Sunday, May 14, 2006

For Those Who Believe There Was No Plane Crash At the Pentagon...

I guess Staff Sergeant Mark Williams is part of the coverup too.

WASHINGTON — On Tuesday, Army Staff Sgt. Mark Williams witnessed a combat zone for the first time in his 11 years of service. He never imagined it would be inside the Pentagon. One of the first recovery personnel to enter the crippled headquarters building after a hijacked Boeing 757 smashed into it, the urban search-and-rescue specialist found a gruesome sight. "If anyone has ever burned a pot roast, they'll know what the victims looked like," Williams, 30, said Thursday after another 12-hour shift of searching for 190 bodies — those of 126 missing Pentagon personnel and the 64 aboard the doomed jetliner.

The fireball occurred when the jetliner's full fuel tank exploded on impact and roared down corridors so fast that "90% didn't know what happened to them," he said.

Many were sitting at their desks or behind partitions. One woman was found frozen in a sitting position, her arms posed as if reading a document.

Several bodies were found huddled in groups near televisions. Pentagon workers were apparently watching the carnage taking place at the World Trade Center when the hellish scene on TV became reality for them, too.

When Williams discovered the scorched bodies of several airline passengers, they were still strapped into their seats. The stench of charred flesh overwhelmed him.

"It was the worst thing you can imagine," said Williams, whose squad from Fort Belvoir, Va., entered the building, less than four hours after the terrorist attack. "I wanted to cry from the minute I walked in. But I have soldiers under me and I had to put my feelings aside."


At 14 May, 2006 15:16, Blogger nes718 said...

No one is saying the fireball didn't kill people inside the building, but the way you have this worded makes it look like he's talking about finding "passengers" as opposed to just victims of the blast.

But let's take this a step further, if in fact the fireball was so hot that it practically vaporized the entire airplane along with the 6 ton steel, aluminum and titanium engines, how on earth could they possibly find bodies made of flesh? In my book, 2 + 2 always equals 4. Seem the "official version" apologists always find and excuse for the impossible. Is Sgt. Mark Williams part of a cover-up? You decide! This story could be a well placed plant by "the powers that be." Now wake up and smell the bullshit.

At 14 May, 2006 15:20, Blogger nes718 said...

Also remember, if a well trained soldier can’t carry out an order regardless of the consequences, he really wasn’t well trained.

At 14 May, 2006 15:52, Blogger roger_sq said...

"Yet, as he (Mark Williams) looked up into the black chasm torn into the symbol of the mightiest military on earth, Williams saw a sign of hope.

On a second floor, right next to where the jet sheared off a section of the building, was an undisturbed stool. And on it was a thick, open book. Fellow searchers who had gotten a close look said it was a Bible. It was not burned. Nor was anything around it or on the two floors above it.

"I'm not as religious as some, but that would have me thinking," the soldier said. "I just can't explain it."

Just God's way of giving the green light to the PNAC. Don't pay any mind to it, and yes, we believe everything you say Sgt. Williams. Everything you say...

At 14 May, 2006 18:14, Blogger James B. said...

No one is saying the fireball didn't kill people inside the building, but the way you have this worded makes it look like he's talking about finding "passengers" as opposed to just victims of the blast.

Can you read?

When Williams discovered the scorched bodies of several airline passengers, they were still strapped into their seats. The stench of charred flesh overwhelmed him.

At 14 May, 2006 22:23, Blogger nes718 said...

I can read. It was a typo, meant:

but the way you have this worded makes it look like he's *ONLY* talking

Caught that after I posted and would have edited if there was and edit feature.

At 14 May, 2006 22:26, Blogger nes718 said...

But James, what about the FACT that Sgt. Williams was part of the team that trained EXACTLY for this type of attack a few months back and JUST happened to be in the area when it happened? Just another in a long like of coincidences?

At 15 May, 2006 05:51, Blogger Lucy Stinks said...

I've never seen any photos of jetliner seats. They'd be the first things to burn to ashes in fire, unless they're fireproof? If there were seats found, then why no iron foodcarts?

