This Is What Happened At The Pentagon On 9/11

[eots]

..so when testimony evidence doesn't fit the official story it is ..in error ..but years later as it adapts to fit with the official story it has been ..corrected...I see

who said it was in error?
i said your take on it is in ERROR
numbnuts

and hint for you, flight 77 circled the pentagon BEFORE it crashed

hint..these reports are AFTER impact or include 2 planes

 

[Setarcos]

Eots posted eyewitness testimony of the plane approaching


let him produce evidence that the plane left the area

 

[eots]

Hey, eots, did your cop friend see the plane pull up after it disappeared while diving at the Pentagon?

no it disappeared from view there are however several witnesses that say they did see a commercial airliner fly over the pentagon low alt immediately after impact

Good.

Produce the evidence that this plane left the area in the air.

corroborated eyewitness testimony is evidence..the rest of the evidence is still classified and in the control of the perps

 

[DiveCon]

who said it was in error?
i said your take on it is in ERROR
numbnuts

and hint for you, flight 77 circled the pentagon BEFORE it crashed

hint..these reports are AFTER impact or include 2 planes

they(the witnesses) made a mistake
it happens a lot

 

[DiveCon]

no it disappeared from view there are however several witnesses that say they did see a commercial airliner fly over the pentagon low alt immediately after impact

Good.

Produce the evidence that this plane left the area in the air.

corroborated eyewitness testimony is evidence..the rest of the evidence is still classified and in the control of the perps

who said they saw the plane fly away ?

 

[Setarcos]

no it disappeared from view there are however several witnesses that say they did see a commercial airliner fly over the pentagon low alt immediately after impact

Good.

Produce the evidence that this plane left the area in the air.

corroborated eyewitness testimony is evidence..the rest of the evidence is still classified and in the control of the perps

corroborated by what?


Navy Study: Eyewitnesses Unreliable The Problem With Eyewitness Testimony FindLaw's Writ - Dorf: How Reliable Is Eyewitness Testimony? Unreliable Eyewitness Testimony : The Frontal Cortex Yale Law School | Eyewitness Testimony Doesn't Make It True--A Commentary by Steven B. Duke Visual Expert Human Factors: Eyewitness Memory Is Unreliable


A very small minority of people allegedly claim to have seen it fly away, whereas half the city saw it come in.

Let the record show that Eots is unable to present any evidence at all for that the plane he admits was present did anything other than continue forward and hit the pentagon. He claims it did not, yet has zero evidence for the plane vanishing, going into an underground bunker, teleporting, flying away or otherwise doing anything other than hitting the pentagon.

The matter is settled with regards to Eots, then.

Given Terral's earlier demonstration of a total lack of knowledge of elementary physics in this and other threads (eg: claiming that steel instantly conducts heat so that all portions of a piece of steel are of equal temperature) as well as his total lack of evidence and refusal to rebut the numerous refutations put forth in this thread (instead merely re-posting the OP), I see no reason he should be acknowledged any further until he presents new evidence.

All evidence makes it clear: the only logical scientific theory that can explain the evidence that Eots and Terral have forwarded is that the plane which they have shown to have been present did not mysteriously vanish or fly away and did, in fact, strike the Pentagon. I would like to thank them both for providing the evidence supporting this conclusion as their futile attempts at spin were quite entertaining (if inappropriate and disrespectful to the dead)

 

[eots]

The 2nd Plane Cover Story









Vin Narayanan:
-"I hopped out of my car after the jet exploded, nearly oblivious to a second *jet* hovering in the skies".



Joel Sucherman:
-Sucherman saw another plane climb steeply and make a sharp turn. "I thought, 'Is this thing coming around to make a second attack? If there is another explosion, we're toast.'"..."another plane started veering up and to the side. At that point it wasn't clear if that plane was trying to maneuver out of the air space or if that plane was coming round for another hit.




Kelly Knowles:
...she saw a second plane in the air *over the Pentagon* *as* a hijacked jet plunged into the five-sided military fortress...some sort of plane followed the doomed American Airlines jet toward the Pentagon, then veered away after the explosion.
Sunday, July 01, 2007

The Confiscated and Permanently Sequestered 911 Calls



One overlooked extremely important category in regards to evidence at the Pentagon are the 911 call recordings. Critics of "The PentaCon" often say that there are no eyewitnesses of a plane that flew over the Pentagon. This is patently untrue if you consider the "2nd plane" witnesses we have already covered but it is also disingenuous because the real fact is that we will NEVER know what people really reported that day due to the fact that the 911 call tapes and transcripts were quickly confiscated and permanently sequestered by the FBI. This is just as important as the fact that they refuse to release any of the clear video of the event. 911 calls are typically available for the public and in fact they were released for the 9/11 attacks in New York



Topic 6

 

[eots]

Good.

Produce the evidence that this plane left the area in the air.

corroborated eyewitness testimony is evidence..the rest of the evidence is still classified and in the control of the perps

corroborated by what?


Navy Study: Eyewitnesses Unreliable The Problem With Eyewitness Testimony FindLaw's Writ - Dorf: How Reliable Is Eyewitness Testimony? Unreliable Eyewitness Testimony : The Frontal Cortex Yale Law School | Eyewitness Testimony Doesn't Make It True--A Commentary by Steven B. Duke Visual Expert Human Factors: Eyewitness Memory Is Unreliable


A very small minority of people allegedly claim to have seen it fly away, whereas half the city saw it come in.

