# Pentagon 9/11 Analyzed in Depth.



## creativedreams (Jan 9, 2010)

Lets have a look at the Pentagon incident on 9/11 and analyze it in depth without resorting to the usual name calling that the people on the low end on the intelligence curve are so quick to resort to....

The top image is actual footage of what hit the building....


----------



## creativedreams (Jan 9, 2010)

The top image is actual footage of what hit the Pentagon...

The second image is what a group of physicists put together to give a closer look at what the actual passenger plane should have looked like in size comparison...





















So what really hit the Pentagon and was it remote operated and painted to look like the larger 757?


----------



## creativedreams (Jan 9, 2010)

11 years of renovations to strengthen the Pentagon and they *ONLY* do the part of the building that is involved in the 9/11 incident?

Perhaps it was a plane at the Pentagon but what are the chances it hits not only the only part of the building undergoing construction renovations at the time......but *ALSO* the *ONLY* part of the Pentagon that was reinforce for a possible impact?

I found this article in the archives of USA Today......Here is a direct quote from the article:

"Luck  if it can be called that  had it that the terrorists aimed the Boeing 757 at the only part of the Pentagon that already had been renovated in an 11-year, $1.3 billion project meant to bolster it against attack. That significantly limited the damage and loss of life by slowing the plane as it tore through the building and reducing the explosion's reach."

Here is the USA Todays link to the article from its archives.

USATODAY.com - Pentagon repairs to cost $700 million

11 years of renovations to strengthen the Pentagon and they *ONLY* do the part of the building that is involved in the 9/11 incident?


----------



## creativedreams (Jan 9, 2010)

All of the evidence of the plane parts put together that was planted......er......found at the Pentagon amounted to less than a pickup load.

Plus every piece was small enough for one man to carry.

A boeing 757 has 10 rims and only one shows up....

 I like how there was ONLY one rim out of TEN...


----------



## creativedreams (Jan 9, 2010)

* Aircraft Accident Investigator Col. George Nelson, U.S. Air Force*


Col. George Nelson, MBA, U.S. Air Force  Former U.S. Air Force aircraft accident investigator and airplane parts authority. Graduate, U.S. Air Force War College. 34-year Air Force career. 

Licensed commercial pilot. Licensed airframe and powerplant mechanic. 
Essay: "In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft -- and in most cases the precise cause of the accident. ... 

The government alleges that four wide-body airliners crashed on the morning of September 11 2001, resulting in the deaths of more than 3,000 human beings, yet not one piece of hard aircraft evidence has been produced in an attempt to positively identify any of the four aircraft. On the contrary, it seems only that all potential evidence was deliberately kept hidden from public view.. 

With all the evidence readily available at the Pentagon crash site, any unbiased rational investigator could only conclude that a Boeing 757 did not fly into the Pentagon as alleged. Similarly, with all the evidence available at the Pennsylvania crash site, it was most doubtful that a passenger airliner caused the obvious hole in the ground and certainly not the Boeing 757 as alleged.  

As painful and heartbreaking as was the loss of innocent lives and the lingering health problems of thousands more, a most troublesome and nightmarish probability remains that so many Americans appear to be involved in the most heinous conspiracy in our country's history."


----------



## creativedreams (Jan 9, 2010)

*The debunking strategy going on*.


Joel M. Skousen  Former U.S. Marine Corps fighter pilot. Commercial pilot. Aircraft flown: McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom, Douglas A-4 Skyhawk, Grumman F-9 Cougar, North American T-2C Buckeye, various civilian planes. Member, Experimental Aircraft Association. Member, Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association. Former Chairman of the Conservative National Committee in Washington DC and Executive Editor of Conservative Digest. 

Essay Debunking the Debunkers 2/14/05: "For over a decade now, the PTB [Powers That Be] have used an odd vehicle to do their debunking on a variety of issues - Popular Mechanics Magazine (a Hearst publication). I suppose they are targeting the back-yard mechanic and auto-enthusiast crowd, who are often prone to accepting conspiracy facts and theories. 

In the March 2005 issue, PM magazine singled out 16 issues or claims of the 9/11 skeptics that point to government collusion and systematically attempted to debunk each one. Of the 16, most missed the mark and almost half were straw men arguments - either ridiculous arguments that few conspiracists believed or restatements of the arguments that were highly distorted so as to make them look weaker than they really were. ... 

I am one of those who claim there are factual arguments pointing to conspiracy, and that truth is not served by taking cheap shots at those who see gaping flaws in the government story ... 

There is significant evidence that the aircraft impacts did not cause the collapse [of the Twin Towers] ... 

The issues of the penetration hole [at the Pentagon] and the lack of large pieces of debris simply do not jive with the official story, but they are explainable if you include the parking lot video evidence that shows a huge white explosion at impact. This cannot happen with an aircraft laden only with fuel. It can only happen in the presence of high explosives."


----------



## creativedreams (Jan 9, 2010)

*Puts in a statement about controlled press*

Commander Dennis Henry, U.S. Navy Reserve, BS CE, PE  Retired from U.S. Navy Reserve, Civil Engineering Corps after 20 years of service. Retired Licensed Professional Engineer, State of Missouri. 34 years of service as a City Engineer, designing bridges, roadways, storm, sanitary sewers, and traffic signals. 

"Being a civil engineer and understanding the laws of physics, I know that a building cannot fall at free fall speed without the floors already falling also giving no resistance. I wish our Congressmen were as smart, and also showed some backbone and got a truly independent investigation going. Also, this 911 truth movement has shown to me that our press is as every bit controlled and spits out as much propaganda as I thought Pravda did for the old Soviet Union. My eyes have been awakened to many things, and I have come to learn that we do not live in as free a country as I thought we did, and with the passage of the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, it has become even less so."


----------



## creativedreams (Jan 9, 2010)

The four Jetliners that supposedly crashed on 9/11 include hundreds and hundreds of 'time-change parts' with serial numbers listed in maintenance log books for each aircraft. The Govt has failed to produce a single time-change part, which you can learn by reading through this article by Colonel George Nelson.

*911Physics.com Story*Physics911, by Scientific Panel Investigating Nine-Eleven, 9/11/2001


*Aircraft Parts as a Clue to their Identity*
*George Nelson
Colonel, USAF *
The precautionary principle is based on the fact it is impossible to prove a false claim. Failure to prove a claim does not automatically make it false, but caution is called for, especially in the case of a world-changing event like the alleged terror attacks of September 11, 2001. The Bush administration has provided no public evidence to support its claim that the terror attacks were the work of Muslim extremists or even that the aircraft that struck their respective targets on September 11 were as advertised. As I will show below, it would be a simple matter to confirm that they were - if they were. Until such proof is forthcoming, the opposite claim must be kept in mind as a precaution against rushing to judgment: the 911 hijackings were part of a black operation carried out with the cooperation of elements in our government.

In July 1965 I had just been commissioned as a Second Lieutenant in the U. S. Air Force after taking a solemn oath that I would protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and that I would bear true faith and allegiance to the same. I took that oath very seriously. It was my constant companion throughout a thirty-year military career in the field of aircraft maintenance. 

As an additional duty, aircraft maintenance officers are occasionally tasked as members of aircraft accident investigation boards and my personal experience was no exception. In 1989 I graduated from the Aircraft Mishap Investigation Course at the Institute of Safety and Systems Management at the University of Southern California. In addition to my direct participation as an aircraft accident investigator, I reviewed countless aircraft accident investigation reports for thoroughness and comprehensive conclusions for the Inspector General, HQ Pacific Air Forces during the height of the Vietnam conflict.

In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft  and in most cases the precise cause of the accident. This is because every military and civilian passenger-carrying aircraft have many parts that are identified for safety of flight. That is, if any of the parts were to fail at any time during a flight, the failure would likely result in the catastrophic loss of aircraft and passengers. Consequently, these parts are individually controlled by a distinctive serial number and tracked by a records section of the maintenance operation and by another section called plans and scheduling.

Following a certain number of flying hours or, in the case of landing gears, a certain number of takeoff-and-landing cycles, these critical parts are required to be changed, overhauled or inspected by specialist mechanics. When these parts are installed, their serial numbers are married to the aircraft registration numbers in the aircraft records and the plans and scheduling section will notify maintenance specialists when the parts must be replaced. If the parts are not replaced within specified time or cycle limits, the airplane will normally be grounded until the maintenance action is completed. Most of these time-change parts, whether hydraulic flight surface actuators , pumps, landing gears, engines or engine components, are virtually indestructible. It would be impossible for an ordinary fire resulting from an airplane crash to destroy or obliterate all of those critical time-change parts or their serial numbers. I repeat, impossible.

Considering the catastrophic incidents of September 11 2001, certain troubling but irrefutable conclusions must be drawn from the known facts. I get no personal pleasure or satisfaction from reporting my own assessment of these facts. 

United Airlines Flight 93

This flight was reported by the federal government to be a Boeing 757 aircraft, registration number N591UA, carrying 45 persons, including four Arab hijackers who had taken control of the aircraft, crashing the plane in a Pennsylvania farm field.

Aerial photos of the alleged crash site were made available to the general public. They show a significant hole in the ground, but private investigators were not allowed to come anywhere near the crash site. If an aircraft crash caused the hole in the ground, there would have literally hundreds of serially-controlled time-change parts within the hole that would have proved beyond any shadow of doubt the precise tail-number or identity of the aircraft. However, the government has not produced any hard evidence that would prove beyond a doubt that the specifically alleged aircraft crashed at that site. On the contrary, it has been reported that the aircraft, registry number N591UA, is still in operation.

American Airlines Flight 11

This flight was reported by the government to be a Boeing 767, registration number N334AA, carrying 92 people, including five Arabs who had hijacked the plane. This plane was reported to have crashed into the north tower of the WTC complex of buildings.

Again, the government would have no trouble proving its case if only a few of the hundreds of serially controlled parts had been collected to positively identify the aircraft. A Boeing 767 landing gear or just one engine would have been easy to find and identify.

United Airlines Flight 175

This flight was reported to be a Boeing 767, registration number N612UA, carrying 65 people, including the crew and five hijackers. It reportedly flew into the south tower of the WTC.

Once more, the government has yet to produce one serially controlled part from the crash site that would have dispelled any questions as to the identity of the specific airplane.

American Airlines Flight 77

This was reported to be a Boeing 757, registration number N644AA, carrying 64 people, including the flight crew and five hijackers. This aircraft, with a 125-foot wingspan, was reported to have crashed into the Pentagon, leaving an entry hole no more than 65 feet wide.

Following cool-down of the resulting fire, this crash site would have been very easy to collect enough time-change equipment within 15 minutes to positively identify the aircraft registry. There was apparently some aerospace type of equipment found at the site but no attempt was made to produce serial numbers or to identify the specific parts found. Some of the equipment removed from the building was actually hidden from public view.

Continued......


----------



## creativedreams (Jan 9, 2010)

Continued.......

Conclusion

The government alleges that four wide-body airliners crashed on the morning of September 11 2001, resulting in the deaths of more than 3,000 human beings, yet not one piece of hard aircraft evidence has been produced in an attempt to positively identify any of the four aircraft. On the contrary, it seems only that all potential evidence was deliberately kept hidden from public view. The hard evidence would have included hundreds of critical time-change aircraft items, plus security videotapes that were confiscated by the FBI immediately following each tragic episode.

With all the evidence readily available at the Pentagon crash site, any unbiased rational investigator could only conclude that a Boeing 757 did not fly into the Pentagon as alleged. Similarly, with all the evidence available at the Pennsylvania crash site, it was most doubtful that a passenger airliner caused the obvious hole in the ground and certainly not the Boeing 757 as alleged. Regarding the planes that allegedly flew into the WTC towers, it is only just possible that heavy aircraft were involved in each incident, but no evidence has been produced that would add credence to the governments theoretical version of what actually caused the total destruction of the buildings, let alone proving the identity of the aircraft. That is the problem with the governments 911 story. It is time to apply the precautionary principle.

As painful and heartbreaking as was the loss of innocent lives and the lingering health problems of thousands more, a most troublesome and nightmarish probability remains that so many Americans appear to be involved in the most heinous conspiracy in our countrys history.
Footnote: It will soon be five years since the tragic events of 9/11/01 unfolded, and still the general public has seen no physical evidence that should have been collected at each of the four crash sites, (a routine requirement during mandatory investigations of each and every major aircraft crash.) The National Transportation Safety Board has announced on its website that responsibility for the investigations and reports have been assigned to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, but there is no indication that mandatory investigations were ever conducted or that the reports of any investigations have been written.



*The time-change parts found at the Pentagon match a decommissioned A-3 Skywarrior that was retrofitted by private contractors (story) for use in the Global Guardian Wargames (story) that ran as a cover for the 9/11 Inside-Job Attacks ...*
Missile & remote control systems added to small jets before 9-11; same parts found at Pentagon - Looking Glass News

9/11 war games before and during the attacks


----------



## creativedreams (Jan 9, 2010)

*Aircraft Parts as a Clue to their Identity*
*George Nelson
Colonel, USAF *


American Airlines Flight 77

This was reported to be a Boeing 757, registration number N644AA, carrying 64 people, including the flight crew and five hijackers. This aircraft, with a 125-foot wingspan, was reported to have crashed into the Pentagon, leaving an entry hole no more than 65 feet wide.

Following cool-down of the resulting fire, this crash site would have been very easy to collect enough time-change equipment within 15 minutes to positively identify the aircraft registry. There was apparently some aerospace type of equipment found at the site but no attempt was made to produce serial numbers or to identify the specific parts found. *Some of the equipment removed from the building was actually hidden from public view.*

---------------
I thought I would look to see if it was true about parts being hidden from public view and here's what I found...

So what are they hiding from public view? Is this something that would contradict the "official story"?


----------



## creativedreams (Jan 9, 2010)

*Aircraft Parts as a Clue to their Identity*
*George Nelson
Colonel, USAF *


American Airlines Flight 77

This was reported to be a Boeing 757, registration number N644AA, carrying 64 people, including the flight crew and five hijackers. *This aircraft, with a 125-foot wingspan, was reported to have crashed into the Pentagon, leaving an entry hole no more than 65 feet wide.*Following cool-down of the resulting fire, this crash site would have been very easy to collect enough time-change equipment within 15 minutes to positively identify the aircraft registry. There was apparently some aerospace type of equipment found at the site but no attempt was made to produce serial numbers or to identify the specific parts found. Some of the equipment removed from the building was actually hidden from public view.

*The time-change parts found at the Pentagon match a decommissioned A-3 Skywarrior that was retrofitted by private contractors (story) for use in the Global Guardian Wargames (story) that ran as a cover for the 9/11 Inside-Job Attacks ...*
Missile & remote control systems added to small jets before 9-11; same parts found at Pentagon - Looking Glass News

9/11 war games before and during the attacks


---------------
I thought I would look to see if it was true about the 125ft wingspan of the plane vs the entry hole that is no more than 65ft wide and here's what I found...


----------



## creativedreams (Jan 9, 2010)

Not ONLY do we have the *BERMUDA TRIANGLE!*

But we ALSO have the *NEW YORK SQUARE!*

Now we EVEN have the *ARLINGTON PENTAGON!*

The Few places in the *UNIVERSE *where all of physics changes!!!]


----------



## creativedreams (Jan 9, 2010)

I found this in Russia Today News.....

This is actually a small clip of a very long article

911 reasons why 9/11 was (probably) an inside job - RT Top Stories

911 Reason why 9/11 was an inside job. Part II. The Pentagon Crash
permalinke-mail story to a friendprint versionPublished 12 September, 2009, 12:28

Edited 21 October, 2009, 09:23

Andrews Air Force Base is a mere 10 miles away from the Pentagon, yet 1 hour and 20 minutes after the attacks began not a single fighter jet had been activated to intercept American Airlines Flight 77.

Yahoo StumbleUpon Google Live Technorati del.icio.us Digg Reddit Mixx Propeller Robert Bridge, RT


Introduction
Part I

PART II
Consider the following: On October 25, 1999, a tiny Learjet 35 departed from Orlando, Florida that was carrying Payne Stewart, a professional American golfer. About 14 minutes after departing from the airport, the control tower lost contact with his plane. The air-traffic controllers, following rigid protocol regarding lost aircraft, immediately notified the US Air Force.

