9/11 MUST SEE: “I can prove that it was NOT an airplane” that Hit the Pentagon – Major General Albert N. Stubblebine

Written by on September 11, 2014 in 9/11, Videos with 146 Comments

How easy is it for you to shift your belief system from ‘I totally believe in my government’ to ‘Oh My God! What’s going on?’  That’s exactly where I went in all of this.” – Albert N. Stubblebine III

Albert N. Stubblebine III is a retired Major General in the United States Army. He was the commanding general of the United States Army Intelligence and Security Command from 1981 to 1984.  In this compelling interview, Stubblemine reveals the following information (what he calls “dots”) about the attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001:

  • Stubblebine initially believed the official story regarding 9/11.
  • Then, he saw the hole in the Pentagon. He can prove that the Pentagon was not hit by a Boeing 757. DOT.
  • All of the sensors around the Pentagon were turned off except one. That one sensor captured an image of the object that hit the Pentagon.  It looked like a missile.  But, after he went public, the imagery was changed to look like a plane. DOT.
  • The collapse of the twin towers was caused by controlled demolition – not the fuel from the airplane. DOT.
  • Larry Silverstein, the lease holder of the WTC complex, admitted that that building 7, which was not hit by a plane and had only a small fire, was intentionally “pulled” – which is phraseology used for controlled demolition.  DOT.
  • All of the air defense systems around Washington DC were turned off that day. DOT.
  • Also on 9/11, there was an exercise designed to mimic an attack on the towers by airplanes.  DOT.
  • When you connect the DOTs, the picture says that what we were told by the media was not the real story.
  • Stubblebine, visibly upset, describes how he felt when he realized the truth about his government after having a strong belief in his country since early childhood: “My belief system was so strong from age five when I could remember standing on a parade ground at attention with not anybody telling me to do that – at West Point.”

Below are some notes from the interview including a partial transcript. (Be sure to watch all the way to the the end, where you can see the deep hurt on his face when he recalled the moment that he realized that his government, the government that he proudly served for over 30 years, was not what he thought was):

5:15 Stubblebine hears about the 9/11 attacks: “We’re at war.”

6:00 Stubblebine said there must have been intelligence information to know that an attack was coming and we didn’t see the signals.  Somebody missed it.

6:35 He initially believed that it was terrorist attack done by other forces: “Not my government.”

7:45 Stubblebine  then saw a photo of the Pentagon showing the hole in the Pentagon supposedly made by a Boeing 757.  “Something’s wrong. There is something wrong with this picture…”

8:30 “Well there was something wrong. And, so I analyzed it not just photographically, I did measurements… I checked the plane, the length of the nose, where the wings were… I took measurements of the Pentagon – the depth of the destruction in the Pentagon.”

9:05 “Conclusion: airplane did not make that hole.”

9:10” I went public at the time. I am the highest ranking officer, I believe, that has ever gone public… The official story was not true.”

9:25 “I was very careful to not say what it was because I couldn’t prove it. I was careful to say that it was not the airplane that did that, because I can prove that it was not the airplane.”

9:45 “In the hole, however, was a turbine that looked like a turbine from the missile… I can’t prove that, I don’t know. But there was something there that did not look like the engine from an airplane, but did look like a turbine from a missile.”

10:10 “Later I saw another photograph taken by one of the sensors on the outside of the Pentagon. Now, all of the sensors had been turned off, which is kind of interesting – isn’t it? That day, why would all of the sensors around the Pentagon be turned off? That’s strange. I don’t care what the excuse is.  That’s strange. There happened to be one that apparently did not get turned off. And in that picture, coming in, flying into the Pentagon, you see this object, and it obviously hits the Pentagon.  When you look at it, it does NOT look like an airplane.  Sometime later, after I’d gone public, that imagery was changed. It got a new suit around it that now looked like an airplane. But, when you take the suit off, it looks more like a missile – not like an airplane.”

11:30 “Let me go back to the next very important piece of information.  The amount of energy to melt the girders – the steel in the tower – cannot be gotten to a melt point with the fuel that was in the airplane.  Not possible!  So, any melting did not occur as a result of the hit from the airplane.  Point. I call it dot. OK?  DOT.”

12:10 “When you look at the tower coming down, what you see at each floor is successive puffs of smoke: puff, puff, puff, puff… all the way down. What are the puffs of smoke coming from? Well, they claim that they are from the collapsing floors… No. No. No. Those puffs of smoke are controlled demolitions. That’s exactly what they are, because that’s exactly how they work. And so, the fact that the airplane hit, it did, it did not cause that collapse of the building.  The collapse of the building was caused by controlled demolition.”

13:05 “Fact: Building 7 – Silverberg, I believe is the name of the owner…” (his name is actually Larry Silverstein), “…was on a video and you could see Building 7.  And, there was a fire in Building 7, there’s no doubt about that. No airplane hit it.  I assume that the fire came from some debris, but I’m not even sure of that.  But, in the lower right-hand corner of the building was a fire – not a very big fire. It didn’t appear to be out of control. It certainly was in a small part of the building.  But, then he is heard on the video and he says Pull it.  Then, the building collapsed. What does pull it mean?  Let me tell you.  That’s the order for controlled demolition.  That is the phraseology that’s used for blowing up something.”

CLN Editorial note: Stubblebine got mixed up with his facts regarding the Siverstein video, which you can see here.  The video is a PBS interview with Silverstein that was shot sometime after 9/11.   The footage of Building 7 going down is historical footage, not live during the interview.  Nonetheless, Silverstein does say that he gave the order to “pull it.”

15:00 All of the air defense systems in that part of the country had been turned off that day.  All of the air defense systems had been turned off… Why would you turn off all of the air defense systems on that particular day unless you knew that something was going to happen? It’s a dot.  It’s information. But, it’s strange that everything got turned off that day.  DOT.”

15:50 There was an exercise that was designed for the air defense systems that was an attack on the towers by airplanes.  Isn’t that strange that we had an exercise that mimicked what really happened?  Strange that we had planned an exercise that was exactly what happened. And, at the same time, the air defense systems were turned off.  Don’t you find that strange? I find that really strange?  DOT.  Just a piece of information.

16:50 “But how does it correlate with everything else? So, you see the dots.  You have all of these dots. They’re just bits of information.  But, that’s exactly how the intelligence world works.  You get a bit of information here. A bit here, and a bit here. And, pretty soon you’ve got a picture. To me, what does the picture say?  The picture says that what we heard and were told in the newspapers, the media, was not the real story. There’s enough doubt in the official story where the story is absolutely not consistent with what happened. They paint a different picture than the one that was given to the media.”

17:45 “How easy is it for you to shift your belief system from ‘I totally believe in my government’ to ‘Oh My God! What’s going on?’  That’s exactly where I went in all of this. Because, my belief system was so strong from age five when I could remember standing on a parade ground at attention with not anybody telling me to do that – at West Point. I did it because I wanted to do it – because I believed! And then going to the military academy and serving, defending…

18:30 The real story was, I have a question I guess. The real story to me is: who was the real enemy? Who participated in this? Who planned this attack? Why was it planned? Were the real terrorists the people in Arab clothing? Or, were the real people that planned this the people sitting in the authority in the White House?

Physical Evidence and Eyewitness Testimony That A Missile Hit The Pentagon – NOT a Boeing 757

The following physical evidence and eyewitness testimony is presented in detail below, most of which is video footage:

  1. Analysis of the physical damage to the Pentagon and lack of debris. You can’t fit a 125 foot wide Boeing 757 into a hole 16 feet wide.  The theory that the plane vaporized is idiotic.  And, what happened to the wings that allegedly sheared off?  DOT
  2. The official story of how the plane arrived at the Pentagon by making a 270 degree turn at a speed of 800 kilometers per hour is absurd.  A Boeing 757 could not possibly perform that maneuver according to experts.   DOT
  3. AA Flight 77 was lost from radar as early as 8:56 a.m. and then allegedly reappeared 36 minutes later at 9:32 am. According to Danielle O’Brien, an air traffic controller at Dulles International Airport, the plane that showed up on the radar was not Flight 77: “The speed, the maneuverability, the way that it turned, we all thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that it was a military plane.”   DOT
  4. No unknown aircraft are allowed within 50 miles of the Pentagon.  The Pentagon has its own anti-aircraft missiles that should have fired to protect the building. Only a military aircraft with a special IFF transponder (identifying it as a friend) would have been allowed to approach the Pentagon.   DOT
  5. CNN reporter on the scene shortly after the impact saying that there was no evidence of a plane hitting the Pentagon.   DOT
  6. Aerial footage showing no debris (confirming the report by the CNN reporter), plus more analysis showing the size of a Boeing 757 compared to the size of the hole in the Pentagon.  Recall also that the initial hole was only 16 feet wide and the CNN reporter said that the Pentagon structure did not collapse until about 45 minutes after impact.   DOT
  7. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and 9/11 Commission Member Timothy Roemer both saying that a MISSILE was used on the Pentagon.   DOT
  8. Analysis of the Pentagon video footage of the alleged Boeing 757 (it certainly doesn’t look like a Boeing 757) hitting the Pentagon that concludes it was faked.   DOT
  9. A leaked video showing a missile hitting the Pentagon.   DOT
  10. Expert testimony that a high radiation reading near Pentagon indicated that a “depleted uranium warhead may have been used”  DOT
  11. Two witnesses who were at the Pentagon who said there was no debris or jet fuel, and another witness who “was convinced it was a missile. It came in so fast it sounded nothing like an airplane.” DOT
  12. KEY POINT. Many people reported seeing a low-flying plane heading towards the Pentagon.  Thanks to a series of videotaped interviews with multiple witnesses by the Citizens Investigation Team, we find out that: (a) a plane did approach the Pentagon, but it was smaller than a Boeing 757, and it approached from a different angle than reported by the 9/11 commission; (b) the plane did not actually hit the Pentagon, but instead flew past the Pentagon at under 200 feet – immediately after the missile hit; (c) the downed flag poles at the Pentagon were staged, which was admitted by the taxi driver whose taxi was supposedly hit by one of the falling poles. DOT

Connecting the dots, a very clear picture emerges: (a) American Airlines Flight 77 (a Boeing 757) disappeared from radar and never re-appeared; (b) instead, a smaller military craft appeared on radar 36 minutes later that was capable of performing a difficult maneuver and could approach the Pentagon without being shot down; (c) a low-flying military craft approached the Pentagon but merely flew past the Pentagon immediately after the Pentagon was struck by a missile.

You Can’t Fit a Boeing 757 into Hole that is Only 16 Feet Wide

Watch this 10-minute segment of the outstanding Italian documentary titled Zero: An Investigation into 9/11, which includes analysis by Stubblebine and addresses many of the serious problems with the official account of what happened at the Pentagon:

The discrepancies that are addressed in the above video include the following:

  • There is no airplane debris visible anywhere in front of the Pentagon. Examples of what you would expect to see at a plane crash site are shown. Captain Russ Whittemberg, a pilot with over 30 years in military and civil aviation, said: “I have been at some accident investigation sites in the Air Force. And I have never come across any accident scene where there is no tell-tale evidence of the plane that crashed.”
  • There is no evidence that either the airplane engines or the wings impacted the building. Instead, we are supposed to believe that the 38 meter (125 feet) wide Boeing 757 fit into a hole that is only 5 meters (16 feet) wide. We are supposed to believe that the wings folded up like those of a dragon fly and squeeze into the 5 meter wide hole.
  • Major General Albert Stubblebine: “One of my experiences in the Army was being in charge of the Army’s Imagery Interpretation for Scientific and Technical Intelligence during the Cold War. I measured pieces of Soviet equipment from photographs. It was my job. I look at the hole in the Pentagon and I look at the size of an airplane that was supposed to have hit the Pentagon. And I said, ‘The plane does not fit in that hole’. So what did hit the Pentagon? What hit it? Where is it? What’s going on?”
  • One theory is that the Boeing 757 was vaporized due to the speed and the force of the crash. The engines are made of a titanium steel alloy that would not vaporize unless they hit a temperature of 3,286 degrees Centigrade. That did not happen. Plus, the engines would have caused significant damage upon impact. Yet, there is no indication that the engines impacted the Pentagon.
  • After a period of time, various photos of airplane debris began to appear in newspapers and on the web did not appear in any photos shown in the days following the event.
  • The Pentagon had numerous cameras that had complete and separate recordings of the incident. The FBI was immediately on the scene and confiscated many video tapes from the Pentagon and nearby buildings. Yet only four videos were released after 2006 when FOIA requests compelled them to release them. Only two showed any useful information. But most experts believe the white image in the videos is too small to be a 757.
  • The story of how the plane arrived at the Pentagon is absurd – by making a 270 degree turn at a speed of 800 kilometers per hour.

AA Flight 77 Was Lost From Radar For 36 Minutes, Then a Smaller Military Plane Appeared On Radar That Was NOT AA Flight 77

Please continue watching the next segment of the documentary Zero: An Investigation into 9/11:

  • According to the official account, the Pentagon was struck by AA Flight 77, under the control of al-Qaeda hijacker Hani Hanjour. Hanjour was known as “a terrible pilot,”  who could not even fly a small airplane.
  • An experienced pilot with thousands of hours would probably require 10-20 attempts to pull off the maneuver that was performed with the Boeing 757 on its way to the Pentagon. “You just can’t do that with one of those big airplanes.” –Robin Hordon, flight controller and flight instructor
  • AA Flight 77 was lost from radar as early as 8:56 a.m. and then allegedly reappeared 36 minutes later at 9:32 am. According to Danielle O’Brien, an air traffic controller at Dulles International Airport, the plane that showed up on the radar was not Flight 77: “The speed, the maneuverability, the way that it turned, we all thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that it was a military plane.
  • No unknown aircraft are allowed within 50 miles of the Pentagon.  The Pentagon has its own anti-aircraft missiles that should have fired to protect the building. Only a military aircraft with a special IFF transponder (identifying it as a friend) would be allowed to approach the Pentagon.
  • The official report of the final half mile of Flight 77 before it allegedly hit the Pentagon is aerodynamically impossible. “I challenge any pilot, any pilot anywhere: give him a Boeing 757 and tell him to do 400 knots 20 feet above the ground for half a mile. CAN’T Do. It’s aerodynamically impossible.” – Nila Sagadevan, pilot and aeronautical engineer.
  • The alleged hijackers had difficulty flying small aircraft, which means that there is a zero possibility that they could pull off an impossible maneuver on the first try.

