Internet Video Questions The 9/11 Pentagon Story

I know we've had a lot of these kind of 'conspiracy theory' stories here lately, and at the risk of becoming one of those 'tinfoil hat' websites, I do let some get published here.<p> I've seen some other sites like this one, but what I want to know is: Has anyone seen a rebuttal to this kind of story? Has there been any sort of a theory to prove or disprove what actually hit the Pentagon?<p> <p>---<br>"If you must kill a man, it costs you nothing to be polite about it." Winston Churchill <br />

I wrote to a retired officer who survived the Pentagon attack. I included
the link to the flash video, and asked him to comment on it.

That email was sent last night. If I get any formal response, I'll be sure to
post any counter-evidence on this thread.

Otherwise, I don't know what to think of this movie. It's dark. I would
like to see a formal response, as it does bring up some strange
questions.

This isn't really all that conspiracy-minded; it isn't coming up with moon goblins or anything to explain the lack of evidence. It's just *pointing out* the lack of evidence. Fairly light on the physics though, I'd like to see some actual moth done on the numbers they give.

And being the ever-so-civic-minded individual, I've put up a copy of the flash video at http://www.vivelecanada.ca/downloads/pentagon121.swf

---
Jesse

Say - could you send me the video? I'd love to post it on
www.freenation.ca

As for the physics, it's a shame there has been no formal response to
this video - though that's far from a surprise.

I wish I had information on the 757 that went missing. If it didn't hit,
where did it go? I've heard alot about those on the planes that hit the
towers, but nearly nothing about the one that (supposedly) hit the
Pentagon.

I've heard of an environmental scientist say that with all the fuel that was on the plane, a fire would have burned there for months, and would have been an environmental disaster. I think the doc was called "In Plane Sight" or something.

---
"George Bush has declared the war on terrorism to be the cause of his generation. The cause of Canadian sovereignty will be ours." - John Godfrey, MP for Don Va

The physics fits, there's no story here. The suicide attackers in these aircraft were not airline pilots making a landing approach at 150 knots, they only wanted to ram their targets and did so at 400+ knots. Check aircraft accident sites and look at pictures of aircraft that have flown into terrain at very high speeds - there's really not much left.
The Pentagon is the largest office building in the world and a large portion of it was damaged by impact and fire, this story of conjecture about missiles and stuff is silly.

hrm, got any links to such sites/images? I would love to do some actual comparisons. As much as it would mean to find out about a coverup of this proportion, I really really need to see more actual evidence rather than anecdotes about 'a scientist' who claims obscure things like a jet carrying enough fuel to burn for months. Jet fuel is *active*, and it would burn up fast.

Also, tristan, just right click on my link and hit 'save as'.

---
Jesse

Just right click on the link, and choose 'save as'. You'll still need Shockwave and a web browser to play it, unless you find a convertor that will turn it into .mpg or .avi file.



---
"If you must kill a man, it costs you nothing to be polite about it." Winston Churchill

All your questions shall be answered . . .

http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/pentagon/slides.html



---
"If you must kill a man, it costs you nothing to be polite about it." Winston Churchill

*sigh*

It's manipulation of the facts that got the American public to support the invasion and occupation of Iraq. We should be more careful.

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm

"Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar." - Sigmund Freud

Sigh, another anonymous apologist for the crime of the century is heard from. Nice site you posted, explain everything away with slight of hand tricks and innuendo. Try looking here instead: <a href="http://www.cooperativeresearch.org">Cooperative Research</a> <p> The reason the US went to war with Iraq is because the 3 branches of the government okayed it. It had nothing to do with the people wanting it or condoning it. I don't recall any referendums being done to determine if there was a will to go to war. Of course propagandists prefer to govern by opinion polls because they can control the sample.

Rivero, somone most would consider a conspiracy type, refuses to buy either the no-plane or the no-Boeing theory, based on <a href='http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/911_pentagon_eyewitnesses.html'>his collection of eyewitness accounts</a>. Myself, I don't worry about that facet anymore; there's enough solid information elsewhere to hang the lot.

I just had a look at the post of "The 911 Who-did-it" and I found that anonymous had posted a site to download a copy of Crossing the Rubicon by Mike Ruppert, here is the site to get your free copy: <a href="http://www.fromthewilderness.com/PDF/CrossingTheRubicon.zip">Crossing the Rubicon</a>

Read the book! <b>FORWARD THIS MESSAGE TO ALL BOOK REVIEWERS OF ALL YOUR NEWSPAPERS... ATTN:</b><i> Book reviewer <b>U R G E N T </b>(hot news!)</i><p> The book that could put the NeoCon Bush administration behind bars.