Read more

According to FAA official transcripts, At 9:52 a U.S. Air Force F-16 from the 40th Flight Test Squadron at the Englin Air Force was vectored toward the aircraft. 

At 9:54  just two minutes after the command to intercept had been ordered  the fighter jet had already spotted Payne Stewart's wayward aircraft.

The pilot of the F-16 reported that both engines on the plane were working, but the cockpit windows were covered with condensation or frost, a sign that the cabin had depressurized without the necessary oxygen reserves. Things looked very bad for the occupants of the aircraft.

Both the Learjet and the F-16 were now over the state of Illinois, many miles from the departing point. The F-16 from Englin stopped pursuing the Learjet and landed at Scott Air Force Base in Illinois for refueling and probably a cigarette.




F-16 
At this point, two Oklahoma F-16s (Codenamed, TULSA 13) were then vectored to intercept the accident airplane by the Minneapolis ARTCC (Air Route Traffic Control Center). Neither pilots of those two planes, which flew within meters of the disabled aircraft, noticed anything mechanically wrong with the tiny aircraft. But still the pilot of the Learjet did not respond. 
Minutes later, the TULSA 13 jets handed off the plane to two F-16s stationed in North Dakota (Codenamed, NODAK 32). One of the pilots from this new sortie reported, Weve got two visuals on it the cockpit window is iced over and theres no displacement in any of the control surfaces 

Twenty minutes later, one of the jets from the NODAK 32 team remained to the west of the Learjet, while the TULSA 13 F-16 followed the Learjet down.

The target is descending and he is doing multiple aileron rolls, looks like he is out of control, the TULSA 13 pilot radioed back to his command station. Its soon to impact the ground he is in a descending spiral.

The plane crashes and all of the passengers, who probably died long before the plane had hit the ground, were killed.

Compare: On Sept. 11 at 9:37 a.m., one hour and twenty minutes after the hijackings were reported, American Airlines Flight 77 slams into the west wall of the Pentagon without ever being followed, intercepted or shot down by US fighter jets.

How does NORAD account for the fact that five (5) state-of-the-art F-16 fighter jets, activated from various air force bases, trailed a tiny wayward Learjet halfway across the United States, yet failed to vector a single aircraft to inspect four commercial jets that were carrying hundreds of passengers across many miles of heavily populated, strategically sensitive territory? It does not compute.

Despite possessing highly sophisticated aircraft that can fly faster than the speed of sound (2,400 km per hour), and shoot down targets from many miles away, the U.S. Air Force opted not to activate a single fighter jet to intercept, tag, or at least investigate, four lumbering commercial jets that had wandered off their courses for periods ranging from 20 to 90 minutes.

Anytime an airliner goes off course, says Robert Bowman, a pilot and decorated Vietnam veteran, or loses radio communication, or loses its transponder signal  anytime any one of those three things happen, the aircraft is supposed to be intercepted.

On 9/11, all three of those things happen, continues Bowman in the film Zero, and still there was no intercept. Those planes flew for 20 minutes to an hour-and-a-half without ever being intercepted.

But there was no shortage of fighter jets available, we must assume, since there are sixteen (16) Air Force bases located in the northeast of the United States. So why werent the large, slow-moving Boeing jets intercepted?

The official version of the story says that NORAD was notified too late; in other words, the air traffic controllers were not on the ball on 9/11. This argument seems equally implausible. John Judge, a 9/11 investigator for former Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, said that 9/11 was the first time in the year 2001 that an air emergency went ignored.

Sixty-seven times in that year, 2001, says Judge, there had been air emergencies. They can get a plane up in 6 to 10 minutes, and scrambled 67 times that year in air emergencies, but there was not an instance where an air emergency went ignored for long periods of time  until 9/11.

One good explanation for the eerily empty skies over New York, Washington and Pennsylvania on 9/11 had a lot to do with a bizarre memorandum (entitled Aircraft Piracy and Destruction of Derelict Airborne Objects) that former Vice President Dick Cheney rammed through the Defense Department on June 1, 2001, exactly three months before 9/11.

Despite warnings from intelligence-collecting agencies that a terrorist strike was becoming an increasing threat (a presidential brief, for example, entitled Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US landed on George W. Bushs desk from the FBI on August 6 that makes direct mention of the Al-Qaeda leader wanting to hijack a US aircraft to gain release of US-held extremists), Cheney inexplicably relieves NORAD of its long-standing responsibility to intercept and shoot down hijacked airplanes that pose a major threat on the ground.

In other words, the U.S. generals had their hands tied on 9/11, and could not even scramble jets without a direct order from the Pentagon. That command, of course, never came.

It should be no surprise as to who failed to pick up the telephone at the Pentagon on the morning of Sept. 11. Yes, Donald Rumsfeld. Where was he? Strangely, nobody could find him. Indeed, the official 9/11 Commission report states that the Defense Secretary was untraceable until 10:30a.m.

Eventually, US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was caught on film shortly after the crash of Flight 77, assisting with the rescue efforts on the lawn of the Pentagon. Although this humanly gesture must be commended, it seems to be completely at odds with Rumsfelds most critical job duty, which was to give clearance for NORAD to shoot down or intercept hijacked aircraft according to Cheneys updated (and short-lived) memorandum mentioned above.

On the lawn of the Pentagon, tending to the wounded was not the right place for the Defense Secretary who should have been sitting near the phone, coordinating our national defenses. And how did Rumsfeld know for certain that another plane might not drop out of the sky, indeed as had been wildly rumored? Wouldnt his expertise and command have been much more helpful inside of the Pentagon?

Or maybe the absence of any aircraft in Americas skies besides hijacked ones had something to do with a secret exercise that was based upon the fiction of a hijacked plane crashing into a building. When did that military exercise occur? Yes, on the very morning of Sept. 11.

In what the government describes as a bizarre coincidence, reports the Associated Press exactly one year after 9/11, one US intelligence agency was planning an exercise last Sept. 11 in which an errant aircraft would crash into one of its buildings" 

Officials at the National Reconnaissance Office had scheduled an exercise that morning in which a small corporate jet would crash into one of the four towers at the agencys headquarters, the AP article revealed. 

Cont.....


----------



## Tom Clancy (Jan 9, 2010)

*yawn*


----------



## creativedreams (Jan 9, 2010)

Osama BIn Laden Video found by CIA fake and FBI knows it.. won't charge him for 9/11

The FBI will not put Osama Bin Laden listed as wanted for 9/11 because they know the CIA tried to frame him with fake tapes.

Just look at the FBI website and you can see he is not listed as wanted for the biggest crime in America.

Here is a comparison of the CIA tape of a confession to the REAL Osama.

Facial recognition points stay the same no matter the weight changes.


----------



## creativedreams (Jan 9, 2010)

Here is a very good documentary that explains what is going on in the big picture and how the event of 9/11 fits in...

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMYAeSBPm2E"]YouTube - War for oil or Death of the US Dollar[/ame]


----------



## rdean (Jan 9, 2010)

creativedreams said:


> The top image is actual footage of what hit the Pentagon...
> 
> The second image is what a group of physicists put together to give a closer look at what the actual passenger plane should have looked like in size comparison...
> 
> ...



Two things so obvious.  First, if the plane hit the way you show, the front part of the wings would hit first with the cement building folding them back like a fan retracting.

But we know that the plane, by time it hit, had actually rolled so one wing was above the plane, the other wing below and the passengers were "sideways".

Sorry to burst your bubble.


----------



## creativedreams (Jan 9, 2010)

rdean said:


> Two things so obvious.  First, if the plane hit the way you show, the front part of the wings would hit first with the cement building folding them back like a fan retracting.
> 
> But we know that the plane, by time it hit, had actually rolled so one wing was above the plane, the other wing below and the passengers were "sideways".
> 
> Sorry to burst your bubble.



Not possible for the wings to fold back and make a smaller impact hole.......the forward motion of the wings tips  would not be stopped or altered in that fraction of a second of impact.


----------



## Fizz (Jan 9, 2010)

the pentagon was really hit by a train.


----------



## creativedreams (Jan 9, 2010)

Fizz said:


> train.



What? When God asked if you wanted brains you thought he said trains and you didn't want any?



Anyways Eots posted this  chilling documentary of disturbing facts surrounding 9/11

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZKS73tNVL8&feature=related"]YouTube- Marvin Bush   the WTC Power-Downs Just Prior to 9 11.flv[/ame][/


----------



## Fizz (Jan 9, 2010)

creativedreams said:


> Fizz said:
> 
> 
> > train.
> ...



so much for you not wanting flaming in your thread, huh?  you jackass. 

i have just as much evidence that a train hit the pentagon as you have that...... whatever you are claiming this week......  missile , A-3, C-130, flying drone....... hit the pentagon.


----------



## Fizz (Jan 9, 2010)

its just too funny that you admit to being on the low end of the intelligence curve!!



creativedreams said:


> Lets have a look at the Pentagon incident on 9/11 and analyze it in depth without resorting to the usual name calling that the people on the low end on the intelligence curve are so quick to resort to....





creativedreams said:


> What? When God asked if you wanted brains you thought he said trains and you didn't want any?


----------



## Vortex (Jan 9, 2010)

Looks like this moron has picked up where Terral left off.


----------



## candycorn (Jan 9, 2010)

Vortex said:


> Looks like this moron has picked up where Terral left off.



At least Terral will stick to one ID.  You'll see 3 or 4 from Creative Dreams in short order.


----------



## eots (Jan 10, 2010)

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bD8Her7JUG0[/ame]


----------



## Fizz (Jan 10, 2010)

eots said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bD8Her7JUG0



good video. a few things make if obvious it wasnt a missile strike. for instance at about 7:00 you can see the columns the left wing hit are bent INWARD. if it was an explosion the columns would be bent away from the explosion, not towards it.


----------



## creativedreams (Jan 10, 2010)

eots said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bD8Her7JUG0



So how did the so called plane fly above the overpass and drop down to obtain this trajectory at these speeds?

The top image is actual footage of what hit the Pentagon...

The second image is what a group of physicists put together to give a closer look at what the actual passenger plane should have looked like in size comparison...


----------



## Fizz (Jan 10, 2010)

the pentagon was hit by a train.


----------



## eots (Jan 10, 2010)

either Allah was his co-pilot or this craft was not under the control of a pilot..one of the two


----------



## Fizz (Jan 10, 2010)

eots said:


> either Allah was his co-pilot or this craft was not under the control of a pilot..one of the two



the elevation of the overpass is about 10 to 15 feet (its not perfectly level) above the elevation of the pentagon. the plane was descending at about 700fps. thats about 350 feet in a half second. seems like more than enough to clear the overpass. 

so what kinda numbers do you have? or are you just making statements with no actual basis in reality again?


----------



## eots (Jan 10, 2010)

The only rational explanation for 9/11 is Allah.. IS BIGGR  THAN jESUS...BIGGER THAN ELVIS...BIGGER THAN THE BEATLES...all put together..it  is all a miracle..the way the hijackers avoided arrest despite a mountain of prior warning.. the way unskilled pilots flew with precise skill...The way Norad and the FAA..failed on cue...how they brought down three building with two planes...the disappearing aircraft parts....and black boxes...the magical passports...the way he kept bin laden safe...yes Allah is Great


----------



## Fizz (Jan 10, 2010)

creativedreams said:


> The second image is what a group of physicists put together to give a closer look at what the actual passenger plane should have looked like in size comparison...



i think your physicists need to go back to school. first of all the tail of the plane is actually larger than where it hits the pentagon in this picture. second, the camera is a fish eye lens so the plane would need to start out small and get bigger as it approaches. this would be exaggerated by the fish eye lens. 

third, your physicists have the plane travelling way too slow. it takes 3 frames for the plane to completely enter the building. one frame per second is 3 seconds. the plane was a 757-200 series with a length of about 155 feet. the first frame there is approximately a third of the airplane length from the building to the nose of the plane but lets be generous and say its half the length of the plane. 155' plus 78' from the building means it travelled 233' in 3 seconds at most. rounding out the numbers and being VERY generous with them means the plane was travelling about 55MPH in the physicist video!!! 

what a bunch of fucking morons.

also the plane appears to make a right turn just before it enters the building. its a nice touch.


----------



## Terral (Jan 10, 2010)

Hi Creative:



creativedreams said:


> Lets have a look at the Pentagon incident on 9/11 and analyze it in depth without resorting to the usual name calling that the people on the low end on the intelligence curve are so quick to resort to....
> 
> The top image is actual footage of what hit the building....



You are looking at the *Closed Circuit Television *(CCTV) images (link) of the *9:31:39 AM Missile Strike* (my "What Happened" Topic) that injured April Gallop and her son (my 911Truth blog entry). The time stamp data was deliberately changed to hide the fact that the Pentagon was first attacked by a Raytheon Missile at 9:31:39 AM (not 9:38 AM) on 9/11 (my 9:31 Topic and my Pentagon Timeline). The DoD Disinformation Operatives working this Board do NOT want anyone to wake up to 'the' 911Truth that the Pentagon was attacked 'twice' ...






... at 9:31:39 AM (top pic) and again at 9:36:27 AM (bottom pic), when *the painted-up and retrofitted A-3 Skywarrior* (pic) crashed into the Pentagon using the "*North Of Citgo Flight Path*" (in blue). 






The DoD Inside-Job Terrorists (Bush, Rove, Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc.) did not allow many pictures to be taken at the Pentagon, but above you see one of the best pre-collapse pictures showing the very small entry hole between Column #13 and Column #15 at the Column Line (CL) 14 location.






This picture demonstrates the *'Column Line 14 Death Corridor'* running on a 45-degree angle from the E-ring Entry Hole to the* little C-Ring Hole* (pic) where the third submunition bomblet exploded to murder everyone in the Defense Intelligence Office. The second bomblet went off in the Navy Command Center to murder Navy Commanders convened to launch Navy Aircraft into the WTC Theater, which of course *never happened* (story). The first bomblet exploded to murder everyone looking for the 2.3 Trillion Dollars (story), so that report was never filed for lack of personnel. AA77 did NOT crash into the Pentagon:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTJehfQkuyE"]All Of These Military/Aviation Experts Agree With Me[/ame]

Up to now, George Bush, Karl Rove, Dickless Cheney, Donald Rumfeld and their murdering Inside-job Terrorist Cohorts are getting away with the murder of innocent Americans and We The People are just *too damned STUPID* (#7-10) to do one thing about it ...

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgfzqulvhlQ"]You Should Be Mad As Hell About The 911 Pentagon Cover Up[/ame]

PS. The *DoD Disinfo Stooges* (How To Spot) working this Board cannot debate me on any of these 911Truth Topics (they are dimwits), so all they can do is call me names. :0)

GL,

Terral


----------



## Fizz (Jan 10, 2010)

there are so many errors in your story i dont know where to begin!!!!

the pentagon was really hit by a train. i have jsut as much evidence it was hit by a train as you have that it was hit by a missile and an A-3.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Jan 10, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Creative:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I have really really tried, but I just have to ask......Where was this missile fired from, that not one person ever saw it in flight?


----------



## candycorn (Jan 10, 2010)

Fizz said:


> creativedreams said:
> 
> 
> > The second image is what a group of physicists put together to give a closer look at what the actual passenger plane should have looked like in size comparison...
> ...



Amazing how the "group of physicists" didn't know about scale relative to perspective.  Creative Dreams is very, very lonely.


----------



## candycorn (Jan 10, 2010)

eots said:


> the way the hijackers avoided arrest despite a mountain of prior warning..



*
Nobody was looking that hard for them on 9/10/01 dipshit
*


eots said:


> the way unskilled pilots flew with precise skill


*
They all crashed dipshit
*



eots said:


> how they brought down three building with two planes.



*

Two massive buildings took out a nearby third one; not that hard to comprehend dipshit.
*


----------



## creativedreams (Jan 10, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Creative:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Wow......that explains it! I was looking at many pics of the exit hole of the Pentagon and I noticed there are two different ones far apart that would indicate two very different impact angles...I'll be back...


----------



## creativedreams (Jan 10, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Creative:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Wow......that explains it! I was looking at many pics of the exit hole of the Pentagon and I noticed there are two different ones far apart that would indicate two very different impact angles...I'll be back...

You have the round one at the bottom and look close to the upper left of it where the distinct damage is with burn marks that indicate another hit with a completely different trajectory...

I'll try and find more...


----------



## Terral (Jan 11, 2010)

Hi Mr. Fizz:



Fizz said:


> there are so many errors in your story i dont know where to begin!!!!



