911 Pentagon plane remote controlled?

TalkieWalkie

bonkey wrote: »

Nope...but none of the official accounts claim that one did, so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.

I think we both know where this is leading bonkey

bonkey

sbsquarepants wrote: »

I don't believe it would be possible to take a p'iss on the pentagon fence without being caught on at least a dozen video cameras, but a commercial jet liner can fly straight into the building and we have to rely on word of mouth and crappy footage from a garage down the road to prove it!
It's the pentagon for god sake, nothing absolutely nothing, no matter how small goes unrecorded from every angle, there is most likely a satelite peering down on it 24/7 recording every second of every day.

You are, of course, entitled to believe (or not believe) whatever you like.

Evidence of these camera's existence, however, would go a long way to suggesting that there is a reason to believe they might have caught the plane (or not, if you're so inclined).

In the almost-9 years since the event, no-one's been able to find any such evidence.

TalkieWalkie

tony 2 tone wrote: »

What size is a 757 and what size is the hole?

About this size



and this size

Di0genes

TalkieWalkie wrote: »

About this size



and this size

That'd be the exit hole on the far side of the building.

Pity there isn't a facepalm smilie on this forum.

TalkieWalkie

Di0genes wrote: »

That'd be the exit hole on the far side of the building.

Pity there isn't a facepalm smilie on this forum.

Ok, im reverting back to the 911 plane remote controlled idea

Di0genes

TalkieWalkie wrote: »

Ok, im reverting back to the 911 plane remote controlled idea

Except the y'know phone calls, and that a 747 doesn't have fly by wire capability.

Other than that your theory is about as solid as the other one you quickly dropped.:cool::pac::cool::rolleyes::D;):p:o:

TMoreno

Di0genes wrote: »

Except the y'know phone calls, and that a 747 doesn't have fly by wire capability.

Other than that your theory is about as solid as the other one you quickly dropped.:cool::pac::cool::rolleyes::D;):p:o:

Show us the pictures of the plane crashing into the Pentagon if they exist.
The hole and the damages have been done by a cruise missile or a drone.

Di0genes

TMoreno wrote: »

Show us the pictures of the plane crashing into the Pentagon if they exist.

Security footage has been released.

The hole and the damages have been done by a cruise missile or a drone.

Evidence

TMoreno

Di0genes wrote: »

Security footage has been released.



Evidence

Not true. There is no single picture of a plane crashing into the Pentagon.

Di0genes

TMoreno wrote: »

Not true. There is no single picture of a plane crashing into the Pentagon.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Om9_Lbco6A

TMoreno

Di0genes wrote: »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Om9_Lbco6A

It is not a plane. You need to face the reality. It's a cruise missile or a drone.

Di0genes

TMoreno wrote: »

It is not a plane. You need to face the reality. It's a cruise missile or a drone.

That flew a few dozen feet above a busy motorway filled with rush hour traffic. Yeah. And Right.

How did a drone or missile clip and knock over lamp posts on other sides of the road?

TMoreno

Di0genes wrote: »

That flew a few dozen feet above a busy motorway filled with rush hour traffic. Yeah. And Right.

How did a drone or missile clip and knock over lamp posts on other sides of the road?

Your missing the point. There is no picture of a plane crashing into the Pentagon.
The only pictures that exist show a light before an explosion. The rest is just wishful thinking. The people who defend the official conspiracy theory wish there was a plane.

Di0genes

TMoreno wrote: »

Your missing the point. There is no picture of a plane crashing into the Pentagon.
The only pictures that exist show a light before an explosion. The rest is just wishful thinking. The people who defend the official conspiracy theory wish there was a plane.

It's a timelapse camera designed to register car licence plates.

I'm really sorry to be the one to break it to you but "24" wasn't a documentary. There are real time HD CCTV cameras everywhere.

The Pentagon doesn't rely on cameras to provide security, it has it's own police force, a guard is much better than a camera.

Once again the plane flew over a busy highway at rushhour. Hundreds of people witnessed it. Within minutes of the crash hundreds of rescue workers from dozens of agencies federal, military and local were on the scene. They saw body parts, plane debris everything.

All this all happened in broad daylight next to a very busy public highway.

You're trying to tell me a missile zig zagged across eight lanes of highway knocking over lampposts, partially crashing into a generator before hitting the pentagon, and then in the minutes after the crash, again in broad daylight in view of a public highway, some how body parts and plane debris like engines, seats with passengers still in them, the tail, all magically appeared on the lawn of the Pentagon.

And you think I have a problem coping with reality?

TMoreno

Di0genes wrote: »

It's a timelapse camera designed to register car licence plates.

I'm really sorry to be the one to break it to you but "24" wasn't a documentary. There are real time HD CCTV cameras everywhere.

The Pentagon doesn't rely on cameras to provide security, it has it's own police force, a guard is much better than a camera.

