Debunk Some Myths Please


Hey All,
So my roomate believes in 911 conspiracy theories. He thinks he is being a better critical thinker than me because he has adopted an 'anti-established' view. As though that in and of itself is all that is required for critical thinking. Anyway after a bunch of discussion He wrote down some questions for me. I'm hoping to go after both the information, and the credibility of it. I've got some good stuff, but am having trouble with 3 questions of his. We've agreed to only use legitimate sources (i.e. peer reviewed). So if anyone more familiar with the issue could help me with these and include links I would really appreciate it.

Pentagon Video
He says that video of Flight 77 hitting the pentagon was seized. I looked and saw that through an FOIA request video from a gas station and Pentagon security camera was released in 2006 I believe. Was this video siezed. Was/is there any other video that was taken?

Molten Steel
I checked out http://www.debunking911.com/ and it gave a very long explanation. Could someone simplify it, and use links other than a website devoted to debunking 911 (as I won't allow him to use 911 truth)

Bin Laden Family
I think this is from Michael Moore. I did some google searching and it looks like Bin Laden and many of his family were in opposition to each other. Could someone point me to any statements from either him or them on this topic? As well if someone could specifically name the family members who were in the US, and any links they had with bin Laden that would be great. Did they really fly out right after 911? If so why?

Thanks I know it is a lot to ask for, but I don't have time to look into everything in detail, so assistance would be appreciated. He gets to ask questions and think he is being insightful, while I have to do all the work. I've tried to flip the tables on him (for example when he says they did....I say 'who did? Be specific.' It never works though - he just keeps coming back to the talking points. The problem is that every time I come up with something (911 Commission, History Channel Doc, Bill Maher, Bill Clinton, Popular Mechanics) they become part of the conspiracy. If every piece of information just becomes part of the conspiracy there really isn't anything I can do. Any thoughts or advice? Personally I think if this doesn't work I'm just going to give up.

There was a website I found that was really good and had tons of links to external sources. Someone on this board recommended it I believe. I have www.911myths.com and www.debunking911.com. Any others? Did one of these sites recently change their format?

Thanks.

reply

Bump.

reply

Pentagon Video
He says that video of Flight 77 hitting the pentagon was seized. I looked and saw that through an FOIA request video from a gas station and Pentagon security camera was released in 2006 I believe.
They were seized and the footage released to the public. There's also one from the Doubletree Hotel, on the other side of 395. If any other videos were seized, they've since been returned to their respective owners because they don't show anything of interest.
Molten Steel
I checked out http://www.debunking911.com/ and it gave a very long explanation. Could someone simplify it, and use links other than a website devoted to debunking 911 (as I won't allow him to use 911 truth)
Try here: http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc_molten_steel.html.

In short, purported photographic evidence of molten metal, such as this (http://infowars.net/pictures/Nov06/171106fireWTC.jpg) from Infowars cannot possibly show molten metal. The guy with the shovel would have to be standing in the supposed molten metal and the image has been edited.
http://www.debunking911.com/wtc_light.jpg

The picture of a hydraulic crane supposedly lifting molten steel (http://www.historycommons.org/events-images/626_molten_metal.jpg)? That "molten steel" is at least 845°F; hydraulics fail at 180°F.
every time I come up with something (911 Commission, History Channel Doc, Bill Maher, Bill Clinton, Popular Mechanics) they become part of the conspiracy. If every piece of information just becomes part of the conspiracy there really isn't anything I can do.
Invoke Occam's Razor. If all these people were really part of the conspiracy, there would be no conspiracy; it would collapse under its own weight.

reply

[deleted]

How can you say they didn't release to the public what they "wanted" the public to see? Or removed what didn't fit with their explanations?

Your claim, now show some proof, otherwise it is just mindless speculation.

And if you think the Prez is the most powerful person you'd be sadly mistaken. They're just a figurehead.. A puppet/symbol to dangle in front of the sheeple while those in the background call the real shots. Remember a politician is nothing but a low level salesman.