That is because *the DoD Handler* (How To Spot) sent me a moron to debate these 911Truth Topics ...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2THs3oNooM]Mr. Fizz! What A Joke!  :0)[/ame]

GL,

Terral


----------



## Terral (Jan 11, 2010)

Hi Ollie:



SFC Ollie said:


> I have really really tried, but I just have to ask......Where was this missile fired from, that not one person ever saw it in flight?



The Raytheon Missile and remote control features were added to the decommissioned A-3 Skywarrior at *"Fort Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport"* (story) in the months before the 9/11 attacks for use in the *"Global Guardian Wargame Exercises"* (story and story). These wargame exercises used 21 airliners and 3 remote-control A-3 Jets, which included the one detached from the WTC Theater ...







... to take this flight path from the *'north'* (over the White House) to strike the Pentagon at the Wedge One Column 14 location from the southwest. The Raytheon Missile was launched upon decent (like this), until the A-3 Jet was in a position near the Citgo Gas Station. Then the Missile went '*hypersonic*' to make up the distance and allow a simultaneous detonation upon A-3 Jet impact at 9:31:39 AM. However, the *missile bow shockwave* (pic) uprooted Light Pole #1 (pic) and launched the projectile into the windshield of Lloyde England (pic). See my *"What Happened At The Pentagon" Topic* (here) for the details and links.

GL,

Terral


----------



## Terral (Jan 11, 2010)

Hi Creative:



creativedreams said:


> Wow......that explains it! I was looking at many pics of the exit hole of the Pentagon and I noticed there are two different ones far apart that would indicate two very different impact angles...I'll be back...



No. There is just one explosion hole in the C-ring wall. The other hole is an open garage door (pic).

GL,

Terral


----------



## SFC Ollie (Jan 11, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Ollie:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I honestly don't know whether to laugh hysterically or cry in pity.


----------



## candycorn (Jan 11, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> Terral said:
> 
> 
> > Hi Ollie:
> ...



*Amazingly the bow shockwave didn't effect anything else it flew over (such as the Citgo station)  So a 180 pound guy is standing there pumping gas and this--I can't even say it without giggling--bow shockwave uproots 5 anchored light poles---tearing them apart off of the base--but doesn't touch the guy pumping gas, the overhead canopy at the pumps, or any thing else not in the exact flight path of where the 9/11 Commission Report says that Flight 77 took.  

It is a pretty judicious bow shockwave we have here; wouldn't you agree?

I think Terral is probably the poster child for free health care; it is quite clear he hasn't been able to afford his psychicatric medicine for decades now.  *


----------



## Fizz (Jan 11, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Mr. Fizz:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


your claims that i am a "DoD Handler" just prove what a raving paranoid lunatic you really are.

how many witnesses saw a missile hit the pentagon?

how many witnesses saw an A-3 hit the pentagon? 

NONE!!! 

how many saw a 757? 

HUNDREDS!!! 

how many people saw your two seperate explosions?

NONE!!!!

if flight 77 didnt hit the pentagon there WHERE IS IT??!!!
if flight 77 didnt hit the pentagon WHERE ARE THE PASSENGERS AND CREW?!!
where is the radar track of the A-3 and the missile strike?
where is the debris from the missile?
where is the debris from the A-3?
how is it even possible to plant evidence of a 757 in front of hundreds (thousands?) of witnesses without one person seeing it happen never mind all the cameras?

your scenario is so ridiculous that a claim that the pentagon was hit by a train is just as credible as your claim. 

facts that prove flight 77 hit the pentagon:
the remains of the 757 were found there.
the remains of the passengers were found there.
the remains of the crew were found there.
the remains of the hijackers were found there.
radar records show where flight 77 was from take off until hitting the pentagon with no gap in coverage at all.
hundreds of witnesses saw the 757 approach and hit the pentagon.
the black boxes from flight 77 were found there.


----------



## Terral (Jan 11, 2010)

Hi Ollie:



SFC Ollie said:


> I honestly don't know whether to laugh hysterically or cry in pity.



You are the one asking questions with no evidentiary support for 'any' 9/11 Pentagon Case whatsoever. You asked a good question 'and' received 'the' right answer from a guy with thousands of hours investigating this 9/11 Pentagon Case. 

Try to come up with something to support the Official Cover Story LIES, or continue to appear like a blooming idiot confused ...

GL,

Terral


----------



## Terral (Jan 11, 2010)

Hi Candy with Ollie mentioned:

I have never seen this Candy guy add one thing to 'any' of these 911Truth Topics that amounted to anything ...



candycorn said:


> *Amazingly the bow shockwave didn't effect anything else it flew over (such as the Citgo station)  So a 180 pound guy is standing there pumping gas and this--I can't even say it without giggling ...*


Thousands of innocent people were murdered on 9/11 during this 'Inside-Job' Attack and Ms. Candy here is giggling. "Quote >>" something and bring your evidence for what Candy thinks happened on 9/11.






The Raytheon Missile (green flight path) made the final approach too far from the Citgo Station for anyone to be knocked down or anything else. The five light poles had 'breakaway bolts' (Pentagon Research Link + I explained this here in Post #28) that allowed them to be uprooted by the passing missile.

The problem with these Official Cover Story Idiots is they do not know enough about this Pentagon Case to carry on a good conversation.

Be like Ollie and just ask the questions ...

GL,

Terral


----------



## SFC Ollie (Jan 11, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Ollie:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Until the day that someone uses real science or facts that will stand up in a court of law i will continue to believe that the 9-11 Commissions Report got all the major points correct. And that you have got them all hopelessly wrong.


----------



## creativedreams (Jan 11, 2010)

eots said:


> The only rational explanation for 9/11 is Allah.. IS BIGGR  THAN jESUS...BIGGER THAN ELVIS...BIGGER THAN THE BEATLES...all put together..it  is all a miracle..the way the hijackers avoided arrest despite a mountain of prior warning.. the way unskilled pilots flew with precise skill...The way Norad and the FAA..failed on cue...how they brought down three building with two planes...the disappearing aircraft parts....and black boxes...the magical passports...the way he kept bin laden safe...yes Allah is Great



Great way to put it......what is funny is you didn't even name half of Allah the Great's majic tricks.......


----------



## creativedreams (Jan 11, 2010)

Terral said:


> Up to now, George Bush, Karl Rove, Dickless Cheney, Donald Rumfeld and their murdering Inside-job Terrorist Cohorts are getting away with the murder of innocent Americans and We The People are just *too damned STUPID* (#7-10) to do one thing about it ...
> 
> You Should Be Mad As Hell About The 911 Pentagon Cover Up
> 
> ...


Great video Terral...

100% Proof We'll Never Get the Truth and Indisputable Massive Government Corruption shown by that video...


----------



## Terral (Jan 12, 2010)

Hi Ollie:



SFC Ollie said:


> Until the day that someone uses real science or facts that will stand up in a court of law i will continue to believe that the 9-11 Commissions Report got all the major points correct. And that you have got them all hopelessly wrong.




Yes, and Ollie stands with the majority of Americans; which is the reason that the USA will certainly be destroyed (#10).

GL,

Terral


----------



## SFC Ollie (Jan 12, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Ollie:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




You're 10 is almost as funny as the rest of your posts.


----------



## Terral (Jan 12, 2010)

Hi Creative:



creativedreams said:


> Great video Terral...
> 
> 100% Proof We'll Never Get the Truth and Indisputable Massive Government Corruption shown by that video...



Some among us already know 'the' 911Truth and have been shouting it from the rooftops for FAR too long. 

My Flight 93 Topic:






This is a picture of an Empty Hole outside Shanksville that Official Cover Story LIARS say is a crashed 100-ton Jetliner!






Here is a close-up shot of the same Empty Hole that shows 'no' sign of any crashed 100-ton Jetliner, because the excavation of the *Diamond T. Mine *(Shanksville Timeline) was already there on *April 20, 1994* (pic)! And, guess what?

My Pentagon Topic:






The Pentagon Case has the same Empty Hole!






The question is: How many pictures of the Empty E-ring Hole do you want to see?






The Official Cover Story Stooges around here have 'nothing' to refute one word of 'the' 911Truth in my testimony. Period!






A man can stand on the roof of the undamaged Green SUV and reach up to the elevation of the intact second-story concrete slab! Note that the windows above and to the left of the little 18-feet 3-inch hole are NOT EVEN BROKEN! The temporary construction fence was blown back in our direction to stretch across the hood of the little sports car with fence posts scattered after being uprooted, during the 9:31:39 AM Missile Strike.






The damage schematic shows no windows broken on the third floor, but somehow the massive 44-feet tall tail section supposedly crashed into this wall going a whopping 530 miles per hour! The Official Cover Story has NO basis in reality whatsoever!






This is a picture of A/E Drive (between the C and D Rings) looking north from about the location of the garage door that you thought was a second explosion hole. The distance of this rear C-ring wall from the outer E-ring wall is only *220 feet* (pic). This means a 100-ton Jetliner going 530 miles per hour should have exited this C-ring wall in just .39 seconds, or 39/100's of a cotton-picking second! And yet, all we have ...






... is the single 8 to 10-feet explosion hole at the rear of the Defense Intelligence Office! You can see daylight through the E-ring windows, but no sign of any crashed 100-ton Jetliner; because the Official Cover Story STUPIDITY never happened!

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTJehfQkuyE"]The Experts Agree With Me[/ame]

I am not the only 911Truther to tell you 'the' 911Truth for all these years by any stretch of the imagination, but the typical American STOOGE refuses to wake the hell up ...

The same Inside-Job Murderers of innocent Americans also murdered JFK 'and' also orchestrated the current U.S./Global Economic Meltdown 'and' are about to cull more than 90 percent of the Global Population when their H1N1 Biological Weapon mutates into a Genocidal MONSTER. And that is exactly what We The Sheeple have earned for being so blind and STUPID (#1-10) ...

GL,

Terral


----------



## Fizz (Jan 12, 2010)

if you keep repeating the same LIES over and over again will they eventually become true?


----------



## SFC Ollie (Jan 12, 2010)

Fizz said:


> if you keep repeating the same LIES over and over again will they eventually become true?



Some people actually believe that. I used to be amazed at the stupidity of it all, now I only feel pity.


----------



## Terral (Jan 13, 2010)

Hi Ollie and Mr. Fizz:

What MORONS!



SFC Ollie said:


> Fizz said:
> 
> 
> > if you keep repeating the same LIES over and over again will they eventually become true?
> ...














Nice rebuttal guys. Keep up the good work ...

GL,

Terral


----------



## SFC Ollie (Jan 13, 2010)

http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/photos/docs/hullpiece_s.jpg

http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/photos/docs/enginerotor.jpg

http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/photos/docs/moussaoui/P200030_1.jpg

http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/photos/docs/diffuser.jpg

http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/photos/docs/landinggear.jpg


All photos taken at the pentagon. Of course all these pieces of AA77 were planted according to the conspiracy nutcases. Along with the DNA. They sure did work fast to get those pieces of the plane and the murdered body parts in there.


----------



## Terral (Jan 13, 2010)

Hi Ollie:



SFC Ollie said:


> All photos taken at the pentagon. Of course all these pieces of AA77 were planted according to the conspiracy nutcases. Along with the DNA. They sure did work fast to get those pieces of the plane and the murdered body parts in there.



You are still missing about 100 TONS of missing Jetliner! Here is the problem with your evidence:

The Official Cover Story LIE says *AA77* (a 100-ton Jetliner) crashed into the Pentagon going 530 miles per hour!






This is the Wedge One E-ring Column Line (CL) 14 location where the 100-ton Jetliner supposedly crashed! Show us one little scrap of the little A-3 Jet that blew up against this E-ring Wall (my 'What Happened' Topic). Show us the 'two' 6-ton Engines or the massive 44-feet tall tail section. 






The spray from this single fire hose covers the little 18-feet 3-inch hole where 'you' say a real 100-ton Jetliner crashed. 






This is a picture of A/E Drive running between the C and D-ring walls showing the little 8 to 10-feet diameter explosion hole. This C-ring Wall is only *220 feet* away from the outer E-ring Wall (pic). Okay hotshot, so start explaining how your 100-ton Jetliner disappeared into thin air BEFORE exiting this C-ring Wall!!!!!!!






These are the components of a real 100-ton Jetliner that includes more than 200 seats, indestructible landing gear, a 60-Ton Titanium Frame (my God man!), *two 6-ton Rolls-Royce Engines* (these suckers are HUGE). That does not even include the massive 44-feet tall tail section AND ...






... no windows were even broken on the third floor! 






Will Mr. Ollie explain to us HOW his 100-ton Jetliner failed to exit the C-ring Wall? No. This Official Cover Story Stooge just posts a few pictures of debris that came from *the retrofitted A-3 Skywarrior* (story and story) that blew up against the E-ring Wall at 9:36:27 AM having NO CLUE about what he is even talking about. Yes. *'A' Jet* did hit the Pentagon, but that had NOTHING to do with any 100-ton Jetliner ...

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SU2SSTNIds4"]Michael Kelly Saw The Skywarrior Crash[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzxhRGevzEg]Don Wright Saw The 'Small Commuter Plane' Crash Too ...[/ame]

GL,

Terral


----------



## candycorn (Jan 13, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Ollie:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Wreckage was found
Lightpoles were knocked down
Body parts were found

None of which comes from a the result of missle strike dumb fuck.


----------



## Fizz (Jan 13, 2010)

still no evidence of a missile. still no evidence of an A-3. 

fucking hell, for someone that claims to be so well researched you would think you would at least get the weight of the jetliner correct. once again you are proven to be a LIAR.

the weight of a boeing 757-200 with the  RB211 engines is 64 tons (127,810lb) not the 100 tons you claim. no wonder you think some of the plane is missing is missing. you are a jackass!!!


----------



## SFC Ollie (Jan 13, 2010)

I see pieces of AA77 all over the place, maybe terral needs glasses?


----------



## Fizz (Jan 13, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> I see pieces of AA77 all over the place, maybe terral needs glasses?



needs a brain transplant. 

he keeps posting pictures of a hole with airplane parts visible and claims its empty.


----------



## creativedreams (Jan 13, 2010)

All the plane parts put together that were planted.....er.....found at the Pentagon on 9/11 could easily fit into a pickup truck.

Every plane part that was planted.....er.....found at the Pentagon on 9/11 was small enough for one or two men to carry.

Somehow this identifying piece shows up like it was an article cut out of a newspaper...







Every golfer knows what the clubs do to the greens let alone flying chunks of jagged metal bouncing, and skidding to a stop on the lawn. Notice how the lawn is untouched by this flying piece of evidence and how there is hardly a scratch or burn mark on this piece that appears to have been cut off for an evidence prop with a pair of tin snips?












Somehow the rim that shows up only has eight spokes when a real 757 rim has 10 spokes...

Somehow there is only one rim that shows up at the scene out of ten...












Somehow there is only one engine that shows up at the scene out of two...












Somehow this light pole knocked over for evidence to prove there were wide wings manages to break a windshield and not even touch the car body...






Somehow the alleged 757 hits the only part of the Pentagon that is partitioned off for construction renovations...







Renovations to strengthen the Pentagon and they *ONLY* do the part of the building that is involved in the 9/11 incident?

Perhaps it was a plane at the Pentagon but what are the chances it hits not only the only part of the building undergoing construction renovations at the time......but *ALSO* the *ONLY* part of the Pentagon that was reinforce for a possible impact?

I found this article in the archives of USA Today......Here is a direct quote from the article:

"Luck &#8212; if it can be called that &#8212; had it that the terrorists aimed the Boeing 757 at the only part of the Pentagon that already had been renovated in an 11-year, $1.3 billion project meant to bolster it against attack. That significantly limited the damage and loss of life by slowing the plane as it tore through the building and reducing the explosion's reach."

Here is the USA Todays link to the article from its archives.

USATODAY.com - Pentagon repairs to cost $700 million

Renovations to strengthen the Pentagon and they *ONLY* do the part of the building that is involved in the 9/11 incident?


----------



## eots (Jan 14, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> I see pieces of AA77 all over the place, maybe terral needs glasses?



really ? all over the place..or do you see one minor piece of wreckage and a bunch of nondescript little white pieces ?


----------



## Fizz (Jan 14, 2010)

creativedreams said:


> All the plane parts put together that were planted.....er.....found at the Pentagon on 9/11 could easily fit into a pickup truck.


