HorizonForumsone horizon
Log inSign up

[ms] · Est. May 2002

Music madethis place,we just kept itgoing...

One durable person. One social graph. Many communities—and every way people speak, share, listen, write, gather and remember.

Forums / Politics

you know what's astonishing?

1064 durable postsStarted 2009-08-24Latest 2015-07-21
#1274449Post 281 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

[QUOTE]No sir, I am not kidding you. First of all, how many other cases do we have out there of planes being deliberately flown into huge skyscrapers? And second of all, you may want to reconsider what we mean by "explain" in a situation involving a phenomenon as complex as this where things happen so rapidly and irreversibly that no one with expertise had time to stop the clock and properly witness and measure exactly what was happening. Think about it: [/QUOTE]

I'm thinking you know about natural laws, so when i say that the governments explaination breaks two laws of physics, i should really have to say no more.

but if i'm going to go thru the time to lay all of this out, you got to put in time on your own research.

[QUOTE]No one can [I]exactly[/I] tell you all of the exact physics of the planes' impacts into the buildings and the exact damage done as a result; they can only [I]estimate[/I] it to a fairly precise degree (but it's still an estimate). [/QUOTE]

a pretty damn good estimate in most cases. but lets take the governments estimate when in doubt, hows that?

[IMG]http://911research.com/wtc/evidence/docs/nist_fig_3_3.png[/IMG]

[QUOTE]No on can [I]exactly[/I] tell you the contribution of the insulation and other building materials to the subsequent fire; it can only be [I]estimated[/I] to a fairly precise degree (but it's still an estimate). [/QUOTE]

not true, nist did do tests on recovered wtc steel to see how it would perform. those tests dont help the government theory.

[QUOTE]No one can [I]exactly[/I] tell you how long the fire burned for and what temperatures it reached in each different square foot of the tower; it can only be [I]estimated[/I] to a fairly precise degree (but it's still an estimate. [/QUOTE]

only because they got rid of the evidence, of course getting rid of the evidence before an investigation even starts is not fishy in the least either.

[QUOTE]No one can [I]exactly[/I] tell you the kinetic energy released by the fall of the towers and the translation of that into kilowatt hours per ton of concrete crushed; it can only be [I]estimated[/I] to a fairly precise degree (but it's still an estimate). [/QUOTE]

but you can get damn close, when you have the right data open to you.

[QUOTE]And furthermore...when you're dealing with a physical phenomenon this complex, small changes in assumptions can yield significant differences of results. So things are not as exact and precise as you may think. [/QUOTE]

i agree to a point. which is why i support releasing the government data to independent researchers, and to also fill in any holes.

[QUOTE]So how did NIST determine the damage done to the South tower?

Architect Eric Douglas revealed that it was entirely based on computer simulations. NIST loaded their computer simulation with "a base case" data for impact damage, then would "tweak" the input parameters with more severe cases. Why? According to Douglas, because that was the only way to produce the desired outcome.Simply put, NIST estimated that anywhere from three to ten columns were broken, then chose the most severe estimate, because only with ten core columns broken would the tower collapse in the computer simulation. This violates scientific honesty.[/QUOTE]

again, let me state that small changes in assumptions aside, physics and the laws of physics are not subject to yours or anyone elses assumptions about anything.

[QUOTE]I don't. See, I said I didn't have all of the answers (again, no one does). [B]But according to the reports, the steel components that they recovered to use for those tests represented less than 1% of the overall steel in those particular parts of the building. [/B][B]If you had less than 1% of the evidence, would you draw a 100% conclusion based on that? [/B]

[URL="http://www.scribd.com/doc/295093/NIST-Mechanical-and-Metallurgical-Analysis-of-WTC-Structural-Steel"][COLOR=#d2d2d2]http://www.scribd.com/doc/295093/NIS...ructural-Steel[/COLOR][/URL] See the section on Inventory of Steel Recovered. [/QUOTE]

no, which is why they carted away the evidence before they could get caught, what OTHER reason do you have for shipping it off so fast?

[QUOTE]"Thousands of tons of steel were carted away from ground zero and recycled before any expert could examine what could have been tell-tale clues. Support trusses, fireproofing fragments and even burnt out electrical switches that might have given scientists and engineers insight were lost forever - even before an investigation was underway.

[URL]http://www.house.gov/list/press/ny09_weiner/021002wtccollapse.html[/URL] [/QUOTE]

but from the tests done on the recovered steel, it does not in ANY way support the governments theory.

i dont understand what your not getting here partner.

[QUOTE]Here's what we do see anecdotally: runningman has posted lots of pictures of molten stuff coming out the sides of the building. That's quite likely aluminum, and it has a melting point of about 660c. We also know that the fuel from the planes must have produced a [I]much[/I] higher heat for a brief period. And we know that steel loses its strength at temperatures well below its melting point. [/QUOTE]

please dont confuse air temp with steel temp, also realize jet fuel was burned up in 10-15 mins.

[QUOTE] NIST is careful to debunk the myth that jet fuel raised temperatures to steel-bending levels. Its tests found that jet fuel accelerated burning of workstation contents [b]but had little effect on temperatures[/b] [NCSTAR 1, p180]. [/QUOTE]

also realize that a fire moves when the combustable load is used up in an area, when the fire moves away from an area, the steel begins to cool and regain strength. thats not to mention the fact that the columns were huge heat sinks in the first place.

the bigger the heatsink that is connect to what your heating, the longer you will need to heat it in order for it to raise the temp.

[QUOTE]And furthermore, you conspiracy folks like to have it both ways, as I've pointed out... first, it was a cool burn and there was no inferno. Then, you say that there was molten stuff all around the wreckage and that stuff was super hot because they used explosives. That Steve E. Jones guy seems to be a huge fan of this. So which is it? [/QUOTE]

iw ont be discussing the molten metal theory, as it has nothing to do with what i'm talking about, lets just stick with the facts as the government has laid out shall we?

[QUOTE]You're probably expecting me to say that the top should have fallen over. It would probably depend on the resistance of the material underneath it relative to any longitudinal movement of the top part of the building...but again, I don't have all the answers. But from everything I've read online, this guy seems to have the most reasonable ones - he says it better than me:

[URL="http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/pseudosc/911nutphysics.htm"][COLOR=#9b9b9b]http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/pseudosc/911nutphysics.htm[/COLOR][/URL] [/QUOTE]

only read the first one, will get to the rest later, but as with most, he is dishonest.

[QUOTE]Actually the loads are much greater because the initial collapse involved a fall of about three or four stories, not just one[/QUOTE]

he provides no source for the 3-4 stories theory, and he expects us to believe that ALL supports on 3-4 floors gave out at the exact same time on 3 buildings?

are you sure you want me to go thru the rest of his stuff? cause i will.

#1274451Post 282 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

double post

#1274452Post 283 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

[QUOTE=yesme;790757]you know before you said something i never realized it would take about 20-30 years of skimming to reach this huge number, thus showing america that there really is no difference between D or R.

1/6th our national debt was what i said, and in 2001, 2.3 trillion was more like 1/5th of our debt, but you get the point..............now.

2.3 trillion is still 2.3 trillion, no matter if it was stolen in one day or twenty years. it's money the taxpayer has to pay back, with interest mind you.to assume the american public would of given the dod record budgets every year since 9-11 after it found out about the missing 2.3 trillion(99% of public does not know about this) is a huge f-ing stretch dont you think?[/QUOTE] Sigh. Wow... Let me try to give you one final example - a very simple one.

Let's say you're a company that recorded $1000 in transactions in your accounting system during a given time period. Now what does that $1000 in transactions really mean from your perspective? Is it all cash that is available to you for stealing? Not necessarily at all, because let's say:

a. $350 of the transactions represent money YOU OWE OTHERS. It's a cash outflow.

b. $400 of the transactions represent money YOU GET FROM OTHERS. It's a cash inflow.

c. $250 of the transactions have NO CASH IMPACT AT ALL; they are income statement-to-balance sheet moves of past cash inflows or outflows such as accruals, prepaids, etc.

On an ABSOLUTE TRANSACTION BASIS, it's $350 + $400 + 250 = $1000

On a NET CASH BASIS to your company, it's -$350 + $400 = $50.

[B]"$1000 in transactions" over a period of time does not at all necessarily mean "$1000 in cash" available to you during that time![/B] Comprende?

And the military is not a for-profit organization, so it's safe to assume that most of the transactions are cash outflows to other military members and vendors, or non-cash transactions. So how are you going to steal the cash outflows? Well, I supposed you could just not pay your bills... but vendors tend to notice when you don't do that and they make a big public stink and sue you. You could steal some of the money coming in, but notice that it's [I]much smaller[/I] than the total volume of transactions recorded. And the non-cash transactions...well, there's no cash there to steal.

And that's why no one is shocked about the "missing $2.3 trillion" is because everyone else understands what you don't: that the volume of total transactions tells you next to nothing about the net cash magnitude available at any given time, and that embezzling the magnitude of 1/6th of the nation's GDP is a ridiculous notion. All it really tells you is that their accounting system is really shitty and disorganized. The military does not even [I]have[/I] 1/6th of GDP sitting around in cash to embezzle.

If you really wanted to "steal" money in such magnitudes, why not just do something simpler like have the Fed and the US Mint print out more money? (this is what they do, by the way - inflation is essentially a "hidden" tax levied on people by the government).

Furthermore, if those guys were stealing $2.3 trillion, do you think they would be so stupid as to announce it in a speech?? They would just shut up about it and fake the accounting records forever.

[QUOTE=yesme;790757]would it not been simpler for the terrorists to fly str8 into the building instead of doing a top gun turn?[/QUOTE] You know...I can for instance show you testimony of a very experienced commercial pilot who says that executing that maneuver would not require any sort of "top gun" skills... but what's the point?

[QUOTE=yesme;790757]of course it's a huge leap that anyone would listen to the foremost expert on bin laden, about bin laden. who would listen to him about bin laden, clearly he knows nothing.[/QUOTE] It's not implausible. After all, you ignore the majority opinion of [I]thousands[/I] of experts who have studied the 9-11 events and focus on the few ones like Steven E. Jones who say what you want to hear.

Look, this is all going nowhere fast... We started saying that you'd not speculate on how this happened and would just show evidence, and now we've seen you suggest all sorts of highly questionable, unsubstantiated speculative theories based on extremely bad reasoning of how the government announced in a speech that it is stealing 1/6th of the nation's GDP in cash and that the only way they could keep the word from getting out is to cook up a very visible, complex scheme to blow up a part of the Pentagon... :roll: Sorry, but I can't take that seriously.

What's the point of even continuing with this? I feel sillier every time I come back here and read more of this stuff, and I don't have the time to keep dealing with it... if you still don't get my simple point with the $2.3 trillion transactions, then you'll never get it... And at any rate, I'm sure there is nothing I could say or show that could ever change your opinion, anyways. So just believe whatever you want to believe...peace out.

#1274456Post 284 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

[QUOTE=yesme;790862]but from the tests done on the recovered steel, it does not in ANY way support the governments theory.

i dont understand what your not getting here partner.[/quote] I'm getting that you're not getting that it was less than 1% of the steel and therefore impossible to conclude a whole lot from it. And I'm not confusing air temp with steel temp...I know that the jet fuel itself only burned briefly (as I said)...and I also think that your opinions on how the combustible load of the fires changed is highly speculative.

But what you maybe didn't recognize about my argument is that it doesn't require super high temperatures to explain the building collapse. It more importantly requires uneven temperatures between different parts of the building.

This MIT guy wrote one of the best summaries of it that I've read...my parting gift to you:

[url]http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/eagar-0112.html[/url]

[quote]It is known that the WTC fire was a fuel-rich, diffuse flame as evidenced by the copious black smoke. Soot is generated by incompletely burned fuel; hence, the WTC fire was fuel rich—hardly surprising with 90,000 L of jet fuel available. Factors such as flame volume and quantity of soot decrease the radiative heat loss in the fire, moving the temperature closer to the maximum of 1,000°C. However, it is highly unlikely that the steel at the WTC experienced temperatures above the 750–800°C range. All reports that the steel melted at 1,500°C are using imprecise terminology at best.