Who is above Bush again Stewie?

764/6943 BLUE!

reply

How can you say they didn't release to the public what they "wanted" the public to see?
I didn't but the footage has been studied and no missing frames were found.

reply

[deleted]

You didn't say what I suggested because you're scared of the ramifications of that.

fennell, Jerome here presents a good example of the conspiracy mindset. The idea that everyone else is too scared to see what's right before their eyes, but he and those who think like him are brave enough and smart enough to see through the looking glass at how things really are.

And who told you no missing frames were found? Oh that's right.. The Gov't TOLD YOU SO and you blindly believe them like a good sheeple would.

Again, Jerome uses the idea that "the government" which in his eyes is a gigantic unified creature that has only one mind and is not composed of millions of individuals, is controlling all information. Jerome, who told you there were "missing frames"? And how did they know? You don't have any evidence of that do you? No, he doesn't. He just assumes that there are because the government is evil. How does he know the government is evil? In his mind, they just are, so they must be guilty.

Just like they expected and trained you to. How obedient of you. So just because the Gov't "says so" that's good enough for you right? The Gov't can tell you whatever they want because you'll ALWAYS believe them right?

Jerome seems to think he's Neo from The Matrix. He's too smart and Tom's too meek and cowardly.

Seems you've let them train you to believe that you are inferior to them in every aspect of your life. They don't see you as an equal human being that's for sure and you let them get away with that by not questioning them just because of their "false" higher societial status over you.

Jerome says the government's made Tom think he's inferior but Jerome seems to do a better job of belittling Tom than any government could ever do. I'd have to think Jerome is a pretty sad individual in his own right... the only means he has to feel good about himself is to mock and belittle others.

Morpheus was right in the Matrix when he said blue pills (drones) will "fight to protect the system they're a slave to."

Oh Jerome... life isn't the Matrix. You do realize that don't you? You're not Neo and there is no conspiracy.

The same Gov't that you defend so strongly are the same people that laugh at you behind closed doors. They laugh at you as you defend them as you wallow in the so-called lower status you've LET them apply to you over the course of your life.

The only thing telling Tom he's in a lower status is Jerome, not any government.

I pity your existence Tom. You've basically let them dictate "how" you think.

Jerome seems to think he exists on a higher level of consciousness than anyone who disagrees with him. He thinks he can see through the fog to what's real and no amount of evidence can convince him otherwise.

I once heard someone say, regarding the 9/11 conspiracy, that "no amount of evidence will convince me our government did not fly planes into those buildings and kill those people." That is pretty much the opposite of skepticism. That is someone who has a preconceived notion and will not be swayed by any argument. That is very sad.




As a disciple of science, I don't believe a plane can fly into a building. - McMike1

reply

Good post, CKent2.

Jerome seems to think the government is this monolithic, omnipotent, omnipresent beast of a creature, and yet there is one part, one speck that points out the falsehood of this idea:

The DMV.


I prefer getting a root canal to registering a car.














Clamo, clamatis, omnes clamamus pro glace lactis.

reply

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?p age=1

-will help those who want intelligent engineering analysis of the 9/11 evidence.. I think the original poster was looking for that.

btw: if Bush & the boys were so smart they pulled off this amazing conspiracy, why weren't they clever enough to stash some WMDs in Iraq to be found before or after the invasion, to support their justification for the war? instead, they ran a smear campaign on the the U.N. Weapons Inspector.

the evidence that has been presented by American investigative bodies, or in documentaries, about inept security measures on many levels is embarrassing enough, isn't it?


:-) canuckteach (--:

reply

btw: if Bush & the boys were so smart they pulled off this amazing conspiracy, why weren't they clever enough to stash some WMDs in Iraq to be found before or after the invasion, to support their justification for the war?
Or, for that matter, plant evidence in hijackers' belongings and around Ground Zero pointing at Iraqis?

reply

CKent2, you've described the entire mentality of the so-called "truth movement" with this one post.

reply

Morpheus was right in the Matrix when he said blue pills (drones) will "fight to protect the system they're a slave to."