BULLSHIT!!
prove it.



creativedreams said:


> Somehow this identifying piece shows up like it was an article cut out of a newspaper...


huh?




creativedreams said:


> Every golfer knows what the clubs do to the greens let alone flying chunks of jagged metal bouncing, and skidding to a stop on the lawn. Notice how the lawn is untouched by this flying piece of evidence and how there is hardly a scratch or burn mark on this piece that appears to have been cut off for an evidence prop with a pair of tin snips?


wait... let me get this straight.... you are comparing the skin of an airplane hitting a building and then landing on a lawn to a GOLF CLUB?!! 

again you make stupid statements like "tin snips" made the cuts. doesnt look like that to me. it looks pretty fucking mangled.





creativedreams said:


> Somehow the rim that shows up only has eight spokes when a real 757 rim has 10 spokes...
> 
> Somehow there is only one rim that shows up at the scene out of ten...



you are another complete fucking moron that just repeats things you heard as long as it supports your "inside job" story. don't let FACTS get in the way of a good conspiracy!!

here is the ACTUAL plane that was flown into the pentagon by muslim hijackers on 9/11. it has 8 holes in the rim. the details of the rim found match the rims of the main landing gear of a 757 EXACTLY. i have no idea where your second picture comes from or if it is even a 757-200 but it is clear that the 757-200 that crashed into the pentagon had 8 holes in the rim, not 10. (the same as many other 757-200s)








creativedreams said:


> Somehow there is only one engine that shows up at the scene out of two...


your picture is from the APU, i think, not the engine.

this is what the engines look like and yes the remains of the engines were found.









creativedreams said:


> Somehow this light pole knocked over for evidence to prove there were wide wings manages to break a windshield and not even touch the car body...


so? whats your point? i mean, other than the fact that it would be impossible to plant evidence in the middle of a highway packed with rush hour traffic without anyone seeing it. suggesting that it was planted jsut make you look like a complete loon. 



creativedreams said:


> Somehow the alleged 757 hits the only part of the Pentagon that is partitioned off for construction renovations...


thats a good thing, right?  you dont want more americans dying do you? well, maybe you do since the purpose of your entire conspiracy hoax is to take the blame off the muslim hijackers and to blame it on americans.




creativedreams said:


> Renovations to strengthen the Pentagon and they *ONLY* do the part of the building that is involved in the 9/11 incident?
> 
> Perhaps it was a plane at the Pentagon but what are the chances it hits not only the only part of the building undergoing construction renovations at the time......but *ALSO* the *ONLY* part of the Pentagon that was reinforce for a possible impact?


the chances would be exactly one in five.

it would also be one in five for any other side of the pentagon you would choose.



creativedreams said:


> I found this article in the archives of USA Today......Here is a direct quote from the article:
> 
> "Luck &#8212; if it can be called that &#8212; had it that the terrorists aimed the Boeing 757 at the only part of the Pentagon that already had been renovated in an 11-year, $1.3 billion project meant to bolster it against attack. That significantly limited the damage and loss of life by slowing the plane as it tore through the building and reducing the explosion's reach."
> 
> ...



thats a good thing, right? again....... you dont want americans dying, right? OR DO YOU?!!!


----------



## candycorn (Jan 14, 2010)

Fizz said:


> creativedreams said:
> 
> 
> > All the plane parts put together that were planted.....er.....found at the Pentagon on 9/11 could easily fit into a pickup truck.
> ...



The funny thing is that there has never been a wreck in history where pictures of 100% of all pieces found were posted on the Internet.  Never.

So going by the "logic" that only seeing some parts means that no plane crashed, there has never been a plane crash in history according to him.

And now, to make us all smile a little; a song:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zN6MxLYB8hM"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zN6MxLYB8hM[/ame]


----------



## Terral (Jan 14, 2010)

Hi Candy and Mr. Fizz:

Candy and Mr. Fizz run their collective mouths and have NOTHING to support 'their' love affair with Official Cover Story L.I.E.S.! Period. 



candycorn said:


> Wreckage was found



Yes, Candy. State the OBVIOUS next time ... Of course wreckage 'was' found, because the *Painted-up A-3 Skywarrior* (pic) crashed into the Pentagon at *9:36:27 AM* (my 'What Happened' Topic). 






Guess what? A Jet crashing into the Pentagon creates 'wreckage,' but your job is to show us evidence that *a 100-ton Jetliner* (AA77 to be exact) crashed into the Pentagon going 530 miles per hour at *9:38 AM* (ACAAR Page 200) from the southwest. However, the 911Truth is that plane parts found at the Pentagon match an *A-3 Skywarrior* (story) retrofitted at *Fort Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport*:

LookingGlassNews.org



> *Missile & remote control systems added to small jets before 9-11; same parts found at Pentagon*
> 
> [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-2]Posted                in the database on Friday, May 27th, 2005 @ 10:58:17 MST (849 views)[/SIZE][/FONT]                                                                               *
> 
> ...


The reason that we have a 'small' amount of Jet debris and no signs of any crashed 100-ton Jetliner is because a smaller Jet crashed into the Pentagon; which turns out to be a DoD-built Flying BOMB. Candy wants these readers to believe that 'any' plane parts at the Pentagon equals a crashed AA77 100-ton Jetliner, when that is simply the Official Cover Story LIE to give the Bush/Obama-controlled FBI jurisdiction over this definite 9/11 Inside Job . . .



candycorn said:


> Lightpoles were knocked down. Body parts were found



So what? 






Five downed light poles in NO WAY makes any case for AA77 crashing ANYWHERE. 






Take a good long look at this photograph of the Pentagon and the location of the construction trailers. Your Official Cover Story LIE says AA77 struck the Pentagon on a 45-degree angle from the SOUTH, which just happens to be from our right-hand side where these trailers stand DIRECTLY IN THE FLIGHT PATH of the starboard wing and the 6-ton Rolls-Royce Engine!!!! Take a look around for ANY signs of any crashed 100-ton Jetliner to realize nothing like that exists. Then look at all the light poles 'still standing' directly in the path of any real 100-ton Jetliner crashing into the first floor!!! 






This is where 'you' say a real 100-ton Jetliner did one of these numbers ...








candycorn said:


> None of which comes from a the result of missle strike dumb fuck.



That is Candy's Official Cover Story Conclusion based upon NOTHING. All of the evidence says the Column Line (CL) 14 location 'was' struck by a Hypersonic Raytheon Missile (my 911Truth Blog Topic) at *9:31:39 AM* (my Topic).






The missile nose appears in the right-hand *CCTV photograph* (link), which I superimposed onto this chalkboard diagram.






From My 911Truth Blog



> Follow the *&#8220;Camera Height Is Also 5 Feet&#8221;* line across the frame to realize the *top of the right-hand column* &#8216;and&#8217; the *nose of our DoD Missile* &#8216;and&#8217; that *reference point* five feet above the horizon are *all* on the same horizontal X-axis plane. We cannot actually see the missile nose in this Camera #1 frame, but we are able to locate the elevation of the missile nose by identifying the elevation of the *center* of the *&#8220;Vapor Trail Exhaust Behind The Missile.&#8221;* The *&#8220;Magic Spot&#8221;* marks the *X-Y Axis Intersection Point* location running from the *security camera lens* through the *cap of the right-hand column* through the *centerline of the flying object* and through to that *reference point* just five feet above the horizon that places *&#8216;all&#8217; of these horizontal points* on the same *5-feet Elevation Plane* from *this diagram* (pic). Once you have examined all the evidence from both diagrams, to conclude that our missile nose is definitely *five feet above the ground*, then we are ready to begin the second portion of our Observational Exercise.
> 
> Now concentrate all of your focus on the first *Camera #2 image* (on right) and make the connection that this flying object is flying just *five feet off the ground*. I superimposed a clip from the Camera 2 image onto the *chalkboard* (above left), so you can begin making the determination about the *diameter &#8216;size&#8217; of the flying object* in relation and proportion to the *&#8216;clearance underneath.&#8217;* Run your eyes through the white arrow where you see *&#8220;Clearance is Over Twice The Diameter,&#8221;* because this is your key to accurately determining the diameter size of our flying object. Once we have the correct *&#8216;proportions&#8217;* for establishing the values of our two coefficients (*.5* and *2.5*), then we are able solve the algebraic equation to find *X*.
> 
> ...


The CCTV Photograph shows a 20-inch Raytheon Missile on final approach to the Wedge One E-ring CL-14 location and NOT any 14-feet diameter 100-ton Jetliner!!! 



Fizz said:


> still no evidence of a missile. still no evidence of an A-3.



Mr. Fizz cool is in 911Truth DENIAL, because he also has no evidence to support 'his' AA77 Crashed Into The Pentagon Official Cover Story LIE. These MORONS come to debate me on these 911Truth Pentagon Topics with nothing more than big mouths and empty hands ...



Fizz said:


> fucking hell, for someone that claims to be so well researched you would think you would at least get the weight of the jetliner correct. once again you are proven to be a LIAR.



So, Mr. Fizz 'can' use swear words in these 911Truth Deliberations ...












[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2THs3oNooM"]What A Moron!! :0)[/ame]

GL,

Terral


----------



## SFC Ollie (Jan 14, 2010)

So you are trying to tell me that an object that is on line with my eyes but 300 ft or so further back in a photograph is still the same height as my eyes?  Aha, ever hear of Depth Of Field?

It's a photography term that fits right in here. Whatever you ever pointing to on a straight line and further back is not at the same physical height. Nor can you compare it in size to something 300 ft closer to the camera.

Seems like you are twisting the laws a physics a bit here. But what would I know?


----------



## Fizz (Jan 14, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Candy and Mr. Fizz:
> 
> Candy and Mr. Fizz run their collective mouths and have NOTHING to support 'their' love affair with Official Cover Story L.I.E.S.! Period.
> 
> ...



terral, why are you putting javascript in your posts? are you just a jackass? (nevermind, its a rhetorical question).

how many holes in your fiction missile and A-3 story can we find at just a quick glance.... let's see....

1. an A-3 jet isnt wide enough to take out the light poles. so no A-3.
2. no missile parts were found. no missile.
3. the parts that were found were parts from a 757.. not a missile or A-3
4. 100s of witnesses. no witnesses reported seeing a missile being fired.
5. 100s of witnesses. no witnesses reported seeing an A-3.
6. an A-3 looks nothing like a 757. an A-3 is a high wing aircraft. its nose is different. its canopy is different. its tail is different. its wings are different. its engines are much smaller. 
7. you dont even know what the weight of a 757-200 is despite your claims that you have researched this thouroughly.
8. you have a picture of a guy carrying wreckage including part of the passenger window. an A-3 obviously has no passenger windows.
9. you are the person making the outrageous claims that no 757 crashed and it was an A-3 and a missile. it is your job to prove your theory. the passengers remains and the aircraft remains from the 757 were found. if this is wrong YOU NEED TO PROVE YOUR THEORY WITH FACTS. you have none.
10. flight 77 was tracked by radar the entire time. if you have proof of an A-3 or a missile on radar please provide it.
11. yes the government tested remote control airplanes. they tested atomic bombs too. you arent claiming atomic weapons were used on 9/11 are you? (well, at least not anymore. you did once)..... they use remote control airplanes every day not. what has this got to do with 9/11? if you have proof of a connection then please provide it. 
12. according you your ridiculous caclulations and graphics on the picture taken by a fisheye lens the part of the pentagon nearest the horizon is only 10 feet tall!! 

this is in no way a complete list of your errors but i have to go now. my girlfriend is walking around wearing only a thong.....


----------



## Terral (Jan 14, 2010)

Hi Ollie:



SFC Ollie said:


> So you are trying to tell me that an object that is on line with my eyes but 300 ft or so further back in a photograph is still the same height as my eyes?  Aha, ever hear of Depth Of Field?



Ollie: If you really want to debate this topic, then *'quote >>' something *from my work for context, so everyone is on the same page. Let us take a look at my photograph and three-part methodology.






A quick look at the Pentagon E-ring Wall Roof Line says we are looking through a wide angle lens, which means the dimensions are skewed in direct proportion to the distance 'away' from the X and Y Central Axis lines. In other words, the only place where the 'true' dimensions can be acquired from this photograph is from the imaginary 'X' (horizontal and vertical) running down the center of the picture. However, the first part of the exercise has nothing to do with determining the size of our flying object. We are only interested in determining the height of the right-hand column, which is five feet. My nephew is a journalist in the Navy and is stationed in Virginia. ;0) 

The *'observational' portion* of this exercise requires us to note the height of the security camera, which happens to be five feet. The security camera is 'level,' which means the center of the lens is giving us a transit reading of *'five feet'* into the distance (like this). All points on the same 'horizontal line' are the same height. The missile 'nose' just happens to be on the same 5-feet horizontal plane. Period! :0)

GL,

Terral


----------



## SFC Ollie (Jan 14, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Ollie:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



As pointed out by Fizz your theory would make the pentagon only 10 ft tall at the furthest point from the camera. Sorry but classic fail.


----------



## Terral (Jan 14, 2010)

Hi Mr. Fizz:



Fizz said:


> how many holes in your fiction missile and A-3 story can we find at just a quick glance.... let's see....



The answer is 'zero.' Try supporting your mere conjecture with 'evidence,' as in links to other sources; as if Mr. Fizz has any credibility whatsoever ...



Fizz said:


> 1. an A-3 jet isnt wide enough to take out the light poles. so no A-3.



Only *Pole #2* was taken down by the A-3 Jet. Pole #1, 3, 4 and 5 were taken down at 9:31:39 AM by *the missile bow shockwave* (pic). Pole #1 was struck by the starboard wing/engine only 'after' being uprooted by the Raytheon Missile Bow Shockwave. See my *'April Gallop' 911Truth Blog* entry (here) for more info. 



Fizz said:


> 2. no missile parts were found. no missile.



The Department of Defense, FBI, CIA, NSA, FEMA, Justice Dept and NORAD carried out the 9/11 attacks (with others), so your unsupported claims about what was 'not' found are meaningless in this discussion. The *Raytheon Missile* (Raytheon/Peter Peterson/Blackstone Connection) went BOOM anyway ...



Fizz said:


> 3. the parts that were found were parts from a 757.. not a missile or A-3



First of all, Mr. Fizz (what a moron) saying so means nothing. Show us the evidence to support 'your' Bush/Obama Official Cover Story LIES. Do it! Secondly, the parts found at the Pentagon are from a decommissioned A-3 Skywarrior (story and story).



Fizz said:


> 4. 100s of witnesses. no witnesses reported seeing a missile being fired.



Donald Rumsfeld said *"a missile"* (story) hit the Pentagon.



Fizz said:


> 5. 100s of witnesses. no witnesses reported seeing an A-3.



The A-3 Skywarrior was 'painted up' to appear like a real American Airlines Boeing 757 Jetliner (pic), as part of the *'Global Guardian' Wargames* (story) that ran as a cover for the 9/11 Inside Job Attacks. Perhaps your DoD Handler (How To Spot) will explain all the details ...



Fizz said:


> 6. an A-3 looks nothing like a 757. an A-3 is a high wing aircraft. its nose is different. its canopy is different. its tail is different. its wings are different. its engines are much smaller.



That is why the DoD had to send the six retired A-3 Skywarriors through the *'retrofit'* (link) process ...



Fizz said:


> 7. you dont even know what the weight of a 757-200 is despite your claims that you have researched this thouroughly.



Sure I do (link).



Fizz said:


> 8. you have a picture of a guy carrying wreckage including part of the passenger window. an A-3 obviously has no passenger windows.



We are looking at a definite 9/11 Inside Job where the DoD and FBI have control of EVERYTHING ...

GL,

Terral


----------



## Fizz (Jan 14, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Mr. Fizz:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


HAHAHAHAHAhahahahaha!!!! 

the BOW SHOCK WAVE OF A MISSILE knocked down the poles!! thats fucking ridiculous!!
you have proof that the type of missile used produces a shockwave strong enough to knock over light poles yet it leaves car windows intact? i didnt think so.... 