Some reports suggest that the aluminum from the aircraft ignited, creating very high temperatures. While it is possible to ignite aluminum under special conditions, such conditions are not commonly attained in a hydrocarbon-based diffuse flame. In addition, the flame would be white hot, like a giant sparkler. There was no evidence of such aluminum ignition, which would have been visible even through the dense soot.

It is known that structural steel begins to soften around 425°C and loses about half of its strength at 650°C.4 This is why steel is stress relieved in this temperature range. But even a 50% loss of strength is still insufficient, by itself, to explain the WTC collapse. It was noted above that the wind load controlled the design allowables. The WTC, on this low-wind day, was likely not stressed more than a third of the design allowable, which is roughly one-fifth of the yield strength of the steel. Even with its strength halved, the steel could still support two to three times the stresses imposed by a 650°C fire.

The additional problem was distortion of the steel in the fire. The temperature of the fire was not uniform everywhere, and the temperature on the outside of the box columns was clearly lower than on the side facing the fire. The temperature along the 18 m long joists was certainly not uniform. [SIZE="3"][COLOR="Red"][B][U]Given the thermal expansion of steel, a 150°C temperature difference from one location to another will produce yield-level residual stresses. This produced distortions in the slender structural steel, which resulted in buckling failures.[/U] Thus, the failure of the steel was due to two factors: loss of strength due to the temperature of the fire, and loss of structural integrity due to distortion of the steel from the non-uniform temperatures in the fire.[/B] [/COLOR][/quote][/SIZE] Read that last paragraph several times and note that it does not call form extremely high temperatures throughout the floors to "melt" anything. And it is actually quite consistent with the ability to discover fairly low temperatures in the steel samples, particularly if your sample covers less than 1% of the area's steel.

If I ever see more overwhelming and definitive evidence about controlled demolitions, $2.3 trillion stolen, cruise missiles fired into the Pentagon, etc., then I will change my opinion. But until that time - no offense - I trust this guy's expertise and theorizing a lot more than yours.

...and I'm out. ;) Have fun, guys.

#1274506Post 285 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

^ So, essentially once the integrity of the 1% of steel gave way, the weight of the top of the building collapsing forced the floor below it and the floor below it, and so on, to collapse.
This specific part of the debate seems like a moot point now.

#1274521Post 286 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

you guys Florida and Miro don't have a clue what you are talking about.. The pancake theory has been deemed impossible by many scientists because the steel core should have still been standing.

Why don't you guys ask yourself what these conspiracy theorists have to gain?? Fired, ridiculed, Ohhhh sounds like a great time to me.. really worth pursuing.

#1274534Post 287 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

[QUOTE]Sigh. Wow... Let me try to give you one final example - a very simple one.

Let's say you're a company that recorded $1000 in transactions in your accounting system during a given time period. Now what does that $1000 in transactions really mean from your perspective? Is it all cash that is available to you for stealing? Not necessarily at all, because let's say:

a. $350 of the transactions represent money YOU OWE OTHERS. It's a cash outflow.

b. $400 of the transactions represent money YOU GET FROM OTHERS. It's a cash inflow.

c. $250 of the transactions have NO CASH IMPACT AT ALL; they are income statement-to-balance sheet moves of past cash inflows or outflows such as accruals, prepaids, etc.

On an ABSOLUTE TRANSACTION BASIS, it's $350 + $400 + 250 = $1000

On a NET CASH BASIS to your company, it's -$350 + $400 = $50.

[B]"$1000 in transactions" over a period of time does not at all necessarily mean "$1000 in cash" available to you during that time![/B] Comprende?

And the military is not a for-profit organization, so it's safe to assume that most of the transactions are cash outflows to other military members and vendors, or non-cash transactions. So how are you going to steal the cash outflows? Well, I supposed you could just not pay your bills... but vendors tend to notice when you don't do that and they make a big public stink and sue you. You could steal some of the money coming in, but notice that it's [I]much smaller[/I] than the total volume of transactions recorded. And the non-cash transactions...well, there's no cash there to steal.[/QUOTE]

wow, your really not getting it are you?

you steal the money by directing it to a company that you will hired on the board of directors, or have a stake in some way. you then pay 25 billion for a plane only worth 1 billion.

maybe you missed some of those great stories comming out of the pentagon?

no one is suggesting otherwise, funny i had to point out exactly what happened.

[QUOTE]Furthermore, if those guys were stealing $2.3 trillion, do you think they would be so stupid as to announce it in a speech?? They would just shut up about it and fake the accounting records forever. [/QUOTE]

hahaha,right, so instead of paying 25 billion for a plane that costs 1 billion, you tell them you bought 25 planes @ a billion each, cause they wont want to know where yo hide these extra 50k planes needed to hide your real accounting errors...lol

good one bro.

[QUOTE]You know...I can for instance show you testimony of a very experienced commercial pilot who says that executing that maneuver would not require any sort of "top gun" skills... but what's the point? [/QUOTE]

so your really going to argue that it was easier for a non commerical pilot to make that turn instead of flying str8 into the top brass office's?

are you going to also say that after 8 years planning, they decided to hit the reinforced, accounting offices of the pentagon instead of the top guys unreinforced part, that would of been easier to hit in the first place?

thats your storey?

[QUOTE]It's not implausible. After all, you ignore the majority opinion of [I]thousands[/I] of experts who have studied the 9-11 events and focus on the few ones like Steven E. Jones who say what you want to hear. [/QUOTE]

  1. thousadns of experts have not studied 9-11, what you have is experts that offer their opinion without evidence, which i will be happy to show you where they go wrong.

  2. did i bring up jones?so why did you?lets stick with what i'm talking about, ok strawman?

[QUOTE]Look, this is all going nowhere fast... We started saying that you'd not speculate on how this happened and would just show evidence, and now we've seen you suggest all sorts of highly questionable, unsubstantiated speculative theories based on extremely bad reasoning of how the government announced in a speech that it is stealing 1/6th of the nation's GDP in cash and that the only way they could keep the word from getting out is to cook up a very visible, complex scheme to blow up a part of the Pentagon... :roll: Sorry, but I can't take that seriously.

[/QUOTE]

fear not, we will get to the physics soon enough, i just wanted to bring up some other issues that need looked into, and the missing 2.3 trillion was not the reason for 9-11, but just a nice bonus for them to not have to give back the money.

[QUOTE]I'm getting that you're not getting that it was less than 1% of the steel and therefore impossible to conclude a whole lot from it[/QUOTE]

so in other words the government should not of shipped off the evidence before the investigation began, and you think we need a new investigation because this in itself is highly suspect is what your saying?

but what could we find out about the steel with only 1% of it to test?

well we could put it thru strength and fire tests to see how it would perform.

[QUOTE] [B]D. Laboratory Tests[/B]

Laboratory tests conducted by NIST included: [LIST] []Tests to prove loss of fireproofing []Workstation burn tests []Tests by UL to test failure in floor assemblies [/LIST] The floor assemblies tests were important because they were supposed to prove the pancake theory. [b]Yet, despite NIST using less fireproofing on the assemblies than was known to be on the steel in the Twin Towers, and despite their loading the floors with double the weight known to have been on the actual floors, it could not get an assembly to collapse.[/b] The tests showed: [INDENT] [LIST] []Minimal floor sagging []No floor collapse []"The results established that this type of assembly was capable of sustaining a large gravity load, without collapsing for a substantial period of time relative to the duration of the fires in any given location on September 11th." [/LIST][/INDENT][/QUOTE]

now that is from the GOVERNMENT tests, lots of experts for you to choose from there partner.

also, i'm still waiting for a half way decent reason why they would only save 1% of the crime scene.

make it a good one brother.

[QUOTE]And I'm not confusing air temp with steel temp...I know that the jet fuel itself only burned briefly (as I said)...and I also think that your opinions on how the combustible load of the fires changed is highly speculative. [/QUOTE]

well you will be glad to know, it's not my opinion, but that of your thousands of experts in the majority, including nist(sucks when the guys theory your trying to back stabs you in the back eh?)

[QUOTE]FEMA's report quotes Culver (1977) stating that typical office-type occupancies contain fuel loads (described in terms of the equivalent weight of wood) of 4 to 12 pounds per square foot, with the mean slightly less than 8. [b]However, NIST's reports of June and October 2004 by S. Shyam Sunder state[/b] that the typical (WTC) floor contained an average of 4 psf of combustible materials.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]But here we note from the recent NIST report that: “[B]The initial jet fuel fires themselves lasted at most a few minutes[/B]” [b]and office material fires would burn out within about 20 minutes in a given location.[/b] (NIST, 2005; p. 179, emphasis added.)[/QUOTE]

so, yeah, no need to take my word for it.

so lets say that the fire under steel column a was 600c for 20 mins, do you think that is hot enought to raise the temp of that column to 600c knowing it is connected to 50k tons of heatsink?

[QUOTE]But what you maybe didn't recognize about my argument is that it doesn't require super high temperatures to explain the building collapse. It more importantly requires uneven temperatures between different parts of the building.

This MIT guy wrote one of the best summaries of it that I've read...my parting gift to you:

[URL="http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/eagar-0112.html"][COLOR=#d2d2d2]http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM...agar-0112.html[/COLOR][/URL] [/QUOTE]

lol i see, so now it dont matter that you cant prove temps were that high, because, magically they did not need to get that hot, because low temps are what really caused the collapse now?

lol.

maybe, maybe this might work, if i was not certified in arc,mig and tig welding and have worked with steel for the last 20 years...lmfao.

[QUOTE]Read that last paragraph several times and note that it does not call form extremely high temperatures throughout the floors to "melt" anything. And it is actually quite consistent with the ability to discover fairly low temperatures in the steel samples, particularly if your sample covers less than 1% of the area's steel. [/QUOTE]

so in parting, nists tests done on the steel could not get collapse to happen because they were to high and not uneven enough?

also, what you keep skipping over, and over, is how all the supports failed at the same time.

you do know the difference between an [B]symmetric collapse and a Asymmetric collapse?[/B]

you also realize that for the building(s) to fall str8 down they would need to lose support in the impact area, on all the supports at the exact same time, correct?

in all 3 buildings correct?

do you know the odds of that just happening?

it reaches into the impossible.

but, since this guy said it is so, it must be.

i like your research skills, find someone who agrees with you, and copy paste his/their info.

now if your ready for some real research i suggest you start with understanding how fire affects buildings/steel etc.

the cardington fire tests is a good starting point(btw they have NOTHING to do with 9-11, except for the fact that their science proves the government(and your buddy up there) wrong........again)

[URL]http://www.civ.ed.ac.uk/research/fire/cardington.html[/URL]

[QUOTE]^ So, essentially once the integrity of the 1% of steel gave way, the weight of the top of the building collapsing forced the floor below it and the floor below it, and so on, to collapse. This specific part of the debate seems like a moot point now. [/QUOTE]

no thats not what he is saying., he is saying since the government only kept 1% of the steel, they cant prove their theory, so lets just take their word for it.

thats what he is saying.

#1274539Post 288 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

Oddly Leslie Robertson claims that the impact of the planes broke the fire retardant off the columns causing the fire to become directly in contact with the columns, which sounds plausible in certain areas of the impact but not the whole building or even the whole floor.