CNN Reporter: “There is NO Evidence of a Plane Having Crashed Anywhere Near the Pentagon”

Jamie Mcintyre, CNN’s senior Pentagon correspondent at the time, was at the Pentagon shortly after it was hit. Here’s what he reported:

“From my close-up inspection, there is no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the Pentagon… The only pieces left that you can see are small enough that you could pick up in your hand. There are no large tail sections, wing sections, a fuselage, nothing like that anywhere around which would indicate that the entire plane crashed into the side of the Pentagon and then caused the side to collapse. Even though if you look at the pictures of the Pentagon you see that the floors have all collapsed, that didn’t happen immediately, it wasn’t until almost about forty-five minutes later that the structure was weakened enough that all of the floors collapsed.”

More Visual Evidence (Including Aerial Footage) Indicating That No Plane Hit the Pentagon on 9/11

In the video below, pay close attention to the aerial footage that begins at the 4:25 mark and especially the closeup shot at 4:50.  Where is the plane debris?  The footage shows exactly what McIntyre described: there was no plane debris.

Also, have a look at the following video containing analysis of the damage to the Pentagon showing that a fully-fueled Boeing-757  could not have possibly hit the Pentagon:

Donald Rumsfeld said that a MISSILE was used to damage the Pentagon

If no plane hit the Pentagon, then what did? In an interview with Parade Magazine in October 2001 (of which a transcript was posted on the U.S. Department of Defense website, defense.gov), Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was asked “How did a war targeting civilians arrive on our homeland with seemingly no warning?” Rumsfeld replied:

“There were lots of warnings… It is a truth that a terrorist can attack any time, any place, using any technique and it’s physically impossible to defend at every time and every place against every conceivable technique. Here we’re talking about plastic knives and using an American Airlines flight filled with our citizens, and the missile to damage this building and similar (inaudible) that damaged the World Trade Center. The only way to deal with this problem is by taking the battle to the terrorists, wherever they are, and dealing with them.” [1]

Note that Rumsfeld indicated that both a plane and a missile were used on the Pentagon, which matches up perfectly with evidence presented in the video, Undeniable Proof a Plane did NOT Hit the Pentagon on 9/11.

Timothy Roemer, Former 9/11 Commission Member, said that the Pentagon was “pried open by a MISSILE”

In an interview in September 2006 with CNN’s Miles O’Brien, former 9/11 Commissioner member, Timothy Roemer, says that a missile caused the damage to the Pentagon and then quickly corrects himself to line up with the official story.

O’Brien: “At any point during this day were you just, in a very base way, afraid?

Roemer: “There was — there were many times, Miles, that you were afraid. You were — you were worried, especially when I was standing in front of the Pentagon that night, seeing one of our fortresses pried open by a missile, an airplane, thinking about the number of people that probably died on the plane and on the ground…”

Click on the link below to see the above exchange between O’Brien and Roemer:

Analysis of Pentagon video indicates that it was faked

Recall that Stubblebine said that he saw the original video tape showing object that looked like a missile hitting the Pentagon, and then the tape was altered. Below is an analysis of the video footage that allegedly shows Flight 77 exploding as it impacts the Pentagon. The frame-by-frame analysis shows the fuselage is still in view when the explosion occurs. In addition, the brief footage of the nose of plane certainly does not look anything like a Boeing 757.  Watch it here:

Leaked Video Showing a Cruise Missile Hitting the Pentagon

Have a look at the following videos about an allegedly leaked video showing a cruise missile hitting the Pentagon (Note: we have no way of verifying that the leaked footage is authentic):

Expert claims that a high radiation reading near Pentagon indicates that a “depleted uranium warhead may have been used”

The missile hypothesis is supported by physical evidence. Dr. Janette Sherman, a well-respected radiation expert, used a Geiger counter to measure radiation levels from about 12 miles downwind of the Pentagon shortly after the attack on 9/11. Sherman reported that the Geiger counter reading was extremely high, 8-10 times greater than normal. [2]

Although Sherman’s findings are not conclusive, Dr. Leuren Moret, formerly a scientist at the Livermore Nuclear Weapons Laboratory, stated:

I’m not an explosives or crash site expert, but I am highly knowledgeable in causes and effects related to nuclear radiation contamination. What happened at the Pentagon is highly suspicious, leading me to believe a missile with a depleted uranium warhead may have been used.” [3]

The missile theory was echoed by retired Army Maj. Doug Rokke, a PhD educational physics and former top military expert:

“When you look at the whole thing, especially the crash site void of airplane parts, the size of the hole left in the building and the fact the projectile’s impact penetrated numerous concrete walls, it looks like the work of a missile. And when you look at the damage, it was obviously a missile.” [4]

Pentagon Employee Witness Says There Was No Plane on 9-11-2001

April Gallop and her child survived the ‘impact’ at the Pentagon. She was a Pentagon employee who was inside the building sitting at a computer when the explosion occurred.  After escaping through a hole in the Pentagon wall she waited on the grass near the road before being taken to the Hospital. She did not see any plane debris or experience any jet fuel or any other evidence of a plane crash.

USAF Witness: There was “a strange lack of visible debris…moments after impact”

Karen Kwiatkowski, PhD, U.S. Air Force (retired) wrote that there was a lack of debris moments after impact. Kwiatkowski, who was an Air Force Lieutenant Colonel employed at the Pentagon on 9/11, was a contributor to a book titled 9/11 and American Empire Intellectuals Speak Out, in which she wrote that there was “a strange lack of visible debris on the Pentagon lawn, where I stood only moments after the impact. . . . I saw . . . no airplane metal or cargo debris.” [5]

Another Pentagon Witness: I was convinced it was a missile.

Lon Rains, who was an Editor for Space News at the time, happened to be driving his car near the Pentagon when it was hit by a missile on 9/11. In an article titled Eyewitness: The Pentagon, published on June 30, 2005, Rains wrote:

“That morning, like many others, the traffic slowed to a crawl just in front of the Pentagon. With the Pentagon to the left of my van at about 10 o’clock on the dial of a clock, I glanced at my watch to see if I was going to be late for my appointment. At that moment I heard a very loud, quick whooshing sound that began behind me and stopped suddenly in front of me and to my left. In fractions of a second I heard the impact and an explosion. The next thing I saw was the fireball. I was convinced it was a missile. It came in so fast it sounded nothing like an airplane. [6]

Undeniable Proof a Plane did NOT Hit the Pentagon on 9/11, part 1 of 8:

Part 1 of the video contains a review of some of the reasons for questioning the official story of Flight 77:

  • Lack of debris, plus what a crash site should look like
  • No damage to foundation
  • Aeronautically impossible
  • No evidence that a plane actually hit the Pentagon

Next, the official version of the Flight 77 flight path (as specified by the 9/11 commission and the alleged “black box” data released by the NTSB in 2006) is established as being south of the Navy Annex and south of the former CITGO gas station. This is key information that has to be true in order to explain the angle of entry that caused the physical damage to the Pentagon.

Undeniable Proof a Plane did NOT Hit the Pentagon on 9/11, part 2 of 8:

In part 2, we are shown images and animation of the path that the plane must have taken in order to knock over five light poles and damage the Pentagon in the manner that it did, which is the official story. The location of the downed light poles is important because it establishes the required location and trajectory of the plane down to the foot.

Part 2 also contains interviews with the first two witnesses (Edward Paik and Terry Morin), who were positioned on the south side of the Navy Annex (vantage point #1) as the plane flew over. Both Edward and Terry saw the plane fly directly over the Navy annex to the north of the “official” path. Of particular significance is the interview with Morin, an aviator and a program manager for SPARTA Inc at the Navy Annex. Initially, Morin was between the wings of the Navy annex, so he could only see the plane as it “flew over the top of me.” Morin than ran over to get a better view and watched the plane for 13-18 seconds. Morin, as an aviator, disputed the official report that the plane was flying 460 knots. Instead, Morin says that the plane was only flying at a speed of around 350 knots.

Undeniable Proof a Plane did NOT Hit the Pentagon on 9/11, part 3 of 8:

Part 3 contains interviews with three witnesses who were at the CITGO gas station (vantage point #2) on 9/11 when a low-flying plane flew by.

Robert Turcios, CITGO station employee, saw the plane on the north side of the station and initially thought the plane was going to crash onto the street between the station and the Pentagon, but saw the plane “lift and go up a little bit.” He did not see the plane hit the Pentagon.

In addition, Pentagon Police officers Chadwick Brooks and William Lagasse each confirm that the low-flying plane flew by on the north side of the CITGO station.

Undeniable Proof a Plane did NOT Hit the Pentagon on 9/11, part 4 of 8:

Morin and Lagasse independently draw a nearly identical, flight path lines showing an approach to the north of the CITGO station.

Next, an interview with a witness who was located on the north side of the Navy Annex (vantage point # 3) on 9/11 is shown. William Middleton Sr., an Arlington Cemetery employee, said that he plane was coming straight down Southgate road on the north side of the Navy annex. Middleton also said that he could see the plane dropping in altitude and that it came so close to where he was standing that he could feel the heat from the plane. In addition, Middleton said that the plane was travelling at a “slow” rate of speed, corroborating what Terry Morin had said.

After the interview with Middleton, interviews with Arlington Cemetery employees Darrell Stafford and Darius Prather, who were positioned at the Arlington Cemetery maintenance buildings (vantage point # 4) on 9/11 are shown. Both said that a plane was coming directly at them and that after barely clearing the Navy Annex building, the plane continued descending and at the same time was banking to the right. The banking of the plane to the right is irreconcilable with NTSB data, physical damage to the Pentagon, and the Pentagon security video.

Undeniable Proof a Plane did NOT Hit the Pentagon on 9/11, part 5 of 8:

This video segment starts with an interview of another Arlington Cemetery employee, Donald Carter, who was also positioned at the Arlington Cemetery maintenance buildings (vantage point # 4) on 9/11. Carter’s testimony is similar to that of his co-workers, Stafford and Prather.

Next, an interview with Sean Boger is shown. Boger, a heliport air traffic controller, was in the Pentagon heliport tower that is located directly in front of the Pentagon (vantage point # 5) on 9/11. Boger said: “I just happened to be looking out the window. And, as I was looking out the window, I could see a plane… The plane was coming directly at us… You know I fell to the ground and I covered my head.”

Boger stated that he saw a plane come over the Navy Annex and bank right toward the Pentagon. Based on the amount of time he watched the plane after he first saw it, the plane was travelling significantly slower than 460 knots.

From five vantage points, 13 eyewitnesses independently and unanimously confirm a north side approach. A drawing is shown depicting the paths drawn by the witnesses. The eyewitness testimony contradicts the official reports that are required to make the official story plausible.

All of the eyewitnesses have worked in the area for many years and are therefore very familiar with the topology and landmarks. Since the release of their interviews in the public domain, all have been made aware of the implications yet stand by their stories as reported. None have claimed that their accounts have been misrepresented.

Most of the witnesses could not see the alleged impact point due to the complex topography and landscape, and admit to running, dropping, or flinching for cover. This explains why they did not see the plane fly away and assumed that it had hit the Pentagon because of the explosion.

The independent and unanimous placement of the plane on the north side and banking to the right amounts to proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the plane did fly away without hitting the building because the damage to the Pentagon required a south side approach.

Although the witnesses presented so far did not see the plane fly away, some did (and are documented in the next video segment).

Undeniable Proof a Plane did NOT Hit the Pentagon on 9/11, part 6 of 8:

Pentagon police officer Roosevelt Roberts Jr. saw the plane fly away immediately after the explosion. He was at the Pentagon south parking lot loading dock, only a few steps inside the building during the explosion. After hearing an explosion, he ran outside, looked up, and saw a plane flying around the south parking lot. Roosevelt describes seeing a commercial jet that was banking and flying away at less than 100 feet above the ground within 10 seconds after the explosion.

Roosevelt could have only seen the same banking plane that all of the other witness reported seeing on the north side flight path.

There is additional evidence that more people saw the plane continue past the Pentagon. Arlington National Cemetery employee Erik Dihle was officially recorded by the Center for Military History on December 13, 2001. Although he personally did not see the plane, he said the first thing that other people reported was that a bomb went off and that a jet flew by and kept on going:

A number of us were working building 123.  Right after the explosion… we got up and ran outside… Some people were yelling that a bomb had hit the Pentagon and a jet kept on going.”

Multiple witnesses have testified to seeing a banking, low-flying plane approach the Pentagon from the north side of the former CITGO gas station. This means that the damaged light poles, of which one allegedly went through the windshield of a taxicab, had to have been staged. Although there are photos of a bent pole laying on the ground and a broken windshield, not a single photograph exists showing the 40 foot, 247 pound pole inside the cab.

Undeniable Proof a Plane did NOT Hit the Pentagon on 9/11, Part 7 of 8:

Taxi cab driver, Lloyde England, initially claimed that a silent stranger helped him remove the light pole from his car. A 247 pound light pole knocked over by a 90 ton Boeing 757 traveling 530 miles per hour certainly would have caused massive damage had it hit Lloyde’s taxi. However, the only visible damage to the taxi is the broken front windshield. Otherwise, the taxi was unscratched, which makes absolutely no sense.