Terral said:


> The Department of Defense, FBI, CIA, NSA, FEMA, Justice Dept and NORAD carried out the 9/11 attacks (with others), so your unsupported claims about what was 'not' found are meaningless in this discussion. The *Raytheon Missile* (Raytheon/Peter Peterson/Blackstone Connection) went BOOM anyway ...


first of all, if you are going to claim all those agencies carried out 9/11 you need to PROVE it. you cant just SAY it and expect it to be fact. i can say santa claus carried out 9/11. it doesnt make it a fact.

second, you are claiming that "what was not found" is meaningless in one breathe and in the next breathe you are asking where the 100 ton jetliner is. so which is it? is what was NOT found meaningless or not? 




Terral said:


> First of all, Mr. Fizz (what a moron) saying so means nothing. Show us the evidence to support 'your' Bush/Obama Official Cover Story LIES. Do it! Secondly, the parts found at the Pentagon are from a decommissioned A-3 Skywarrior (story and story).


sorry to burst your little fantasy bubble but the engine parts found at the pentagon were from a Rolls-Royce RB211 series jet engine. these are the jet engines from a 757 not the JT8D engines from an A-3.



Terral said:


> Donald Rumsfeld said *"a missile"* (story) hit the Pentagon.


 the hijackers used the planes as missiles. this statement was repeated over and over and over again by everybody. no surprise rumsfeld said it. 





Terral said:


> The A-3 Skywarrior was 'painted up' to appear like a real American Airlines Boeing 757 Jetliner (pic), as part of the *'Global Guardian' Wargames* (story) that ran as a cover for the 9/11 Inside Job Attacks. Perhaps your DoD Handler (How To Spot) will explain all the details ...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


you dipshit!!!! maximum takeoff weight is NOT what the aircraft actually weighs!!! it is the maximum it can possbily weigh once fully loaded with fuel, passengers and cargo.

you arent actually expecting to find all the fuel at the pentagon, are you?!!! HAHAHahahaha!!! 

the actual weight of your "100 ton" aircraft is 57,975kg (127,810lb) (thats 63 tons for the rest of the world that doesnt live in your fantasyland) 
Boeing 757-200 | Airliners.net


----------



## Terral (Jan 15, 2010)

Hi Ollie:



SFC Ollie said:


> As pointed out by Fizz your theory would make the pentagon only 10 ft tall at the furthest point from the camera. Sorry but classic fail.



Mr. Fizz offers 'NO' links to pictures, accounts or third-party evidentiary support for 'his' version of Official Cover Story LIES. The guy sends me EMPTY POSTS with ramblings about NOTHING. 

Neither of you understand my methodology for determining the Raytheon Missile Diameter sufficiently to write any rebuttal of any kind! That is 'your' problem and not mine. 

The DoD should send *Handlers, Operatives and Assets* (How To Spot) capable of doing the math ...

GL,

Terral


----------



## candycorn (Jan 15, 2010)

Fizz said:


> Terral said:
> 
> 
> > Hi Mr. Fizz:
> ...



Wasn't Terral supposed to be abducted or something by "the man", swine flu or something like that?

Well, the A3 fantasy can't account for:

757 parts found all over the god damn place
757 passenger bodies sadly found all over the god damn place
and 5 downed light poles which match up perfectly to a 757's wing span.  

Just let the idiot rant on and on about it; he looks less sane every day.


----------



## candycorn (Jan 15, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> So you are trying to tell me that an object that is on line with my eyes but 300 ft or so further back in a photograph is still the same height as my eyes?  Aha, ever hear of Depth Of Field?
> 
> It's a photography term that fits right in here. Whatever you ever pointing to on a straight line and further back is not at the same physical height. Nor can you compare it in size to something 300 ft closer to the camera.
> 
> Seems like you are twisting the laws a physics a bit here. But what would I know?



You know quite a bit.  In your avatar, the fence behind the person is probably a good 8 -12 feet; the trees are probably a good 40 feet tall. Yet the person is likely 6' or so yet he appears taller.  

Terral is off his meds.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Jan 15, 2010)

candycorn said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > So you are trying to tell me that an object that is on line with my eyes but 300 ft or so further back in a photograph is still the same height as my eyes?  Aha, ever hear of Depth Of Field?
> ...



No Candy, I think he is taking someone elses meds.


----------



## Fizz (Jan 15, 2010)

Terral said:


> Mr. Fizz offers 'NO' links to pictures, accounts or third-party evidentiary support for 'his' version of Official Cover Story LIES. The guy sends me EMPTY POSTS with ramblings about NOTHING.
> 
> Neither of you understand my methodology for determining the Raytheon Missile Diameter sufficiently to write any rebuttal of any kind! That is 'your' problem and not mine.



the "nothing" i am rambling about just proved your missile and A-3 hoax to be physically impossible. it sucks when your whole delusional world comes crashing down around you, huh? 

apparently i know the formulas you used for determining your non-existant missile diameter better than you do because your formula made the pentagon 10 feet high!!!


----------



## Terral (Jan 15, 2010)

Hi Ollie, Candy, Mr. Fizz:



SFC Ollie said:


> No Candy, I think he is taking someone elses meds.



If anybody has questions about *"What Really Happened at the Pentagon"* (My Topic) on 9/11, then I have thousands of hours invested reconciling the facts told by the mountain of evidence. These yoyo's have NOTHING to support the Official Cover Story LIE, so they have no other option than to try and attack me. :0)

GL,

Terral


----------



## SFC Ollie (Jan 15, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Ollie, Candy, Mr. Fizz:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



If nothing else you are consistently funny.


----------



## Fizz (Jan 15, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Ollie, Candy, Mr. Fizz:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



you could investigate a bowling ball for thousands of hours and still not know what it is...


----------



## candycorn (Jan 15, 2010)

Fizz said:


> Terral said:
> 
> 
> > Hi Ollie, Candy, Mr. Fizz:
> ...



If you had evidence, you'd have a court case pending.
You ain't got that so you ain't got shit loser!!!


----------



## Trojan (Jan 15, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Ollie, Candy, Mr. Fizz:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Further proof that most twoofers have no job, no life, and live in their mothers basement eating paint chips


----------



## Terral (Jan 16, 2010)

Hi Ollie, Mr. Fizz, Candy and Trojan:

Creative was kind enough to start this Topic where real 911Truthers can deliberate upon the evidence for the 9/11 Pentagon Case, but these Official Cover Story Stooges offer 'NO' evidence for anything. 



SFC Ollie said:


> If nothing else you are consistently funny.





Fizz said:


> you could investigate a bowling ball for thousands of hours and still not know what it is...





candycorn said:


> you could investigate a bowling ball for thousands of hours and still not know what it is...
> If you had evidence, you'd have a court case pending.
> You ain't got that so you ain't got shit loser!!!



We 'do' have a case (Gallop Vs. Cheney, Rumsfeld, Etc.) with the *CenterFor911Justice* (link) and Bill Veale:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkj5jnCz_kw&feature=player_embedded"]Bill Veale At CenterFor911Justice.org[/ame] 

I have been providing information to Bill Veale and April Gallop for about a year now. Bill changed the language of his original Complaint to incorporate the components of my *"Two-Attack Pentagon Working Hypothesis"* (What Really Happened). The 911Truth 'is' going to be exposed 'and' you Official Cover Story Stooges will become laughingstocks before God's Mighty Angels ... Watch and see ... 



Trojan said:


> Further proof that most twoofers have no job, no life, and live in their mothers basement eating paint chips



Morons! These idiots are supposed to be showing us pictures of AA77 crashed into the Pentagon, which supposedly impacted at 530 miles per hour from the southwest. However, these people would rather waste our time with their nonsense and stupidity, as if any of them know one thing about 'the' 911Truth. Where can we find one Topic from any of these losers on the Flight 93/Shanksville Topic, the AA77/Pentagon Case or the WTC-7 Controlled Demolition Case. These idiots are here to run their mouths and throw smoke into the air and divert attention 'away' from the 911Truth. Period. 

Every murder investigation includes the very basic component of a 'Timeline' that lists a series of events in chronological order. My Pentagon Timeline is here:

Terral's Pentagon Timeline

How many of these idiots above even have *a Pentagon Timeline* in their possession that itemizes events with links for the 'facts' told by 'THE EVIDENCE'???? None of them. I provided the evidence to prove the Pentagon was struck by *a Peter Peterson/Blackstone/Raytheon-built Hypersonic Missile* (story = from my Blog Entry) in Post #33, but these yoyo's do not understand enough about the math to even participate in this Pentagon Discussion. 

Again, if anybody (not these Official Cover Story Idiots) has a question about what really happened at the Pentagon on 9/11, then I know more about this Topic than all of my debating opponents combined (vast understatement). Ask away ...

GL,

Terral


----------



## SFC Ollie (Jan 16, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Ollie, Mr. Fizz, Candy and Trojan:
> 
> Creative was kind enough to start this Topic where real 911Truthers can deliberate upon the evidence for the 9/11 Pentagon Case, but these Official Cover Story Stooges offer 'NO' evidence for anything.
> 
> ...



Are you still upset that Fizz proved your phony Wheels were indeed fake? Awe poor baby....


----------



## Fizz (Jan 16, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Ollie, Mr. Fizz, Candy and Trojan:
> 
> Creative was kind enough to start this Topic where real 911Truthers can deliberate upon the evidence for the 9/11 Pentagon Case, but these Official Cover Story Stooges offer 'NO' evidence for anything.
> 
> ...



are you out of your fucking mind? 

here is the proof we have shown you:
1. the black boxes from flight 77 were recovered at the pentagon.
2. the dna from the passengers and crew of flight 77 were recovered from the pentagon.
3. airplane parts from a 757-200 (which is what type of plane of flight 77) was recovered from the pentagon.
4. the flight was tracked the entire time from take-off until the crash by radar.
5. engine parts matching the rolls royce engines from flight 77 were recovered at the pentagon.

what evidence has been shown to prove flight 77 didnt hit the pentagon??
1. a nice picture with lots of graphics that proves the pentagon is 10 feet tall.
2. a picture of a landing gear hub with the claim it has the wrong number of holes in it. i proved that your claim is wrong by posting a picture of the actual plane that crashed with the actual number of holes in the wheel rim that match the debris at the pentagon.
3. a picture of the 757's APU part with the claim it is an engine part.

got any more physical evidence?


----------



## Trojan (Jan 16, 2010)

Terral

Here is a simple question you have dodged about a half dozen times.

Under what legal theory do you exclude ALL eyewitness testimony?

Because eyewitness testimony is accepted under every legal principal through the world today, in fact, its been accepted as evidence under every legal system since the beginning of recorded history.

Yet, you wish to exclude every witness that saw a plane hit the Pentagon, of which there are at least 106 documented witnesses.

So again, without visual aides, tell me how and why you are able to declare these witnesses as 'not evidence'?


----------



## Terral (Jan 16, 2010)

Hi Mr. Fizz:



Fizz said:


> are you out of your fucking mind?



Running your idiot mouth means nothing. Support your Official Cover Story Nonsense with evidence or have the sense to shut up.

GL,

Terral


----------



## Terral (Jan 16, 2010)

Hi Trojan:



Trojan said:


> Terral
> 
> Here is a simple question you have dodged about a half dozen times.
> 
> Under what legal theory do you exclude ALL eyewitness testimony?



*'The' 911Truth* says *exactly* what all the evidence says *'without'* creating a single contradiction. Period.



Trojan said:


> Because eyewitness testimony is accepted under every legal principal through the world today, in fact, its been accepted as evidence under every legal system since the beginning of recorded history.



Trojan is stating the OBVIOUS. This Topic is dedicated to analysis evidence pertaining to the 9/11 Pentagon Case. Bring out 'your' evidence and perhaps we will have something to consider.



Trojan said:


> Yet, you wish to exclude every witness that saw a plane hit the Pentagon, of which there are at least 106 documented witnesses.



No sir. Trojan has no clue about what he is talking about. Don Wright saw the *'Small Commuter Plane'* (Retrofitted A-3 Skywarrior + Retrofitted At Fort Collins/Loveland Municipal Airport) hit the Pentagon at approximately 9:35 AM (9:36:27 AM).

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzxhRGevzEg"]Don Wright Saw The 9:36:27 AM A-3 Jet Crash[/ame]

Michael Kelly saw the A-3 Jet Hit The Pentagon:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SU2SSTNIds4"]Michael Kelly Witnessed The 9:36:27 AM A-3 Jet Crash[/ame]

If Trojan actually knew anything about my *"Two Attack Pentagon Explanation"* (What Really Happened), then you would not look so STUPID for making this silly statement above. Yes. 'A' Jet did hit the Pentagon, but that had NOTHING to do with any AA77 Jetliner!



Trojan said:


> So again, without visual aides, tell me how and why you are able to declare these witnesses as 'not evidence'?



What witnesses? Trojan is grandstanding without offering the testimony of a single witness to support 'his' version of Official Govt Cover Story LIES. 

You guys need a LOT of help to debate just one real 911Truther on these Topics ...

GL,

Terral


----------



## Terral (Jan 16, 2010)

Hi Ollie:



SFC Ollie said:


> Are you still upset that Fizz proved your phony Wheels were indeed fake? Awe poor baby....



Mr. Fizz has offered 'no' evidence to support his version of the Bush/Obama Official Cover Story LIE. Period. Look at his posts to see he just runs his mouth and supports NOTHING with any evidence at all. Anybody moved by his *STUPIDITY* (#7-10) is not even paying attention ...

GL,

Terral


----------



## SFC Ollie (Jan 16, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Ollie:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You just dismissed all the evidence. Without any explanation. And you totally ignore all the real witnesses in favor of two who might give you an ounce of credibility. But tell me is there even one witness who saw your so called missile strike and the crash of your A3? I mean actually saw it. 

_Like I saw this thing crash into the building and explode so i went over there to see if i could do anything and then this plane crashed into the exact same place....
_

Got anybody like that terral? If not you are simply blowing smoke as per normal.


----------



## Terral (Jan 16, 2010)

Hi Ollie:



SFC Ollie said:


> You just dismissed all the evidence. Without any explanation.



Ollie and Mr. Fizz and Trojan are JUST TALKING like idiots and fools. You really believe a 100-ton AA77 crashed into the Pentagon! Right? Okay then. SHOW US YOUR EVIDENCE!!! Bring out your witnesses. Quote them and I will show you how 'all' of the evidence supports *'my What Really Happened' Explanation*. Do it! 



SFC Ollie said:


> And you totally ignore all the real witnesses in favor of two who might give you an ounce of credibility.



No sir. I can give you testimony from dozens of Pentagon witnesses, but my point to Trojan that *'A Jet' DID hit the Pentagon* requires only the two above. 



SFC Ollie said:


> But tell me is there even one witness who saw your so called missile strike and the crash of your A3? I mean actually saw it.



Donald Rumfeld ordered up the Hypersonic Raytheon Missile and reported that 'a missile' struck the Pentagon to Parade Magazine on 9/12 ... 

The7thFire.com Story



> Donald Rumsfeld >> "It is a truth that a terrorist can attack any time, any place, using any      technique and it's physically impossible to defend at every time and every      place against every conceivable technique.      Here we're talking about plastic      knives and using an American Airlines flight filled with our citizens, and *     'the missile' to damage this      building* and similar (inaudible) that damaged the World Trade Center. The      only way to deal with this problem is by taking the battle to the      terrorists, wherever they are, and dealing with them."





SFC Ollie said:


> _Like I saw this thing crash into the building and explode so i went over there to see if i could do anything and then this plane crashed into the exact same place...._


The Raytheon Missile went hypersonic about a half mile from the Pentagon, so nobody at the Pentagon had the opportunity to 'see' the missile. I explained how the missile 'was' photographed in Post #33, so *'quote >>' anything* and ask your questions ...

GL,

Terral


----------



## Fizz (Jan 16, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Mr. Fizz:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



what's wrong, scumbag? i gave you a list of evidence already shown to you many times. your reply of "shut up and support the official cover story" does nothing to refute the evidence or bring any evidence to the contrary.

then in a later post you cite testimony that people saw "A COMMUTER PLANE" as evidence of an A-3 military jet. i have a bit of news for you. no matter how you paint it an A-3 is not a commuter plane. you cant change people's statements. these statements do NOTHING to support your A-3 hoax. nobody saw an A-3.