Mayor Bloomberg, a former engineering major, was not concerned about the destruction of the evidence:

[QUOTE=] If you want to take a look at the construction methods and the design, that's in this day and age what computers do. Just looking at a piece of metal generally doesn't tell you anything. [/QUOTE]

#1274672Post 289 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

[QUOTE=yesme;790976]wow, your really not getting it are you?

you steal the money by directing it to a company that you will hired on the board of directors, or have a stake in some way. you then pay 25 billion for a plane only worth 1 billion.

maybe you missed some of those great stories comming out of the pentagon?

hahaha,right, so instead of paying 25 billion for a plane that costs 1 billion, you tell them you bought 25 planes @ a billion each, cause they wont want to know where yo hide these extra 50k planes needed to hide your real accounting errors...lol

good one bro. [/QUOTE] Seriously...I still don't get how does a reasonably intelligent, sane adult automatically goes from Rumsfeld's statement of "our infrastructure is so outdated that we can't propoerly track $2.3 trillion of transactions through the accounting system" to "I up and stole $2.3 trillion in cash?" And I'm the one who doesn't get it?? :lol:

And how do you even have the gall to present yourself as an objective, evidence-based expert who criticizes me for lack of evidence...and then you try to sell me [I]this[/I] kind of a nutty bullshit story with exactly ZERO real evidence behind it?

You don't know anything about military pricing and expenditures, and suddenly you're the "expert" whistleblower on rampant government emblezzlement? Whatever.

[QUOTE=yesme;790976]so your really going to argue that it was easier for a non commerical pilot to make that turn instead of flying str8 into the top brass office's?[/QUOTE] Me? Nah, I'm not going to argue. I'm not an expert on Boeing 757 maneuverability. But these experienced commercial pilots are and they will.
[URL]http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/2006/05/19/askthepilot186/print.html[/URL] [URL]http://www.911myths.com/Another_Expert.pdf[/URL]

Look, you clearly like speculative theories, so how about this one:

The hijacker decided to arrive at the target at a safe 7-8k feet (from like 30+ miles away) and then circle down and come in at a very shallow angle, which is easier and more conservative than trying to swoop down into the thing from a larger height (see articles). He picked which ever side of the Pentagon was easiest once he had decreased altitude and turned towards the building...no particular reason, he just wanted to hit the damn thing. Oh, and perhaps in addition to the I-395 freeway that provides a handy guide right towards the building (get a map) maybe it was easy enough for him to use this as a navigation aid: [IMG]http://www.911myths.com/assets/images/Monument.jpg[/IMG]

I dunno.... just a hypothesis from a non-expert. It seems to explain the general situation just as well.

Look, bottom line: I'm all for the investigation of 9-11 to be reopened as many times as you want. But until I see clear and compelling evidence, I will stick with experienced pilots who suggest that the turn does not require Top Gun status and the bulk of field experts who say that the best explanation for the fall of the towers was some form of unsustainable redistribution of load as a combination of the impacts and fires. Even though the conventional explanations certainly have holes that desire better explanation, they make a lot more sense and have more credibility than jumping to extreme and unfounded conclusions about how the government stole $2.3 trillion, how they needlessly demoed a bunch of skyscrapers, how they fired cruise missiles into the Pentagon, etc. End of story until some real evidence comes along.

#1274811Post 290 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

[QUOTE=Miroslav;791138]

Me? Nah, I'm not going to argue. I'm not an expert on Boeing 757 maneuverability. But these experienced commercial pilots are and they will. [URL="http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/2006/05/19/askthepilot186/print.html"][COLOR=#9b9b9b]http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/...186/print.html[/COLOR][/URL] [URL="http://www.911myths.com/Another_Expert.pdf"][COLOR=#9b9b9b]http://www.911myths.com/Another_Expert.pdf[/COLOR][/URL]

[/QUOTE]

And so are these

[URL]http://pilotsfor911truth.org/[/URL]

#1274816Post 291 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

Miro the guy couldn't fly a cessna? What evidence are yo ulooking for? God coming down and telling you himself. You have video, you have heard testimony that it wasn't an inferno in the buildings, you have evidence of thermate, You have molten steel in pools at the bottom, the buildings fell at near free fall speed, first time in history that a building fell by fire (3 times that day), you have mixed opinions on the Pentagon (Where is the plane)..

#1274875Post 292 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

"Inferno" issue is subjective and misleading; there was obviously a significant fire, and best explanation is that this layered on top of the initial impact provides the best explanation for why the buildings fell. No one says steel was melting out the windows except for you.

Molten steel at the bottom is highly uncertain, although some may have developed in certain insulated pockets. At any rate, it is completely inconclusive and probably highly unlikely that it has nothing to do with the fall of the building - especially if you are a proponent of the "no inferno" argument.

Thermate is more speculative than anything the government has said - all Jones found on one tiny sample that he had mailed to him was residue of certain things like sulfur that [I]could[/I] be from thermate, but that is also quite normal to expect from [I]tons[/I] of other non-thermate things.

The free fall thing is silly since every really tall building that lost structural integrity like that is extremely likely to fall "near free fall speed" and "look like a demolition" to every couch potato "expert" with an internet connection. It doesn't tell you much, especially from a Youtube video.

Buildings never felled by fire is a pointless argument since you never had some of the tallest skyscrapers in the world hit at full speed by modern jetliners.

The "no plane at the Pentagon" argument is beyond retarded, since obvious components of the plane were recovered, lots of people saw it, and DNA evidence confirmed the remains of the plane passengers.

None of these things are sufficient and reasonable evidence to contradict what was witnessed, and [I]some[/I] of them are just flat-out asinine and clearly wrong.

I haven't even heard a logical, coherent argument as to why the government would even [I]have[/I] to resort to something as complicated, needless, and stupid as to first ram big buildings with airliners and then demo them later in broad daylight or to shoot missiles into the Pentagon.

If I see some real evidence some day and not the same tired arguments, I'll change my tune.

Toodles.

#1275058Post 293 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

[QUOTE=Miroslav;791388]"Inferno" issue is subjective and misleading; there was obviously a significant fire, and best explanation is that this layered on top of the initial impact provides the best explanation for why the buildings fell. No one says steel was melting out the windows except for you.

Molten steel at the bottom is highly uncertain, although some may have developed in certain insulated pockets. At any rate, it is completely inconclusive and probably highly unlikely that it has nothing to do with the fall of the building - especially if you are a proponent of the "no inferno" argument.

Thermate is more speculative than anything the government has said - all Jones found on one tiny sample that he had mailed to him was residue of certain things like sulfur that [I]could[/I] be from thermate, but that is also quite normal to expect from [I]tons[/I] of other non-thermate things.

The free fall thing is silly since every really tall building that lost structural integrity like that is extremely likely to fall "near free fall speed" and "look like a demolition" to every couch potato "expert" with an internet connection. It doesn't tell you much, especially from a Youtube video.

Buildings never felled by fire is a pointless argument since you never had some of the tallest skyscrapers in the world hit at full speed by modern jetliners.

The "no plane at the Pentagon" argument is beyond retarded, since obvious components of the plane were recovered, lots of people saw it, and DNA evidence confirmed the remains of the plane passengers.

None of these things are sufficient and reasonable evidence to contradict what was witnessed, and [I]some[/I] of them are just flat-out asinine and clearly wrong.

I haven't even heard a logical, coherent argument as to why the government would even [I]have[/I] to resort to something as complicated, needless, and stupid as to first ram big buildings with airliners and then demo them later in broad daylight or to shoot missiles into the Pentagon.

If I see some real evidence some day and not the same tired arguments, I'll change my tune.

Toodles.[/QUOTE]

Sounds to me like a bury my head in the sand post. I don't think you will accept anything other than the official story unless its broadcast on CNN or ABC as fact and then you probably still wouldnt believe it. All you have done is regurgitated your arguments from earlier in the thread even after being shown contradicting arguments. You certainly haven't watched much of the footage shown in this thread.

#1275124Post 294 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

[QUOTE=chunky;791596]Sounds to me like a bury my head in the sand post. I don't think you will accept anything other than the official story unless its broadcast on CNN or ABC as fact and then you probably still wouldnt believe it. All you have done is regurgitated your arguments from earlier in the thread even after being shown contradicting arguments. You certainly haven't watched much of the footage shown in this thread.[/QUOTE] Not all of it, to be honest. I also have a career and it takes up a lot of time right now.

As I said before, I'll admit that there are lots of areas that are still unsatisfactorily explained in the conventional explanation. But do you really think that you have sufficient evidence that the WTC buildings were all detonated via [I]controlled demolition[/I]? I just don't think that you have sufficient evidence to reasonably conclude that.

And if you want to talk about contradictions...sure, I've been wrong about certain things and I don't have all of the answers. But I've also pointed out and corrected some of runningman's false statements about "molten steel" pouring out of the building while it was still standing. And I've pointed out and corrected some of yesme's false statements about Rummy saying he "stole $2.3 trillion cash" (which he continues to maintain with no earthly evidence). [B]And I've pointed out and corrected some of [I]your[/I] false statements[/B] about using a picture of the [I]wrong hole[/I] in the Pentagon to try to "prove" that it wasn't a plane. So now what do you have to say to that? Not a peep out of any of you guys when I point those things out.

It's a bit tough to talk about burying one's head in the sand when one disregards clear and obvious evidence about certain things that don't fit the conspiracy agenda, such as DNA records, eyewitness reports, phone calls from passengers, and wheel/engine/fuselage remnants of a large aircraft at the Pentagon, don't you think?

#1275126Post 295 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

[QUOTE=Miroslav;791677][B]And I've pointed out and corrected some of [I]your[/I] false statements[/B] about using a picture of the [I]wrong hole[/I] in the Pentagon to try to "prove" that it wasn't a plane. So now what do you have to say to that? Not a peep out of any of you guys when I point those things out.

It's a bit tough to talk about burying one's head in the sand when one disregards clear and obvious evidence about certain things that don't fit the conspiracy agenda, such as DNA records, eyewitness reports, phone calls from passengers, and wheel/engine/fuselage remnants of a large aircraft at the Pentagon, don't you think?[/QUOTE]

You talk about the eye witnesses but most of these eye witnesses stories don't add up. Floridaoranges news anchor man claimed the the wings folded up on impact which obviously doesn't correspond with your picture. All the witnesses who where interviewed in runningman's video, who where very clear on what they saw regarding the plane and the route it took before hitting the Pentagon (some of them would not of seen the plane if it took the official route). On realising the ramifications of their accounts no longer wanted to discuss it any more.

#1275146Post 296 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

[QUOTE=chunky;791681]You talk about the eye witnesses but most of these eye witnesses stories don't add up. Floridaoranges news anchor man claimed the the wings folded up on impact which obviously doesn't correspond with your picture. All the witnesses who where interviewed in runningman's video, who where very clear on what they saw regarding the plane and the route it took before hitting the Pentagon (some of them would not of seen the plane if it took the official route). On realising the ramifications of their accounts no longer wanted to discuss it any more.[/QUOTE] Most eyewitnesses not adding up, my ass... I will repost the eyewitness accounts and even an aggregate analysis of the results that shows a lot of consistency in things reported. And by the way, virtually NO ONE that I am aware of saw a cruise missile or anything else of that sort. You'd be trying to sell me this exacts same story about the WTC too, if the planes there hadn't happen to have been caught on video.

And just by the way...eyewitness accounts always have some variation. Shit happens fast, some people have bad memories, some people are fricken idiots who also claim to see Jesus in their pancake syrup...get the picture? What does one idiot news anchor know about what actually happened to the wings? They repeatedly say dumb shit. But there[I] is[/I] reasonable consistency in what the eyewitness reports say.

But eyewitness reports aside, there is of course all of the other evidence of the plane crash at the site including DNA reports, detailed analysis of plane components...but go ahead and bury your head on the sand on that stuff, too (and keep looking at the wrong "entry hole"). ;)

#1275165Post 297 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

Variation is putting it lightly, the fact that they say they saw a plane hit the pentagon is enough for me...of course their stories are going to be different and of course they are going to be confused weeks or months or more after it occurred.

Plus, the fine folks that were interviewed were not exactly scientists if you get what I'm saying.

#1275201Post 298 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

one of the main give aways against the pentagon tail, is the story of floyd banks, cab driver.

#1278409Post 299 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

Plus the fact some of the eye witness could not of possibly seen the plane had it used the route in the official story.

I don't know where you got the cruse missile from Miro, but had the pentagon been hit by a cruise missile I would imagine there would be a lot more damage.