When you can't debate facts bring up the fictional fanboy movie of Tinfoilers everywhere.

STEWIE ON A DATE =

Andromeda_XO-Hates Jews and Gays, Loves fans of the kinder!

reply

You didn't say what I suggested because you're scared of the ramifications of that.
Bull.
And who told you no missing frames were found? Oh that's right.. The Gov't TOLD YOU SO
More bull.
just because the Gov't "says so" that's good enough for you right?
Hell no, and if you'd been paying attention to my posts all these years you'd have noticed that I believe the real truth exists somewhere in the middle. More toward the "official story" than Alex Jones' version, sure, but in the middle nonetheless.
I pity your existence Tom. You've basically let them dictate "how" you think.
I pity your existence Jerome. You've basically let Alex Jones dictate "how" you think.

reply

Hi Tom,

In particular I was looking for information on the Bin Laden family being in the US. I found a little discussing how Osama Bin Ladin's extremism resulted in his family disowning him or whatever....

CKent,

You are right about the mindset. I actually had it 'taken to the next level' by my roommate. When I started discussing some of the nuts out there he said that some of the conspiracy theorists are accurate, while others are government plants to confuse the issue and distract us from the truth. So basically he is giving himself a total out. Anytime a conspiracy notion is disproved it goes into the government plant category. Any time there are unanswered questions (and I think there are. While I don't believe in a conspiracy the Bush Administration is cloaked in secrecy and I think it would be foolish to say we know everything) it goes into the conspiracy category.

I've made real progress though. We've agreed that a key part of any theory is that it must be disprovable. We've also agreed that none of the conspiracy theorists were actually there, and were getting their information from a third party. Therefore it is likely the third party would have talked to the media or some other similar venue. As many of his ideas cannot be found in these sources he is starting to come around.

For fun I am making a list of who is involved in the 'conspiracy'. I'm lowballing the figures but please feel free to adjust them and add others.

The Entire Mainstream Media - (1000)
Popular Mechanics (20)
History Chanel (20)
NIST (20?)
Scientific America (20)
The 911 Commission Report (20)
Congress (200)
The Bush Administration (20)
The guys who planted the explosives. This one kind of depends on how long before. Less people in a longer period vs. More people in a shorter period. I'm going to go with the latter (50)
People who saw suspicous activity but didn't report anything (200)
The airline companies who pretended to put passengers on the planes (50)
The phone companies who faked the phone calls (20)
Parts of the military who didn't send out their fighter jets even though they knew it was an attack (20)
The guys who made the explosives (100)
Tom Veil and MasterShake (2)
Theoretically some of these people could be the same so I'm going to subtract 102.

So that puts me at 1660. Any others? Be creative.






reply

[deleted]

most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inert, so hopelessly dependent on the system that they will fight to protect it.

Yes, I see your point. You think you're Neo... hence all your Matrix references. It's really quite crystal clear.

See what's in bold sheeple?

Geez Jerome, drop the sheeple crap. It's so old. You are a mindless Alex Jones/Loose Change drone.

You are all so dependant on your Gov't to "think for you", to "protect you", to dictate how you live that here you all are on imdb defending them so hard.

I don't depend on anyone to think for me or protect me, Jerome. I don't think you've really looked into 9/11 any more than any Loose Change drone has. You really haven't got a clue about what you're talking about.

I'm just making a point about how you and Tom behave here and why you behave that way. The dialog is a good anology of you all.

Ironically it has more to do with you than us.

You don't think for me and can't tell me who I think I am.

Yet you believe you can tell me or Tom how we think. The conceit of the conspiracy mindset at work again.

through we both know the answer how about you tell me who says there are no missing frames?

This was aimed at Tom but I'm curious... who says there ARE missing frames?