----------



## Fizz (Jan 16, 2010)

*Alan Wallace* -- firefighter with safety crew at Pentagon's heliport
_We have had a commercial carrier crash into the west side of the Pentagon at the heliport, Washington Boulevard side. The crew is OK. The airplane was a 757 Boeing or a 320 Airbus._

*Albert Hemphill* -- from inside the Naval Annex
_Immediately, the large silver cylinder of an aircraft appeared in my window, coming over my right shoulder as I faced the Westside of the Pentagon directly towards the heliport. The aircraft, looking to be either a 757 or Airbus, seemed to come directly over the annex_

*James S. Robbins* -- Robbins, a national-security analyst and 'nationalreviewonline' _contributor, watched from his 6th story office window in Arlington. The Pentagon is about a mile and half distant in the center of the tableau. I was looking directly at it when the aircraft struck. The sight of the 757 diving in at an unrecoverable angle is frozen in my memory, ..._

*Tim Timmerman --*
_... said it had been an American Airways 757._

*Tim Timmerman* -- from 16th floor apartment near National Airport
_It was a Boeing 757, American Airlines, no question._

*Mike Dobbs* -- observed from upper level of outer ring of Pentagon
_... looking out the window when he saw an American Airlines 737 twin-engine airliner strike the building._

*Terry Morin* -- watched from 5th wing of BMDO offices at the old Navy Annex
_The plane had a silver body with red and blue stripes down the fuselage. I believed at the time that it belonged to American Airlines, but I couldn't be sure. It looked like a 737 and I so reported to authorities._

*Jim Sutherland* -- from his car
_... saw ... a white 737 twin-engine plane with multicolored trim fly 50 feet over I-395 in a straight line, striking the side of the Pentagon._

*Noel Sepulveda* --
_... saw a commercial airliner coming from the direction of Henderson Hall the Marine Corps headquarters._

*Madelyn Zakhem *--
_... she heard what she thought was a jet fighter directly overhead. It wasn't. It was an airliner coming straight up Columbia Pike at tree-top level. It was huge! It was silver. It was low -- unbelievable! I could see the cockpit._

*Joel Sucherman* --
_Do you know how many engines? - I did not see the engines, I saw the body and the tail; it was a silver jet with the markings along the windows that spoke to me as an American Airlines jet, it was not a commercial, excuse me, a business jet, it was not a Lear jet, ... it was a bigger plane than that._

*Dave Winslow* -- Winslow is an AP reporter
_I saw the tail of a large airliner ... It ploughed right into the Pentagon._


----------



## Fizz (Jan 16, 2010)

an A-3 has a wingspan or 72' 6" so how can it make a hole in a reinforced building that is 141' wide?

it can't. its too small.


----------



## Fizz (Jan 16, 2010)

a silver A-3





and a silver 757





not even close to looking the same!!!!


----------



## Fizz (Jan 16, 2010)

the worlds largest missile. so big its the same size as a 757!!


----------



## candycorn (Jan 16, 2010)

Fizz said:


> the worlds largest missile. so big its the same size as a 757!!



Amazingly, the fireball is the same dimension, color, size, and have identical characteristics as the fireballs in NYC when PLANES hit two buildings.


----------



## Fizz (Jan 16, 2010)

candycorn said:


> Fizz said:
> 
> 
> > the worlds largest missile. so big its the same size as a 757!!
> ...



stop being logical. this is the conspiracy forum. there's no room for logic in here.


----------



## Trojan (Jan 16, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Trojan:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



From the lists above, 136 people saw the plane approach the Pentagon, and

104 directly saw the plane hit the Pentagon. 

6 were nearly hit by the plane in front of the Pentagon. Several others were within 100-200 feet of the impact. 

*26 mentioned that it was an American Airlines jet. *

*39 others mentioned that it was a large jet/commercial airliner. *

2 described a smaller corporate jet. 1 described a "commuter plane" but didn't mention the size. 

*7 said it was a Boeing 757. *

8 witnesses were pilots. One witness was an Air Traffic Controller and Pentagon tower Chief.

2 witnesses were firefighters working on their truck at the Pentagon heliport. 

4 made radio calls to inform emergency services that a plane had hit the Pentagon.

10 said the plane's flaps and landing gear were not deployed (1 thought landing gear struck a light pole). 

16 mentioned seeing the plane hit light poles/trees, or were next to to the poles when it happened. Another 8 mentioned the light poles being knocked down: it's unknown if they saw them hit. 

42 mentioned seeing aircraft debris. 4 mentioned seeing airline seats. 3 mentioned engine parts. 


2 mentioned bodies still strapped into seats.

15 mentioned smelling or contacting aviation/jet fuel. 

3 had vehicles damaged by light poles or aircraft debris. Several saw other occupied vehicles damaged. 

3 took photographs of the aftermath.

Many mentioned false alarm warnings of other incoming planes after the crash. One said "3-4 warnings." 


*
"I did see airplane seats and a corpse still strapped to one of the seats."*Capt. Jim Ingledue, Virginia Beach Fire Dept

*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."

seven witness videos

JREF Forum - View Single Post - Pentagon Eyewitness Accounts (Videos)

Your theory has contradictions, many contradictions 


paint chips Terral, you need to change your diet


----------



## Fizz (Jan 16, 2010)

and no matter what paint you put on it an A-3 is NOT a corporate jet or a commuter plane. so not one person described seeing the A-3 or the missile.


----------



## Terral (Jan 17, 2010)

Hi Mr. Fizz cool:



Fizz said:


> *Alan Wallace* -- firefighter with safety crew at Pentagon's heliport_. We have had a commercial carrier crash into the west side of the Pentagon at the heliport, Washington Boulevard side. The crew is OK. The airplane was a 757 Boeing or a 320 Airbus._



Please include 'links' (like this to Alan Wallace Testimony) or we have nothing to deliberate. Alan Wallace was attached to on-station Foam 161 and 9/11 was his first day on the job. Your information above contradicts the testimony of Alan Wallace who said:

Alan Wallace Testimony



> Alan Wallace >> The airplane *appeared to be* a Boeing 757 or an Air Bus 320- white with blue and orange stripes.  Mark later recalled the plane was silver and even identified that it was American Airlines. So many people think Mark and I watched the plane hit the building.  *We did NOT.*  We only saw it approach for an instant.  I would estimate not longer than half a second . . .



Mr. Official Cover Story Fizz has deliberately removed certain terms to change Alan Wallace Testimony to agree with 'his' Official Cover Story LIES. This bottom-of-the-barrel *DoD Op* (How To Spot) refuses to include third-party links to his sources, because then you would know for a fact that ... HE ... IS ... LYING. Period.  

Every reply you send in my direction 'without' third-party sources to support your idiotic Cover Story is an 'empty post' with nothing but Mr. Fizz running his Official Cover Story mouth.

GL,

Terral


----------



## Fizz (Jan 17, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Mr. Fizz cool:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



even in your quote it says a 757 or a A320.

it doesnt say A-3 or a missile.

so now you are claiming that the pentagon was attacked THREE TIMES? once by a missile, once by an A-3 and then a third time by a 757 or an A320?!!


----------



## Terral (Jan 17, 2010)

Hi Mr. Fizz:



Fizz said:


> an A-3 has a wingspan or 72' 6" so how can it make a hole in a reinforced building that is 141' wide?
> 
> it can't. its too small.



Mr. Fizz is asking questions, when he is supposed to be showing us evidence that a 100-ton Jetliner (AA77) crashed into this Wedge One E-ring Wall going 530 miles per hour from the southwest. The reason Mr. Fizz wants to talk endlessly about the size of his little hole is over the complete lack of evidence for his crashed 100-ton Jetliner. :0) Note that even Mr. Fizz identifies the fact that no windows are broken on the third floor ...






... but a real Boeing 757-200 Jetliner stands more than 40 feet tall off the tarmac on the cotton-picking runway! 






The windows above and on the left side of the little 18-feet 3-inch second-story hole are NOT broken, but this Official Cover Story Lunatic really wants you to believe a 100-ton Jetliner crashed here! The size of the first-floor hole means nothing in this debate ...






... because the Green SUV is untouched ...






... and Cable Spools talker than a man (pic) stand directly in the flight path for any first-floor crash. Look carefully at the white circle where I highlighted *Column #17* that is still very much intact on the first floor. Then note the black plastic covering the cables is *'not'* melted, because the Raytheon Missile exploded 'inside' the E-ring Wall. That is why the large cable spool is leaning back in our direction rather than being dragged into the Pentagon by a 100-ton Jetliner going 530 miles per hour. You can see the second-story concrete slab is still intact, because the fire is blazing away on the second floor between Column #16 and #18. Then enlarge this damage schematic photograph ...






... to realize that Column #9 and #10 are also intact. These columns are on 10-foot centers, which means the distance from Column #17 to #10 is no more than seventy feet 'and' the Official Cover Story LIE says AA77 crashed on a 45-degree angle from the south ...






... which means the impact hole 'should' extend all the way over to CL-5 going north 'and' to CL-21 on the right side. However, none of this ever happened ...






... because the temporary contractor construction trailers stood directly in the flight path of the starboard (right side) wing!!!! Allow the 100-ton Jetliner to pass 'over' those trailers at 530 miles per hour and they would have been sucked right inside the Pentagon. However, Terry Cohen was having a meeting inside one of those trailers and she was standing in front of the little entry hole in mere seconds ...

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyIi7Z3fuhg"]Terry Cohen Saw "Just Smoke."[/ame]

The size of the first-floor hole does not matter, because subsequent 'explosions' enlarged the hole; until the *E-ring Roof finally collapsed at 10:15 AM* (my Pentagon Timeline). 






This is the very best picture of the E-ring Hole left-side to CL-5 showing the temporary construction fence thrown back in our direction and over the hood of the little sports car. A man can stand on the hood of that undamaged SUV and reach up to the elevation of the second-story slab, which means very simply that NO ROOM exists for any 44-foot tall 100-ton Jetliner! Period! Terry Cohen ran from the small 18-feet hole to hear the 'Terrible Explosion' from the 9:37:27 AM A-3 Jet attack, which created all the FIRE in the lower pic:






The "Just Smoke" environment was changed into a 'Fiery Inferno' (Lloyd's "Big Boom") only after the 9:36:27 AM A-3 Jet crash, which is proven by careful examination of Terry Cohen's Pentagon Testimony (What Really Happened).

Mr. Fizz is trying to make his little hole bigger to accommodate 'his' 100-ton Jetliner, but the evidence shows nothing like that ever happened:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTJehfQkuyE"]These Experts Agree With Me[/ame]

GL,

Terral


----------



## Terral (Jan 17, 2010)

Hi Mr. Fizz:



Fizz said:


> even in your quote it says a 757 or a A320.
> 
> it doesnt say A-3 or a missile.



Alan Wallace and Mark Skipper saw *the painted-up A-3 Skywarrior* (pic) approaching the Pentagon, during the 9:31:39 AM Missile Strike (my Blog Entry). The firemen saw the A-3 for perhaps a half second to then begin running north 'just before' the Missile Strike and 'just before' the A-3 began clipping light poles and 'just before' the A-3 flew over the E-ring wall. Yes. Alan Wallace thought he saw an American Airlines Jetliner in the flash of that moment, because the DoD painted up their Flying Bomb to look like a real Jetliner. Yes. These firemen thought the A-3 Jet hit the Pentagon, because the Missile exploded behind them and they did not see the A-3 fly through the single smoke plume. 

These firemen gave accurate testimony for what they thought they saw on 9/11, but to this day they do 'not' know the 911Truth. Alan Wallace and Mark Skipper were trapped in the corner created by the E-ring Wall and the south Heliport Building Wall, which concentrated the sound waves to render both men temporarily deaf. Both men suffered severe shock and ran to hide under their vehicles parked on the north side of the Heliport Building, until the A-3 returned just 4 minutes and 48 seconds later to create all of the 'fire.' 






The firemen were chased out from under their vehicles by the fire, until they eventually regained their hearing and began helping other people suffering from this inside-job attack.  



Fizz said:


> so now you are claiming that the pentagon was attacked THREE TIMES? once by a missile, once by an A-3 and then a third time by a 757 or an A320?!!



Asking stupid questions only makes 'you' appear the fool before these readers. Yes. The Pentagon was attacked 'three times:'






1. *9:31:39 AM* Missile Strike (Alan Wallace and April Gallop were injured)
2. *9:36:27 AM* A-3 Jet Strike
3. *9:42 - 10:15 AM* Demolition Explosions taking down the E-ring Roof

My Pentagon Timeline:



> *14. 9:31:39 AM* Missile Strikes Wedge One Column Line 14 of E-Ring Wall (gif = diagram)
> 
> *27. 9:36:27 AM* A-3 Jet crashes between Column Line 8 and 13 at base of E-Ring wall (diagram = lower pic)
> 
> ...


Then realize the 911CR 'and' the ACAAR never use the plural term *"explosions"* (#10) even one time, as the *Govt Documentation Proves A 9/11 Inside Job* (my Topic).

PS. Mr. Pentagon Investigator Fizz: Please provide a link to 'your' Pentagon Timeline from which your investigation should be based. TY in advance ...

GL,

Terral


----------



## Fizz (Jan 17, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Mr. Fizz:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



holy fuck you are an ignorant asshole!!! 
you are telling me that we are not supposed to question the things you say? thats the most ridiculous fucking argument you have ever made!! 

the fallacy of your statement is that the 100 ton jetliner isnt really a 100 ton jetliner. you arent even smart enough to know what you are looking at when you quote specs. 100 tons is the maximum take-off weight. it is NOT what the 757 actually weighs, you dumbfuck. yet you keep saying over and over and over again that its 100 tons actually only weighs 64 tons.  YOU CANT EVEN GET YOUR MOST BASIC DETAILS RIGHT!!!!
Boeing 757-200 | Airliners.net

then you keep showing the outside of the building looking for the 757 when the plane crashed INTO the building. most of the debris is INSIDE, jackass.












































Terral said:


> The reason Mr. Fizz wants to talk endlessly about the size of his little hole is over the complete lack of evidence for his crashed 100-ton Jetliner. :0) Note that even Mr. Fizz identifies the fact that no windows are broken on the third floor ...



and with your thousands and thousands of hours you claim that you spent i'm sure you were thorough enough to check on the windows, right? obviously not. 
you do know that the windows were blast resistant and cost about $10,000 a piece, right? i guess not. fucking moron!! 
Viracon to Receive Award for Blast Resistant Windows in Pentagon



Terral said:


> ... but a real Boeing 757-200 Jetliner stands more than 40 feet tall off the tarmac on the cotton-picking runway!


how fucking dumb can you possibly be? its really sad that i need to point this out to you but do you think that maybe..... just possibly.... that the fact that it is standing on the landing gear and wheels might possibly add to its overall height on the "cotton picking" runway? 



Terral said:


> The windows above and on the left side of the little 18-feet 3-inch second-story hole are NOT broken, but this Official Cover Story Lunatic really wants you to believe a 100-ton Jetliner crashed here! The size of the first-floor hole means nothing in this debate ...


you mean the $10,000 per item blast proof windows survived the blast of a 757 hitting the building? how odd that something the government bought actually did what it was designed to do. 

so you think the size of the hole has nothing to do with anything? why is that? because it proves that your A-3 could not possibly have made the hole!!!

you fucking ignorant moron. as soon as somebody proves your hoax to be incorrect you say "it doesnt mean anything" and go into your delusional denial mode.

well it does mean something. it means you are a fucking delusional moron that refuses to look at ALL the evidence and instead only see what you want to see.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Jan 17, 2010)

Let us not forget that Terrels missile was able to knock over at least one light pole in its wake but was unable to move empty cable reels.


----------



## Terral (Jan 17, 2010)

Hi Mr.Fizz cool:



Fizz said:


> holy fuck you are an ignorant asshole!!!
> you are telling me that we are not supposed to question the things you say? thats the most ridiculous fucking argument you have ever made!!



Mr. Fizz ran out of Official Cover Story Arguments to begin his swearing really fast. Asking me a thousand questions does NOT make any Official Cover Story Case. Period. Mr. Fizz uses Disinformation Trickery in order to hide the fact that no pictures of any crashed AA77 even exist and the Pentagon evidence DOES NOT even begin to match 'his' Official Cover Story LIES. Once again I am looking at a post from this guy that makes a case for NOTHING ... 



Fizz said:


> the fallacy of your statement is that the 100 ton jetliner isnt really a 100 ton jetliner . . .  you arent even smart enough to know what you are looking at when you quote specs. 100 tons is the maximum take-off weight.