#1278667Post 300 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

Why is it always whoever comes out of the loud speaker is credible? Those cops in my video are credible on what they saw. They are trained in that area so good luck trying to disprove that one.

Miro Toasty Florida you give your gov't to much credit that they are good and honest people when we see how fucked up their personal lives are. Not to mention how crooked they are either. It always comes down to making money.. That's it.

#1278765Post 301 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

^wrong thread?

#1278776Post 302 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

[QUOTE=chunky;791879]I don't know where you got the cruse missile from Miro, but had the pentagon been hit by a cruise missile I would imagine there would be a lot more damage.[/QUOTE] It's another common conspiracy theory that has spread all over since the claim is that it wasn't a plane. So since you claim there was no plane, what's [I]your[/I] explanation for what happened there? Was it another "controlled demolition"?

[QUOTE=yesme;791763]one of the main give aways against the pentagon tail, is the story of floyd banks, cab driver.[/QUOTE] First of all, the Pentagon does not have a tail. But anyways...

So the cab driver who couldn't remember what the hell exactly happened to his car and then supposedly later implicitly "confessed" to being a special operative in the 9-11 planned government attack (I saw those Youtube videos)... that's the "main give away" to "the Pentagon tail" that outweighs all of this evidence:

(1) [I]hundreds[/I] of other witnesses who say they saw a plane come in and impact, (2) phone calls from the plane prior to impact, (3) detailed evidence of 757 plane components in the wreckage, and (4) DNA confirmation of the passengers' remaines all throughout the wreckage area?

Are you serious?

You really think that the US government, with all of its sophistication and connections, needs to involve some common [I]cab driver[/I] (particularly one who is far from the sharpest tool in the shed) as a secret operative in order to make 9-11 work?? What in the hell would they need him for? You really think the government would need his cab to drive by just as the plane flew in and get his winshield busted up (but not the hood, government forgot that part! lolz) as a part of their secret plot? That's probably the stupidest premise I've ever heard of.

[QUOTE=runningman;792157]Miro Toasty Florida you give your gov't to much credit that they are good and honest people when we see how fucked up their personal lives are. Not to mention how crooked they are either. It always comes down to making money.. That's it.[/QUOTE] I don't think they are good and honest people. But I'm not going to swallow every bullshit wive's tale that sounds like an exciting B-rated Hollywood action movie.

I fully admit that there are things I can't explain in the events of that day, but the enormous conclusions you guys jump to - oftentimes on complete misunderstandings of statements, misleading pictures, downright false pictures, and crappy reasoning - are just unacceptable to me. This Lloyd England story is a classic example of that.

#1278783Post 303 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

What about the eyewitnesses who saw a very low flying plane fly over and away from the Pentagon after the explosion.

#1278798Post 304 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

Funny thing with that zeitgeist movie I gave it to a work colleague who was interested in it after I mentioned this thread at work. He enjoyed it that much he burnt a few copies off and it has been circulating quicker than the swine flu.

#1278806Post 305 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

[QUOTE=runningman;783290]hey chunky did you see the lloyd england interview at the end of that link I posted?? he admits that he was in on it!!! That "his life has changed because of it." He got paid off. Just watch the last 20 mins of it if you don't have the time.[/QUOTE] See, this is what I'm talking about as far as patently ridiculous reasoning. This is beyond anything that even remotely makes rational sense.

You people reason like this, and then you expect people to take you seriously on your other "theories"?

I can understand the point of arguing certain things about the physics of the WTC building collapses, but I can't believe you guys would take shit like this seriously... it suggests that you'll believe anything.

#1278809Post 306 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

[QUOTE=Miroslav;792317]See, this is what I'm talking about as far as patently ridiculous reasoning. This is beyond anything that even remotely makes rational sense.

You people reason like this, and then you expect people to take you seriously on your other "theories"?

I can understand the point of arguing certain things about the physics of the WTC building collapses, but I can't believe you guys would take shit like this seriously... it suggests that you'll believe anything.[/QUOTE]

Coming from someone who only believes in the loud speakers, that isn't saying much.:takethat:.:lol:

Do you believe that people on earth have ever been paid off to keep their mouth shut? And that they would be getting paid because it was very sensitive information (ie. about someones death..etc)? Well why is that so hard to believe in this situation? Have you ever dealt with the mafia? Or heard stories about getting people to keep their mouth shut?

All of your sources are establishment based. Ours are independant. You can't recreate the situation and we can. Case closed.

#1278811Post 307 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

Hey chunky, look at all of this "inconsistency" in the eyewitness reports. Keep in mind that this is surely not a complete list. There will always be some contradicting reports when you poll a lot of people about a traumatic event that occurred very fast (like the guy who called it a turboprop), but only you nutty people would deny all of this in favor of some hare-brained story about an inside plot involving one cab driver. :roll:

[B]Washington Boulevard, Columbia Pike, and I-395[/B]

[B]Gary Bauer,[/B] “I was in a massive traffic jam, hadn’t moved more than a hundred yards in twenty minutes. My office called to tell me about the first plane in New York, the reaction was ‘horrible accident.’ And then they called about the second plane, and clearly that meant something much worse was going on. It was only then that I really noticed where I was in that traffic jam. I was going past the Pentagon, really inching a yard or so every couple of minutes. I had just passed the closest place the Pentagon is to the exit on 395 . . . when all of a sudden I heard the roar of a jet engine. “I looked at the woman sitting in the car next to me. She had this startled look on her face. We were all thinking the same thing. [COLOR="Red"][B]We looked out the front of our windows to try to see the plane, and it wasn’t until a few seconds later that we realized the jet was coming up behind us on that major highway.[/B][/COLOR] And it veered to the right into the Pentagon. The blast literally rocked all of our cars. It was an incredible moment.[1]

Richard Benedetto was in his car on his way to work, stuck in traffic just outside the Pentagon. He was listening -- in horror -- to an account of what had just happened at the World Trade Center in New York. [COLOR="red"][B]"Then the plane flew right over my head. I said to myself, boy, that plane is going awfully fast,"[/B][/COLOR] Benedetto said. "That plane is going to crash." The jet knocked over several light posts before it smashed into the Pentagon. Other observers said it seemed to come in full throttle with no attempt to slow down. "The noise was like an artillery shell, not an explosion like a bomb," Benedetto said. Then he saw a giant billow of smoke followed by a huge fireball, presumably the exploding fuel from the crashed plane. "You couldn't even see the building because there was so much smoke," said Benedetto. The sight was shocking and chilling, even for a veteran reporter. "You don't hand in your humanity when you get a press pass," he said.[2]

[B]Donald R. Bouchoux[/B] "I was driving down Washington Boulevard (Route 27) along the side of the Pentagon [COLOR="red"][B]when the aircraft crossed about 200 yards in front of me and impacted the side of the building.[/B][/COLOR] There was an enormous fireball, followed about two seconds later by debris raining down. The car moved about a foot to the right when the shock wave hit. I had what must have been an emergency oxygen bottle from the airplane go flying down across the front of my Explorer and then a second piece of jagged metal come down on the right side of the car."[3]

O[B]mar Campo[/B], a Salvadorean, was cutting the grass on the other side of the road when the plane flew over his head. [B][COLOR="red"]"It was a passenger plane. I think an American Airways plane," Mr Campo said. "I was cutting the grass and it came in screaming over my head. I felt the impact.[/COLOR][/B] The whole ground shook and the whole area was full of fire. I could never imagine I would see anything like that here."[4]

[B]Daryl Donley[/B], saw the crash as he was driving on Washington Boulevard. Among debris that was scattered as the plane crashed, he found a "scorched green oxygen tank marked 'Cabin air. Airline use'" on the road.[5] Mr. Donley also had a camera with him, and took some of the first photographs after the crash.[6]

[B]Penny Elgas[/B] exited I-395 and came on to Washington Boulevard, heading towards the Memorial Bridge. She was "stuck in late morning rush hour traffic, almost in front of the Pentagon. Traffic was at a standstill. I heard a rumble, looked out my driver's side window and realized that[COLOR="red"][B] I was looking at the nose of an airplane coming straight at us from over the road [/B][/COLOR](Columbia Pike) that runs perpendicular to the road I was on. The plane just appeared there- very low in the air, to the side of (and not much above) the CITGO gas station that I never knew was there. My first thought was “Oh My God, this must be World War III!” In that split second, my brain flooded with adrenaline and I watched everything play out in ultra slow motion, I saw the plane coming in slow motion toward my car and then it banked in the slightest turn in front of me, toward the heliport. In the nano-second that the plane was directly over the cars in front of my car, the plane seemed to be not more than 80 feet off the ground and about 4-5 car lengths in front of me. It was far enough in front of me that I saw the end of the wing closest to me and the underside of the other wing as that other wing rocked slightly toward the ground. I remember recognizing it as an American Airlines plane -- I could see the windows and the color stripes. And I remember thinking that it was just like planes in which I had flown many times but at that point it never occurred to me that this might be a plane with passengers. In my adrenaline-filled state of mind, I was overcome by my visual senses. The day had started out beautiful and sunny and I had driven to work with my car's sunroof open. I believe that I may have also had one or more car windows open because the traffic wasn't moving anyway. At the second that I saw the plane, my visual senses took over completely and I did not hear or feel anything -- not the roar of the plane, or wind force, or impact sounds. The plane seemed to be floating as if it were a paper glider and I watched in horror as it gently rocked and slowly glided straight into the Pentagon. At the point where the fuselage hit the wall, it seemed to simply melt into the building. I saw a smoke ring surround the fuselage as it made contact with the wall. It appeared as a smoke ring that encircled the fuselage at the point of contact and it seemed to be several feet thick. I later realized that it was probably the rubble of churning bits of the plane and concrete. The churning smoke ring started at the top of the fuselage and simultaneously wrapped down both the right and left sides of the fuselage to the underside, where the coiling rings crossed over each other and then coiled back up to the top. Then it started over again -- only this next time, I also saw fire, glowing fire in the smoke ring. At that point, the wings disappeared into the Pentagon. And then I saw an explosion and watched the tail of the plane slip into the building. It was here that I closed my eyes for a moment and when I looked back, the entire area was awash in thick black smoke."[7] (read more... See photos)

[B]Fred Gaskins[/B] recounted "[COLOR="red"][B](The jet) was flying fast and low[/B][/COLOR] and the Pentagon was the obvious target," he said , who was driving to his job as a national editor at USA TODAY near the Pentagon when the jet passed about 150 feet overhead. "It was flying very smoothly and calmly, without any hint that anything was wrong."[8]

[B]Afework Hagos, a computer programmer,[/B] was on his way to work but stuck in a traffic jam on Columbia Pike near the Pentagon when the plane flew over. [B][COLOR="red"]"There was a huge screaming noise and I got out of the car as the plane came over. Everybody was running away in different directions. It was tilting its wings up and down like it was trying to balance. It hit some lampposts on the way in."[/COLOR][/B][4]

[B]Asework Hagos, 26, of Arlington,[/B] was driving on Columbia Pike on his way to work as a consultant for Nextel. He saw a plane flying very low and close to nearby buildings. [B][COLOR="red"]"I thought something was coming down on me. I know this plane is going to crash. I've never seen a plane like this so low."[/COLOR][/B] He said he looked at it and saw American Airline insignia and when it made impact with the Pentagon initially he saw smoke, then flames.[9]

[B]Eugenio Hernandez, APTN - Latin American Desk[/B], "I was in my Jeep Cherokee, driving on Route 395 toward DC and listening to NPR. [B][COLOR="red"]I saw the plane coming down. I didn't have a camera with me.[/COLOR][/B] On the left shoulder, I saw this tourist with a video camera. The man was with his wife and son. They were from southern Virginia. He was freaked out completely. He was not recording anything. The camera was facing the ground. I jumped out of my car, pulled out one of my business cards, and handed it to him. 'I work for a news agency. Please could I borrow your camera?' I explained, 'I'm sure you will be rewarded.' He handed me the camera, and I went across the road. No one stopped me. I was holding my press badge on top of the camera while I was recording; I walked as close as possible. I was maybe 300 feet from the impact."[10]