However, don’t forget that testimony from multiple witnesses has proven that none of the downed light poles could have been knocked over by the incoming plane. Therefore, the lack of damage to the taxi does make sense.

After Lloyde was confronted with the information provided by the witnesses indicating a north side approach (and that therefore the downed light poles must have been staged), he had a very strange reaction. Lloyde then changed his story and refused to admit that his taxi was on the bridge next to the downed light pole, where it appears that photos of both Lloyde and the taxi were taken.

Undeniable Proof a Plane did NOT Hit the Pentagon on 9/11, Part 8 of 8:

Lloyde goes on to explain that history has nothing to do with the truth and that he was used by people who have money. He then essentially admits that the downed light pole was staged and pre-planned. But, he was cautious not to outright confess. He distanced himself from the planners while admitting that the staging was planned.

Conclusion: The Pentagon was hit by a MISSILE, not hit by a plane

The lack of any evidence that a plane hit the Pentagon, eyewitness testimony of a banking, north side approach, eyewitnesses who saw a low-flying “jet” fly past the Pentagon that “kept on going,” plus Lloyde’s confession that the downed light pole was preplanned and staged all provide ample evidence proving that a Boeing 757 did not hit the Pentagon, but instead a smaller “jet” merely flew past the Pentagon immediately after it was hit by a missile in order to appear as though a plane did the damage.

References

[1] Secretary Rumsfeld Interview with Parade Magazine, News Transcript, October 12, 2001
http://web.archive.org/web/20041118063828/http://www.defense.gov/transcripts/2001/t11182001_t1012pm.html

[2] Greg Szymanski, Radiation Expert Claims High-Radiation Readings Near Pentagon After 9/11 Indicate Depleted Uranium Used; High-Ranking Army Officer Claims Missile Used at Pentagon, Not Commercial Airliner, August 18, 2004
http://web.archive.org/web/20060111183631/http://www.arcticbeacon.com/18-Aug-2005.html

[3] Ibid.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Karen Kwiatkowski, PhD, USAF (ret), 9/11 and American Empire Intellectuals Speak Out, Edited by David Ray Griffin and Peter Dale Scott, 2006

[6] Lon Rains, Eyewitness: The Pentagon, Space News, June 30, 2005
http://web.archive.org/web/20060210130450/http://www.space.com/news/rains_september11-1.html

 

Tags: , ,

Subscribe

If you enjoyed this article, subscribe now to receive more just like it.

Subscribe via RSS Feed Connect on YouTube

146 Reader Comments

Trackback URL Comments RSS Feed

  1. bruce@bcat.us' Sorgfelt says:

    I do believe that there was a conspiracy involved and that the twin towers were demolished with explosive, however, my wife and other witnesses saw the airplane dive towards the Pentagon. Some witnesses saw the plane go into the Pentagon before exploding, explaining the lack of debris outside of the Pentagon. You can’t throw those eyewitness testimonies away. And I believe that my wife has had enough experience in her job to know an airliner when she sees one.

    • justus2id@yahoo.com' Mike says:

      One must be not be aware of Military grade Holotech?

    • drhowell1962@hotmail.com' Don says:

      Yep there were quite a few witnesses that saw the airplane dive towards the Pentagon. People on the road in cars said it was so low that they could see the passengers looking out the window.

    • admin@consciouslifenews.com' clnews says:

      Thank you for your comment. Your wife and other witnesses were correct about an airplane diving towards the Pentagon. I added video footage of eyewitness testimony that a low-flying plane merely flew next to and past the Pentagon immediately after the explosion. Watch for yourself. I’d really love to see your evidence that Boeing 757 flew “into the Pentagon before exploding” – especially since that the initial entry hole (before the structure collapsed) was only 16 feet wide. Could you please provide some links? -Ross Pittman

      • bruce@bcat.us' Sorgfelt says:

        I once saw a very long document listing all of the eye witness reports. Unfortunately, I didn’t save the link and haven’t been able to find it, since. If I find it, I will try to remember this article and post it.

      • bruce@bcat.us' Sorgfelt says:

        A C-130 transport plane that had just taken off followed the airliner to the Pentagon, after the pilot was asked to follow it. The C-130 pilot witnessed the airliner crash into the Pentagon, after which the C-130 flew over the Pentagon. At least one witness, watching from the above ground portion of the subway at Arlington National Cemetery knew what he was looking at and confirmed that. I think many witnesses have mistaken the C-130 with the airliner, when they say the airliner flew over the Pentagon.

        • alex.hoemke@att.net' Gottfried Alexander says:

          If the FBI took the footage, they would have also spoken to the witnesses. If this was a conspiracy, They would have set up false accounts and had people sign vows of silence.

        • had.matter@hotmail.com' hadmatter says:

          I’ve come a little late to this thread, but want to respond to your C-130 statements nonetheless.

          This is false. The C-130 pilot did NOT see the plane hit the Pentagon. He said so himself.

          “I distinctly remember having a difficult time keeping the AA flight in sight after we turned back to the east to follow it per a request from Wash. Departure Control. When I saw the initial explosion I was not able to see exactly where or what it had impacted, but remember trying to approximate a position to give to ATC. It was then that I was able to see the sun reflecting off the Potomac and the runway at Wash. Nat’l and thought to myself that the AA flight must have had some sort of IFE and was trying to make it back to National Airport. It was a few more seconds on our eastbound heading before I saw that the aircraft had impacted the west side of the Pentagon.” ~ Lt. Col Steve O’brien.

          Also, regarding the witness at the ANC subway station – do you have a name and more details of what this witness claims he saw? The above ground portion of the only station at ANC is approx 1 mile away from the crash site and block on both sides of the street by an 10 ft hedge for anyone standing at the subway entrance. I don’t believe this individusal could have seen the attack plane flying low near the Pentagon.

          What he could possibly have seen was the C-130 that arrived from the NW about 3 minutes after the explosion. At it’s lowest point it was ~2,000 ft AGL. That description doesn’t jive with Pentagon witness Roosevelt Robert’s description, which was a plane, silver in color with jet engines flying ~50-100ft over the light poles of the Pentagon South Parking lot just seconds after the explosion.

          In his second recorded interview, this one with CIT in 2008, he said he was at the south parking lot and east loading dock when he saw the plane flying away from the Pentagon. The east loading dock is on the opposite side of the Pentagon from the side of the explosion at the west wall, on the Metro Station side at the north end, where that wall meets the River Entrance side of the building.

          A low flying aircraft is corroborated by all other witnesses. Again, the C-130 was no lower than ~2,000 ft AGL at its lowest point, and turned around back generally in the direction it came from just before it reached the Pentagon.

          The flyaway witnesses were not describing the C-130.

          Here are a couple of video clips showing its arrival and departure:

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WV4jaijNqyo&feature=related

          The first is the complete clip. According to the cameraman he turned it on about 1 minute after the explosion. The C-130 comes into the scene at about the 1:50 mark. The shot looks to have been taken from I-395 from the south side of the Pentagon.

          This second one is a close up that clearly shows the image in the first clip is a C-130.

          • bruce@bcat.us' Sorgfelt says:

            Thank you for your additional info. It really adds to this and clarifies things, which now make the Barbara Honneger video make more sense. I seem to see more information in this article than I noticed being there the first time it was posted, and I now more fully agree with the whole premise of the article.

            Concerning the hedge: The last time I was at that subway stop before 9/11 was in the late 1990s, and you could see clearly from the platform at the top of it. The hedge must have grown.

      • apatriot4usa@gmail.com' dave festa says:

        The heat and energy caused the light wieght materials , the molecular make up was converted to a semi solid,semi liquid state…no mistake a large commercial jet hit the Pentagon

  2. Chrisabercrombie8930@hotmail.com' Chris Abercrombie says:

    This guy is a moron.

    • j.willbanks@me.com' Alcyone says:

      On what do you base that unsubstantiated claim Chris?

    • adnezal@yahoo.com' ThisGuyIs-F-Clueless says:

      And you, surely, are in the upper echelon of military and strategic intelligence. Another video of a kitten farting for you.

      • skwirrlmaster@hotmail.com' Tyler says:

        This General also believes he can walk through walls (and repeatedly tried day after day to the point of comedy) and kill with a thought. The section of the military he was in charge of was the one running the experiments made famous in “The Men Who Stare at Goats”

  3. sarahwhite2@yahoo.om' sarah says:

    One must be cautious when believing that all of these comments are from people who are not invested in the scheme.

    • bruce@bcat.us' Sorgfelt says:

      Of course, you don’t know me, especially because I hide my identity behind a username, otherwise I might resent your implication, but I do think it highly unlikely that so many people are “invested in the scheme”. Even one eye witness lends credibility to what they said they saw, and if all of them say the same thing, I tend to take it seriously.

  4. Pc77User@aol.com' TheHolyCrow says:

    On that fateful morning, I saw live coverage of “the 16 foot hole”, before the collapse. Shortly after the collapse of the Pentagon roofline, the media started with the “hijacked plane hit the Pentagon” story and I immediately knew that was FALSE !!!!! There was NO DOUBT in my mind that a Hugh jumbo jet was going to fit in the small round hole starting at ground level that I saw with my own eyes. Then I watched live TV as 2 HUGH skyscrapers tore themselves apart in a very obvious controlled demolition fashion. Please, don’t try to push your lies down my throat. I will never align myself with murderous liars. Please Google from the Bible John 8:44 and wake up.

    • bruce@bcat.us' Sorgfelt says:

      I have looked again at the Pentagon photos. There are gashes where the wings would have hit. 16 feet is about as wide as the body of the plane would be. In view of that, I am giving it an 80% probability that a plane crashed into the Pentagon, subject to change, if I get any better information.

      Concerning the controlled demolitions, I agree completely, and it also upsets me that so many people I know can’t accept that they were what they looked like – controlled demolitions. I know one person who works for the Department of Transportation who won’t accept it or even look at it, possibly because they are emotionally invested in the NTSB report being correct. I know three engineers, one of whom agrees it was a controlled demolition, one of whom hasn’t expressed an opinion, and one of whom had trouble accepting it, because they knew it would take months to prepare such a thing and didn’t see how they did it. I explained that the CIA knew about the threat of planes a year in advance, and the owner of the building had “insulation” put onto the steel support structures by a company owned by a Bush cousin, and it could have been done then. And the finishing touches were put on during the three weeks advance warning that was given to enough people by a CIA asset, Susan Lindauer.

      Don’t call me a liar. I am a truth-seeker. And there are too many overblown, poorly researched ideas that are making it harder for the truth to be known, because too many people see one idea being discredited, then turn off on truthers, saying you can’t believe anything on the Internet, and re-accept the official story, which I do believe is based on lies, supported by some honest work based on false premises. The NTSB, for example, were lied to, and not allowed to consider the obvious, so did what they were allowed to do.

      • Pc77User@aol.com' TheHolyCrow says:

        Sorgfelt,
        I was not referring to you as a pusher of lies. Sorry if it seemed that way, but I am aiming that as a generalization to the people who push the official version.
        Now getting back to the Pentagon, to the left of the round 16 foot hole, it seems that nothing was disturbed. There appear to be no wing marks at all. And above the 16 foot hole, there is no disturbance as you would expect from the 44 foot high stabilizer at the tail end of the plane. There are windows still intact, and photos show them before and after they were covered with the white firefighter foam that the engine company sprayed on the face of the building. Now to the right of the round 16 foot hole, there are some sections that were knocked out, but there are still what appear to be intact columns. The areas that are knocked out could have been caused by the explosions, or the pulling on long sections of Re-bar that was imbedded on the outer wall. There also could have been explosives inside the building that blew outwards. As for any witness testimony, unless it is taken under oath in a court of law, it is nothing but hearsay as far as I am concerned. If you have links to any YouTube video with the eyewitnesses on video, stating their names, addresses, and all other pertinent details, I myself would certainly love to see them so that I could judge for myself. Afterall,we have video of many first responders testifying that explosions were going off on the 2 towers and Bldg. 7. Where are the videos of the witnesses to the planes hitting the Pentagon. If this is true, these witnesses should be put under oath and videotaped while they are still alive. In all these years, I have seen none, and I look for 911 stuff every day since then.

  5. Pc77User@aol.com' R. J. S. says:

    Yes Sarah,
    There is no dirth of paid trolls available to lend their credence to the official BS story. Check out “9/11 is the litmus test” video. It says it all.

    • bruce@bcat.us' Sorgfelt says:

      I won’t deny that I have and still do work for the government as a contractor, but I am not a paid troll. Again, I agree that there was a conspiracy and the towers were downed in controlled demolitions, but I want the whole complete truth, not poor “research”. I know other contractors who think that there was a conspiracy. I think too many people are too emotionally invested in their jobs and pride in their country to think that their blessed government would lie to them.

      • Pc77User@aol.com' The Holy Crow says:

        Sorgfelt,
        What many people don’t understand is that the govt is like a rental car.
        The driver and the occupants of the seats is constantly changing. Sometimes the renter may be a little old lady who uses the car only to drive to church on Sundays. Other times it could be rented by a band of bank robbers who use it only to commit crimes, and they beat the dickens out of it while doing so. And they keep their secret and don’t tell anyone else what they are doing. Once they understand this simple fact, the lights can go on.

  6. The answer to your question General, the Rand Corporation, because they believed that was the thing to do. A gambit that worked.

    • Pc77User@aol.com' R. J. S. says:

      Steve,
      I see the Rand Corp. was founded by a Harry Arnold. Do you know if he descended from BENEDICT ? And the founding date was May 14, 1948.
      Isn’t that the founding date of ISRAHELL ????? Now who says we can’t have any coincidences ! Or Synchronicities !!