How many posts did you trollfriend drop over the last 24hrs compared to myself since he spends too much time in his basement

Jerome, your continued obsession with Shake is sad, pathetic and frightening.

while I was away doing more constructive things like work, screw a few girls, hang out wth friends, see a few films etc

Funny stuff... I'd sooner believe in your 9/11 theories than believe you've had sex (with a human) recently.


As a disciple of science, I don't believe a plane can fly into a building. - McMike1

reply

Liar! You know the ramification would destroy the existance you believe in and fight so hard for. Meaning you'd cry like a baby. Probably have a breakdown. (same goes for the rest of you) I understand you'll never admit that but sadly it sucks to be you.
Again: I believe the real truth exists somewhere in the middle. More toward the "official story" than Alex Jones' version, sure, but in the middle nonetheless. You, however, are so ingrained that you have made threats to attack people in public--then won't follow through on them!
Even through we both know the answer how about you tell me who says there are no missing frames?
People who know the equipment involved and who don't have anyone telling them what to say. Take the object's speed and the frame rate(s) involved, calculate how many frames it would take for the object to cross the field, then compare that to the number of frames that are present.

Anyway, the damage pattern at the Pentagon was not consistent with any missile, ergo there was no missile to film. So why would any frames be deleted?
I think for myself.
No, you're a parrot who is incapable of posting anything other than twoofer talking points or ad-hominems aimed at Shake.

reply

[deleted]

See what's in bold sheeple? You are all so dependant on your Gov't to "think for you", to "protect you"

As Stewie uses fantasy comic book movies to prove his point, by the way Stewie what is......

dependant
diolog
anology
existance

and

wth?



Andromeda_XO-Hates Jews and Gays, Loves fans of the kinder!

reply

CKent2 9 hours ago (Wed Jan 28 2009 22:39:16)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sometimes the government does lie to us. Look at Watergate, the Iran-Contra affair and so on. But occasionally, they don't. If you start off with a hypothesis of "The government is always lying no matter what" then you can make a TON of errors in logic and judgement.
QFT

reply

[deleted]

And no I don't think i'm NEO.

No, You are Stewie the Cat ravisher.

Once again I see your loser Trollfriend has to jump on typos because he can't debate without posting someone else's opinion on the topic or tossing childish retort

LMFAO! Did you notice your tagline and also what is there to debate, your dream cat?

Andromeda_XO-Hates Jews and Gays, Loves fans of the kinder!

reply

[deleted]

Which is a response to you ALWAYS jumping on typos as you did earlier Trollboy. Y

From the above to this, I'm just pointing out your Morris Molesting Stupidity Stewie!

Mastershake - "WHAT IS your area of knowledge and eduction? "


Andromeda_XO-Hates Jews and Gays, Loves fans of the kinder!

reply

First of all CKent no Truther has said the Gov't "always lies no matter what".
They don't need to because it's obvious from the stance they take, McMike for one. Also when they sarcastically say "the Gov't never lies, right?"
Name those that said no frames were removed.
Answer these first:
by CKent2 11 hours ago (Thu Jan 29 2009 02:30:43)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
who says there ARE missing frames?
by Tom_Veil 8 hours ago (Thu Jan 29 2009 05:23:01)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[T]he damage pattern at the Pentagon was not consistent with any missile, ergo there was no missile to film. So why would any frames be deleted?

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

I simply said that released tape footage could contain only footage the Gov't wanted us to see.

Sure. And space aliens could be responsible for the whole thing. Both are just as likely since there's no proof of either.

And Tom already answered your question:

"People who know the equipment involved and who don't have anyone telling them what to say. Take the object's speed and the frame rate(s) involved, calculate how many frames it would take for the object to cross the field, then compare that to the number of frames that are present."

But the problem is you're too dense to understand what he's talking about.

So to answer your question no one here said "there ARE missing frames".. but I see what you're trying to do with your strawman question.

You don't seem to know what a strawman is. Figures. Okay, so we are agreed. There are no missing frames because no one here is claiming that. Good.