[B]Aydan Kizildrgli[/B], an English language student who is a native of Turkey, [B][COLOR="red"]saw the jetliner bank slightly then strike a western wall of the huge five-sided building that is the headquarters of the nation's military.[/COLOR][/B] "There was a big boom," he said. "Everybody was in shock. I turned around to the car behind me and yelled 'Did you see that?' Nobody could believe it."[8]

[B]Mary Lyman[/B], who was on I-395, [B][COLOR="red"]saw the airplane pass over at a "steep angle toward the ground and going fast" and then saw the cloud of smoke from the Pentagon.[/COLOR][/B][11]

[B]David Marra[/B] had turned his BMW off an I-395 exit to the highway just west of the Pentagon when he saw an American Airlines jet swooping in, its wings wobbly, looking like it was going to slam right into the Pentagon: [B][COLOR="red"]"It was 50 ft. off the deck when he came in. It sounded like the pilot had the throttle completely floored. The plane rolled left and then rolled right. Then he caught an edge of his wing on the ground.[/COLOR][/B]" There is a helicopter pad right in front of the side of the Pentagon. The wing touched there, then the plane cartwheeled into the building.[12]

[B]Father Stephen McGraw[/B] was driving to a graveside service at Arlington National Cemetery the morning of Sept. 11, when he mistakenly took the Pentagon exit onto Washington Boulevard, putting him in a position to witness American Airlines Flight 77 crash into the Pentagon. "The traffic was very slow moving, and at one point just about at a standstill," said McGraw, a Catholic priest at St. Anthony Parish in Falls Church. [B][COLOR="red"]"I was in the left hand lane with my windows closed. I did not hear anything at all until the plane was just right above our cars."[/COLOR][/B] McGraw estimates that the plane passed about 20 feet over his car, as he waited in the left hand lane of the road, on the side closest to the Pentagon. [B][COLOR="red"]"The plane clipped the top of a light pole just before it got to us, injuring a taxi driver, whose taxi was just a few feet away from my car. "I saw it crash into the building,"[/COLOR][/B] he said. "My only memories really were that it looked like a plane coming in for a landing. I mean in the sense that it was controlled and sort of straight. That was my impression," he said. "I hadn't heard about the World Trade Center at that point, and so I was thinking this was an accident. I figured it was just an accident. "There was an explosion and a loud noise and I felt the impact. I remember seeing a fireball come out of two windows (of the Pentagon). I saw an explosion of fire billowing through those two windows.[13]

[B]Kirk Milburn, a construction supervisor for Atlantis Co[/B]., who was on the Arlington National Cemetery exit of Interstate 395 when he said he saw the plane heading for the Pentagon. [COLOR="red"][B]"I was right underneath the plane, I heard a plane. I saw it. I saw debris flying[/B][/COLOR]. I guess it was hitting light poles," said Milburn. "It was like a WHOOOSH whoosh, then there was fire and smoke, then I heard a second explosion." [9]

[B]Christopher Munsey[/B], who was en route to work on I-395, "Already dumbfounded by the first, sketchy radio reports of the catastrophic attack on the World Trade Center towers in New York, [B][COLOR="red"]I couldn’t believe what I was now seeing to my right: A silver, twin-engine American Airlines jetliner gliding almost noiselessly over the Navy Annex, fast, low and straight toward the Pentagon, just hundreds of yards away. It was a nightmare coming to life. The plane, with red and blue markings, hurtled by and within moments exploded in a ground-shaking “whoomp,” as it appeared to hit the side of the Pentagon.[/COLOR][/B] A huge flash of orange flame and black smoke poured into the sky. Smoke seemed to change from black to white, forming a billowing column in the sky." [14]

[B]John O’Keefe, managing editor of Influence, an American Lawyer Media publication[/B], "I was going up Interstate 395, up Washington Boulevard, listening to the radio, to the news, to WTOP, and from my left side, [B][COLOR="red"]I don’t know whether I saw or heard it first -- this silver plane; I immediately recognized it as an American Airlines jet, it came swooping in over the highway, over my left shoulder, straight across where my car was heading.[/COLOR][/B] I’d just heard them saying on the radio that National Airport was closing, and I thought, ‘That’s not going to make it to National Airport.’ And then I realized where I was, and that it was going to hit the Pentagon. There was a burst of orange flame that shot out that I could see through the highway overpass. Then it was just black. Just black thick smoke. The eeriest thing about it, was that it was like you were watching a movie. There was no huge explosion, no huge rumbling on ground, it just went ‘pfff.’ It wasn’t what I would have expected for a plane that was not much more than a football field away from me. The first thing I did was pull over onto the shoulder, and when I got out of the car I saw another plane flying over my head, and it scared ...me, because I knew there had been two planes that hit the World Trade Center. And I started jogging up the ramp to get as far away as possible. Then the plane -- it looked like a C-130 cargo plane -- started turning away from the Pentagon, it did a complete turnaround. There was nothing to see but black. The whole side of Washington Boulevard was black and on fire. I lost all sense of time. I think I was standing outside a good 20 minutes or so, and then, it was just 10 minutes until I got to the Memorial Bridge, which was closed, so I went up the GW Parkway and to a friend’s house."[15]

[B]Mary Ann Owens, of Gannett News Service[/B], was stuck in traffic near the Pentagon,[B][COLOR="red"] when she saw the airplane pass 50 to 75 feet overhead and crash into the Pentagon.[/COLOR][/B][5]

[B]Christine Peterson[/B], "I was at a complete stop on the road in front of the helipad at the Pentagon; what I had thought would be a shortcut was as slow as the other routes I had taken that morning. [B][COLOR="red"]I looked idly out my window to the left -- and saw a plane flying so low I said, 'holy cow, that plane is going to hit my car' (not my actual words). The car shook as the plane flew over. It was so close that I could read the numbers under the wing. And then the plane crashed.[/COLOR][/B] My mind could not comprehend what had happened. Where did the plane go? For some reason I expected it to bounce off the Pentagon wall in pieces. But there was no plane visible, only huge billows of smoke and torrents of fire. Now I wanted to get as far away as I could, but that was impossible. The people around me had gotten out of their cars. At least half had cameras and the others were on their cell phones. I experienced a moment of irrelevant amazement that so many people had cameras in their cars. A few minutes later a second, much smaller explosion got the attention of the police arriving on the scene. They began ordering people back into their cars and away."[16]

[B]Alfred S. Regnery[/B], travelling on I-395, "As I approached the Pentagon, which was still not quite in view, listening on the radio to the first reports about the World Trade Center disaster in New York, [B][COLOR="red"]a jetliner, apparently at full throttle and not more than a couple of hundred yards above the ground, screamed overhead. Although airplanes regularly fly over the Pentagon on their way to Reagan National Airport, just a mile or two south, this plane was too low and going too fast.[/COLOR][/B] As I watched it disappear behind bridges and concrete barriers I knew it was about to crash... Seconds before the Pentagon came into view a huge black cloud of smoke rose above the road ahead. I came around the bend and there was the Pentagon billowing smoke, flames and debris, blackened on one side and with a gaping hole where the airplane had hit it."[17]

[B]Steve Riskus[/B] [B][COLOR="red"]witnessed the plane crash into the Pentagon, as he was driving along Washington Boulevard[/COLOR][/B] and stopped to take photographs moments after the impact.[18]

[B]Joel Sucherman, USAToday.com Editor[/B], [B][COLOR="red"]"saw it all: an American Airlines jetliner fly left to right across his field of vision as he commuted to work Tuesday morning. It was highly unusual. The large plane was 20 feet off the ground and a mere 50 to 75 yards from his windshield. Two seconds later and before he could see if the landing gear was down or any of the horror-struck faces inside, the plane slammed into the west wall of the Pentagon 100 yards away.[/COLOR][/B] My first thought was he's not going to make it across the river to [Reagan] National Airport. But whoever was flying the plane made no attempt to change direction," Sucherman said. "It was coming in at a high rate of speed, but not at a steep angle--almost like a heat-seeking missile was locked onto its target and staying dead on course." [19]

[B]Jim Sutherland[/B], on I-395, [B][COLOR="red"]witnessed the plane pass 50 feet overhead, heading in a straight line into the Pentagon.[/COLOR][/B][20]

Jim Sutherland, a mortgage broker, was driving near the Pentagon at 9:40 a.m. [B][COLOR="red"]when he saw a 737 airplane 50 feet over Interstate 395 heading in a straight line into the side of the Pentagon.[/COLOR][/B] The fireball explosion that followed rocked his car. Drivers began pulling over to the side - some taking pictures - not quite believing what they were seeing.[21]

[B]Henry Ticknor, intern minister at the Unitarian Universalist Church of Arlington, Virginia,[/B] [B][COLOR="red"]was driving to church that Tuesday morning when American Airlines Flight 77 came in fast and low over his car and struck the Pentagon. "There was a puff of white smoke and then a huge billowing black cloud," he said.[/COLOR][/B][22]

[B]Clyde Vaughn, Brig. Gen. of the U.S. Army and director of military support[/B], [B][COLOR="red"]told reporters he was in his car on nearby Interstate 395 when the plane hit the Pentagon on Tuesday morning.[/COLOR][/B] Vaughn said "I was scanning the air" as he was sitting in his car. "There wasn't anything in the air, except for one airplane, and it looked like it was loitering over Georgetown, in a high, left-hand bank," he said. "That may have been the plane. I have never seen one on that (flight) pattern. A few minutes later, Vaughn witnessed the craft's impact. [23]

[B]Mike Walter, USA Today reporter[/B], while driving on Washington Boulevard, also witnessed the crash. He recounted to CNN,[B][COLOR="red"] "...looked out my window. I saw this plane, the jet, American Airlines jet coming. And I thought, this doesn't add up. It's really low. And I saw it. It just went — I mean, it was like a cruise missile with wings, it went right there and slammed right into the Pentagon. Huge explosion."[/COLOR][/B][24] (See video - Mike Walter debunks the conspiracy theorists)

[B]Barbara (spoke to CNN at 10:20 a.m.)[/B]: Barbara - As we were driving into town on 395, there was an exit, we were trying to get off the exit for Memorial Bridge. [B][COLOR="red"]Off to the lefthand side, there was a commercial plane that came in and was coming too fast too low and the next thing we saw was it go down low beside the road and we just saw the fire that came up after that[/COLOR][/B] CNN - How large was the explosion? Barbara - It was large. CNN - Was there a sound, as well? Barbara - Umm, that can't verify because the windows were up in the vehicle. CNN - Was it clear to you what had happened? Barbara - Yes, definitely. CNN - So you believe it was a commercial airliner that was hitting the Pentagon? Barbara - Yes, and I'm not sure exactly where it, the Pentagon was in relation to where the plane went down, but they are relatively close to one another, whether it hit any part of the Pentagon, I'm not sure. CNN - How low was the plane? Barbara - When it was coming down? CNN - Yep. Barbara - It was coming down on less than a 45 degree angle and coming down to where the side of the 395 and when it came down it just missed the 395 and went down below it and we saw the fire come up from it. CNN - Were you able to see what kind of plane or what airline it belonged to? Barbara - No, I did not see what kind of airliner. I just assumed that we were so close to the airport that it was coming in to land. CNN - But it seemed awfully low to you? Barbara - Yes. And fast. CNN - How big was the fireball? Barbara - Umm, I was spatially challenged at times, but it was pretty big. CNN - What did you think was happening? Barbara - Umm, I know that it hit the ground and exploded. CNN - Were you frightened yourself? Barbara - Yes, everybody stopped the cars and we all got out and so forth. CNN - Thank you very much. The Pentagon

[B]David Battle, who worked at the Pentagon[/B], [B][COLOR="red"]was standing outside the building and just about to enter when the aircraft struck. "It was coming down head first," he said. "And when the impact hit, the cars and everything were just shaking."[/COLOR][/B][25]