  7. wizdym4@aol.com' Carmon Elliott says:

    “Lucky Larry” Silverstein, who bought the World Trade Center several weeks before 9/11, with a minimal down-payment, bought special terrorism insurance on the buildings, from which he ultimately received several $Billion tax-free from the insurance companies. He had bought the World Trade center complex for a pittance because it was widely known then that the complex was a ‘white elephant’ filled with asbestos. Regulations required that the World Trade Center buildings would have to be dismantled rather than demolished because of all the asbestos would cause unacceptable pollution, which, of course, ultimately occurred with the collapse of the buildings. Careful dismantling of the World Trade Center would have cost a few $Billion. Since Silverstein owned the buildings, and Bush’s brother was head of World Trade Center Security, it would have been easy for a team to plant thermite explosives throughout the buildings prior to 9/11, awaiting the time planes would crash into the buildings, providing “cover’ for their demolition.

    Who benefited from 9//11? Obviously, Silverstein. Yet, how could he know of the impending attack on the World Trade Center? Silverstein has had close ties to Natanyahu and the Mosaad, who could have facilitated the terrorist’s plot concerning the hijackings by covertly shutting down American air defenses. Remember the “dancing Israelis” who were caught filming the World Center attacks and celebrating its occurrence? Israel has benefited greatly from 9/11 attacks, for it manipulated the US into fulfilling the Mosaad-neocon agenda, ie. attacking Afghanistan and Iraq, and providing for further subjugation of the Palestinians. Bush embraced the neocon agenda and vigorously opposed any investigation of the 9/11 events, until it was ensured that the parameters of the investigation were so limited that it was easily contained. Manipulation of the media proved easy. The anthrax letters, sent to media and key legislators shortly after 9/11, were a clear message to the media and legislators to avoid their usual journalistic inquiries and to merely accept the new paradigm.

  8. daveinsd@hotmail.com' David Zuckerman says:

    We have heard before, bits and pieces of WTC conspiracies. This knowledgeable Major General, ret puts the pieces together well. For a while now I have come to believe that our government has turned downright evil.
    I never heard anyone offer a “why” regarding the WTC tragedy.

    I believe 9/11 was carried out by our own government in order to further the dominance and control over We, the People, using this sinister plot, among others, as an excuse to create organizations… DHS, TSA, NSA… and policies… Patriot Act, drones and other domestic spying and info gathering of citizens… that will, in the future, be used to quash citizen uprising as Obama, and those above and below him, intentionally destroy America during a transformation towards that new world order they openly speak of.

  9. bruce@bcat.us' Sorgfelt says:

    I did see a video from security cameras that showed the explosion occur in the Pentagon just BEFORE the airplane appeared to crash into it. It lends some credibility to the idea that a missile was involved in addition to the airplane. After all, the Pentagon was and is “protected” by a missile battery. The twin towers are easy to figure out compared to the Pentagon. I don’t have all of the answers.

  10. jamx3259@netzero.com' fran says:

    Where are all the people that were on board the plane?

  11. jamx3259@netzero.com' fran says:

    And if it was a missile,why aren’t the familys comming out demanding answers?What did they do with all the passengers on the plane that took off?

  12. charles0390@hotmail.com' Charles Queen says:

    the fact that peole that were right there in NY wacted and seen 2 jets one hitting each building disproves this guy;s ingo completey,Paul McCartney was sitting in his jet on a runway watching out the window and seen the jets hitting both towers which is when he cancled leaving the U.S. and started organzing the conerts for the tragedy so again it sidproves what this guy is saying and what about all the parts of a jet not a missle that were all around the pentagon hit,that cannot be faked either not on live feeds it can’t,he’s nuts

    • tulipwalk@yahoo.com' Katherine L says:

      yes, remote controlled planes. do you think drones are the only technology?
      remote my dear. remoted take over.

  13. abrahamsonjon@yahoo.com' Abe says:

    General! First thanks for having a pair!
    I’m one of the big mouth a$$holes on your wifes website! Once upon a time I was a little green monster. The obvious is obvious!! How many else sees the Emperor has no clothes? At least I know I’m not alone anymore! You don’t need a degree to say it’s raining out side. If it is,,, It is!!
    Hope you look into the hole in the Helo-Pad on Deepwater horizon. Dare I say DUH?? They’re all crooks!!

  14. tulipwalk@yahoo.com' Katherine L says:

    We knew it was all fake, soon after from eyewitnesses from NY and Washington. I mean forgetting what these guys are saying, we knew it.

    The terrorist are not out there, there in HERE, in our government. plain and simple.

  15. laurie.miner18@yahoo.com' Laurie says:

    I don’t know what to think anymore. All I do know is that it is very scary knowing that our government could be responsible.

  16. terrymcfalls@yahoo.com' terry mc falls says:

    I had a conversation with a young service man that was there that day,it was not a plane.no wreckage, check the round hole in the inside of the building. I assumed the plane folded up like a cheap lawn chair ,wings and all and it never left a mark on the outside…

    • skwirrlmaster@hotmail.com' Tyler says:

      Considering you can cut the hull of a plane with one of those baggage movers, yes the plane would leave almost no wreckage as it turned into a fireball headed into the building.

  17. dkcollum2@gmail.com' Donna says:

    Its been proven and i have seen it that eyewitness testimony is not really that accurate

    • admin@consciouslifenews.com' clnews says:

      What do you mean by “its been proven”? Who proved what? You cannot possibly be saying that the 9/11 commission proved anything. “The commission had to subpoena the F.A.A. for documents, had to subpoena NORAD for documents and they will never get the full story. That is one of the tragedies. One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9/11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up.” -Max Cleland, 9/11 Commission member

      Regarding the tragic events on Sept. 11, 2001, we can be certain of one thing: we have not been told the truth. Many of the 9/11 Commission members, who authored the official 9/11 Commission Report [2], have admitted as much. In addition to the above statement by Max Cleland about a White House cover up, commission members have revealed that they “were setup to fail,” [3] [4] the “CIA obstructed our investigation,” [5] the statements made by NORAD officials “was just so far from the truth,” [6] that they were “extremely frustrated with the false statements we were getting,” [7] and they “don’t believe for a minute that we got everything right.” [8] FOR MORE, see: http://consciouslifenews.com/care-about-911-truth-plus-massive-evidence-911-inside-job/1136867/

  18. dunnigank@ymail.com' Naomi says:

    Ok… so what are we going to do about what we “know?” It’s been so long since it happened. But what are we going to do about it? In the meantime, my children’s government is growing… more corrupt. I’m tired of hearing what sounds like little old ladies sitting around a quilting table talking about the local sheriff and how he fornicates with all the pretty young women in town. “Ohhh what are we to do?” Get off your butts and DO SOMETHING! You know in your guts what is wrong… fix it! You have nothing to lose.

  19. rharkins@gmail.com' Rick Harkins says:

    How the hell can anybody really believe this crap. For all the people who died that day, I am sorry you have to put up with idiots like this.

    • Pc77User@aol.com' TheHolyCrow says:

      Rick Harkins, and what makes you so smukin fart ? All the scripted cover story you were spoon fed on Fox and CNN ? You just been brainwashed thats all. It was a big psyop so they could drain the treasury and asset strip the country. Now don’t you feel like a complete ass, just like most of the Americus Doofuses ?and get ready to cough up the $147,000 you and every other sucker in the country owes to the Bankster Gangsters.

  20. tigervik76@gmail.com' Luke says:

    They chose 911 for what the psychologists call “an anchor”. They linked it in American minds with their emergency number. They spread a lie and try to make us to remember always that lie. In Europe the emergency number is 112. Perhaps there, a great lie will happen at 1st on December or 11th of February.

  21. bad2@csproject.net' Curtis says:

    If this wasn’t American Airline flight 77 that crashed into the Pentagon, what happen to that plane and the passengers?

    • admin@consciouslifenews.com' clnews says:

      Good question. I see it often. First of all, look at the physical evidence at the Pentagon: 16-foot wide hole, no debris, no jet fuel, no bodies, etc. Also, look at the evidence for the three WTC buildings and the complaints by the 9/11 commission members about their investigation being impeded (see both here: http://wp.me/p1ic0v-9uO and http://wp.me/p1ic0v-9AD). For example: “The commission had to subpoena the F.A.A. for documents, had to subpoena NORAD for documents and they will never get the full story. That is one of the tragedies. One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9/11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up.” -Max Cleland, 9/11 Commission member. Many of the 9/11 Commission members, who authored the official 9/11 Commission Report, have admitted that we have NOT been told the truth. In addition to the above statement by Max Cleland about a White House cover up, commission members revealed that they “were setup to fail,” the “CIA obstructed our investigation,” the statements made by NORAD officials “was just so far from the truth,” that they were “extremely frustrated with the false statements we were getting,” and they “don’t believe for a minute that we got everything right.”
      OK, if you can believe that there were factions withing the US govt involved in orchestrating the 9/11 attacks and the collapse of the WTC buildings using explosives, then you know that the psychopaths had no problem killing 3000 people. Whoever knows what exactly happened to AA Flight 77 is not talking. It is likely that AA77 was flown somewhere like Wright-Patterson AFB (which was fairly close to where the plane was last seen before it went off radar). It is also likely that the passengers were executed and the plane was destroyed. Do I know this for sure? Of course not. But, I do believe that something like that happened. I actually contacted a remote viewer and a medium to see if they could provide some insight. The both said that the passengers were executed. But, neither could provide a location. And, the methods of execution that they described were different. I was disappointed about that. I want to know exactly what happened to AA77 too! This I do know: AA77 did NOT crash into the Pentagon. -Ross

      • msdella2000@yahoo.com' Dee says:

        Americans spend too much time looking for conspiracy theories. First, may I remind you a republican, George W. Bush, was president. Secondly, are you going to look at the families of the people who were killed on those planes and tell them their loved ones are still alive and hiding from them. This man wants his 15 minutes of fame and does not care who he hurts getting it.

        • Pc77User@aol.com' ThrHolyCrow says:

          Dee…what does that stand for ? Dumb ? You are just another Americus Doofus that fell for the magic trick. You don’t have a clue, do you ? Never mind, go back to sleep.

  22. fer.orige@gmail.com' Fernando Orige says:

    Take attention: when someone doesn’t care about a bad action of some others because they paid to manipulate the mainstream media…that group again will try, on high level, to make money — doesn’t the matter lives involved.
    US Constitution prohibited alcohol, a PROCESSED drug. Why it came an amendment liberating that and who paid for that?
    The only country that has a law against one part of our nature was created (“invented”) in USA. If you ask three questions for the majority people of the world, included in US, they will know only one to answer: do you know hemp?… Do you know cannabis?… Do you know marijuana (marihuana)?
    If the law is based on the national and Latin languages, how can the nation accept a law with a SLANG foreign word from Mexico, if on that time all Americans know the word hemp? Why the law makers hided the English name? Why they didn’t show it as “hemp, aka cannabis and marihuana” on the case? We have to cut this law that makes fool all people!
    If that law came against one plant of our nature, why they didn’t do the same with poppy? I hope they don’t. Poppy is processed by human to make the drug heroin. Hemp lives can dry by nature, if someone uses it is by his action; why against a nature that dropped lives naturally? Why everyone can have on vase a poppy plant and cannot have a hemp plant on vase? How many products in the marketing that can cause acts as drugs and they don’t prohibit it and point it as drug? One example is contact cement glue.
    What is the difference if a COP sees inside of one car some lives of hemp and a bottle of whiskey and no one used it? What is the difference when someone says: I bought it hemp from that guy and the whiskey bottle from that liquor store? From those what is processed and what cause more fatalities and bad behaviors?
    NOW FROM THAT FIRST PARAGRAPH YOU CAN GO TO 9/11 CASE. THEY SAW, IF THE PEOPLE ARE STILL INCAPABLE TO REJECT AN ABSURD, ABUSED LAW AGAINST OUR NATURE THEY CAN DO ANYTHING ELSE.

  23. jpstine@comcast.net' American says:

    So, all you “believers”, what have you been waiting for? This isn’t about abortion, gay marriage, or legalizing marijuana. You’re talking about an atrocity that killed 3000. Peoples in other countries have rebelled for less. And they didn’t have the right to arm themselves as you do. There’s supposed to be thousands of you. Why haven’t you armed and organized yourselves and tried to seize control? If you truly believe you’re government committed this act, then it’s time for armed opposition.

    Yet here we are, 12 years later and you’re all still sitting around pointing fingers feeling all smug and righteous. It’s obvious you care more about being right, than making right.

    It also tells me you don’t really believe after all.

    • bruce@bcat.us' Sorgfelt says:

      For one thing, who are you going to shoot? Government employees, believe it or not, are much like the general population. It is only a few in positions of power or influence in government and private industry, and especially the top of the banking industry, that are causing the problems. Actually, the ones mostly causing the problems are people who believe them. And that is where we need change. We need people to read, learn, wake up and stop electing people who deceive them and abuse their power. Until that is done, nothing will be accomplished by shooting anyone, and when that is done, no shooting need be done.

    • kchildress63@yahoo.com' kim says:

      wow STRONG POINT HERE…Many top officials have done nothing to have this investigated WHY?? Make this situation right give americans hope again…there is enough military and americans that could fight for this scientist to back you up and videos what is the hold up?? all these yrs and people still talking but NO ACTION taken to bring people to justice….be a Hero and bring to justice…

  24. kchildress63@yahoo.com' kim says:

    I do agree with you this is all corruption ..in the beginning i was like you and couldnt believe it..but watching the videos over again i thought a plane could not demolish the world trade centers like that..i read about scientist saying it was explosives and the men who designed and built and tested the steel said there is no way the fuel burned and made steel week like that..then i thought let me check the pentagon well hardly no damage at all…then i went to see if any government offiicials lost lives…NONE..ok..I looked to see if it was true president reading story book in a school..true..people who were to be in WTC were not there..hmmm..Then wondered why no military was stopping these planes..after all these planes were in air 45 minutes or longer before crashing they all did not hit at the same time…then the plane in Pa..well people were heros and took that plane down so that didnt hit the white house…amazing civillians the only ones killed…but still what happened to flight 77 that people claimed to see civilians on?? why is there no footage of the truth of 9/11 any real footage..black boxes all damaged or not found..every piece of evidence turned off..sciientist and investigators said bombs were involved…no one listened to them..no real investigation took place..why didnt other countries help with investigation?? most of all why did vice president take control 3 months prior that generals had no say so to stop these planes? so many unanswered questions..cant this be open again for investigation ..