At 15 May, 2006 07:12, Blogger James B. said...

Oh brother, you people are ridiculous. It is a waste of time arguing with you. It must be easy making an argument when you can ignore any evidence that you don't like. How are those holocaust denial theories coming?

At 15 May, 2006 08:32, Blogger nes718 said...

How are those holocaust denial theories coming?

Since you went there, here's a Holocaust revisionist FACT you can't deny:

So just what constitutes "Holocaust denial"? Surely a claim that most Auschwitz inmates died from disease and not systematic extermination in gas chambers would be "denial." But perhaps not. Jewish historian Arno J. Mayer, a Princeton University professor, wrote in his 1988 study Why Did the Heavens Not Darken?: The 'Final Solution" in History': ... From 1942 to 1945, certainly at Auschwitz, but probably overall, more Jews were killed by so-called 'natural' causes than by 'unnatural' ones." (note 9)

Even estimates of the number of people who died at Auschwitz -- allegedly the main extermination center -- are no longer clear cut. At the postwar Nuremberg Tribunal, the Allies charged that the Germans exterminated four million people at Auschwitz. (note 10) Until 1990, a memorial plaque at Auschwitz read: "Four Million People Suffered and Died Here at the Hands of the Nazi Murderers Between the Years 1940 and 1945." (note 11) During a 1979 visit to the camp, Pope John Paul II stood before this memorial and blessed the four million victims.

Is it "Holocaust denial" to dispute these four million deaths? Not today. In July 1990, the Polish government's Auschwitz State Museum, along with Israel's Yad Vashem Holocaust center, conceded that the four million figure was a gross exaggeration, and references to it were accordingly removed from the Auschwitz monument. Israeli and Polish officials announced a tentative revised toll of 1.1 million Auschwitz dead. (note 12) In 1993, French Holocaust researcher Jean-Claude Pressac, in a much-discussed book about Auschwitz, estimated that altogether about 775,000 died there during the war years. (note 13)

Professor Mayer acknowledges that the question of how many really died in Auschwitz remains open. In Why Did the Heavens Not Darken? he wrote (p. 366):

... Many questions remain open ... All in all, how many bodies were cremated in Auschwitz? How many died there all told? What was the national, religious, and ethnic breakdown in this commonwealth of victims? How many of them were condemned to die a 'natural' death and how many were deliberately slaughtered? And what was the proportion of Jews among those murdered in cold blood among these gassed? We have simply no answers to these questions at this time.


At 15 May, 2006 11:02, Blogger LT said...

from above post:

"but probably overall"

James man, they got us beat hands down. How are we supposed to compete with such solid "evidence"?


At 15 May, 2006 12:12, Blogger nes718 said...

James man, they got us beat hands down. How are we supposed to compete with such solid "evidence"?

The real "evidence" is that the number on the plaque changed, this is verifiable though many sources. But in usual "brown shirt" fashion, you neglect to refute substance but instead try and make a point where there is none.

At 15 May, 2006 12:42, Blogger LT said...

the number on the plaque changed from what to what. Please provide numbers and link.

At 15 May, 2006 14:17, Blogger Pat said...

"For many years, a memorial plaque placed at the camp by the Soviet authorities and the Polish communist government stated that 4 million people had been murdered at Auschwitz. This number was never taken seriously by Western historians, and was never used in any of the calculations of the death toll at Auschwitz (which have generally remained consistently around 1-1.5 million for the last sixty years) or for the total deaths in the Holocaust as a whole. After the collapse of the Communist government, the plaque was removed and the official death toll given as 1.1 million. Holocaust deniers have attempted to use this change as propaganda, in the words of Nizkor: "Deniers often use the 'Four Million Variant' as a stepping stone to leap from an apparent contradiction to the idea that the Holocaust was a hoax, again perpetrated by a conspiracy. They hope to discredit historians by making them seem inconsistent."

From the Wikipedia article on Auschwitz.

At 15 May, 2006 18:52, Blogger Alex said...