[B]Maurice L. Bease, a Marine Sergeant[/B], had worked around Marine aviation long enough to know what a fly-by was, and it sounded like one as he stood outside his office near the Pentagon on Sept. 11.[B][COLOR="red"] Turning around expecting to see a fighter jet fly over, he saw only a split-second glimpse of a white commercial airliner streaking low toward the building, and him! He did not even have time to duck before it plowed into the side of the Pentagon around the corner and about 200 yards from where he stood.[/COLOR][/B] Immediately, a ball of flame shot up the side of the building, followed by smoke, lots of it.[26]

[B]Mickey Bell, on-site foreman[/B], had "just left the Singleton Electric trailer when he heard a loud noise. The next thing he recalled was picking himself off the floor, where he had been thrown by the blast. [B][COLOR="red"]Bell, who had been less than 100 feet from the initial impact of the plane, was nearly struck by one of the plane´s wings as it sped by him.[/COLOR][/B] In shock, he got into his truck, which had been parked in the trailer compound, and sped away. The full impact of the closeness of the crash wasn´t realized until coworkers noticed damage to Bell´s work vehicle. He had plastic and rivets from an airplane imbedded in its sheet metal, but Bell had no idea what had happened. During Bell´s close call, other Singleton workers, including sub-foreman Greg Cobaugh, were doing other work on the first and third floors."[27] "We went out to look at his truck and the truckbed was filled with all kinds of debris that must have come from the blast. He's one really lucky guy," marvels Singleton.[28]

[B]Sean Boger, worked at the Pentagon helipad air traffic control tower[/B], which was between the building and the heliport. He was looking out the window and saw[B][COLOR="red"] "the nose and the wing of the aircraft just like coming right at us, and he didn't veer... I am watching the plane go all the way into the building, " he stared as the Boeing 757 smacked into the building" less than 100 feet away.[/COLOR][/B][29]

[B][COLOR="red"]"I just looked up and I saw the big nose and the wings of the aircraft coming right at us and I just watched it hit the building,[/COLOR][/B]" Air Traffic Controller and Pentagon tower chief Sean Boger said. "It exploded. I fell to the ground and covered my head. I could actually hear the metal going through the building."[30]

[B]Mark Bright, a police officer at the Pentagon[/B], saw the plane hit the building. He had been manning the guard booth at the Mall Entrance to the building. [B][COLOR="red"]"I saw the plane at the Navy Annex area," he said. "I knew it was going to strike the building because it was very, very low -- at the height of the street lights. It knocked a couple down."[/COLOR][/B] The plane would have been seconds from impact -- the annex is only a few hundred yards from the Pentagon. He said he heard the plane "power-up" just before it struck the Pentagon. "As soon as it struck the building I just called in an attack, because I knew it couldn't be accidental," Bright said. He jumped into his police cruiser and headed to the area. [31]

[B]Mike Dobbs, Marine Commander, who worked at the Pentagon[/B], was on an upper level of the outer ring, looking out the window. [B][COLOR="red"]He saw an American Airlines aircraft as it passed over the Navy Annex and hit the Pentagon.[/COLOR][/B][20]

[B]Lincoln Liebner, Army Captain[/B], who was parking his car in the South Parking lot... [B][COLOR="red"]"I saw this large American Airlines passenger jet coming in fast and low,[/COLOR][/B] My first thought was I've never seen one that high. Before it hit I realised what was happening."[32] He saw Flight 77 come in "full throttled, wheels up, a controlled flight."[33]

[B]Frank Probst, an information management specialist for the Pentagon Renovation Program[/B], "left his office trailer near the Pentagon's south parking lot at 9:36 a.m. Sept. 11. [B][COLOR="red"]Walking north beside Route 27, he suddenly saw a commercial airliner crest the hilltop Navy Annex. American Airlines Flight 77 reached him so fast and flew so low that Probst dropped to the ground, fearing he'd lose his head to its right engine."[/COLOR][/B][34]

Probst - At approximately 9:30 a.m. on September 11, he left the Wedge 1 construction site trailer, where he had been watching live television coverage of the second plane strike into the World Trade Center towers. He begna walking to the Modular Office Compound, which is located beyond the extreme north end of the Pentagon North Parking Lot, for a meeting at 10 a.m. [B][COLOR="red"]As he approached the heliport, he noticed a plane flying low over the Annex and heading right for him. The aircraft pulled up, seemingly aiming for the first floor of the building, and leveled off. Probst hit the gorund and observed t right wing tip pass through the portable 750 kW generator tha provides backup power to Wedge 1. [/COLOR][/B]The right engine took out the chain-link fence and posts surrounding the generator. The left engine struck an external steam vault before the fuselage entred the building. As the fireball from the crash moved toward him, Probst ran toward the South Parking Lot and recalls falling down tice. [B][COLOR="red"]Fine pieces of wing debris floated down about him.[/COLOR][/B] The diesel fuel for the portable generator ignited while he was running. He noted only fire and smoke within the building at the point of impact.[35]

[B]Alan Wallace was one of three firefighters assigned to the Pentagon’s heliport[/B]. Along with crew members Mark Skipper and Dennis Young, Wallace arrived around 7:30 in the morning. After a quick breakfast, the 55-year-old firefighter moved the station’s firetruck out of the firehouse...He parked it perpendicular to the west wall of the Pentagon. [B][COLOR="red"]Wallace and Skipper were walking along the right side of the truck (Young was in the station) when the two looked up and saw an airplane. It was about 25 feet off the ground and just 200 yards away—the length of two football fields. [/COLOR][/B]They had heard about the WTC disaster and had little doubt what was coming next. “Let’s go,” Wallace yelled. Both men ran. Wallace ran back toward the west side of the station, toward a nine-passenger Ford van. “My plans were to run until I caught on fire,” he says. He didn’t know how long he’d have or whether he could outrun the oncoming plane. Skipper ran north into an open field. Wallace hadn’t gotten far when the plane hit. “I hadn’t even reached the back of the van when I felt the fireball. I felt the blast,” he says. He hit the blacktop near the left rear tire of the van and quickly shimmied underneath. “I remember feeling pressure, a lot of heat,” he says. He crawled toward the front of the van, then emerged to see Skipper out in the field, still standing. “Everything is on fire. The grass is on fire. The building is on fire. The firehouse is on fire,” Wallace recalls. “There was fire everywhere. Areas of the blacktop were on fire.”[36] [B][COLOR="red"]"I just happened to look up and see the plane," said Wallace. "It was about 200 yards away, and was coming in low and fast. I told Mark that we needed to get the hell out of there."[/COLOR][/B][37]

[B]Dennis Young[/B], [B][COLOR="red"]was inside the Pentagon's fire house facility. He'd been watching the reports of the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center on television when he heard a loud noise.[/COLOR][/B] Ceiling tiles lifted from the pressure as a ball of fire rolled through the station. The fire house was demolished but, other than twisting his ankle when he was trying to get out of the building, Young was unhurt. [B][COLOR="red"]"I knew from past experience that it was a plane crash." said Young, who was one of the first to respond when a Canadian C-130 crashed near Fairbanks, Alaska in 1989.[/COLOR][/B][37]

[B]John J. Kirlin Inc. employee - For one employee with Wedge One's mechanical subcontractor John J. Kirlin Inc., Rockville MD[/B], "lucky" is an understatement. [B][COLOR="red"]"We had one guy who was standing, looking out the window and saw the plane when it was coming in.[/COLOR][/B] He was in front of one of the blast-resistant windows," says Kirlin President Wayne T. Day, who believes the window structure saved the man's life.[28]

[B]Pentagon City[/B]

[B]Terrance Kean, who lived in a nearby apartment building[/B], [B][COLOR="red"]heard the noise of loud jet engines, glanced out his window, and saw "very, very large passenger jet." He watched "it just plow right into the side of the Pentagon. The nose penetrated into the portico. And then it sort of disappeared, and there was fire and smoke everywhere."[/COLOR][/B][38]

[B]D. S. Khavkin "We live in Arlington, VA just outside of Washington, DC in a high-rise building on the eight floor[/B]. Our balcony faces the city, with a panoramic view of the Pentagon, National Airport, and the entire downtown area of Washington, DC. We were watching the events unfolding on TV in New York. Then, at about 9:40 am Eastern Daylight Time, [B][COLOR="red"]my husband and I heard an aircraft directly overhead.[/COLOR][/B] At first, we thought it was the jets that sometimes fly overhead. However, it appeared to be a small commercial aircraft. The engine was at full throttle. [B][COLOR="red"]First, the plane knocked down a number of street lamp poles, then headed directly for the Pentagon and crashed on the lawn near the west side the Pentagon.[/COLOR][/B] A huge fireball exploded with thick black smoke."[39]

[B]Dave Winslow, AP reporter[/B], who also witnessed the crash, recounted [B][COLOR="red"]"I saw the tail of a large airliner. ... It plowed right into the Pentagon."[/COLOR][/B][40] "I live in Pentagon City on the tenth floor of a 17-floor building that looks out at Washington. I've got a wall of windows stretching from one side to the other. I heard this enormous sound of turbulence. I said, "Oh, my God. I know what's happening." You'd have to stand next to a plane on the runway to hear it that loud. [B][COLOR="red"]I knew it was another attack. As I turned to my right, I saw a jumbo tail go by me along Route 395. It was like the rear end of the fuselage was riding on 395. I just saw the tail go whoosh right past me. In a split second, you heard this boom.[/COLOR][/B] A combination of a crack and a thud. It rattled my windows. I thought they were going to blow out. Then came an enormous fireball. Only in the movies have I ever seen anything like that. It lasted one to three seconds max."[10]

[B]Navy Annex and VDOT[/B]

[B]Terry Morin, who worked at the nearby Navy Annex[/B], [COLOR="red"][B]witnessed the airliner pass 100 feet overhead, moments before it crashed into the Pentagon.[/B[/COLOR]][41]

[B]Anonymous, from the Navy Annex[/B]. [B][COLOR="red"]As I stood there, I instinctively ducked at the extremely loud roar and whine of a jet engine spooling up. 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, as if it had been following Columbia Pike - an Arlington road leading to Pentagon[/COLOR][/B]. The aircraft was moving fast, at what I could only be estimate as between 250 to 300 knots. All in all, I probably only had the aircraft in my field of view for approximately 3 seconds. The aircraft was at a sharp downward angle of attack, on a direct course for the Pentagon. It was "clean", in as much as, there were no flaps applied and no apparent landing gear deployed. He was slightly left wing down as he appeared in my line of sight, as if he'd just "jinked" to avoid something. As he crossed Route 110 he appeared to level his wings, making a slight right wing slow adjustment as he impacted low on the Westside of the building to the right of the helo, tower and fire vehicle around corridor 5. [42]

[B]R.E. Rabogliatti was in his office at the Navy Annex[/B]. [B][COLOR="red"]He "peered out of his office window and saw the airliner looming over the building. Later, recalling its screaming engines he judged that the pilot must have pushed the jet's throttle to the limit; he estimated its altitude at less than 150 feet."[/COLOR][/B][43]

[B]Madelyn Zakhem, executive secretary at the STC[/B], had just stepped outside for a break and was seated on a bench [B][COLOR="red"]when 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. I fell to the ground.... I was crying and scared."[/COLOR][/B][44]

[B]Sheraton[/B]

[B]Deb Anlauf was in her 14th floor hotel room[/B], [B][COLOR="red"]"Suddenly I saw this plane right outside my window. You felt like you could touch it; it was that close. It was just incredible. Then it shot straight across from where we are and flew right into the Pentagon.[/COLOR][/B] It was just this huge fireball that crashed into the wall. When it hit, the whole hotel shook."[45] Arlington Cemetery

[B]Ron Turner, the Navy's deputy chief information officer[/B], [B][COLOR="red"]was standing solemnly at a funeral at Arlington National Cemetery when American Airlines Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon.[/COLOR][/B] "There was a huge fireball," he said, "followed by the [usual] black cloud of a fuel burn."[46] Crystal City