    • kchildress63@yahoo.com' kim says:

      another thing people were saying Fema was already there the night before the attack…stocks were at their highest with these 2 airlines..Silverstein only owned the trade centers for 2 months and collected a fortune…to me NOT ONE PIECE OF EVIDENCE FOUND gone without a trace to support the governments information..i remember a lady video taping and she said it didnt look like a plane that hit the world trade center there were no windows and it looked strange…i never seen her video again…why did the government confiscate all videos and why are people so quiet about this situation..american civilians died in this plus some military at the pentagon but no one is talking…A Miracle not one government official killed …it amazes me…most of all why wasnt the president removed from school immed..didnt want to scare the kids..now that dont sound right..AMERICA NEEDED IMMED RESPONSE to crisis not a story….

  25. kchildress63@yahoo.com' kim says:

    since 9/11..other strange things happened…Iraq is a enemy to us but we over threw the government we rebuilt their country and built up their military and supplied them with money and weapons…A ENEMY!!! ohhh they are our friends now..never in history do you hear stuff like this…but that is not all….Benghazi another situation Ambassador murdered with 3 others OVER A VIDEO be for real and no help was given to them….Hillary clinton claims responsibilty but still no answers…then there is Syria we wanted to overthrow their government because syria government was suppose to have used nerve gas on its peope..we almost attacked them but russia and china threat stopped us…well guess what saudi arabia did that to syria..so United States hoax to war with syria didnt work..we been overthrowing alot of governments and controlling middle east but nothing done to help us americans NOTHING..now government shutdown making worse on us americans…it seems they are not for us at all but the middle east..i warned everyone long ago something isnt right…like our government will leave us and allow china who we owe our debt to take us over or russia and we will be slaves…we are not poor United States treasury was on tv wanting our gold and silver (fine writing) for exchange for money of course people sent their gold they are hungry and poor but really our money is worth very little the gold counts…why not use our oil ? government wont allow it…so many unexplainable events..like our government wants us to be so poor to control us…nothing has ever been the same since 9/11..NOTHING…

  26. kchildress63@yahoo.com' kim says:

    since 9/11..other strange things happened…Iraq is a enemy to us but we over threw the government we rebuilt their country and built up their military and supplied them with money and weapons…A ENEMY!!! ohhh they are our friends now..never in history do you hear stuff like this…but that is not all….Benghazi another situation Ambassador murdered with 3 others OVER A VIDEO be for real and no help was given to them….Hillary clinton claims responsibilty but still no answers…then there is Syria we wanted to overthrow their government because syria government was suppose to have used nerve gas on its peope..we almost attacked them but russia and china threat stopped us…well guess what saudi arabia did that to syria..so United States hoax to war with syria didnt work..we been overthrowing alot of governments and controlling middle east but nothing done to help us americans NOTHING..now government shutdown making worse on us americans…it seems they are not for us at all but the middle east..i warned everyone long ago something isnt right…like our government will leave us and allow china who we owe our debt to take us over or russia and we will be slaves…we are not poor United States treasury was on tv wanting our gold and silver (fine writing) for exchange for money of course people sent their gold they are hungry and poor but really our money is worth very little the gold counts…why not use our oil ? government wont allow it…so many unexplainable events..like our government wants us to be so poor to control us…nothing has ever been the same since 9/11..NOTHING…

  27. mark.frazer@live.com' Mark says:

    Unfortunately for your theory, I worked in the first commercial building next to the Pentagon, on the 8th floor, and was there on 9/11. From my office window, I looked down on the Pentagon. I witnessed the aircraft fly into the Pentagon. It amazes me to read theories saying that it did not happen.

    • cabal5628@yahoo.com' A. Wright says:

      Hello Mark,
      could I ask you where exactly you were and where do you think the plane flew before it hit the building ?

      • Pc77User@aol.com' TheHolyCrow says:

        Gee A. Wright, after all this time and still no answer from our “eyewitness Mark”. Perhaps he forgot where he really was. No matter, as far as I am concerned, unless any of these witnesses can put their left hand on a Bible and their right hand up in the air, and swear under oath in a court of law with videotape rolling, then it is nothing but hearsay which would be equal to BULLSH*T, especially what we know now. And even then I wouldn’t trust them to be telling the truth since money talks and most of them would sell their mothers for a hand on a dime.

  28. tharp42@gmail.com' Tharp says:

    Stop it, truthers. Hundreds of eye-witnesses saw a plane crash into the Pentagon. Here is their testimony:http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/911_pentagon_eyewitnesses.html

    And most of the plane wreckage was inside actually inside the first couple of rings of the Pentagon and burned up in the extremely hot jet fuel fire. But there are photographs of some small pieces of obvious plane wreckage in front of the building. See and read a whole article explaining everything clearly here: http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/911_pentagon_eyewitnesses.html

    • bruce@bcat.us' Sorgfelt says:

      Thank you very much! I have been looking for this page of eye-witness testimony for a long time. My wife saw the plane dive towards the Pentagon, although she didn’t actually see the collision, due to buildings or trees in the way.

      I do believe that the truth lies somewhere between the official story and the truthers’ story. I do believe that the buildings in New York were downed by controlled demolitions, but that they were first hit by real commercial jet airplanes with people inside. I have read the NIST report and have some qualifications to understand it, and think that some of the conclusions rest on unfounded assumptions. I have previously studied the process of controlled demolitions and know about enough intelligence to indicate that they had at least several months to prepare them while supposedly installing thermal insulation.

    • Pc77User@aol.com' TheHolyCrow says:

      Tharp…that satisfies you as evidence ? You got tobe out of your mind, dumb as a bag of hammers, or in on the cover-up. And by your picture you don’t look that evil to be part of the coverup, so I’ll go with the hammers for now. The litmus test for testimony is under oath in a court of law while being videotaped, otherwise it is BS hearsay.

  29. Mburjida2003@yahoo.com' Abdallah A Andani says:

    Hi good work may God bless you and your good work because they claim is plane crash why building collapse
    God is watching USA

  30. Mburjida2003@yahoo.com' Abdallah A Andani says:

    Haw world leaders why can’t you speak true so America will stop this their hypocrites and let the world move forward

  31. KJH86xr@hotmail.com' Kyle says:

    I’m willing to bet that space aliens did it. Why? Because of the same reasons our moon landing was a hoax to conceal a deal we have with the Russians that work for the moon aliens.

    The plot of 9/11 was meant to be FAR worse to TOTALLY destroy New York City and other East Coast targets but people fighting back in Flight 93 scared off the rest of the attackers.

    One group of attackers at JFK airport about the time Flight 93 happened left via side door leaving behind box cutters.

    General Timmons was the 1st officer of that flight bound for LAX when she was given the order to abort take off and to secure the cockpit.

    Here is a part of the actual article found here. http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=208559.0;wap2

    The profile of General Timmons recounts that on the morning of September 11, 2001, she was the first officer on United Airlines flight 23 preparing to take-off from New York’s JFK Airport bound for Los Angeles. The plane had already pulled away from the gate and was taxiing down the runway when the airport was shut down and the crew was ordered to secure the cockpit.

    Timmons confirmed that as the pilot grabbed the crash ax, she jumped from her seat and started barricading the cockpit door. From the other side of the barricade the cabin crew relayed their concern about four young Arab men in first-class who became agitated when the take-off was cancelled, and fled from the plane when it returned to the terminal. Box cutters and Al Qaeda documents were later found in their luggage.

  32. KJH86xr@hotmail.com' Kyle says:

    I also heard there was meant to be a wave of terrorism on the West Coast later that afternoon but people fighting back prevented those plans from fruitition.

    The reason I think aliens have to do with it is because The summer before 9/11 I had really bad thoughts about terrorism in America some time that year including dreams of important buildings being blown up and we would go to wars in other countries leading to the end times.

    I thought I was going crazy so I choose not to say anything. The real smoking gun was that at that time Dad was a relief Pharmacists and where he was working the DAY BEFORE 9/11 he had a Muslim customer look unusually happy where he was doing some kind of jig or dance and acted very unusual.

    It gave Dad bad vibes and he was tempted to phone the police because he (The Customer) was starting to bother other people in the store. This dude was really bad news but Dad wasn’t sure if the police would’ve cared because also at that time there were a lot of car thefts going on.

    So much that the police admitted they were not going to pursue suspects unless there was a violent attack or somebody was threatened with violence because a lot of police were having MAJOR budget cuts so that lead Dad to decide not to report the suspicious customer to the police.

  33. KJH86xr@hotmail.com' Kyle says:

    He can’t because he his a shill. That’s how they operate to cause people to feel guilt for standing up.

    Conservatives and Republicans are smoke n mirrors and have been since the 70s. It just got worse in the 90s.

    America since the Oklahoma City Bombing was swept from under our feet.

  34. tomxvesely@hotmail.com' thomas vesely says:

    what crap ?
    refute if you can or else
    S.T.F.U………………

  35. bruce@bcat.us' Sorgfelt says:

    I found some long pages of eyewitness reports and am posting links to two of them. One of them is an analysis that I don’t entirely agree with, but it has lots of good testimony.

    http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/911_pentagon_eyewitnesses.html

    http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/F77pentagon.html

    • Pc77User@aol.com' TheHolyCrow says:

      Sorry Sorgfelt, unless the testimony is videotaped under oath in a court of law it is nothing but hearsay, which, in essence, is nothing but horse manure, balder trash, or just plain bullsh*t.

  36. fortran.forever@ymail.com' Joe says:

    Another NWO crash dummy. How much do they pay you to write this trash?

  37. voegelid@aol.com' ratchet says:

    I watched the entire video. Personally, as someone who has never believed there was a conspiracy that took place on 9/11, it certainly gave me pause. Two of my biggest questions are this: If the 757 didn’t hit the pentagon, where is that plane and passengers? Would they have been killed somewhere just as the people on the flights that hit the towers were sacrificial lambs? In watching the helicopter footage, what on earth could stop (pause) so quickly and then accelerate into the Pentagon without losing it’s ability to fly? It seems like an impossibility, or against the laws of physics. I’ll admit the round hole is very intriguing. I don’t know what to believe.

    • bruce@bcat.us' Sorgfelt says:

      I have been following this in detail for a long time. My wife saw the plane dive towards the Pentagon, although she didn’t actually see it hit, due to buildings in the line of view. There is a lot more than this article and video mention. My opinion is that the plane did in fact hit the Pentagon. Any mention of no debris outside is not true. The holes in the Pentagon walls are consistent with a plane hitting it, including the size of the holes. One hole often mentioned in an inner ring wall was made by an engine, not the body of the aircraft. There is evidence of wings having hit the outer wall. One first responder eye witness saw the carnage on the inside. I deal with the police every day in my job, have once worked in the Pentagon for a few years, have a degree in physics, and think I know what to believe. And I am not “one of them”.

      Concerning the 9/11 conspiracy, of that I am certain. While I do believe that two planes hit the twin towers, I am certain that they were brought down by controlled demolitions. There was a confluence of different persons in government and the private sector with different motives all involved. The CIA and probably the buildings owner had at least 3 weeks warning. The “failure of intelligence” was not that of the CIA, but a failure on the receiving end by a President and Vice President to distort the information to suit their motives or worse. There was obviously some military planning involved. The hijackers were not the people who actually flew the planes.

      Regarding the plane downed in Pennsylvania, I do not pretend to know what happened. There is just too much contradictory evidence.

    • Pc77User@aol.com' TheHolyCrow says:

      Ratchet, you believe your eyes and what you know about the laws of physics. You block out anything that is said on TV, in newspapers or magazines, and what other people say. You make believe that you just came on the scene at the Pentagon, before the collapse, with just the round hole there, and you ask yourself…what made that hole ?

  38. third.uncle@yahoo.co.uk' third uncle says:

    the question to be asked is what will these murdering bastards do next?

    • Pc77User@aol.com' TheHolyCrow says:

      They almost nuked Charleston SC on Oct. 8, 2013. Thanks to a few Patriots, the day was saved. Google “Carey & Giardinia save Charleston 10-8-13″ for the story. Three EMP producing nukes were supposed to be high altitude detonated but they were intercepted. The patriots took one 600 miles offshore and exploded it on the ocean floor. It left a 4.5 earthquake mark on the seismic record, and the white hats still got 2 left for bargaining chips. The black hats wanted a false flag to blame on Iran, plus the devastation would have allowed for martial law in USA. There are one or 2 other white hat patriots that have to be commended also, but I can’t remember their names off hand. They all will go down in history. But the black hats have also stolen 350 nuclear Pitts from decommissioned Davey Crockett missles. Some of which may have been detonated 50 meters below the WTC basements. Google “Dimitri Khalezov 911 video” for pics of the craters left behind.

  39. wyattb773@gmail.com' agree says:

    great question

  40. bruce@bcat.us' Sorgfelt says:

    The Barbara Honegger video above is amazing, containing much more depth than anything else I have seen anywhere proving in many ways with inside eye witnesses, instrument readings and external analysis and video that a drone hit the Pentagon about 5 minutes before several inside explosions not due to any aircraft and not in the same area as the drone that exploded outside. It is long, but definitely worth watching.

  41. nothingultra@gmail.com' Josh says:

    Really, dude? Do you even listen to yourself? “Holotech”?