No sir. The maximum takeoff weight of a Boeing 757-200 class Jetliner is *255, 000 pounds* or well over 125 tons (specs). However, AA77 was canceled on 9/11 (#1) and nothing like that ever crashed into the Pentagon on 9/11 or any other day.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dm_cnFoMHjA"]Jamie McIntyre Was There On 9/11[/ame]



Fizz said:


> it is NOT what the 757 actually weighs, you dumbfuck.



Mr. Fizz is tired of being sent here every day to lose Official Cover Story Debates, so he escalates into a swearing frenzy from time to time. :0) 



Fizz said:


> yet you keep saying over and over and over again that its 100 tons actually only weighs 64 tons.  YOU CANT EVEN GET YOUR MOST BASIC DETAILS RIGHT!!!!
> Boeing 757-200 | Airliners.net



No sir. A real 100-ton Boeing 757-200 Jetliner has a 60-ton Titanium Frame and two (2) 6-ton Rolls-Royce Engines, before you add the indestructible landing gear, fuel, cargo, water, people, etc., etc.. These Aviation/Military Experts agree with me that we are talking about a "100-Ton Jetliner."

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTJehfQkuyE"]@ 00:58/6:12[/ame] 

This Official Cover Story LIAR is trying to reduce the size of 'his' mythical AA77 Jetliner by almost half! :0)



Fizz said:


> then you keep showing the outside of the building looking for the 757 when the plane crashed INTO the building. most of the debris is INSIDE, jackass.



When all else fails for Mr. Fizz, then he just starts lying! 






You are looking at the aftermath of the *9:31:39 AM Missile Strike* 'and' the *9:36:27 AM A-3 Jet Crash* (imprint + story) that struck the second-story concrete slab elevation to explode into a kazillion little bits. What Really Happened at the Pentagon has NOTHING to do with any AA77 100-ton Jetliner. Period. That is 'your' Official Cover Story LIE that gave the Corrupt Inside-job FBI jurisdiction over the Pentagon Case, even though the FBI helped to carry out the attacks ...



Fizz said:


> and with your thousands and thousands of hours you claim that you spent i'm sure you were thorough enough to check on the windows, right? obviously not.
> you do know that the windows were blast resistant and cost about $10,000 a piece, right? i guess not. fucking moron!!



Do you kiss your mommy with that mouth? In other words, this Official Cover Story Stooge thinks that expensive glass windows can remain unbroken after being struck by a 100-ton Jetliner going 530 miles per hour! :0)

Once again this guy offers his big mouth and no third-party support for anything, and I was hoping the DoD would actually send me a competent Disinfo Stooge ...

GL,

Terral


----------



## candycorn (Jan 17, 2010)

Wasn't martial law supposedly going to be imposed sometime last year?


----------



## Fizz (Jan 17, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> Let us not forget that Terrels missile was able to knock over at least one light pole in its wake but was unable to move empty cable reels.



funny thing about these pictures is that it completely disproves terral's missile shockwave hoax and his A-3 hoax....









for instance, his shock wave was supposed to be able to knock over much more sturdy light poles yet they leave this temporary fencing in place. this is where the engine from the 757 passed through on the way to the pentagon. it is too far from the centerline of the damage to be an A-3. also notice that the damage is all bent TOWARDS the pentagon indication that it could not have possibly been caused by an explosion.


----------



## Fizz (Jan 17, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Mr.Fizz cool:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


i'll curse as much as i fucking want and the more you complain about me doing it the more i will bring to everyone's attention what a complete fucking moronic asshole you are.

you have this ridiculous double standard that its ok for you to question everything about 9/11 but its not ok for anyone to question your absurd hoax.

there is an infinately larger percentage of 757 parts at the pentagon than there are A-3 or missile parts.

you also have ZERO pictures of a missile and ZERO pictures of an A-3. 

there are hundreds of witnesses that saw ONE airplane go towards and crash into the pentagon. some even name the plane as a 757.  there is not one witnesses that says they saw an A-3 or a missile. so you have no pictures, no debris and no witnesses to back up any of your hoax.



Terral said:


> Fizz said:
> 
> 
> > the fallacy of your statement is that the 100 ton jetliner isnt really a 100 ton jetliner . . .  you arent even smart enough to know what you are looking at when you quote specs. 100 tons is the maximum take-off weight.
> ...


well then i have no idea where you are getting your 100 ton aircraft statement from. all i know is that it's wrong. the weight of a 757-200 with two rolls royce RB211s is 127,810lb.

from Boeing 757-200 | Airliners.net
*Weights*
Operating empty with P&W engines 57,840kg (127,520lb), *with RB211s 57,975kg (127,810lb). Basic max takeoff 99,790kg (220,000lb)*, 



Terral said:


> However, AA77 was canceled on 9/11 (#1) and nothing like that ever crashed into the Pentagon on 9/11 or any other day.
> 
> Jamie McIntyre Was There On 9/11


every flight that didnt make it to their destination by the time the FAA cleared the skies is listed as cancelled.

surely you arent going to try to make the argument that flight 77 would have reached its destination by the time the skies were cleared.

nevermind. scratch that. you are are DUMBFUCK and probably will try to make that argument. 

you want to tell all the american airline employees that checked the passengers in, loaded the airplane with bags and pushed the aircraft back from the gate.... as well as the tower personal at Dulles that gave it clearance to take off that the flight was cancelled.

oh, you might want to tell the passengers and crew that died on the plane it was cancelled. you can also tell the families of those people it was cancelled too.

you really are a dumbfuck!!! 





Terral said:


> Mr. Fizz is tired of being sent here every day to lose Official Cover Story Debates, so he escalates into a swearing frenzy from time to time. :0)


tired of being sent here?

and miss all your delusional statements such as i am a government agent and a bow shockwave from a missile knocked over light poles but left car windows intact?

you cant pay for entertainment like that!!! 

if you think calling you a moronic dumbfuck is a swearing frenzy then you should see what happens when i get pissed off!! 
i call you are moronic dumbfuck because thats the best description for you. its not a frenzy.





Terral said:


> No sir. A real 100-ton Boeing 757-200 Jetliner has a 60-ton Titanium Frame and two (2) 6-ton Rolls-Royce Engines, before you add the indestructible landing gear, fuel, cargo, water, people, etc., etc.. These Aviation/Military Experts agree with me that we are talking about a "100-Ton Jetliner."
> 
> @ 00:58/6:12


i'm sorry... but now you are changing your statement. your claim is that we should find a 100 ton jetliner AFTER it crashes into the pentagon. do you really think that the jet fuel and the water would remain intact after it crashes into the pentagon? the people?

as i just showed above, the weight of a COMPLETE 757-200 is 127,810lb (about 64 tons). this includes the engines (that means you just LIED above) and the landing gear (again you LIED above) unless of course you think that a 757 can operate without them.

you are a moronic dumbfuck.

your video is a complete joke. it talks about a "ten foot high hole"

DOES THIS LOOK LIKE A TEN FOOT HIGH HOLE TO YOU IGNORANT MORONIC DUMBFUCKS!! 








Terral said:


> This Official Cover Story LIAR is trying to reduce the size of 'his' mythical AA77 Jetliner by almost half! :0)


no. i am showing the actual weight of your "100 ton jetliner" because either you are too much of a moronic dumbfuck to know what it weighs even after being shown or you are a complete fucking LIAR.
you choose which one better suits you.



Terral said:


> Fizz said:
> 
> 
> > then you keep showing the outside of the building looking for the 757 when the plane crashed INTO the building. most of the debris is INSIDE, jackass.
> ...


where is your proof that a missile hit the pentagon? your eyewitnesses? how about the proof of your A-3? your witnesses for that?

you keep saying a 757 didnt hit the pentagon...well something hit it, right? so PROVE what hit it!!!

dont just say it was a missile and draw pretty flight path graphics of it. PROVE IT WITH ACTUAL EVIDENCE!!!

i have just as much evidence that the pentagon was hit by a train as you have that it was hit by a missile and an A-3.

i also have the exact same amount of witnesses. 



Terral said:


> Fizz said:
> 
> 
> > and with your thousands and thousands of hours you claim that you spent i'm sure you were thorough enough to check on the windows, right? obviously not.
> ...



did i say a dirty word and hurt your little feelings? awwww...... i'm sorry....




NOT!!!


so now you are claiming that a 100 ton jetliner actually smashed into the reinforced blast proof windows and they didnt break? or are you claiming that they survived the blast of a jetliner hitting the building.... because considering they were blast proof windows the fact that they survived a blast would make them......

nevermind.... your right. blast proof windows should shatter even when they arent hit with anything...


----------



## Trojan (Jan 17, 2010)

Terral

You had best stop digging, the hole is getting deep


----------



## Terral (Jan 18, 2010)

Hi Mr. Fizz and Ollie:

We should all remember that Mr. Fizz is here to push Official Cover Story LIES, which includes a 100-ton Jetliner (AA77 to be specific) crashing into the Wedge One E-ring Wall location at* 9:38 AM* (ACAAR page 200) on a 45-degree angle from the southwest going a whopping 530 miles per hour. Rather than make *'his' Official Cover Story Case*, he is desperately trying to convince these readers that a problem exists with 'my' What Happened At The Pentagon Explanations. 



Fizz said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > Let us not forget that Terrels missile was able to knock over at least one light pole in its wake but was unable to move empty cable reels.
> ...



No sir. First of all, the light poles have '*breakaway bolts*' and are made to snap off when struck by a VW Rabbit at low speeds (PentagonResearch.com). These idiots are trying to say that a Raytheon Missile exploding 'inside' the Pentagon did not move the cable spools ...






... but two of these four cable spools are leaning back in our direction, because the 'explosions' detonated inside the Pentagon (9:31:39 AM) and against the E-ring Wall (9:36:27 AM)!!!! However, the Official Cover Story LIE says AA77 crashed into the first floor going 530 miles per hour from our right on a 45-degree angle; which means these cable spools should have been dragged inside the Pentagon!! Take a good look around in the fiery picture above to realize the E-ring Wall is still standing and there is no room for any 100-ton Jetliner! You can see the corner of the generator fence that appears in Mr. Fizzle's picture:

Picture Link #1

Picture Link #2

This idiot is 'hotlinking' pictures off the internet, which is a definite no-no, so click on the link to see his photograph of the 'generator fire.' The Raytheon Missile made the final approach on a 45-degree angle from the southwest (green flight path) to plow directly through this generator fence and explode inside the Pentagon at the Column Line (CL) 14 location. However, the generator did not catch fire during the 9:31:39 AM Missile Strike, but caught fire during the *9:36:27 AM A-3 Jet Crash* (lower pic). 






We know this is 'the' 911Truth, because Terry Cohen and her construction associates ran to the impact hole (CL-14 location) to see *"Just Smoke."*

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyIi7Z3fuhg"]Terry Cohen Stood Outside The E-ring Hole In Mere Seconds![/ame]

The 'fire' dominated the E-ring Wall environment 'after' Terry Cohen's *"Terrible Explosion,"* which she perceived to be "15 minutes later" (shock skewed the perception of time), but actually took place exactly 4 minutes and 48 seconds after the original 9:31:39 AM Missile Strike. If a real 100-ton Jetliner plowed through the generator fence, the starboard wing would have taken out all of the temporary construction trailers and these standing light poles!








Fizz said:


> for instance, his shock wave was supposed to be able to knock over much more sturdy light poles yet they leave this temporary fencing in place.



Again, *the five light poles* (pic) have *breakaway bases/bolts* (pic and info) that are 'designed' to snap off. The construction fence is anchored at every fence pole location, but the Hypersonic Raytheon Missile simply plowed through the generator fence to detonate inside the E-ring Wall 'and' throw debris back in our direction.  



Fizz said:


> this is where the engine from the 757 passed through on the way to the pentagon.



No sir. Again, all of the construction trailers stand directly in the flight path of any approaching 100-ton Jetliner!!!! These guys (Ollie, Fizz) act like a missile is supposed to move the cable spools, but not their 100-ton Jetliner!!! :0) The 9:31:39 AM Raytheon Missile plowed through the Pentagon to create Terry Cohen's 'Boom' from the News Video, which knocked ceiling tiles down. However, she did NOT even begin to describe any crashing 100-Ton Jetliner that would have plowed through the trailer and killed her with all of her construction companions.  



Fizz said:


> it is too far from the centerline of the damage to be an A-3.



This guy is just talking without one clue. The A-3 Jet flew over the E-ring Wall during the 9:31:39 AM Missile Strike, but returned to strike the Pentagon Wall at 9:36:27 AM using the "North Of Citgo Flight Path" (in blue). The DoD Flying BOMB impacted at the *second-story concrete slab location* (imprint pic + story) to become Terry Cohen's *"Terrible Explosion"* and Lloyde England's *"Big Boom"* (LibertyPost.org Story). Lloyde England also saw "Just Smoke" coming up out of the little entry hole (Barbara Honegger's Paper), until the 'Big Boom' created the 400-foot long fiery inferno during the *9:36:27 AM A-3 Jet Strike*. 






Lloyde is standing in the lower left-hand corner of this fiery photograph ...



Fizz said:


> Also notice that the damage is all bent TOWARDS the pentagon indication that it could not have possibly been caused by an explosion.



Mr. Fizz is trying to say a 100-ton Jetliner crashed into this Pentagon Wall ...






... as if Terry Cohen and her coworkers are going to see "Just Smoke" from a crashing 100-ton Jetliner (pic)!!!! No sir. Lloyde England's Taxi Cab was struck by Pole #1 (pic) and he stood on Washington Blvd to report ONLY *"inside-the-building fires"* (Barbara Honegger's Paper again), which matches Terry Cohen's Testimony TO A TEE. 

The *'only'* explanation that reconciles *'all' the evidence* is my *'Two Attack Pentagon Working Hypothesis'* adopted by Bill Veale (CenterFor911Justice) for the *April Gallop/Dick Cheney Lawsuit* (link) ... Period ...

GL,

Terral


----------



## Terral (Jan 18, 2010)

Hi Mr. Fizz:



Fizz said:


> i'll curse as much as i fucking want and the more you complain about me doing it the more i will bring to everyone's attention what a complete fucking moronic asshole you are ...














GL (#7-#10),

Terral


----------



## candycorn (Jan 18, 2010)

Wheres that martial law you promised us?  Well terral; WTF is it?


----------



## Fizz (Jan 18, 2010)

HAHAHAhahahahah!!!! 

so you are saying that the missile physically hit these fence posts.... then made a left turn and travelled along the face of the pentagon.... then made a right turn into the building and exploded creating the huge hole??!!! 





the fence posts in question are in the lower right of the picture.


----------



## Fizz (Jan 18, 2010)

so the shockwave that knocked over light poles did nothing to the flimsy wooden stairs of the construction trailer after physically hitting the fence only inches away!!!


----------



## Terral (Jan 18, 2010)

Hi Mr. Fizz cool:



Fizz said:


> so you are saying that the missile physically hit these fence posts.... then made a left turn and travelled along the face of the pentagon....



No.  






The Raytheon Missile traveled from the Route 47 (Washington Blvd) Cloverleaf (south/right of Pole #1), on this flight path, to pass right through the generator fence (like this), before striking the E-ring Column Line (CL) 14 location.






The five downed light poles 'and' the generator fence 'and' the E-ring CL-14 Location 'and' the 45-degree damage to the Pentagon (3 bomblets = my 911Truth Blog Entry), including the C-Ring Explosion Hole ...






... are *'all'* on the same 45-degree angle line of destruction corresponding to the *"Column Line 14 Death Corridor."* The A-3 Jet flew over the Pentagon Roof at 9:31:39 AM to return 4-minutes and 48-seconds later for the *'second attack'* (What Happened).

GL,

Terral


----------



## Terral (Jan 18, 2010)

Hi Mr. Fizz:

Let's see: Mr. Fizz is supposed to be proving that this wall ...






... was struck by a 100-ton Jetliner (AA77) at 530 miles per hour at 9:38 AM, but all he can do is whine about my "What Really Happened At The Pentagon" Explanations that he in NO WAY even begins to understand. 



Fizz said:


> so the shockwave that knocked over light poles did nothing to the flimsy wooden stairs of the construction trailer after physically hitting the fence only inches away!!!