Once again the plane flew over a busy highway at rushhour. Hundreds of people witnessed it. Within minutes of the crash hundreds of rescue workers from dozens of agencies federal, military and local were on the scene. They saw body parts, plane debris everything.

All this all happened in broad daylight next to a very busy public highway.

You're trying to tell me a missile zig zagged across eight lanes of highway knocking over lampposts, partially crashing into a generator before hitting the pentagon, and then in the minutes after the crash, again in broad daylight in view of a public highway, some how body parts and plane debris like engines, seats with passengers still in them, the tail, all magically appeared on the lawn of the Pentagon.

And you think I have a problem coping with reality?

First the people who saw a plane, did not see the plane crashing into the building.
Second there is no single material or visual proof that a plane crashed into the building.
Third by ridiculing people who are skeptic you just show that you are not interested in a debate. You just want to defend the official theory. Why? Are you afraid to find out that a democratic government could lie?
Why do you think it's impossible that the people who lied about the WMD before the war against IRAQ could not lie to you again?
The FBI has confiscated all the cameras around the Pentagon. Why? Because they know that if we see those pictures, it will incriminate the real perpetrators.
It's like building 7 if you can't see the scam there is nothing I can do.

humanji

TMoreno wrote: »

First the people who saw a plane, did not see the plane crashing into the building.

There were many people who are on record as seeing the plane crash into the building.

TMoreno wrote: »

Second there is no single material or visual proof that a plane crashed into the building.

Except for plane wreckage and all the witnesses. You seem awfully eager to ignore this, but are happy with the zero evidence that it was a missile.

TMoreno wrote: »

Third by ridiculing people who are skeptic you just show that you are not interested in a debate. You just want to defend the official theory. Why? Are you afraid to find out that a democratic government could lie?

There's a lot of evidence that it was a plane. There's no evidence that it was a missile. It's not a matter of refusing to believe what you claim. It's that there isn't really any reason to believe without evidence.

TMoreno wrote: »

Why do you think it's impossible that the people who lied about the WMD before the war against IRAQ could not lie to you again?

Iraq had WMD's (they even used them in the Iran/Iraq war). They just got rid of them long before Bush and his monkeys got there.

TMoreno wrote: »

The FBI has confiscated all the cameras around the Pentagon. Why? Because they know that if we see those pictures, it will incriminate the real perpetrators.

Or it could be something to do with their investigation into the incident. And the FBI later released the footage.

Di0genes

TMoreno wrote: »

First the people who saw a plane, did not see the plane crashing into the building.

Yes they did.

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."

And of course,

0 saw a military aircraft or missile strike the Pentagon.

0 saw a plane narrowly miss the Pentagon and fly away.

Not mentioned on that list is a friend of mine who was stuck in traffic on that freeway that day, and mailed me on Sept 12th to tell me how she watched as the plane hit the pentagon.

http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/911pentagonflight77evidencesummary

Second there is no single material or visual proof that a plane crashed into the building.

The following organisations were involved in the rescue attempt that day

Alexandria VA Fire & Rescue, American Airlines, American Red Cross, Arlington County Emergency Medical Services, Arlington County Fire Department, Arlington County Sheriff's Department, Arlington VA Police Department, Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms, DiLorenzo TRICARE Health Clinic staff, DeWitt Army Community Hospital staff, District of Columbia Fire & Rescue, DOD Honor Guard, Environmental Protection Agency Hazmat Teams, Fairfax County Fire & Rescue, FBI Evidence Recovery Teams, FBI Hazmat Teams, Federal Aviation Administration, Federal Disaster Medical Assistance Teams, FEMA 68-Person Urban Search and Rescue Teams Maryland Task Force 1, New Mexico Task Force 1, Tennessee Task Force 1, Virginia Task Force 1, Virginia Task Force 2, FEMA Emergency Response Team, Fort Myer Fire Department, Four U.S. Army Chaplains, Metropolitan Airport Authority Fire Unit, Military District of Washington Engineers Search & Rescue Team, Montgomery County Fire & Rescue, U.S. National Guard units, National Naval Medical Center CCRF, National Transportation Safety Board, Pentagon Defense Protective Service, Pentagon Helicopter Crash Response Team, Pentagon Medical Staff, Rader Army Health Clinic Staff, SACE Structural Safety Engineers and Debris Planning and Response Teams, Salvation Army Disaster Services, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, US Army Reserves of Virginia Beach Fairfax County and Montgomery County, Virginia Beach Fire Department, Virginia Department of Emergency Management, Virginia State Police

Are all of them in on the conspiracy.

Wreckage and Body parts were found littering the impact site.

The remains of every passenger were recovered bar one.

Third by ridiculing people who are skeptic you just show that you are not interested in a debate.

I'm sorry it was you that said

You need to face the reality.

You'd probably want to stop throwing stones, the insurance premiums on glass houses are a bitch.

You just want to defend the official theory. Why?

Because it's true.