Heh. Well done Pat. Just goes to show how even a misinterpretation of an insignificant even can be turned into a conspiracy by those who are mentaly unstable enough. Keeping that in mind, is it really any wonder that there are literlay thousands of different consipracy theories about an event like 9/11?

At 25 May, 2006 11:44, Blogger BoBilla said...

I dont understand how stupid some people can be.
Sure SOMETHING hit the building dud. there are/were people in the Pentagon - they died. Where are the wings for the "airplane" where is the engine the tail.... stop being so stupid and open your eyes

At 01 June, 2006 14:27, Blogger undecidedbutleaning said...

Pat, loved your auschwitz source. you forgot to mention that any body can post thier personal opinion on wilkipedia and call it fact.Leaving aside that arguments about how many million died at one place miss the point entirely.History proves without doubt that if you believe a governments bullshit without question then disgusting things can be done in the name of your country.

At 14 June, 2006 12:35, Blogger Pandora - The Creator said...

We need to get back to the fact of the bodies and plane.

According to the 9/11 stories told by the government: The plane was VAPORIZED! That means THE WHOLE PLANE WAS VAPORIZED. There is no way the engine fuel could perfectly destroy the whole plane(not to mention wings and all before the crash since they made no impact) made of titanium but only burn the plane seats and people.

How could those people even be idenitfied as "strapped in the seat"?

I'm not denying that there could've been victims found in the Pentagon, but in the Plane?

The total vaporization of the plane is question enough, so how could human bodies survive a fire that would destroy titanium with a melting point higher than kerosene can create?

Anwser me that..

At 14 June, 2006 12:35, Blogger Pandora - The Creator said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

At 22 July, 2006 22:32, Blogger Mike V. said...

Until I see video of a plane hitting the pentagon, there is no fucking way I will believe that one did.

It is utterly impossible for a jetliner to be vaporized all the while creating only a 14 foot wide hole in the building.

At 06 August, 2006 04:58, Blogger heusdens said...

The crash/explosion at the Pentagon was the most suspicious event of the 9/11 attacks, in that we have up to today serious doubts that this was a plane (supposedly a 757) crashing into the building, and not some missile or aircraft acting as a missile.
A number of things that can't be explained are:
- there are no pictures or videos of the flight of the aircraft itself that identifies the object that caused the impact. That is: in so far they exist, they have been seized by the FBI, and were not made public. All rumours and questions of what the actual object was, good probably be settled when this material is released.
- The impact size immediately after the crash does not show indications of where the wings and engines hit the outer walls, and numerous people suggest for that reason, a 757 could not have caused that impact.
- The person supposed to have flown the 757 was not capable of the manouvres that the plane made.
- Many bystanders have claimed they smelled cordite, an explosive stuff. The only video frame of the impact from a security cam on the Pentagon looks more like an explosion caused by some sort of explosives.
- There are many claims that an attack on the Pentagon was a scenario used by the military for training purposes.
- How to explain the total failure of air defense on that specific day?
Just "coincidences" or "incapabalities", or was there within the military prior knowledge?
- A possible and/or partial explenation to these last 2 could be: either the military scenarios were confused with the actual facts, or there were order from higher up, not to intercept the hijacked planes (or a combination of those two).
- Why did the crash occur at the just renovated part of the pentagon, which was the most difficult flight path, and all that undertaken by an amateur pilot, without experience.

These questions still remain, up to today. I don't know the answer, but there are reasons to believe that the official version isn't true.

Add to this the fact that many warning were emitted long time before 9/11, which were simply ignored, and this will blow up the myth that that day these attacks came as a "total surprise" and that USA - the largest and most advance military power on earth - was undefendable to these kind of attacks. That is something nobody can believe.

I don't go into speculating what realy happened, as I simply don't know. But the official version is just not the whole truth.

Even if the original plan was carried out by the guys that the US claims, this does not rule out the possibility that the US military and government, had prior knowledge to that, and choose to "not prevent" these attacks, for the obvious reasons that this attacks served as the excuse to execute plans for attacking Afghanistan, Iraq, and probably later on also Syria and Iran.

