RR engine, i dunno where he got the left picture from. I thought he used that same picture from Loose Change. So i apologize for my fault. Maybe i should turn in, cause its getting late over here.

 
At 29 November, 2006 13:11, Blogger Alex said...

There has been what I consider "disinfo" about what hit the Pentagon

In other words, the fucking CTers have been tossing around so many lies and idiotic theories, that BG can't commit to talking about any of them because even he realizes that his movement is full of shit.

I'm not attempting to solve the crimes of 9/11. Never said I was. I would appreciate it if you'd give me a break.

Fuck you. You're on here 24/7 hammering away with clueless "questions", lies, and spam to idiotic books and articles, and now you want us to give you a break? Not bloody likely. If you really want a break you need to shut your gormless gob, get off the computer, and stop spreading your disinfo. You do that, you won't have any problems with us ever again.

Does that mean I have the knowledge of what really happened?

You've answered that question over and over again, but I think it should come as a disclaimer on every post you make:

"WARNING: The following message is BG's clueless opinion, and has no factual backing whatsoever."

That's the problem: we don't know because we haven't had the luxury of a real investigation.

Ofcourse we didn't, JFK boy. Don't worry, the Roswell aliens will come and take you away to Jupiter soon.

 
At 29 November, 2006 13:17, Blogger acmefoilco said...

I was at Ft. Lee, VA on Tues 11 SEPT 2001. On the following Friday we were released from training for the weekend.(Supply School) We were ordered not to go into DC as all hell was still in process. Like the good soldier I was, I ignored the order. A couple of us rented a car and drove to Arlington House;(R.E. Lee's Property that was turned into the National Cemetery.) It has a great view of the Pentagon, particularly the side that was hit. The scene was surreal. One of my companies investors is a retired Major General, Joseph P. Franklin. He ran West Point and has a phd in nuke physics. He has a LOT of friends in the Pentagon and knew one of the officers that was killed when Flight 77 hit. Not he nor any of his contempories believe that anything other than Flight 77 hit the Pentagon. Anyone who even suggests otherwise, he deems a fool, a liar, or both. I agree. What kind of sick mind thinks that if they didn't see it happen with their own eyes, that it didn't happen, as per the OS, then it wasn't Flt 77, and was an inside conspiracy job?! BG and Swing... have you no sense of shame?

 
At 29 November, 2006 13:23, Blogger troy said...

It's obvious Major General, Joseph P. Franklin has been bought by THEM

 
At 29 November, 2006 13:26, Blogger acmefoilco said...

Actually, General Joe got out because he didn't want to work at the Pentagon; for reasons I can't post here.

 
At 29 November, 2006 13:30, Blogger troy said...

I wasn't serious.

 
At 29 November, 2006 13:33, Blogger acmefoilco said...

I'm hip.

 
At 29 November, 2006 13:41, Blogger pomeroo said...

Hey, Bg doesn't have much to say about Fetzer's brilliant performance in his debate with J.R. Dunn (see americanthinker.com; search for J.R. Dunn--you'll see the three relevant articles). Fetzer really knows what he's talking about, yesirree! Yup, that was an A-3 all right.
Question: how can a discredited crackpot like Fetzer continue to show his face in public?

 
At 29 November, 2006 13:49, Blogger pomeroo said...

Bg displays his characteristic love of learning in his profound commentary on this technical paper by an Italian pilot. Oh, I'm sorry--Bg never bothered to read it. Well, the rationalists have only cited it a few dozen times.

http://911myths.com/Another_Expert.pdf

 
At 29 November, 2006 14:10, Blogger CHF said...

That's the problem: we don't know because we haven't had the luxury of a real investigation.

Oh boy - it's the "we need a real investigation" BS again.

Fine, BG - WHO SHOULD CONDUCT IT?

Gimme some names.

 
At 29 November, 2006 14:19, Blogger pomeroo said...

Don't forget to tell those "new" investigators that if they refuse to confirm that explosives were used in bringing down the WTC, despite the total absence of any evidence of their use, we'll just demand still another investigation.

We are the tinfoil-hat brigade.

We demand answers.

When we don't get the answers we demand--

WE DEMAND DIFFERENT ANSWERS!

 
At 29 November, 2006 14:22, Blogger CHF said...

The Pentagon crime scene is one of my weakest areas.

And what would be your strongest area, BG?

 
At 29 November, 2006 14:46, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

Swing:

I wouldnt attempt to analyze it. You see one of our group, apathoid, actually analyzes and works with FDR and other similar instruments...that is his job. Now from what he has said, it is not as simple as just reading the data, because the data provided may not accurately reflect the original data from the FDR. I am not sure of the exacts, and it actually went above my head, but from what they said, it has to do with time intervals within successive frames of the original data.