[B][COLOR="red"]Some workers at offices in nearby Crystal City also witnessed the crash.[/COLOR][/B][11]

[B]National Airport[/B]

[B]Allen Cleveland, who was aboard Washington Metro heading to Ronald Reagan National Airport[/B], [B][COLOR="red"]"looked out the window to see a jet heading down toward the Pentagon."[/COLOR][/B][47] "I was just pulling in on the subway station at national airport, I just happened to look over, actually my back was facing in the direction of the Pentagon, I looked to the right from the train, as we were coming into the station and [B][COLOR="red"]I notice a jet flying in real low, about a mid-size passenger jet flying in, I know it was silver, that's the only thing I know, as it was coming in, I just realized that there was no landing strip on that side of the subway system,[/COLOR][/B] so I just happened to look and thought maybe it was just my mistake because the subway system kind of curves around a little bit, and the next thing I know there was a huge explosion there and everybody on the subway, one mouthed profanity, everybody on the subway turned around and looked and everyone went into total hysterics, women were crying, and people were just absolutely in disbelief."[48]

[B]Meseidy Rodriguez, also on Metro[/B], saw the plane. [B][COLOR="red"]"I saw it as it was about to hit, I didn't see it coming in because he [Allen Cleveland] just caught my attention, he yelled and I looked up and I started seeing, basically it was , I just saw very little of it, all I could tell was it was like a mid-size plane and then it was gone and there was all this smoke, and it just caught me off guard I couldn't really tell, it just went straight for the building, straight for the Pentagon."[/COLOR][/B][48]

[B][COLOR="red"]Kate Agnew, a passenger on Washington Metro, also witnessed the explosion.[/COLOR][/B][11]

[B]George Washington Parkway[/B]

[B]Mike Cahill, a Alexandria paramedic[/B], [B][COLOR="red"]was driving along the George Washington Parkway near the Pentagon, listening to radio reports about the World Trade Center attack, when he saw "a huge column of smoke" rising above the trees in front of him.[/COLOR][/B] Cahill stepped on the gas of his 1995 Subaru Impressa and arrived at the scene minutes later. He pulled his first-aid bag out of his trunk, hopped over a barrier and rushed toward the flames. Injured streamed from the building. "Everyone that was coming towards me had burns," he said . "Some of these guys still literally had smoke or steam coming off of their body or skin."[49]

[B]Rossyln[/B]

[B]Steve Anderson worked on the 19th floor of the USA Today building[/B]. [B][COLOR="red"]"I witnessed the jet hit the Pentagon on September 11...as I was looking down at my desk, the plane caught my eye. It didn't register at first. I thought to myself that I couldn't believe the pilot was flying so low. Then it dawned on me what was about to happen. I watched in horror as the plane flew at treetop level, banked slightly to the left, drug it's wing along the ground and slammed into the west wall of the Pentagon exploding into a giant orange fireball.[/COLOR][/B] Then black smoke. Then white smoke."[50] Elsewhere in Arlington

[B]Daniel McAdams and his wife, Cynthia, said they were sitting in their kitchen drinking coffee in their third-floor condominium in Arlington[/B] just two miles from the Pentagon [B][COLOR="red"]when they heard a plane fly directly overhead around 9:45 a.m. It was unusually loud and unusually low. Seconds later, they heard a big boom and felt the doors and windows of their three-storey building shake. From their window, they could see a plume of black smoke coming from the Pentagon.[/COLOR][/B][51]

[B]Across the Potomac[/B]

[B]Captain Joseph Candelario, USA a first year student in the Family Nurse Practitioner Program[/B] began Tuesday, 11 September like most people. It was a clinical day, which meant getting up early and making the trip in to Ft. McNair to start seeing patients at 0630. He was first alerted that the day was drastically changing when one of the medics told him that a plane hit the World Trade Center. While watching the tower burn, another plane hit the second tower. Thinking that this was a very serious terrorist attack, I went outside to the river to take a break. [B][COLOR="red"]As I was looking across the river towards the direction of the Pentagon, I noticed a large aircraft flying low towards the White House. This aircraft then made a sharp turn and flew towards the Pentagon and seconds later crashed into it.[/COLOR][/B][52]

[B]Ken Ford, a State Department employee, recounted looking from the 15th floor of the State Department Annex[/B], over 1 1/2 miles away, [B][COLOR="red"]"We were watching Reagan National Airport through binoculars a short distance away. The plane was a two-engine turbo prop that flew up the river from National. Then it turned back toward the Pentagon. We thought it had been waved off and then it hit the building."[/COLOR][/B][53]

[B]Steve Snaman, manager of the datacom division for Walker Seals,[/B] [COLOR="red"][B]watched in horror from Fort McNair (across the river) as the jetliner came in low at full throttle, banked left and smashed into the wall of the Pentagon. "We saw the plane hit the Pentagon,"[/B][/COLOR] Snaman said.[54]

[B]Elsewhere in Arlington[/B]

[B]Ralph Banton was on "a house porch a little more than a mile away."[/B] [B][COLOR="red"]He heard a jet flying directly overhead, very low. "It sounded like it was jetting instead of slowing down," he said.[/COLOR][/B] Seconds later, Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon.[55]

[B]Other witnesses[/B]

[B]Tim Timmerman, who is a pilot himself[/B], [B][COLOR="red"]noticed American Airlines markings on the aircraft as he saw it hit the Pentagon.[/COLOR][/B][56] it had been an American Airways 757. "It added power on its way in," he said. "The nose hit, and the wings came forward and it went up in a fireball."[4] "I was looking out the window; I live on the 16th floor, overlooking the Pentagon, in a corner apartment, so I have quite a panorama. And being next to National Airport, I hear jets all the time, but this jet engine was way too loud. [B][COLOR="red"]I looked out to the southwest, and it came right down 395, right over Colombia Pike, and as it went by the Sheraton Hotel, the pilot added power to the engines.[/COLOR][/B] I heard it pull up a little bit more, and then I lost it behind a building. And then it came out, and I saw it hit right in front of -- it didn't appear to crash into the building; most of the energy was dissipated in hitting the ground, but I saw the nose break up, I saw the wings fly forward, and then the conflagration engulfed everything in flames. It was horrible.[57]

CNN: What can you tell us about the plane itself? Timmerman: [B][COLOR="red"]It was a Boeing 757, American Airlines, no question.[/COLOR][/B] CNN: You say that it was a Boeing, and you say it was a 757 or 767? Timmerman: 7-5-7. CNN: 757, which, of course. Timmerman: American Airlines. CNN: American Airlines, one of the new generation of jets. Timmerman: Right. It was so close to me it was like looking out my window and looking at a helicopter. It was just right there. Oscar Martinez, "I saw a big jet flying close to the building coming at full speed. There was a big noise when it hit the building."[58]

[B]Paul Begala, Democratic Party consultant[/B], [B][COLOR="red"]was among others who witnessed the explosion at the Pentagon.[/COLOR][/B][40]

[B]Pam Bradley[/B], [B][COLOR="red"]"was on my way to work, in my car, sitting on a bridge, and saw the plane hit the Pentagon. I am in a complete state of shock."[/COLOR][/B][59]

[B]Aircraft debris[/B]

[B]Carlton Burkhammer, a member of the Fairfax County Urban Search and Rescue Team[/B]... Early Friday morning, shortly before 4 a.m., Burkhammer and another firefighter, Brian Moravitz, were combing through debris near the impact site. [B][COLOR="red"]Peering at the wreckage with their helmet lights, the two spotted an intact seat from the plane’s cockpit with a chunk of the floor still attached. Then they saw two odd-shaped dark boxes, about 1.5 by 2 feet long. They’d been told the plane’s “black boxes” would in fact be bright orange, but these were charred black. The boxes had handles on one end and one was torn open. [/COLOR][/B]They cordoned off the area and called for an FBI agent, who in turn called for someone from the National Transportation Safety Board who confirmed the find: the black boxes from American Airlines Flight 77. “We wanted to find live victims,” says Burkhammer. But this was a consolation prize. “Finding the black box gave us a little boost,” he says.[36]

[B]John Damoose, a Travis City, Mich. native who was in a meeting[/B] said "everybody got nervous. .‚.‚. We didn't know whether to stay inside or go outside. The thing with terrorist attacks is that you don't know what is the next thing that will happen." [B][COLOR="red"]Damoose said the worst part was leaving the Pentagon and walking along Fort Meyer Drive, a bike trail, "you could see pieces of the plane."[/COLOR][/B][9]

[B]Michael Defina, Captain of the National Airport's aircraft rescue firefighters (ARFF[/B]), "That afternoon, Captain Defina and airport Battalion Chief Walter Hood, as well as other jurisdictions' battalion chiefs, led crews inside with attack lines to fight fires on every floor of the "D" and "E" rings. The aircraft had penetrated all the way to the "C" ring. [B][COLOR="red"]'The only way you could tell that an aircraft was inside was that we saw pieces of the nose gear.'"[/COLOR][/B][60]

[B]Rich Fitzharris (electrical engineer and former residential contractor) was in the Modular Office Compound[/B] at the time of the crash and rushed to the site on foot, arriving before the partial collapse. He recalls that the building - near the are of impact - was in flames, and [B][COLOR="red"]he remembers seeing small pieces of debris, the largest of which might have been part of an engine shroud.[/COLOR][/B][35]

[B]Jamie McIntyre, CNN reporter[/B], "A short -- a while ago I walked right up next to the building, firefighters were still trying to put the blaze. The fire, by the way, is still burning in some parts of the Pentagon. And I took a look at the huge gaping hole that's in the side of the Pentagon in an area of the Pentagon that has been recently renovated, part of a multibillion dollar renovation program here at the Pentagon. [B][COLOR="red"]I could see parts of the airplane that crashed into the building, very small pieces of the plane on the heliport outside the building. The biggest piece I saw was about three feet long, it was silver and had been painted green and red, but I could not see any identifying markings on the plane.[/COLOR][/B] I also saw a large piece of shattered glass. It appeared to be a cockpit windshield or other window from the plane."[61]

[B]Anonymous[/B] - [B][COLOR="red"]"There were pieces of aircraft spread all the way up the road, at least a third of a mile from the impact site."[/COLOR][/B] - a witness speaking to a local CBS reporter. [1]

[B]Bodies[/B]

[B]Captain Joseph Candelario and his medics joined a Search and Rescue team[/B]. Upon entering the impact site, the team conducted a search of the area, surrounding corridor 5 and 6. They were able to free a few people still trapped by debris. [B][COLOR="red"]Unfortunately, as they continued the search, they found many body parts and around six burned corpses.[/COLOR][/B] Unable to proceed, the fire was too hot, they set up a rally point near the front of the aircraft and waited for the D.C.F.D. to put the fire out. What they did not know was that fire would burn for over a day. After waiting a few hours, they pulled back to the center courtyard and began to set up the morgue, remaining on site until 1930 hours.[62]

#1278816Post 308 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

well then there should be a new investiagtion with witnesses under oath right? So you finally agree then..

#1278818Post 309 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

[QUOTE=runningman;792329]well then there should be a new investiagtion with witnesses under oath right? So you finally agree then..[/QUOTE] What the hell are you talking about? What does that even have to do with what I just posted?

There can be as many new investigations as you want - I don't care.

The point is that you guys are remarkably dense for thinking that all of the eyewitness accounts and other evidence was all just "made up" and that no plane hit the Pentagon.

[QUOTE=chunky;792292]What about the eyewitnesses who saw a very low flying plane fly over and away from the Pentagon after the explosion.[/QUOTE] I don't know, maybe they're fucking morons. There are also lots of other planes in the area and there is a major airport just across the river, by the way.

But what about all of the multitudes of eyewitnesses who did see a plane crash into the Pentagon??