In conclusion: these attacks were just part of the overall war plan of the USA.

At 22 August, 2006 18:08, Blogger ramrod_the_republican said...

"I don't go into speculating what realy happened..."

Really? Looks to me like you've got your head stuck in speculation nirvana. If you could posit an argument that rises above the totally inane you could possibly be forgven for blantantly lying about your innocence.

AS it is I must wonder how is it possible for one human being to be so stupid and still breathe?

At 26 August, 2006 12:28, Blogger canadiansteve said...

Wow, Ramrod. Heusdens gives 8-10 questions and facts that are well laid out and your clever rebuttal to his argument is "you're stupid" and "ha ha, you did speculate a bit when you said you weren't going to" but the questions and facts still remain unanswered. All you pro-bush debaters just defame peoples characters instead of answering questions and addressing facts. If we were in debate club back in highschool you would have your asses served to you.

At 04 September, 2006 02:42, Blogger SeanS said...

Fact: it was a plane.

Fact: there are photos of the wreckage of the plane.

I apologize for self-pimpage, but here is THE EVIDENCE.

If you want more, there is a link in the post for the Popular Mechanics article that explains the FACT that a PLANE hit the PENTAGON. Although, knowing most of you conspiracy-theory wackos, you'll try and find a way to disprove them too (without factual evidence, of course), so what's the point?

At 11 September, 2006 00:07, Blogger Nick'sOnIt said...

Why wouldn't they (the us gov't) just crash a plane with us civilians into the pentagon? Why use all these smoke and mirrors?

At 11 September, 2006 22:23, Blogger cptCanuck said...

I love the Cordite argument. It was one idiot who said that not many. The hole was not 14feet wide. Do some research other than watching some half ass film students hack job. The hole was over 40ft wide. And if it was a missile what the hell moved the generator and knocked down all the lamp posts in the direction of the pentagon. Its astounding that Dylan Avery and his crackpot friends have gotten any credence with a film that is so biased and full of contradictions. FFS the guy quotes a Nazi white supremacist that has a web site up denying the holocost as one of his major points. You had murderous lunatics in the middle east jumping for joy and dancing in the streets when this happened and Osama Bin Laden congratulating his lieutenants on there success with there second try at the WTC and here this idiot comes along and starts this crap. I am just so disgusted but you know what the fact is the very institution so many of you love to label as evil and corrupt is the very one that stands up and allows you to voice these type of thoughts. If Osama and his ilk get there way there will be one thought process and that will be based on radical Islam. Wake up and stop trying to find ways to hate your government and concentrate on the real issues at hand.

At 15 September, 2006 19:00, Blogger - said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

At 15 September, 2006 19:04, Blogger - said...

RE: the evidence of the plane that crashed into the pentagon...

How come its not burnt.. or even singed? This photo is of one part. This is not a "wreckage". A wreckage would involve engines, fusiloge, nose, tail, wing pieces..etc...

And why - when there so much footage of the WTC - is there no footage or pictures of a plane crashing into the pentagon?

At 17 September, 2006 08:16, Blogger SeanS said...

I suppose a plane is supposed to stay in one piece while it is plowing into the ground? Bex, are you an engineer? Perhaps a physics major? It's pretty obvious that you are not.

Here's a bit of a lesson for you. Plane fuselages are made of aluminum. Ever squish a Coke can? Try it sometime and you'll see that it is very easy to rip it apart. The force of a plane crashing is MORE THAN ADEQUATE to rip the plane apart. Not all of the wreckage went into the building. Not all of the wreckage went into the fire (that's why it's not singed).

As far as why there weren't any cameras... ever try to film near a military installation? Even before 9/11 it wasn't allowed. Especially near sensitive installations like the Penatagon. Also it is a matter of population. How many people live/work in NYC? How many live/work at the Pentagon? Hint: BIG difference.