    You, sir, are the poster-child for nut-jobs the world over.

  42. drewrdyer@gmail.com' Doom says:

    There is no easier way to fund an Anti-Terror campaign than to have a successful terrorist attack on your homeland.

    If nothing else, there have been more than enough questions raised to at least warrant a response. Answers. Answers from the people we employ. People we elect. People who are supposed to serve us.

    Aluminum planes don’t slice thru steel reinforced buildings effortlessly, like a knife thru butter. Nor would a structure like the tower collapse so easily due to the corresponding damage. Too many inconsistencies.

    Government employees told not to go to work. Elevators in the towers shut down for “maintenance” wks-mos leading up to it. The clear demolition style collapse. The fact building seven waa perplexing to be demolished that day. As mentioned above, that’s a tedious process that takes wks to plan.

    This isn’t conspiracy. This is common sense. Genuine, fact based questions, that anyone involved simply refuse to answer or even entertain.

    As for the pentagon.. I believe the lack of evidence is evidence enough. It can be simplified to one issue. There were cameras on. Not the doctored, edited still frame crap we were fed. Live feeds. I would like to think if what was on those tapes showed proof of what they say happened, they would shove it down our throats and have released it that day.

    Our government brags when its right. Always have. You know what they do when they have something to cover up?.. hide behind top secret, unreleased evidence, and bullshit just-for-show commissions.

    Wake up people. It’s the 21st century. If despite all evidence, dating as far back as our countries very own foundation, you are still naive to think “our government would never endanger or take advantage of us for their benefit”.. well, then we have already lost.

  43. bluffcountryart@live.com' Tom says:

    There are so many arguments , you can’t win , so what I say is this , The Pentagon is the most protected building in the U.S. ,maybe in the world, all kinds of security and cameras ,they can put a stop to all the theories by doing one simply thing , show me a picture of a plane hitting the building , the reason they don’t do that is ,because it didn’t happen.
    They confiscated video from all surrounding businesses and didn’t provide any evidence of there own ,because they can’t.
    That’s it , you can’t deny they are hiding something , and that engine they show as proof , it’s small , a Boeing engine is 9 feet in diameter and 12 feet long.

  44. ourjourneystogether@gmail.com' Miss Cheryl says:

    You are awesome. May I take a whole or part of this to use in my battles against the very “believers” you are speaking of? I am not completely convinced in any direction of what may or may not have happened, but I am tired of being insulted, and ridiculed when I question or have doubt on my own personal journey to find the truth for myself. I will of course reference you (American) and this website when I use it. I am simply a reader as you are and do not have any way to access or pass on your personal information so you will of course remain anonymous. I thank you in advance.
    –Miss Cheryl

  45. ourjourneystogether@gmail.com' Miss Cheryl says:

    You are so right. People do need to read and learn. And they need to step away from their self absorbed, self centered lives and see the world around them. The last I read, congress has a 10% approval rating and yet 90% are incumbents. What sense does that make? My father always stressed the importance of voting as a way of making your voice heard. And that it was simply choosing who you thought the best of two evils.

  46. tpmrussell@gmail.com' Karin says:

    I would highly recommend Barbara Honegger’s 3 hour lecture on the Pentagon. Her theory includes a small plane hitting the Pentagon about 100 feet away from the official “entrance hole” and inside explosives. If your wife has seen it, I’d love to know her thoughts.

  47. rusonislam@hotmail.com' Ruson Islam says:

    shut up!

  48. NYC Watches WTC Building #7 Come Down Again This 9/11/14 http://stateofthenation2012.com/?p=7553

    9/11 FACT: The Pentagon Was Hit By A Cruise Missile From The US Military Arsenal
    http://stateofthenation2012.com/?p=7521

    9/11 US Government Criminal Conspiracy: THERE IS NO DEBATE
    http://stateofthenation2012.com/?p=7258

    • Pc77User@aol.com' TheHolyCrow says:

      Doreen Agostino…is their any wonder that the New York Times ignores the evidence of 911 ? The Times is run by the Sulzbergers, Khazarians from way back and part of the Khazarian Konspiracy, covering up for the Khazarian Mafia and the Khazarian lease holder of the WTC Complex, Lucky Larry Silverstein and his Khazarian judges that made sure he became the leaseholder despite the fact that he was not the high bidder, and made sure he got his double indemnity insurance settlement. It seems it was Khazarian Kriminals who made off with 350 nuclear Pitts from decommissioned Davey Crockett missles, some of which were used to demolish the 3 towers, and create underground hell holes into which the debris could be dumped for quick cleanup. And it’s not to say that they didn’t recruit help from other Mafia organizations in the tri state area, not to mention rogue Mossad operatives for their expertise in demolition work. But the whole operation could not have been a success without the help of the Khazarian Kontrolled Press and Media.

  49. thatcrazytoaster@mail.com' Katherine L says:

    My bet is on a ‘false flag alien invasion” – remember, it has to be BIG. The bigger the lie the less people will believe that it’s fake.

  50. clojo105@gmail.com' Jermaine Brackett says:

    It is also a fact that eyewitness accounts are some of the most unreliable. But the police and FBI don’t know what they are talking about smh.

  51. cf@claire-france-perez.com' Claire-France Perez says:

    For the first time in military history, in July of that year a civilian took over command of Fort Myers, Florida. You might remember him as Bush’s vice president. That is the only person who could have authorized the shut downs of every device, the air exercises and all the coordination.

  52. had.matter@hotmail.com' hadmatter says:

    This is a good article. Looks like you put a lot of work into bringing together all this info. I’m with you most of the way on your presentation, but take issue with you on a few points.

    Foremost is your insistence a missile hit the Pentagon. Notwithstanding Rumsfeld’s and Roemer’s “accidental” slips of the tongue (two people I do not trust) there are no witnesses to a missile. Missiles may be fast, but they aren’t that fast. Not even the ATC in the heliport control tower or the two fire fighters standing next to the Pentagon fire truck reported anything like a missile approaching. It’s at best a speculative theory.

    Also, the so called “leaked video” of the missile striking the Pentagon is fake. Someone took a video called “ariel b-roll” of an aircraft circling the Pentagon, cropped the edges, then photo shopped the white streak hitting the Pentagon. There’s a youtube debunk of the missile video showing it and the original ariel b-roll side by side. It’s an obvious fake.

    Pre-planted explosives, specifically “shaped charges” set to mimic a directional impact seems a more logical source of the destruction. The damage had to be precise to wipe out the info and auditors looking for the missing $2.3 trillion. There’s no way the perps could count on a plane or even a missile hitting that exact spot no matter who was at the controls or firing the missile. Couple that with the fact Rumsfeld and all the top brass were in that building it’s unlikely they’d take such a chance.

    Planes and pre-planted explosives were the MO in NYC. It would seem reasonable they’d do the same thing at the Pentagon, but with the twist the plane flew over hidden by the distraction of the massive fire ball and billowing smoke.

    I’m also curious why you conclude it was a smaller plane that approached the Pentagon. The only witnesses who describe a smaller plane were pretty far away with the exception of Omar Campos, who says he was working apparently outside the ANC maintenance buildings. But what he actually said in an interview is that the plane wasn’t “muy grande”. That was misinterpreted by a translator (who didn’t speak very good Spanish) to mean a “business jet”. But according to native Salvadoran speakers I’ve asked, what they understand him to be saying is that it wasn’t a 747 or similar size jumbo jet. All other witnesses describe either a 737 or 757 size airplane.

    Overall I like what you’ve done. I just don’t think there’s enough evidence to conclude a missile struck the building. And promoting the fake missile video is the kind of thing debunkers like to home in on to discredit anything and everything else you present.

  53. had.matter@hotmail.com' hadmatter says:

    Here’s the link to the video debunking the missile video:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzoUlajZVY0

    Don’t be put off by the requirement to sign in to prove your age. There’s nothing x-rated in the video. Some group is simply doing what they can to keep it hidden.

    And IIRC the original “ariel b-roll” was shot in 2006, not 2001 as stated at the link you posted to, adam.

  54. KJH86xr@wavecable.com' TheBigOne says:

    Sadly Americans are too divided against each other to see the beams in their eyes. The US Government used our political divide as a leverage by getting the Clintons to have sex with women *his secretaries* and the Republicans to be blinded by it so that’ s all the focus.

    Then Bush who is neither a Republican or Liberal used the distraction as a vantage point to gain popular support to fulfill his globalists plans for a one world banking system but blogs like these called him out.

    I wish there was a way 9/11 could’ve been stopped but then again we would’ve still had TSA anyways from the shoe bomber and underwhere? Bomber.

    The massive scope and execution of the TSA showed to me that it was preplanned in the event of a national emergency so I think it would’ve been rolled out on a slower scale without 9/11 but happen nontheless.

    The only thing I think Bush did right was try to stop the banks from being allowed to give loans out to people who cannot afford it which lead to 2008 banking crisis.

    2008 economy crash was doomed to happen regardless of whom sat in that big chair in the Oval Office on 1600 Pennsylvania Ave due to laws in the 80s/90s being passed which gave the courts authority to sue banks so banks had to give money away they didn’t really have.

  55. bruce@bcat.us' Sorgfelt says:

    I now mostly agree with the premise of this article, especially after watching the Barbara Honegger video linked elsewhere in these comments, and it seems that another video was added to the body of this article that I didn’t notice before. The Global Hawk cruise missile/drone hit the Pentagon well to the left of the hole, which was probably made by explosives.

  56. bruce@bcat.us' Sorgfelt says:

    Go back over these comments or search for the Barbara Honegger video and reexamine the videos here. It looks like a Global Hawk drone/cruise missile, which really looks like a smaller plane, hit the area well to the left of the hole and that the hole was made by explosives. This is in addition to the 747 that eyewitnesses that I personally know said they saw approach the Pentagon at a dive, and apparently flew over the Pentagon, rather than impact it.

    I’ve seen a lot of articles and videos on this subject, and it seems that everyone always gets one or two little facts wrong, which of course is always used to debunk the whole article by people still in denial. It is very frustrating.

  57. theunforgiven420@gmail.com' Spuzzum says:

    I’m not too sure about it being a “radioactive” warhead, not when all the first hand witnesses claimed to smell “cordite”.. an explosive. Don’t forget.. the initial fireball is NOT the same blast that took the wall down. That happened some 30-45 minutes later.. heard live on CNN. And that flash, caught on still frame camera… was a bright white flash. If you had a warhead explode… you would have had a lot different look to both the explosions, and the resulting smoke.

    • Pc77User@aol.com' SlipperySlope says:

      Spuzzum…some people, such as nuclear device expert Dimitri Khalezov, maintains that it was a Granit Missle that hit the Pentagon. It, and about 20 others, were recovered from the Kursk submarine some years ago. For some reason, the nuclear warhead was inoperable at the time and did not detonate. Lucky for Washington DC and the surrounding area that it was inert. BTW, have you seen the craters at the WTC, below the level of the deepest basements ? Google “Dimitri Khalezov 911 Video”. When the list of selections comes up, select the video that is about 4.5 minutes in length. Then fast forward to about the 2:00 mark and let it play. You will see the craters at a stage where they have been mostly filled in except for the remaining 40 feet or so. Dimitri Khalezov also has a 4.5 hour interview on YouTube. You can watch it in 10 minute segments if you google “Dimitri Khalezov Interview 1 of 26″, “…2 of 26″, “…3 of 26″, and so on. I suggest you do, but you don’t have to agree with everything he says.

      • theunforgiven420@gmail.com' Spuzzum says:

        SlipperySlope… I’ll take a look, but given that the Pentagon was trying to cover up the $2.3Trillion dollars they couldn’t account for, by blowing up the Pentagon’s accounting office, the very side of the Pentagon that they had just reinforced for a direct missile hit… I really don’t see the need to waste a nuclear device, and have all that bullshit come back to them… when they can just use conventional explosives to begin with.

        There’s a lot of bs out there… a lot of misdirecting counterintelligence. Including the likes of Dr. Judy Wood, and anyone else trying to cloud the truth. I’m not saying Khalezov falls in that category, as I am open minded about a device beneath the towers, and possibly mini devices in the elevator shafts, along with “something” that was blowing up the corners of the towers.. separate from the windows being blown out, but I don’t buy it for the Pentagon. Not with the top brass there.. with Rumsfeld outside on the lawn… for at least 30 minutes.

      • Pc77User@aol.com' TheHolyCrow says:

        Hey Slippery, yes I saw those photos of those craters at the WTC. And I personally know a fellow who saw them live when he crossed the temporary footbridge when he was going to see his girlfriend, several times. When he asked about them he got an explanation that they were leftover craters from the ice age. Yeah right !, they built the biggest and heaviest towers in the world over ice age craters. What a load of malarkey. Luckily someone ignored the “no cameras allowed” signs and got these photos. And according to Khalezov, it was found out in the 80’s that the accepted demolition plan was to have a pre-drilled 50 meter deep shaft under the basements, and when demolition day came they lower a mini nuke down the shaft and detonate it, after evacuating the area of course. The nuke would create a cavern under the building and it would fall into it and melt and burn. When people found out about this plan in the 80’s, there was a big scandal and the rules were changed. But, many skyscrapers from that era have the 50 meter shafts already there, ready for a Davey Crocket size warhead. Supposedly, there are 350 of those missing from Pentax. Check out VeteransToday for more info on that.

        • theunforgiven420@gmail.com' Spuzzum says:

          TheHolyCrow… “Luckily someone ignored the “no cameras allowed” signs and got these photos.” Actually, you couldn’t move without credentials in that area. The photos, and videos, came from FEMA photographer Kurt Sonnenfeld. The same guy who kept the videos instead of giving them to FEMA, and has since been fighting a bullshit allegation/frameup of him murdering his wife, New Years Eve, 2001. Judge found him Denver innocent, then he fled to Argentina, and the US has been trying their damnedest to get him back. Argentina just agreed to extradition. But the Argentinian President still has to agree to it. Sonnenfeld says some of the evidence he says they knew ahead of time, was the fact WTC7 had been emptied.. of tons of documents, prior to the collapse. Truckloads of documents.