Podman

You believe the official story is true because you've been told its true.

If there was any real evidence, it would have been released.

Not even one video of a plane, just a load of talk.

Somebody made trillions of dollars from the "war of terror", guess who it was..

Di0genes

chompy wrote: »

You believe the official story is true because you've been told its true.

Or I've examined all alternative theories and found them to be less plausible than the truth.

If there was any real evidence, it would have been released.

To who and why?

Not even one video of a plane, just a load of talk.

Yeah I mean all those months painstakingly going through the rubble finding passenger and pentagon staff DNA, piffle, if it's not on you tube it didn't happen.

Somebody made trillions of dollars from the "war of terror", guess who it was..

Batman?

Podman

You stoop to ridicule, but it's expected.

Di0genes wrote: »

Or I've examined all alternative theories and found them to be less plausible than the truth.
..
To who and why?
..
Yeah I mean all those months painstakingly going through the rubble finding passenger and pentagon staff DNA, piffle, if it's not on you tube it didn't happen.
..
Batman?

PirateShampoo

chompy wrote: »

You believe the official story is true because you've been told its true.

As opposed to some random guy on You Tube saying its a lie?

Podman

If you guys think that youtube is the only source then you obviously haven't done your homework.

Di0genes

chompy wrote: »

If you guys think that youtube is the only source then you obviously haven't done your homework.

Yes because I didnt link to witness statements like several posts ago.

Podman

uprising2 wrote: »

Yea Crap, wake up, where's the 757?, look at the live clip, no need to rely on bad eyewitness accounts, now wouldn't it be easier for you to admit there is NO PLANE at the pentagon "crash" site.:pac::pac::pac::pac::pac::pac::pac::pac:

EDIT:
Here maybe David was at the pentagon.:pac::pac::pac:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwOV8zVRczM

Maybe we should ask David Copperfield where the 911 "evidence" has gone?

I think that most people here have see CSI, or at least heard of forensics..

Don't you ever wonder why the "evidence" was destroyed so quickly after the events?
How can an airplane's alluminium nosecone punch holes through several reinforced walls?
There is no mention of the demolition of WTC Building 7 in the official 911 report.
And why, when everything else was pulverized, the only intact fragments from the day are the alleged hijacker's passports?

I could go on and on and on about this, there are so many inconsistencies about the 911 lie that Grissom and his CSI team would find the whole official story laughable, if it wasn't so sickening.

bonkey

chompy wrote: »

Don't you ever wonder why the "evidence" was destroyed so quickly after the events?

Yes...and I looked up the facts to find that It wasn't.

How can an airplane's alluminium nosecone punch holes through several reinforced walls?

I don't know...but given that the official account of events doesn't claim it did, I'm not sure why that's relevant.

There is no mention of the demolition of WTC Building 7 in the official 911 report.

Perhaps that's because the investigation of WTC7 concluded that it wasn't demolished?

And why, when everything else was pulverized, the only intact fragments from the day are the alleged hijacker's passports?

They're not the only intact fragments.

I could go on and on and on about this,

Would you go on and on making inaccurate claims if you did?

(Edit : I'm more then willing to discuss any of these points. Why don't you pick the one you're most certain I'm wrong about)

Torakx

What happened to that other building that it colapsed/fell down/demolished?
It did come down right? Whats the officialstory behind that?

TMoreno

bonkey wrote: »

Yes...and I looked up the facts to find that It wasn't.


I don't know...but given that the official account of events doesn't claim it did, I'm not sure why that's relevant.


Perhaps that's because the investigation of WTC7 concluded that it wasn't demolished?


They're not the only intact fragments.


Would you go on and on making inaccurate claims if you did?

(Edit : I'm more then willing to discuss any of these points. Why don't you pick the one you're most certain I'm wrong about)

Try to debunk the controlled demolition of WTC7

Di0genes

TMoreno wrote: »

Try to debunk the controlled demolition of WTC7

Already discussed at length. hit by massive chunks of rubble by the collapsing twin towers, fires raging uncontrolled and unfought for hours, combined with a unique building design.

NIST wrote a long report about it.

Di0genes

chompy wrote: »

Maybe we should ask David Copperfield where the 911 "evidence" has gone?

I think that most people here have see CSI, or at least heard of forensics..

Don't you ever wonder why the "evidence" was destroyed so quickly after the events?

Evidence like?

How can an airplane's alluminium nosecone punch holes through several reinforced walls?

Velocity increases mass.

There is no mention of the demolition of WTC Building 7 in the official 911 report.

Several other buildings were brought down later due to damage sustained that day. Your point?

And why, when everything else was pulverized, the only intact fragments from the day are the alleged hijacker's passports?

Thats simply not true personal effects of passengers, body parts, DNA, parts of the airplanes were all recovered from the three sites.

Torakx

Im confused now.
How many buildings exactly did "Al-Qaida" knock down at the end of that day?