At 22 September, 2006 10:06, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'd just like to pass along a favorite quote from Der Spiegel on conspiracy theories: "as diverse as these theories and their adherents may be, they share a basic thought pattern: great tragedies must have great reasons." Link:,1518,265160,00.html

At 18 October, 2006 02:11, Blogger pladecalvo said...

I am amazed by some of the comments I have just read. I am amazed how the supporters of the 'official government story' class everyone how does not agree with it as crank, idiots, morons and half wits.

The initial hole in the Pentagon was, by the goverments own figures, less than 20 feet wide. This hole widened slightly more when the face of the building collapsed. The depth to which the plane/missile reached was to the third ring of the Pentagon's five rings, known as the C-ring. The hole in the C-ring wall was approximately 7 feet in diameter. Official accounts that the damage was caused by a Boeing 757 do not hold water if you consider that, since the aircraft only penetrated the building as far as the C-ring, only the nose of Boeing 757 would have gone inside the building. The rest of the 757 would have remained out side with a considerable amout of wreckage remaining outside the building.

In an air traffic accident, wings, fusilage, engines, seats, tail sections and other sundry items are scattered over an extremely wide area, sometimes as much as half a mile from the crash site. Yet no such wreckage has been found'.

Are we to believe that a Boeing 757, with a wing span of 125 feet, smashed into a building creating a hole of less than 20 feet, and then disappeared inside it, leaving no trace of itself.

Debate is healthy and neccessary and must include input from both sides of the argument but please, don't class everyone who disagrees with you as an idiot. If you approach the subject with an open mind you will see that there are too many important questions left unanswered, too many pieces of the jigsaw missing, for either side to offer conclusive proof of what happened on 9/11.

For myself, I believe the the Bush administration knows more than it's telling you. I believe that the events that led up 9/11 could not have occured without very high level government involvment. I cannot believe that the greatest military power on this planet could not prevent half a dozen highjackers armed with a knife, from inflicting the biggest attack on American interests since Pearl Harbor, unless of did'nt want to!

Keep debating people..but keep an open mind. Listen to the other side as well as your own. Study the facts and then ask the questions and remember......the human mind is like a parachute, it does'nt function unless it's open.

P.S. ..and yes, I do know something about aircrash investigations!

At 17 May, 2007 15:12, Blogger Catherine Todd said...

I have always believed that the events of 9/11 were orchestrated by persons or a group within the government of the USA; what better way to take control of and bankrupt our country, based on people's easily aroused hatred and fears?

But I can't really get to the "facts" presented here due to the sarcasm and other types of comments made. I am sure that what is being said holds a great deal of truth, but I can't tell what is "serious" and what is not.

Points like the seats of the airplane not being burnt when the bodies were "charred" is a very good point and one I never would have thought of, as obvious as it should be. But then the sarcasm and other innuendos make things even more confusing. Please explain clearly, as I would like to know more. Thank you for taking the time to present this very important information.

At 17 May, 2007 15:37, Blogger Catherine Todd said...

Thanks, pladecalvo: you said what I was trying to say:

<< I am amazed by some of the comments I have just read. I am amazed how the supporters of the 'official government story' class everyone how does not agree with it as crank, idiots, morons and half wits. >>

How can anyone get to the "truth" with all this name-calling and negativity being emanated?

This is exactly what causes these wars to begin with. First it is words, then blows, then sticks, stones, guns, bombs, airplanes, whatever can be commandeered for destruction. Anything that makes a war.

Unfortunately, as is shown so clearly here on this blog, some people just seem to be "wired" that way. These are the terrorists and madmen, as far as I can see.

I appreciate all the people who posted comments made based on reasonable, intelligent questions and answers, rather than "incitement to riot."

So many people here were so well-spoken. Too bad for the few throwing firebombs. I guess those individuals are the next "terrorists." But I hope not! Would like to read more from the helpful, questioning, admirable minds posted here. Thanks again.

At 23 June, 2007 09:39, Blogger _mark said...

It seems that this person believes everything he reads or what he wants to believe that he reads without digging deeper. Typical Blind Patriot. I didn't see one quote .. (QUOTE EMPHASIZED) that made me believe it. GET IT?