Your supposition that the *Hypersonic Raytheon Missile Bow Shockwave* 'did nothing' is impossible to prove, as if we have photographs of the position before 'and' after the attacks. Again, *the "missile"* (Donald Rumsfeld Testimony) *'exploded INSIDE'* the Pentagon! There was 'no fire' outside the Pentagon after the 9:31:39 AM Missile Strike and I am not going to repeat myself to this DoD Stooge in every post. The corner of the generator fence is the very location where the Hypersonic Missile passed on the way to striking the CL-14 Location directly behind those Cable Spools. 






This is a picture of the aftermath of the 9:31:39 AM Missile Strike 'and' the 9:36:27 AM A-3 Jet Crash 'after' the fire was put out 'and' before the *E-ring Roof collapsed at 10:15 AM* (my Pentagon Timeline).

GL,

Terral


----------



## SFC Ollie (Jan 18, 2010)

Explain to us again how the hole in the first floor was made by an A3 but is twice the length that would have made so it doesn't matter......it was still an A3.........


----------



## candycorn (Jan 18, 2010)

Terral is like the energizer bunny of bullshit; he just keeps going and going and going. 

Shock waves travel in a cone.  The narrow end of the cone is closest to the source.  

The light poles as the missile supposedly passed are about 100 feet apart and were supposedly disloged by the missile, sent careening down the freeway, and then the missile wasn't able to disloge a trailer or a wooden set of steps outside of as it passed with two or three feet making a gigantic dent in the uppper corner of the trailer.  

He just keeps going and going and going.


----------



## Fizz (Jan 18, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Mr. Fizz:
> 
> Let's see: Mr. Fizz is supposed to be proving that this wall ...



no. i am here to show what a dumb fucking idiotic hoax your entire scenario is so we can all get to the truth of what really happened on 9/11.

so explain to us all, mr retard, how you "bow shockwave from a hypersonic missile" was able to knock over light poles dozens if not hundreds of feet away from its trajectory yet it travels in between these fence posts without knocking any over except the ones it physically hits and also manages to leave this flimsy wooden staircase along with its flimsy handrail standing?


----------



## Fizz (Jan 18, 2010)

Terral said:


> Your supposition that the *Hypersonic Raytheon Missile Bow Shockwave* 'did nothing' is impossible to prove, as if we have photographs of the position before 'and' after the attacks. Again, *the "missile"* (Donald Rumsfeld Testimony) *'exploded INSIDE'* the Pentagon! There was 'no fire' outside the Pentagon after the 9:31:39 AM Missile Strike and I am not going to repeat myself to this DoD Stooge in every post. The corner of the generator fence is the very location where the Hypersonic Missile passed on the way to striking the CL-14 Location directly behind those Cable Spools.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




so let me get this straight... your official explanation of what happened is that first a missile flew across the highway full of rush hour traffic and through a construction site and nobody saw it. 

then minutes later a military A-3 airplane crashes into the pentagon and blows it up a second time. its wings impact along over 100 feet of the pentagon yet the wingspan of an A-3 is is about 72 feet. 

then...just for fun, i guess..... demolitions are used to blow up the building a third time.

yet not one person says there was more than one explosion. (well, except you. but you are a fucking idiot).

and you expect experienced aviation professionals to mistake one of these...






for one of these....





so where is your technical data proving that a missile can produce a shock wave strong enough to knock over light poles which appear to be over 100 feet apart?

where is your evidence of any missile at all?

where is your A-3 wreckage?

where are your missile witnesses?

where are your A-3 witnesses?

where is your radar data showing an A-3 or any aircraft in position to fire a missile towards the pentagon?

your hoax has so many holes in it you could use it to grate cheese.


----------



## Trojan (Jan 18, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Mr. Fizz:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Terral 

two explosions

please tell us, who witnessed two explosions five minutes apart?


----------



## Fizz (Jan 18, 2010)

Trojan said:


> Terral said:
> 
> 
> > Hi Mr. Fizz:
> ...



well, i was looking through his posts for a graphic on his non-existent missile trajectory. i came across a post of his that claims explosives collapsed the pentagon.

so that makes 3 explosions. not two.

for a team of people that planned every detail of 9/11 so precise it seems kinda stupid to blow something up 3 times in front of witnesses and then claim it was only hit by one aircraft.


----------



## Terral (Jan 19, 2010)

Hi Ollie:



SFC Ollie said:


> Explain to us again how the hole in the first floor was made by an A3 but is twice the length that would have made so it doesn't matter......it was still an A3.........



The masonry walls between the 21-inch columns on the first floor of the Pentagon were blown 'out' by the 9:31:39 AM Missile Strike to also receive damage (CL-10 through CL-14) from the 9:36:27 AM A-3 Jet crash:






However, the E-ring Roof 'wedged' itself against the north side of the intact CL-11 Control Joint on the left: 






Note how the windows on the right side of CL-11 are one-foot lower, because the entire wall section (CL-11 through 18) has fallen to wedge this entire section tightly. The DoD Inside-Job Murderers then began setting off 'demolition charges' between 9:32 AM and 10:15 AM (my Pentagon Timeline) to include this very large explosion:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQ_g1buWhAA"]9:45 Pentagon Explosion[/ame]

Look very carefully at the short video clip images to realize this explosion is coming from directly behind CL-9!!!! That is the very reason that CL-9 (above pic) is blown out in 'our direction' in the first place! Ollie's problem is that he is assuming the Pentagon was attacked 'just once,' when in truth we are looking at 'three' (3) separate attacks that include:

1. 9:31:39 AM Missile Strike (my Blog Entry).
2. 9:36:27 AM A-3 Jet Strike (my What Happened Topic).
3. 9:42 AM - 10:15 AM Controlled Demolition Of The E-ring Roof.






There is no reason for anyone here to try and prove that a real 100-ton Jetliner crashed into the Pentagon, because NOTHING like that came out the back side of the C-ring Wall ...






... (on left) that is only 220 feet away from the outer E-ring Wall (diagram)! All of these experts agree:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTJehfQkuyE"]The Bottom Line Is ...[/ame]

Your silly Govt Conspiracy Theory says a 100-ton Jetliner disappeared into thin air in the *.39 seconds* it took to travel through the rear C-ring wall (never happened) at 530 miles per cotton-picking hour! That is 'your' Official Cover Story LIE that makes 'you' guilty of running diversion for *Inside-Job Murderers of Innocent Americans* (my new What Happened Topic).

GL,

Terral


----------



## Terral (Jan 19, 2010)

Hi Corn:



candycorn said:


> Shock waves travel in a cone.  The narrow end of the cone is closest to the source.



*Bow Shockwaves* (Wiki) follow the laws taught by *'Fluid Dynamics'* (Wiki) that are 'far' more complicated than Mr. Corn currently realizes. Bow Shockwaves attach, *detach* (article) and reattach, grow, shrink and grow again, when coming in contact with obstructions in the environment. The DoD geniuses who developed this "Pentagon Attack" failed to realize the ramifications of the bow shockwave force created by their Hypersonic-class Raytheon Missile ...    



candycorn said:


> The light poles as the missile supposedly passed are about 100 feet apart and were supposedly disloged by the missile ...



All five light poles are on *this tight flight path* (pic), but the A-3 Jet accounted for the clipping of 'only' Pole #2. The Raytheon Missile Bow Shockwave uprooted Pole #1 and took out Pole #3 - #5. Therefore, these five poles were taken down by a 'combination' of the A-3 Jet 'and' the Raytheon Missile, during the 9:31:39 AM Missile Strike. Here is Candy's problem that she will never address:






These construction trailers all stand in the way of the starboard wing of any 100-ton Jetliner crashing into the first floor 'and' look at all of the light poles that 'are' still standing directly in the way! We are looking at the 45-degree angle flight path of the Official Cover Story, but only five light poles were taken down; because they were taken down by the Raytheon Missile 'and' the starboard wing of a smaller A-3 Jet ...



candycorn said:


> ... sent careening down the freeway, and then the missile wasn't able to disloge a trailer or a wooden set of steps outside of as it passed with two or three feet making a gigantic dent in the uppper corner of the trailer.



The Rayteon Missile Bow Shockwave 'was' strong enough to uproot and twist 'breakaway light poles,' but NOT nearly strong enough to move any construction trailer. Remember again that any missile bow shockwave 'attaches' itself to the nose and 'detaches' when contacting an obstruction to then reattach at some point down the line. The missile can pass right by an object, but if the bow shockwave is momentarily 'detached,' then that object is 'not' affected one way or the other. However, your 100-ton Jetliner should have taken down ALL of the light poles from the Route 47 (Washington Blvd) cloverleaf/overpass on that flight path 'and' that .... never .... happened ....



candycorn said:


> He just keeps going and going and going.



Yes! I do! Because I know more about what really happened on 9/11 at the Pentagon than all of you Official Cover Story Stooges combined (BY FAR). There is only one (1) 911Truth and everything else is a LIE. Period.

GL,

Terral


----------



## Terral (Jan 19, 2010)

Hi Mr. Fizz:



Fizz said:


> no. i am here to show what a dumb fucking idiotic hoax your entire scenario is so we can all get to the truth of what really happened on 9/11 ...



Run your silly mouth all day long in direct support of Official Govt LIES if that blows air up your skirt ...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lbOuPSThOQ]What A Moron![/ame]

My 911Truth Presentations are made for the benefit of *the 'unbiased' third-party reader*. If anyone is impressed by this Fizzle idiot, then thank you for helping to prove my hypothesis (#7-10).

GL,

Terral


----------



## Terral (Jan 19, 2010)

Hi Trojan:



Trojan said:


> Terral
> 
> two explosions
> 
> please tell us, who witnessed two explosions five minutes apart?



Lots of people experienced multiple explosions at the Pentagon on 9/11. A good example is Lloyde England the famous Taxi Driver (story) who saw the A-3 Jet pass directly in front of his taxi, during the 9:31:39 AM Missile Strike (explosion #1 = top pic). 






Lloyde saw black smoke rising from the single impact hole and the *'inside-the-building fires'* (Barbara Honegger's Paper) from the original 9:31:39 AM Missile Strike. THEN, he was wrestling with Pole #1, with the help of a man from the white van, until they both experienced the *"Big Boom"* that became Terry Cohen's *"Terrible Explosion"* from this video:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyIi7Z3fuhg]Key Pentagon Witness[/ame]

Yes. Terry Cohen thinks this 'Terrible Explosion' happened some 15 minutes later, but the time differential is caused by the 'shock' and the 9/11 Pentagon Chaos ...

GL,

Terral


----------



## SFC Ollie (Jan 19, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Ollie:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That explosion could have been dozens of different things. I want to hear from the guy who saw all three of your explosions at the times you claim. Then I want him to explain why no one else heard or saw them.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Jan 19, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Trojan:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Her terrible explosion 15 minutes later was probably the transformer that blew up in your other video. She definitely says the first thing she heard turned out to be the plane as reported to her by eyewitnesses. Your own videos disprove your theories.


----------



## Fizz (Jan 19, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Ollie:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Terral (Jan 19, 2010)

Hi Mr. Fizz:























Fizz said:


> holy fuck, you are a moron!!! ...














GL,

Terral


----------



## Fizz (Jan 19, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Mr. Fizz:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



so now you surrender and admit that you have no reply for any of this post other than to laugh at being a fucking idiotic moron!!! 



> where are your A-3 remains?!! you are going to complain that there is no 757 yet you provide absolutely no evidence of an A-3 having crashed there. again, you have this stupid double standard that none of your moronic hoaxes need to have any proof or any evidence yet you insist on evidence of a 757. (which has been provided).
> 
> quit being a dumbfuck and if you are going to complain that there are no airplane part then show us airplane parts from YOUR airplane!!
> 
> ...


----------



## Terral (Jan 20, 2010)

Hi Mr. Fizz:



Fizz said:


> so now you surrender and admit that you have no reply for any of this post other than to laugh at being a fucking idiotic moron!!!



No sir. We already know that Mr. Fizz cannot control his temper and his swearing, when outmatched in any real 911Truth Debate. There is NOTHING in your moronic posts to threaten a single component of my Pentagon Explanations of the facts told by the evidence. Ask all the questions you wish 'and' if anyone really believes this idiot has made any *"Official Cover Story" Case* (#8), then congratulations! 






Here is the deal with Gam, Mr. Fizz and their *DoD Disinfo* (How To Spot) Stupidity: These DoD-sent Official Cover Story LIARS cannot debate me on these related 911Truth Topics, which is the reason I have been banned from LooseChange, LetsRoll, PilotsForTruth and many other DoD-run Boards (more info). They cannot ever win a real debate with me, so their only chance is to send these bottom-of-the-barrel idiots to wave their arms and throw a ton of dust into the air using every underhanded debating tactic in the book. The bottom line is that "I" am doing all of the work in these 911Truth deliberations and these guys are throwing stones. They 'can' whine and cry with the best of them, but they cannot even begin to place any 100-ton Jetliner in the Empty Shanksville Field, nor at the Pentagon ... and WTC-7 Was Definitely Brought Down Using Controlled Demolition ...

This Is What Really Happened On 911 'and' these guys *cannot 'debunk' *(idiots) a single word ...

GL,

Terral


----------



## Fizz (Jan 20, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Mr. Fizz:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



debunk? whats to debunk? you tell a fictitious story with absolutely no facts to back up anything except stupid graphics that draw illogical conclusions. when asked where your evidence is you reply that anyone that disagrees with you is a government agent and still dont show any evidence.

i have exactly the same amount of evidence that the pentagon was hit by a train that you have that the pentagon was hit by a missile, an A-3 and then blown up with explosive demolitions that create fireballs.

you are a fucking moronic, paranoid lunatic!! 

(i'm not angry. i'm laughing my ass off!!)


----------



## SFC Ollie (Jan 20, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Mr. Fizz:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yet Mr Terral cannot point out one paragraph in the 911 commissions report that addresses a major point and tell us that it is wrong, while giving actual physical evidence as to why it is wrong. Why? Because he has zero physical evidence.

The 911 Commissions Report was and still is correct on all major issues.


----------



## Terral (Jan 21, 2010)

Hi Mr. Fizz:



Fizz said:


> debunk? whats to debunk? you tell a fictitious story with absolutely no facts to back up anything except stupid graphics that draw illogical conclusions ...



Once again this DoD Crybaby sends me an empty post (no links to anything) with third-party support for NOTHING. 

GL,

Terral


----------



## Terral (Jan 21, 2010)

Hi Ollie:



SFC Ollie said:


> Yet Mr Terral cannot point out one paragraph in the 911 commissions report that addresses a major point and tell us that it is wrong, while giving actual physical evidence as to why it is wrong. Why? Because he has zero physical evidence.
> 
> The 911 Commissions Report was and still is correct on all major issues.



That is some really great *"Pentagon Case Analysis!"*  No sir. The *911CR* does 'not' even use the term *'explosions'* one time like the corrupt *ACAAR* (#10). The error-filled *911CR* does NOT even mention WTC-7 once. *

The Govt Document 'Proves' A 9/11 Inside Job* (my Topic). Period. Bump one of those Topics and start 'debunking' ...












GL,

Terral


----------



## candycorn (Jan 21, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Ollie:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*
I think you're giving Ollie a superiority complex.  He's beating the shit out of you.

*


----------



## SFC Ollie (Jan 21, 2010)

candycorn said:


> Terral said:
> 
> 
> > Hi Ollie:
> ...



You noticed how he picked nothing is wrong. And by doing so verified that he has no evidence to disprove the report. Just the standard I'm right because i said so. It's almost too easy.


----------



## Terral (Jan 21, 2010)

Hi Corn:



candycorn said:


> *I think you're giving Ollie a superiority complex.  He's beating the shit out of you.
> *



Only in your deluded dreams ...

GL,

Terral


----------



## Fizz (Jan 21, 2010)

Terral said:


> Hi Corn:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



you have no evidence.

where are your missile parts?

where are the aircraft parts from the A-3?

where are the radar tracks of your flights?

where are the eye witnesses?

you have NONE of the above. the official version of events has all of them.

FACT vs. FICTION

you lose.


----------



## creativedreams (Feb 20, 2014)

creativedreams said:


> The top image is actual footage of what hit the Pentagon...
> 
> The second image is what a group of physicists put together to give a closer look at what the actual passenger plane should have looked like in size comparison...
> 
> ...



Still another good thread!


----------



## SFC Ollie (Feb 20, 2014)

Wake up from hibernation early?


----------



## creativedreams (Feb 20, 2014)

SFC Ollie said:


> Wake up from hibernation early?



Ya....got out of my cave and cracked a Busch Light!


----------