Let the record show that Eots is unable to present any evidence at all for that the plane he admits was present did anything other than continue forward and hit the pentagon. He claims it did not, yet has zero evidence for the plane vanishing, going into an underground bunker, teleporting, flying away or otherwise doing anything other than hitting the pentagon.

The matter is settled with regards to Eots, then.

Given Terral's earlier demonstration of a total lack of knowledge of elementary physics in this and other threads (eg: claiming that steel instantly conducts heat so that all portions of a piece of steel are of equal temperature) as well as his total lack of evidence and refusal to rebut the numerous refutations put forth in this thread (instead merely re-posting the OP), I see no reason he should be acknowledged any further until he presents new evidence.

All evidence makes it clear: the only logical scientific theory that can explain the evidence that Eots and Terral have forwarded is that the plane which they have shown to have been present did not mysteriously vanish or fly away and did, in fact, strike the Pentagon. I would like to thank them both for providing the evidence supporting this conclusion as their futile attempts at spin were quite entertaining (if inappropriate and disrespectful to the dead)

this is just a bunch of empty words and statements without addressing any of the evidence

 

[Setarcos]

this is just a bunch of empty words and statements without addressing any of the evidence

A fine summation of your responses to the numerous refutations put forth thus far. I've noticed that your story changes and becomes ever more complex in order to 'account for' the refutations put forth over the years.

 

[eots]

this is just a bunch of empty words and statements without addressing any of the evidence

A fine summation of your responses to the numerous refutations put forth thus far. I've noticed that your story changes and becomes ever more complex in order to 'account for' the refutations put forth over the years.

it is a summation of your rambling responses to the numerous flaws in the official story ..I
notice you have little problem accepting evidence from sources that agree with the official story even though the 0/11 commission says NORAD was untruthful and The FAA destroyed evidence..

 

[eots]

the case of the disappearing engines...38 sec mark


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMqgFaNvoP8&feature=PlayList&p=F18DCE0FACD17614&index=30&playnext=2&playnext_from=PL]YouTube - 9/11 PENTAGON ATTACK - INDEPENDENT ANALYSIS[/ame]

 

[Setarcos]

Again, present your evidence that the plane you admit approached the building did anything but hit the building.

 

[DiveCon]

this is just a bunch of empty words and statements without addressing any of the evidence

A fine summation of your responses to the numerous refutations put forth thus far. I've noticed that your story changes and becomes ever more complex in order to 'account for' the refutations put forth over the years.

it is a summation of your rambling responses to the numerous flaws in the official story ..I
notice you have little problem accepting evidence from sources that agree with the official story even though the 0/11 commission says NORAD was untruthful and The FAA destroyed evidence..

having a FEW people that had errant recollection of what happened is not flaws in the story

 

[DiveCon]

the case of the disappearing engines...38 sec mark


YouTube - 9/11 PENTAGON ATTACK - INDEPENDENT ANALYSIS

the engines didn't disappear, moron
you can clearly see them and then it went to the FUEL
that's how fucking dishonest you troofer morons are

 

[Setarcos]

Is there radar or video evidence of the plane leaving the area?

 

[eots]

the case of the disappearing engines...38 sec mark


YouTube - 9/11 PENTAGON ATTACK - INDEPENDENT ANALYSIS

the engines didn't disappear, moron
you can clearly see them and then it went to the FUEL
that's how fucking dishonest you troofer morons are

no the engines disappear at the 38 sec mark no question about it and the location where the engines should have impacted shows no different structural damage than the areas impacted only by the fragile breakaway parts of the wing

 

[DiveCon]

the case of the disappearing engines...38 sec mark


YouTube - 9/11 PENTAGON ATTACK - INDEPENDENT ANALYSIS

the engines didn't disappear, moron
you can clearly see them and then it went to the FUEL
that's how fucking dishonest you troofer morons are

no the engines disappear at the 38 sec mark no question about it and the location where the engines should have impacted shows no different structural damage than the areas impacted only by the fragile breakaway parts of the wing

no, you dont get it
at that point they changed to tracking the FUEL
thts why your video is DISHONEST

 

[eots]

The Purdue study's simulation of the plane crash was limited in its realism. The simulation featured on the webpage September 11 Pentagon Attack Simulations Using LS-Dyna is limited to the collision of an engine-less jetliner with the Pentagon's first-floor columns. 7 It doesn't account for the facade walls or the second-floor slab or columns. It has the jetliner entering on a level heading with wings inches from the ground. It shows the ends of its wings passing into the building, sliced by columns. Simulating the effects of the walls in deflecting the portions of the wings that could not have fit through the approximately 96-foot-wide span of punctured walls was apparently beyond the scope of Purdue's study.

9-11 Research: Official Pentagon Investigations

 

[Setarcos]

Again, present your evidence that the plane you admit approached the building did anything but hit the building.

 

[eots]

Again, present your evidence that the plane you admit approached the building did anything but hit the building.

I presented evidence NORAD lied ..that the FAA destroyed evidence and the investigation excluded all credible witnesses that contradicted the official flight path or reported multiple aircraft