At 09 July, 2007 20:23, Blogger Unknown said...

Yeah. A fire hot enough to disintegrate 6 tons of metal can't leave human flesh intact. If you can't believe this, let's test it on you!

At 03 August, 2007 19:41, Blogger Unknown said...

ok ok forget about the so called theories. How can a plane evaporate but not human flesh. I'm no science wiz. But how is this scientifically possible. also a plane evaporates but not people or books or even a querer than a 4 dollar bill.Explain that one.Please dont argue junk just tell me facts.

At 06 October, 2007 22:49, Blogger aicraft mech said...

I'm not the smartest guy around, but i know a little about jet engines, I know that they are made out of titanium and they are made to withstand a lot of heat, I mean think about it, it is made to burn jet fuel inside itself, and your telling me a jet fuel fire desintegrated it. Are you stupid? Where did the engines actually impact? What happenned to all of the wreckage?
Ive seen alot of videos of a lot of plane crashes and there is always some type of wreckage.(usually they find most of the plane) They say it got so hot it vaporized the entire plane yet they found passengers, That's a little hard to swallow.
I watched JFK, gov conspiracy was definatly a factor in that cover-up. When I saw Loose Change it definatly brings up the fact that our gov is lying about the 757 crashing into the pentagon. Why, I'm not sure, but that doesn't change the fact that the gov is not to be trusted. And that a boeing 757 does not just dissappear because it crashes into a building and explodes.
I believe anyone who thinks it could happen,should probably be tested for drugs, or apply for a political job, because you are easily decieved or full of ****
either way politics is the way for you and the Republicans would love ya!

Why did we go to Iraq???
Why are we still in Iraq???
Where is Bin ladin???
Why can't we all just get along???
Why doesn't MTV play music???

At 20 March, 2008 09:10, Blogger PIHATIL said...

The government still hasn't release the 80 surveillance tapes of the plane hitting the Pentagon that were confiscated from neighboring buildings. Why? When evidence is hidden or destroyed, there must be a reason.

At 13 July, 2009 09:08, Blogger Kevin said...

I don't consider myself to be a "CT" as they are called here - but the systematic derogation of all people that believe a minority point of view is close-minded to a fault. I believe anything and everything MAY be disproved at any point - including things we take as gospel fact, such as gravity, the need for oxygen to survive, etc. If enough compelling evidence suggests one solution over another, OR simply the impossibility of one solution as the "correct" one, to ignore it would be folly.

In this argument unfortunately we have black and white polar opposites, without enough gray matter (pun intended) in between to lend justification to both side - because let's face it: BOTH SIDES HAVE MERITS.

I think this, and all other matters should be entered into with an open mind. This is not to say an open mind willing to believe anything simply because it is stated, but an open mind willing to lose his/her inherent beliefs if presented with new and compelling evidence. Very few on either side of the 9-11 debate fit this description unfortunately. They have picked their camps, labeled the other side as ignorant cooks (CTs) or dogmatic patriots (non CTs). Furthermore, broad derogatory generalizations are being made to discredit anyone falling on either side - such as a CT must believe ALL fringe theories and wear tin-foil hats, and all "believers" (of the official story) must be flag-waving fools that hate minorities and long for the good old days of slave-operated plantations. None of this is productive.

I think ultimately progress will be made when the two "sides" can come together, leave emotions and preconceived notions aside and look at each piece of evidence, analyze it and ultimately accept or dismiss it, without falling upon circular logic or "there's just no way" type answers.

At 06 June, 2011 14:33, Blogger Adam Holland said...

"According to the Defense Department’s book about the Pentagon attack: “The front part of the relatively weak fuselage [of Flight 77] disintegrated, but the mid-section and tail-end continued moving for another fraction of a second.… The chain of destruction resulted in parts of the plane ending up inside the Pentagon in reverse of the order they had entered it, with the tail-end of the airliner penetrating the greatest distance into the building.” [GOLDBERG ET AL., 2007, PP. 17]"


Post a Comment

<< Home