If apathoid were here, he could explain, or if you are interested, g to JREF, where he hangs out more often, and ask him about the FDR data, and the errors that the Pilots might not be noticing when they did their analysis.

TAM

 
At 29 November, 2006 17:03, Blogger Lying_Dylan said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 
At 29 November, 2006 17:05, Blogger Lying_Dylan said...

And what would be your strongest area, BG?

His advanced knowledge of Psych meds and soft leather restraints?

 
At 29 November, 2006 17:16, Blogger Lavoisier said...

BG's statements are getting weaker and weaker. Perhaps we are getting to him?

 
At 29 November, 2006 18:40, Blogger R.Lange said...

I would appreciate it if you'd give me a break. Yes, I'm aggressive in calling some of what shows up on "SLC" as bullshit.

There seems to be a 2-for-1 sale on Standards in BG's world...

 
At 30 November, 2006 05:24, Blogger Swing Dangler said...

James I just posted some of your BS. I've pointed out the Atta/Keller relationship that did exist which this site continues to push there was no relationship issue..which is bullshit.
Again people on this site will state: NO EVIDENCE OF CD! However firefighters, rescue workers, citizens at the WTC complex report explosions going off, steel flowing like lava, etc, etc. Yeah proof there that something other than jets and fuel brought 'em down. Must have been a massive storage unit for hair spray canisters. Simple logic right Pomeroo? Or are you still denying the WTC7 CD?

James, in regards to the witnesses of course that was your opinion with no factual base which is of course bullshit. Remember James, we only know what the mainstream tells us.

acmefoilco Sure I have shame!
However, my mind is perfectly fine.
But in regards to this entire event, the track record of our own government with regards to items like this and particularly this administration, I don't trust 'em that is all. How far back in our own history do I have to go to list the numerous cover-ups, conspiracies, false-flag operations, state-sponsored terror operations, etc. As a (former?) soldier you have been conditioned to think in a particular way and for a particular reason. I don't hold that against you. You chose to become that way. Calling someone sick and shamefull is simply a reflection of such conditioning. I forgive you. What I find disconcerting is the blind acceptance of the what the Federal Government and its agencies say is truth. You on the other hand have been conditioned to accept it as fact.

The point remains if there were no conflicting evidence, if there were no question as to what hit the Pentagon on the video tapes, if all of the evidence was released to the public, if this administration and those like didn't spout continous lies there would be no need to investigate conspiracies of this nature and it would be a case closed issue.

I think you will find a excellent idea on how this operation was pulled off at http://team8plus.org/news.php

 
At 30 November, 2006 09:02, Blogger Alex said...

Again people on this site will state: NO EVIDENCE OF CD! However firefighters, rescue workers, citizens at the WTC complex report explosions going off, steel flowing like lava, etc, etc.

None of which are evidence of a controlled demolition. So what th hell is your point? Are you that deficient in logic? Here, I'll make an argument similar to yours just to illustrate how stupid you sound:

"You people claim the was no evidence of CD, yet people at ground zero heard Metallica playing 'For Whom The Bell Tolls'!"

See? Doesn't works.

As a (former?) soldier you have been conditioned to think in a particular way and for a particular reason.

Wow. You really ARE retarded....

However, my mind is perfectly fine.

Not even close, bud.

The point remains if there were no conflicting evidence, if there were no question as to what hit the Pentagon on the video tapes, if all of the evidence was released to the public, if this administration and those like didn't spout continous lies there would be no need to investigate conspiracies of this nature and it would be a case closed issue.

Actually, if there was no conflicting evidence, THAT is when I would get suspicious. The only time everything fits perfectly is when it has been designed to.

 
At 30 November, 2006 16:56, Blogger Pat said...

Swing, what's your evidence that the Keller-Atta relationship existed? We've linked several times to the article where she admits that she lied.

 
At 01 December, 2006 07:28, Blogger Stevew said...

Alex
I would love to see a pik where any CD produces rivers of molten steel

 
At 04 December, 2006 11:16, Blogger Swing Dangler said...

Swing, what's your evidence that the Keller-Atta relationship existed? We've linked several times to the article where she admits that she lied.

In that original post, Pat, that you linked to earlier. She admitted and other witnesses admitted to harrassment by the FBI prior to Keller's reversal. There are also other witnesses that have stated Keller's realtionship with Atta did exist. The proof goes on and on. See the Hopsickler investigation for more details.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home