          As for nukes pre-planted for the destruction of the towers… get real, that would never have passed in the building plans. Yeah.. ok… let’s have a nuke, planted in our basement… with 50,000 people working overhead. Where the hell do people come up with this crap? Even underground nukes have fallout. Just google video it.

          • theunforgiven420@gmail.com' Spuzzum says:

            TheHolyCrow… and if they did have nukes in the foundation, put there during construction, then why didn’t they detonate them the first time the towers were bombed? I mean, it would have been just that easy.. right?

            One last thing to ponder.. if these warheads were planted deep in concrete… who has the detonators? That’s quite the responsibility. Even more impressive that they kept it quiet for 30 years.

          • Pc77User@aol.com' TheHolyCrow says:

            Spuzzum, I suggest you listen to Khalezov’s interview. He states that just the 50 meter shaft is pre positioned. The nukes don’t get there till demolition day, after everyone is safely evacuated. Then they are carefully lowered into the shaft. They had it down to a science. Of course the nukes are not sitting there for years. They need constant maintenance and care. They are only brought in at the last moments of the buildings life. After the demolition, truckloads of special radiation absorbing resin is dumped over the hole, then concrete and fill. And of course this is after a cooling off period of time. Listen to the man and quit making assumptions. It is a waste of time responding to objections that he explains. BRW, he says that the Sears Tower in Chicago has the same shaft and demo plan. And that is why they evacuated that building on 911 morning. Because they were afraid the nukes arrived there also.

      • theunforgiven420@gmail.com' Spuzzum says:

        Furthermore… if the story was to be a hijacked plane crashed into the Pentagon, then using a nuclear device, even a mini nuke, would have created an explosion so big, that the hijacked plane theory would’ve been questioned right from the start. Just google a mini nuke.. 100 pounds, and a massive fireball, with an even bigger mushroom cloud. I don’t buy it.

        • Pc77User@aol.com' SlipperySlope says:

          Well, like Dimitri K. Says in his detailed interview, the Granit nuke warhead was inoperable, or maybe had been removed. If you listen to his interview, he even says that the 2 drones that hit the towers, each had a Granit missle in them. Neither of their nuke warheads detonated either. Perhaps they were warnings, like, “look you guys, we got 18 or 19 more of these. Next time the nukes might go off if you don’t do what we say, see” ? Ever hear of the Khazarian Mafia ? Don’t even pretend that you have the slightest clue as to what IS REALLY going on. And most likely everything you thought you knew is WRONG ! I find that as soon as I think I have it figured out, something else comes along, like these pictures of craters. They kept them hidden from me until around last Thanksgiving, and I am on the WTC net every GD day. Of course I heard some theories of a nuke event, and read up on the tritium, but the puctures say a BILLION words. And unless you can proove they were photoshopped or faked, and debunk the eyewitnesses to the “ice age craters”, then I have to be inclined to the 50 meter & mini nuke story. And Dimitri seems to know what he is talking about when it comes to the Granit Missles.

          • theunforgiven420@gmail.com' Spuzzum says:

            You need your meds.

          • Pc77User@aol.com' SlipperySlope says:

            Spuzzum…oh, so I need my meds do I ? You need a new pair of glasses and a jackhammer to loosen all the crap in your brain. What makes you think that your preconceived notions are correct. You don’t know nothing, son. What are you, one of those shills who comes around with your BS stories ? Got all kinds of nasty stuff to say about Stubblebine and anyone else who knows a 757 just won’t fit in a 16 foot hole ? Even pre school kids got that figured out, so don’t piss in my ear and try to tell me it’s an April shower. We are done. Think what you want, the earth is flat. And your DNS says you are in some shitty little country in the M.E.

          • theunforgiven420@gmail.com' Spuzzum says:

            I never said shit about photoshopped or faked. I said I don’t believe nukes buried in the foundations during construction. And whatever your saviour, Mr. K. says… it’s a theory. I’ve already stated I believe something went off in the basement core. Nukes? I’m not too sure. If nukes went off, from the basement/foundation, the towers would have destroyed from the ground up.. not the reverse.

            I’m not against you dude, so you need to settle down. This is what they want… divide and conquer.

            My guess, is they probably used something non-conventional, but possibly something we have never seen before. They do keep technologies under wraps far longer than need be. Not to forget that plasma device that uses thermite to melt concrete. I’m not saying that’s what they used.. just pointing out the technology exists.

            As for the nuke theory, and sites like Veteren’s Today… personally, I think their shills, misdirecting from the truth. Jim Fetzer for example.. used to push the nuke theory, stating that thermite doesn’t explode. I called him out on youtube.. linking a video showing that yes, indeed thermite DOES explode. When encapsulated. And sealed. All those tests from debunkers, where they just pour the thermite on a car or a beam, were essentially doing nothing more than cracking a firecracker open and lighting the open ends. It does nothing but fizz. Not without the pressure from being sealed.

            Hell.. just listen to Gordon Duff.. Senior Editor of Veterans Today. Says most of the things they post IS NOT REAL…

  58. theunforgiven420@gmail.com' Spuzzum says:

    Like I say.. I’m not against you. I too have been researching this since the beginning. Logically, those towers shouldn’t have come down. Period. Even if they did.. it sure as hell wouldn’t turn them into dust. And planes just don’t sink into “soft dirt”.. even if it was an old mine shaft. Plane at the Pentagon? CNN said there was no sign of one, then about 15 to 20 minutes later.. the 2nd explosion went off, collapsing the wall. I watched that live. I never believed a damn thing Bush said in his speeches.. just look at his eyes.. he keeps looking to his right at Rumsfeld and his boys, trying to hide this mischievous grin. I smelled bs right from the start. Especially since Bin Laden publicly denied it within the first few days. Why on Earth would a famous terrorist deny a piece of his work? Didn’t make sense. Then on December 26, 2001.. FoxNews site ran a piece “Bin Laden Already Dead”.. died in that bombing raid of Tora Bora. But a few months later, Bush said he didn’t care where he was, wasn’t overly concerned.. he wasn’t “the big picture”. Then came the Iraq accusations. It was starting to make sense.

    At least at the time. After all the research to follow, coming across the 911 timeline page, you read about the Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline.. and who all was involved. Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India->Caspian Sea. Trillions in natural gas, plus oil. Cheney’s Haliburton did the drilling for the pipeline. Then there’s all that Lithium in Afghanistan.. Trillions as well. The “motherload”.

    And that’s just the financial motivation. They then went into global positioning mode, getting ready to take on Iran. Pakistan sent the Taliban into Afghanistan to settle things down for the pipeline, and they also paid some of the hijackers.. at least in the official story. Who knows.. maybe they really did use the patsies. But it also sounds like the Saudis paid some of them, as well as most of them being Saudis to begin with. Tie in the fact that the 5 dancing Israelis.. along with the 9/11 moving van, packed with explosives going to the bridge, being driven by Israelis… it is interesting to hear that Saudi Arabia has just given Israel basing rights to attack Iran, just in the last few days.

    If you’ve watched everything, or just want more to see.. check out September 11 : The New Pearl Harbour.. all 3 parts, 5 hours. It goes by pretty fast though. It’s the evidence the main Citizen’s Group is going by. They held hearings in Toronto in 2011, and the Honorary President of the Italian Supreme Court was there.. he grilled them pretty hard. He believes them. He says it’s a strategy of tension, the same thing as the bombings in Europe from the 50’s to the 90’s, blaming them on the Communists. Turns out NATO has stay behind armies, and they pull off these attacks to get the people in line. And to stop the Communists from rising to power. He heard a case about the kidnap and murder of an Italian President. He was going to invite ALL the parties to the table, including the Communists. So they killed him.

    See? I do my research too. And I’m not a denialist. But I’m also not trying to play Perry Mason, without having the subpoena power to get the real answers. All I’ve been concerned with, is finding as much evidence to show that the official story is bs, including the fact they exploded into fragments, and not collapse due to weakening of floor beams due to simple office fires. “What” they used and “how” they did it, isn’t the concern. That’s for the courts to discover.

    • Pc77Usee@aol.com' SlipperySlope says:

      Spuzzum…you need to pay attention to what people say and the DETAILS. I never said the nukes were in the shaft when the place was built. I said the shaft was drilled, and the nukes come in on demolition day. Understand ? Also, Fetzer never said nanothermite does not explode. He says it is not a powerful enough explosion to turn steel beams into dust. He says in order to do that the explosive material has to create an explosive velocity greater than the speed of sound in steel. DETAILS, my boy ! Do you really think you are smarter than Fetzer when it comes to those matters of physics ? Of course he knows thermite can explode in the right conditions. And he is also saying that thermite or nanothermite will ignite, and then explode or burn, but then it will be all gone, and won’t be around to cause the fires that burned for 3 months underground at thousands of degrees. But a mini nuke underground will cause 8 to 12 thousand degrees that will take MONTHS to cool off. I suggest that you do a serious study of the 4.5 hour interview of Mr. Khalezov. He will explain to you the details in the physics of underground nuclear detonations, and why you don’t get “mushroom clouds”, and a minimum of above ground radiation, and all those other pesky little DETAILS that the layman has no clue about. And yes, there was some radioactive vapors released, and that is why so many of the first responders and cleanup crew are coming down with leukemia these days. And there will be many more getting sick, thousands, since it can take twenty years for symptoms to show up. Please don’t come back and nit pick everything I just said, just go and do your damn homework. And don’t take things out of context, or twist my words around like you did previously, because you just make a pain in the ass out of yourself. And just maybe that is what you are trying to do. Now run along and do your homework. Mr. Khalezov even drew you some nice pictures so you can understand things easily.

    • Pc77User@aol.com' SlipperySlope says:

      Yes, I saw the Toronto Hearings and New Pearl Harbor. Many times each. You should make sure you listen to the Khalezov Interview. All of it is full of good nuggets, and he has good illustrations to make it easy to understand what he is talking about. Remember, he was in charge of the USSR nuclear device arsenal and knows about international nuclear device demolition treaties, and how nukes are used for underground mining and creating glass lined gas holders, and lakes. Also, on YouTube, find “Declassified 1962 Davey Crocket training video” so you can get an idea of what a mini nuke is and what it does. 350 nuclear Pitts were stolen from decommissioned Davey Crocket missles, so the bad guys got lots of bombs for false flag operations. They may have been used at WTC.

      • theunforgiven420@gmail.com' Spuzzum says:

        Doing a quick google on Khalezov, I do remember reading and seeing some of his explanation on Veterans Today. I’m sorry.. I don’t buy it. If you watched New Pearl Harbour, and the Toronto Hearings, you see a few clips of one of the towers (sorry forget which tower at the moment) exploding floor by floor in rapid succession, but the crush zone, the top portion crushing it’s way down, is still 5 to 10 floors behind. The windows are exploding outwards, but the corners are still intact. The top is basically surfing the debris as it falls, and destructs itself long before it hits the 50th floor. A nuke, if placed in the basement or in the foundation, when deployed.. will expel it’s energy upwards, destroying the tower from the bottom up, not the reverse.

        As for stuff found in the water samples, there’s tons of things in computers, and monitors, and fire detectors, and exit signs, and neon lights to account for that. Especially when talking enough for 50,000 people.

    • Pc77User@aol.com' TheHolyCrow says:

      What they used IS important because some of the materials and devices can only come from a few places. Thereby it narrows down the field of WHO did it. There is evidence that conventional high explosives were used. Many people saw flashes and heard loud explosions. There are also sound recordings and sound tracings that are available. There is evidence of thermite, thermate, and nanothermite in the form of iron spheres and unexploded red/gray chips. There is also video footage of molten metal pouring out of the tower. There is evidence of nukes in the form of residues that only come from nuke explosions. There is photographic evidence of the deep craters left in the bedrock far below the basement levels. And the first responders and cleanup crews are coming down with cancers scientists would expect from radiation exposure. Dr. Judy Wood has seen evidence that she attributes to DEWS and other exotic little known weapons. Some of these could be from little known types of nukes they may have used, but it is also very possible that she is right in thinking that exotic unknown weapons were tested on 911. I personally think that anything and everything they had at their disposal, from kinetic jet planes, to jet fuel, to conventional high explosives, to old timely TNT, to the thermite a and nanothermites, to any kind of mini nuke, to DEWS, to Hutchinson effect weapons…anything and everything, bar none, was and could have been thrown at those buildings, to make absolutely sure that they were totally and completely obliterated from the landscape. And they didn’t give a damn about how many goy were killed or wounded in the process.

      • theunforgiven420@gmail.com' Spuzzum says:

        “What they used IS important because some of the materials and devices can only come from a few places. Thereby it narrows down the field of WHO did it.”

        Wrong. Nobody had access to those towers that the government didn’t know about. Impossible. All we have to prove is they blew up. REAL investigators, with REAL access to the evidence can then discover WHAT they used. Get real… what the hell are you going to find on the internet, sitting in your home? Nothing. Not if you can’t subpoena anyone who was involved. All you’re doing is speculating. And all that does is cloud things over, pushing people in the wrong direction.

        • Pc77User@aol.com' SlipperySlope says:

          When you say “the government”, exactly who are you referring to ? Are you blaming all the people at the Post Office, or the DMV, or over at the Social Security Office, or all the people at NORAD, or all the FAA, or everyone in Congress, or everyone in the Pentagon ? Or how about everyone on the White House Staff ? Or everyone in the CIA, or NSA ? No, it was not everyone in the govt. It was a few people here and there in on the plot. They are the ones who have to be identified. The rats in the woodwork. The traitors who were slinking about. Not EVERYONE in the entire government.