I certainly haven't seen many eyewitnesses back up planed flying low and away from the Pentagon after the explosion, not the way they all back up a plane hitting the Pentagon. And I've not seen any eyewitnesses say that something else hit the Pentagon.

So what exactly have you got on this one? Nothing, that's what.

I'd take your other arguments more seriously if you could demonstrate basic rational sense on this one point.

#1278821Post 310 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

double post. oops.

#1278822Post 311 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

No Miro you are retarded. To have to read your decrepit arguments why there shouldn't be an investiagtion is sad to say the least. Who wouldn't be for putting people under Oath and holding people accountable? I mean shit lets do it the old fashioned way!

#1278825Post 312 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

[QUOTE=runningman;792335]No Miro you are retarded. To have to read your decrepit arguments why there shouldn't be an investiagtion is sad to say the least. Who wouldn't be for putting people under Oath and holding people accountable? I mean shit lets do it the old fashioned way![/QUOTE] First of all, instead of running your mouth, maybe you should read what I just fucking wrote. [B]I [U]said[/U] that as far as I'm concerned, there can be as many investigations as you guys want.[/B] I don't give two shits about it.

Second of all, how convenient of you to not address[I] any[/I] of the many consistent eyewitness accounts, the debris evidence, the phone calls from the airplane, or the DNA evidence of the passenger remains that contradicts your "no plane" theory and instead just call me names. Yeah, that makes you really look like a smart little boy.

Why don't you address any of those eyewitness accounts I just posted? This is so like you. Pathetic.

Just keep believing that the government needed to employ some cab driver helped blow up the Pentagon and that there was molten steel coming out of the WTC buildings while they were standing. :roll: I don't even need to respond to your name calling with more names for you because your own statements already do a great job of demonstrating your intellect and credibility.

#1278845Post 313 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

Nice edit..;) oops double post..

Now your getting into propaganda I see. You said I was stupid in a previous post and edited it that was I said "No Miro--- your retarded." I was responding to your attack.. that you edited so you could post your last post.. good job..;) sneaky sneaky..

#1278848Post 314 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

[QUOTE=runningman;792359]Nice edit..;) oops double post..

Now your getting into propaganda I see. You said I was stupid in a previous post and edited it that was I said "No Miro--- your retarded." I was responding to your attack.. that you edited so you could post your last post.. good job..;) sneaky sneaky..[/QUOTE] I left everything I had to say to you in my posts up above for everyone to see. The double post occurred because I accidentally made a separate post for my last response to chunky, which I then moved into my post above (#309).

I have no interest in getting into a name calling match with you, so just drop it. I have nothing more to say to you on this.

#1278910Post 315 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

[QUOTE=Miroslav;792323]Hey chunky, look at all of this "inconsistency" in the eyewitness reports. Keep in mind that this is surely not a complete list. There will always be some contradicting reports when you poll a lot of people about a traumatic event that occurred very fast (like the guy who called it a turboprop), but only you nutty people would deny all of this in favor of some hare-brained story about an inside plot involving one cab driver. :roll: [/QUOTE]

I agree with you I wouldn't rely on anything Loyd England had to say, however like I said before I would be interested to see the eyewitness recount their stories and ask them how it corresponded with the video footage.

#1279387Post 316 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

i'll take the time to go thru point by point, i'm hoping you will do the same.

[QUOTE]First of all, the Pentagon does not have a tail. But anyways...

So the cab driver who couldn't remember what the hell exactly happened to his car and then supposedly later implicitly "confessed" to being a special operative in the 9-11 planned government attack (I saw those Youtube videos)... that's the "main give away" to "the Pentagon tail" that outweighs all of this evidence:

(1) [I]hundreds[/I] of other witnesses who say they saw a plane come in and impact, (2) phone calls from the plane prior to impact, (3) detailed evidence of 757 plane components in the wreckage, and (4) DNA confirmation of the passengers' remaines all throughout the wreckage area?

Are you serious?

You really think that the US government, with all of its sophistication and connections, needs to involve some common [I]cab driver[/I] (particularly one who is far from the sharpest tool in the shed) as a secret operative in order to make 9-11 work?? What in the hell would they need him for? You really think the government would need his cab to drive by just as the plane flew in and get his winshield busted up (but not the hood, government forgot that part! lolz) as a part of their secret plot? That's probably the stupidest premise I've ever heard of.

[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]So the cab driver who couldn't remember what the hell exactly happened to his car and then supposedly later implicitly "confessed" to being a special operative in the 9-11 planned government attack (I saw those Youtube videos)... that's the "main give away" to "the Pentagon tail" that outweighs all of this evidence: [/QUOTE]

what do you mean he could not remember? have you done NO research at all? his story is all over the net

[QUOTE] England’s story is that he was going 40 mph when he felt the jet go over head, and then the light pole came smashing through his front windshield. He says he then skidded sideways to a stop, and that a stranger stopped and helped him remove the light pole from the windshield, and then left without ever giving his name, or even speaking a word.

England’s story is suspect because photos show the hood of his sedan untouched and gleaming like a mirror, although his front windshield was destroyed. England is quite clear that it was not the smaller section at the top of the light pole that impaled his windshield, but the big, 40 foot, 247 pound pole. He contends that after it pierced his windshield, with perhaps five feet of the top end of the pole inside the cab, that the other 35 feet stuck straight out into the air, not touching the hood of the cab.

The question is, with the windshield destroyed, what held the pole up the in air? CIT drove with England to his property in the country to inspect the cab.

They hypothesized that perhaps the narrow end of the pole had pierced the back seat or floorboards of the cab, holding it in place and not allowing it to touch the hood of the cab. But their inspection showed that there was only an insignificant rip in the rear seat, and no damage to the floorboards. Although the dashboard was damaged, no part of the hood, including the edge near the windshield, showed any damage.

What makes the story even more incredible is that England claims that as he was removing the pole from the windshield, he fell down, but managed, even as he was on the ground, to keep holding the pole in the air. Remember that the pole is 40 feet long and weighs 247 pounds, while England appears to be about 65 years old. [/QUOTE]

now for those of you who thinks it's possible that they stood at the front of car and lifted the pole out, without damaging the hood, even after the cabby fell down, i will ask you to yourself go out and pick up a 30 foot long 100 pound pole from one end, and see if you can do it.

you can not, it's called center of mass.

caber tossing is a good point of reference for this fact.

QUOTE [I]hundreds[/I] of other witnesses who say they saw a plane come in and impact[/QUOTE]

hundreds saw the plane, very few claim to have seen it impact, and even then eyewitnesses imho can not be trusted on either side.

QUOTE phone calls from the plane prior to impact, [/QUOTE]

please provide list of phones calls from this flight, yes i know how to use google, but i have a feeling that your anwser will be telling as to how much research you have done on this subject.

QUOTE detailed evidence of 757 plane components in the wreckage, and [/QUOTE]

really? cause if your talking about the photos of "engine parts" found at the pentagon, it would be nice to note that NO ONE from any company that makes those parts has verified that they are from their engines.

also, i notice thru pics and such, that you dont have enough evidence for one engine, so what happened to 99% of the plane and 1+ engines?

did the engine disintergrate on impact? or did it melt in the 20 min fire?

QUOTE DNA confirmation of the passengers' remaines all throughout the wreckage area? [/QUOTE]

i know it escapes you how the engines did not survive, but bone and flesh did, i will get into this topic when i find out what you think happened to the rest of the plane and the engine.

btw, there ARE studies done on dna in a fire setting, i would suggest you read up on it, along with temps used in the creamation process.

i'll give you a clue though, dna burns in alot less of a fire then a 757 engine does.

[QUOTE]You really think that the US government, with all of its sophistication and connections, needs to involve some common [I]cab driver[/I] (particularly one who is far from the sharpest tool in the shed) as a secret operative in order to make 9-11 work??[/QUOTE]

to make 9-11 work? no

but it is a small part of the bigger story, yes, the cab driver story is supposed to make the plane flying thru 5 lightpoles more believeable, except to people like me who know how plane wings are built and what they can withstand.

i wont bore you with the details on how wings can flex up and down but not front to back due to the spars in the wing.

i wont bore you with the fact that BIRDS have been known to damage wings(but steel lightpoles dont..lmfao)

i wont let you in on the fact that by the first light pole, there would of been a hairline fracture, by the second light pole, the wing would of ripped off, but if by magic it did not, the walls of the pentagon would of snapped the wings off.

their is only two possibiltys here, the wings hit the wall and the wall gave way to the wings(we would see the holes caused by the wings) or the wings snapped off when hitting the wall, when the wall did not give.

there is no other possibilty.

none

at all.

i dont see no holes in the wall where the wings went into the building, nor do i see the wings outside of the wall.

lets hear your explanation on this matter sir.

btw, before you ask, i have 3 years of aerospace education thru the civil air patrol, i know how planes are built, and how they perform, i can provide tons of links that will back up everything stated about a planes wings in my post.

[QUOTE]What in the hell would they need him for? You really think the government would need his cab to drive by just as the plane flew in and get his winshield busted up (but not the hood, government forgot that part! lolz) as a part of their secret plot?[/QUOTE]

you mean, do i think the government or who ever did this planted witnesses and people like floyd to make the story more believeable?

absolutly.

do they lose anything by having the cabby tell his tale? not really, cause if he decides to turn on them(which he has) they will label him a crazy and say" why would the government need this guy to make 9-11 work" and then sheep like you repeat the same sentiments.

yeah, the mind is an easy thing to manipulate in case you did not know.

also i suppose the pentagon had their lawn dug out like this for a reason?

[IMG]http://members.shaw.ca/freedomsix/pics/Pentagon_9_7_01.jpg[/IMG]

this was 4 days before 9-11, funny the lawn points out the exact flight path of the jet before it happened.

here is a pic on 9-11, you can see the plane followed the line in the grass.

[IMG]http://members.shaw.ca/freedomseven/pentagon-path-marker.jpg[/IMG]

let me guess, the terrorists also did the lawn the week before so they could leave this ground marker, correct?

#1279393Post 317 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

btw an interesting although not concrete version of what could of happened with the phone calls are in this report.

[URL]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/dotmil/arkin020199.htm[/URL]

[QUOTE]The Gulf War hologram story might be dismissed were it not the case that washingtonpost.com has learned that a super secret program was established in 1994 to pursue the very technology for PSYOPS application. The "Holographic Projector" is described in a classified Air Force document as a system to "project information power from space ... for special operations deception missions." [/QUOTE]

#1279413Post 318 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

Rescue me star Daniel Sunjata.. What are you going to call this guy Miro?

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkCos-y-WWM[/YOUTUBE]

#1279417Post 319 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

the thing about all of this is that like i said in the beginning, even if they conduct another so called "investigation" nothing is going to happen, you seriously think the goverment is gonna say, oh shit, you know what, yeah, it was us, with all of the "anti-goverment" shit thats going on at the moment, you think that Obama's gonna do a press conference and say "my fellow americans, we just learned that us, the Goverment have always been responsible for all of this terrorist attacks, so yeah, all of your fears and insecurities about the Goverment are real, so yeah, we've been lying to you all of this time, but hey, you know what, this doesnt mean that we're gonna continue doing this shit, i mean, you can sit at home and feel secure that your Goverment is working for you............"

like you keep on saying, people dont trust their goverment, people are pissed at their own economic situation, and yet you want something like this to be admited by the goverment? yeah, that would be a great move, i would think people would enjoy the Goverments honesty............

This is whats going to happen, if all of these holliwood dumb asses keep on talking about this shit, the goverment is gonna conduct an investigation, with their own experts, and guest what? they are all going to agree once again that yeah, it was all because of the plains, I called it first.

#1279440Post 320 of 1064

Re: you know what's astonishing?

Its not a case of the government conducting an investigation. Its the government allowing some one else to conduct an independent unobstructed investigation where independent arbitrator's are installed to to insure there is no tampering. Usually both sides wound appoint people who sit on the commission. All people called to give statements would be called on oath and all avenues investigated and reasonable funding given.

Log in to reply