          • theunforgiven420@gmail.com' Spuzzum says:

            Dude.. quit trying to show how much you know and how much better you think you are than me or anyone else. You’re grandstanding. I never once said “the entire government”. I’ve always said “rogue elements within the government”, and I even go as far as a “coup”. I get the feeling Bush was told during the children’s book reading.. just look at his face.

            In my reply you’re talking about, I said the government would know if someone rigged the towers with explosives. They had to. There was security 24/7.. except for a few days before 9/11. The CIA was in WTC7. It was wired for demo. Obviously they knew as well.

            So yes.. the government knew. Which department specifically? Not sure.. start with the Port Authority of New York.

        • Pc77User@aol.com' SlipperySlope says:

          Yes Spezzum, in order to get real answers, we need a REAL investigation with subpoena power. However, all the big shots in govt continue to deny that process. Remember early on when the family members were petitioning Bush to start an investigation ? He dragged his feet for over 400 days, then appointed the D-Bag war criminal Henry the Khazarian Kissinger to head it. Not to long ago David Meiswinkle, founder of NJ911Aware.org put together a 60 some page legal complaint and submitted it to Cyrus Vance Jr. For the purpose of initiating a new investigation, but Vance said it was out of his league, oops, I mean jurisdiction, so that was turned down. There is definitely a concerted effort by the PTB that currently occupy the seats in our govt to make sure that the facts remain hidden. Only strong public pressure can change this, and to educate the public that the official conspiracy theory is a contrived fabrication, is crucial. The pictures of the nuclear craters are very convincing to even the staunchest sceptic a, and must go viral immediately. Those along with the videotape of testimony such as from Kevin McPadden who told about the underground explosions that wanted to make him “grab onto something”. And the fire chief who stepped out of the Marriott Hotel and felt a rumbling under the ground, as if a big train was speeding under ground, and then he looked up and the tower started falling. This is how to convince the public to push for an investigation. Especially since it will greatly help the persons coming down with leukemia and other cancers that come from the radioactive vapors that leaked out of those craters.

          • theunforgiven420@gmail.com' Spuzzum says:

            I replied, but it got deleted(?).

            If you watched the Toronto Hearings, the Honorary President of the Italian Supreme Court was there, and he believes the evidence. He says it was a strategy of tension. He sent it to the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court in 2012, but they can’t hear it.. 9/11 happened before the court’s date of inception, July 1st, 2002. But he says any country that’s a signed member of the Rome Statute can hold the case. A member of Canada’s Green Party recently submitted a petition requesting Ottawa to look at it, but they replied the same day, saying they won’t waste tax payer’s money on “conspiracy theories”. Yet they spent how much building a fake indoor lake for G20? LoL. :P There’s even a Green Party member vowing to run on a 9/11 truth platform. We shall see.

            So.. currently, there are attempts to get this going, in a REAL court of law. Until then… all we are doing is speculating. It’s pointless.

            And the cancers wasn’t from radioactivity leaking from the craters… it was mostly from the 400 tons of asbestos that was “dustified” into their lungs.

          • Pc77User@aol.com' SlipperySlope says:

            Asbestos does not cause leukemia. It causes a specific type of lung cancer called Asbestosis. And it takes at least FORTY YEARS to start showing up. I know because my father died from it in 2004. He spent WW2 in the engine room of a ship where the asbestos floated in the air like snow. He was well into his late 60’s before any sign of it showed up. Radiation causes leukemia, and other exotic cancers, and thyroid cancers.

      • theunforgiven420@gmail.com' Spuzzum says:

        And “Dr. Wood” says herself, she has no evidence, not even a theory… all she’s doing, is showing things she found bizarre. She’s a shill.. she used to be associated with the guys in ae911truth, then backstabbed them by saying it was molten aluminum from the plane that was dripping from the tower, and not thermite. I’m not sold on thermite exclusively, but I know for a fact that wasn’t aluminum. She claims “aluminum glows”, even having a page about it on her site, using pictures of a foundry pouring a reddish orange metal, taken from a book. Turns out, the book was about backyard “iron” foundries.. the authour says it was iron, and not aluminum “glowing” in his pictures. Her page now says it’s unknown what the metal is. :P

        Energy beams?? Think about it.. an energy beam from above, so powerful that it destroys the buildings.. yet it only starts destroying from the 90th floor down, and not from the rooftops? The roofs should have been the first things to go if that was the case. A beam from the side would’ve destroyed from 1 side to the other.. it doesn’t. It destroys downwards, symmetrically.

        Hell.. she doesn’t even acknowledge all the debris falling, being lodged into surrounding buildings. She seems to think everything “dustified”. Just watch her get torn apart… lol.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qYm1AnUKi8

        She’s a shill.. a disinformant, pushing people away from the real truths. Just listen to her speeches..

        1) forget all you know, or thought you know
        2) forget what you saw, or thought you saw
        3) let the good doctor TELL you WHAT you saw and what to THINK

        Psyops101 :P

        • Pc77User@aol.com' SlipperySlope says:

          Well, like I said. There is physical evidence for some things. Stick with the physics and the rest is conjecture until proven otherwise. There is physical iron spheres, physical red/gray chips, physical craters, physical video evidence of loud explosions, physical video of multi ton steel beams flying sideways, etc etc etc. Most of us know what the physical evidence is. The only people at this point who know exactly what happened and how it happened are the ones at the very top of the pyramydical scheme, or conspiracy. Do your homework and bone up on the underground nuclear detonation aspect for now, because just one look at the crater photos is enough to connvince many sceptics that the official story is hogwash. And if your objective is to convince sceptic a, then you have to know the physics of underground detonations, be able to explain it to people, and start off with simply showing them the footage, without any previous explanation. Just “here, take a look at this for 1 minute”. Nothing else. If you say. Hey, would you like to see pics of nuclear craters at the WTC”, they will just walk away. You say nothing except, “take a look at this” and the lights will go on in their heads real fast. Then give them a piece of paper with directions how they can find it again on the web and leave.

          • theunforgiven420@gmail.com' Spuzzum says:

            I’ve seen the craters, both beneath the towers and the buildings beside them.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jM3bHgTBxGo

            Conventional bombs can do the same thing. As for the physics of it all… that’s exactly what I’ve been doing. That’s why I say a nuke, even a mini nuke, would’ve destroyed the building from the bottom up, not the reverse. That’s a huge amount of energy directed straight up. All that happened, was the lobbies got rocked, and a fireball in at least just one. Yes.. they blew the cores, they had to. They knew that from the first attack. CNN even mentioned the towers were leaning, or at least 1 of them were. Live news camera interviews, on scene, had people saying they thought the subway blew up.. before the 1st plane hit. If that was a nuke… the buildings would’ve come down right then and there.

            As for the iron spheres and chips.. yes, I believe *thermite was used. I’m just not sold it was the only thing. And neither is ae911truth.. they said so at the Toronto hearings, saying they were open to a combination of different things being used. My “guess” would be, that the elevator shafts were packed with something, which blew out the floors 1 by 1, and then *thermite used for the corners. They blew up separately, and looked like firecrackers. So.. bombs on the cores, bombs in the elevator shafts, and the corners rigged. The elevator bombs and even the core bombs, could have been *thermite as well, as I’ve seen videos proving it does indeed explode when encapsulated and sealed, not just poured out and set ablaze. Like a firecracker split in 2. :P But I’ve also read that *thermite can be used as the ignition for another substance in a bomb, or even mixing with other substances, making them even more powerful. Especially if it’s nanothermite. The smaller the particles, the faster they ignite their neighbours, which creates that much more energy in the explosion. Learned that in the Toronto Hearings. :P

          • theunforgiven420@gmail.com' Spuzzum says:

            More food for thought…

            If the nuke, or “whatever” bomb, was buried in the foundation at time of construction, ie: 1972 at the latest, then how the hell DID they plan on detonating it? Was it on a timer, preset for 9-11-01? Or was it by radio control? If radio, then what the hell did they have back then, that we don’t have today? Ever try and get reception from a concrete underground parking lot? Never mind encased in a few stories of concrete before the basement parking lots above. ;)

            More physics? Yes.. they had mini nukes since the late 60’s, but even they have a HUGE energy blast. Just search youtube for underground blast examples. Even if they’re a bigger bomb, just take 10% of it. That much energy.. being forced straight up like a gun barrel. It would’ve torn straight through the buildings, from the ground floor up. That doesn’t account for what we see in all the videos of the “initial” collapses.

            At the same time, I am open to what the hell caused the mushroom clouds. Did they in fact perfect cold fusion? Nukes without massive radiation? Who knows. But whatever it was blowing up the towers from top to bottom, had a colourless flame, and white smoke. The core bombs were red fireballs, including the immediately 1 before the 2nd tower collapsed. Reporter said an explosion that you could feel on the street, followed by the ground opening up, and a huge fireball coming right at them. They ran like hell. But again.. if that was a nuke, it would’ve been a lot more destructive.

            I seriously doubt it. Sorry.

          • Pc77User@aol.com' SlipperySlope says:

            You still don’t get it, eventhough I have explained this to you 2 or 3 times in the last 24 hours. The nukes ARE NOT encased in concrete when the building is constructed. They are no where near until the DAY of demolition. Get it ? Only the shaft is pre constructed, 50 meters deep. How many times do I have to make that point to you ? And weather you believe nukes were used or not is quite immaterial to reality. Conventional explosives are not going to make a cavity 100 meters in diameter that the debris is supposed to be discarded into. You haven’t done your homework and it perplexes me why you haven’t gotten the simple fact yet that the nukes aren’t brought in and placed down the shaft until the last hours of the buildings existence. Are you just jerking me around, or what ??? And if you do your homework, you will find that all different yield sizes for mini nukes have been made since the 1950’s. NOT 1960’s, 1950’s. International treaty says the largest underground nuke for demolition at sub basement 50 meters is 150kt. That size mini nuke in bedrock is supposed to make a 100 meter cavity at 8 to 12,000 degrees, suitable for a skyscraper to sink into and vaporize. Exactly what size mini nuke was used at WTC is open for conjecture. Ask the perpetrators for exact specifications. But, there were at least 3 of them detonated on 911. At least 3 cavities were formed, and that helps explain how they cleaned that place up so fast.

  59. theunforgiven420@gmail.com' Spuzzum says:

    SlipperySloap…

    I suggest you actually look at Khalesov’s diagrams… the nukes are buried deep beneath the towers. A good 50 stories worth or so. They may not be encased in concrete, as I’ve seen in other videos trying to push this, but they were still deep in dirt, solid ground. Ever see when they prepare the dirt for a parking lot? That big-assed pounding machine, packing everything so tight.. it might as well be concrete. And then there’s the actual foundation of the buildings on top of that. A few floors of underground parking, with even more concrete to pass through.

    It wasn’t a last minute, last day, or even last decade burial of said nukes. He claims it was done when the towers were being constructed.. they were completed early 70’s, so they must’ve been buried late 60’s. We still don’t have technology top transmit a signal through solid earth, not 50 stories worth. Not even 10 feet’s worth.

    Don’t believe me? Google “Dimitri Khalezov nukes buried under towers”, then hit images. All his diagrams are right there.

    • theunforgiven420@gmail.com' Spuzzum says:

      Our good buddy Jim Fetzer, over at Veterans Today.. the site you suggested to me.. lol, has already ripped apart your nuke theory. I guess you missed it? Or just don’t want to believe it? Handpicking which evidence fits your story?

      http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/09/19/busting-911-myths-nanothermite-big-nukes-and-dews/

      • theunforgiven420@gmail.com' Spuzzum says:

        SlipperySloap… I suggest you do some more research. Under “normal” circumstances, it can take between 20 and 50 years. But that’s exposure.. that’s not inhaling huge amounts of it. Just listen to this firefighter himself.. although he says “toxic soup”, he says 4 years.

        http://youtu.be/DegLpgJmFL8?t=1h24m32s

        Also interesting to note… there were plenty first responders, government officials, and even that FEMA photographer on scene that day, and the days to follow. They are still alive and well. Because they wore masks. Masks don’t protect you from radiation.

    • Pc77User@aol.com' SlipperySlope says:

      Look again. All of his diagrams specify 50 METERS, not 50 stories.
      And in BEDROCK, not dirt. That is how the international treaties specify it. All nukes have rather short shelf lives. They need periodic maintenance. You CANNOT bury one and expect it to work 50 years down the road. Khalezov says that the demolition SHAFT was constructed when the basement was put in. Can you imagine trying to get a giant boring machine down the stairs after the building is built ? And let’s not forget that many other 60’s and 70’s era skyscrapers have their built in shafts, just waiting for the big day.

      • theunforgiven420@gmail.com' Spuzzum says:

        From the pictures I saw, it looked more like 1/2 the height of the tower above. (110 stories) / (2).

        50 meters is 13 stories. You really think radio wave will travel through 13 stories worth of solid ground? o.O

      • theunforgiven420@gmail.com' Spuzzum says:

        And you still haven’t explained how said nukes destroyed the towers from the top down, not the bottom up? If all it was to do was to sever the core… then you didn’t need a nuke, buried during construction. The truck bombs they originally thought it was would’ve been enough. That was the original working theory of the FBI… truck bombs.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Aquaponics 4 Idiots

FAIR USE NOTICE. Many of the stories on this site contain copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making this material available in an effort to advance the understanding of environmental issues, human rights, economic and political democracy, and issues of social justice. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law which contains a list of the various purposes for which the reproduction of a particular work may be considered fair, such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. If you wish to use such copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use'...you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

The information on this site is provided for educational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended as a substitute for professional advice of any kind. Conscious Life News assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. Your use of this website indicates your agreement to these terms.

Paid advertising on Conscious Life News may not represent the views and opinions of this website and its contributors. No endorsement of products and services advertised is either expressed or implied.
Top