As a disciple of science, I don't believe a plane can fly into a building. - McMike1

reply

[deleted]

That's not an answer you fool!

Please calm down Jerome. You're not being very civil.

about he name the "people" he's talking about then?

I could name thousands of people who say that no frames were removed. Some are qualified to say so and some probably are not.

He's speculating out of his a$$!

Just like yourself. Some recent examples of Jerome "speculating":

"The Gov't can tell you whatever they want because you'll ALWAYS believe them right? "

"You're so brainwashed into thinking people that have more money, status are "better" than you so you believe their opinions etc.. are above anything you can say, hence you don't challenge them while fighting those that do. "

"The same Gov't that you defend so strongly are the same people that laugh at you behind closed doors. "

"How can you say they didn't release to the public what they "wanted" the public to see? Or removed what didn't fit with their explanations?"

"Bush didn't even have to be involved personally. There are other people besides him that can do things without his knowledge or permission if they want to."

Here is Jerome's obsession with thinking he's Neo from The Matrix:

"This is how all drones like you are brought up in american society. Morpheus was right in the Matrix when he said blue pills (drones) will "fight to protect the system they're a slave to."

"'Morpheus: The Matrix is a system, Neo. That system is our enemy. But when you're inside, you look around. What do you see. Business men, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system, and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inert, so hopelessly dependent on the system that they will fight to protect it.'

See what's in bold sheeple? "

Then he says...

"And no I don't think i'm NEO. and the words apply more to your side so dream on."

Yeah Jerome... that makes sense!

We don't agree on squat and you can't say no frames are missing because you (Or your clique here) have nothing to do with the frames personally. Meaning none of you are in a position to say all the frames are there or none were removed.

By that reasoning, who's to say the universe was ever created? You or I weren't there to personally witness it, so I say it never happened!


As a disciple of science, I don't believe a plane can fly into a building. - McMike1

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

Again: none of us needed to be involved personally or hands on in regard to the tapes, we just need to take what's available and use a little math. Which I did for you and ended up with three frames per second, perfectly within the parameters of such cameras.

You claim to be able to think for yourself? Now would be a good time. I'll even give you a start: the fact that the available frames matches the frame rate for such cameras means...?

reply

Since none of us here were involved personally or hands on in regards to handling the tapes.

Well then the only truth you know from personal involvement or hands on is the love of the feline?

Andromeda_XO-Hates Jews and Gays, Loves fans of the kinder!

reply

[deleted]

As you can see Tom you should have a serious talk with your beastiality obsessed trollfriend.

Honestly Stewie I don't think Tom considers you a friend, nor do your cats.

Andromeda_XO-Hates Jews and Gays, Loves fans of the kinder!

reply

As you can see Tom you should have a serious talk with your beastiality obsessed trollfriend.
Why? You're the one who claimed to have moved on, not him.
Still waiting for you to answer my question.
Stop hiding behind your claim that we needed to have personal involvemet with the tapes. I've demonstrated how this is wrong by providing you with the necessary numbers and even worked out the answer for you.
by Tom_Veil 5 days ago (Thu Jan 29 2009 05:23:01)

UPDATED Thu Jan 29 2009 07:32:05
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take the object's speed and the frame rate(s) involved, calculate how many frames it would take for the object to cross the field, then compare that to the number of frames that are present.
In short, I am in a position to say nothing's missing; so are you, along with everyone else on the planet who can read a map and perform simple equations.

Five frames.
1.667 seconds.
Three frames per second.
Ideal rate for such cameras.
Three per second, not four.
Think for yourself.
Deal with it.

reply

The argument between those that believe the "Big Bang theory" and those that don't is old news.

Is that the theory about you and the cats when mom leaves.

The most logical thing is for both sides to shut up and conceed defeat but of course due to our silly nature to have one up on the other side that won't happen.


What is "conceed", though I think you just admitted you have no evidence of missing frames ..... STEWIE!

Andromeda_XO-Hates Jews and Gays, Loves fans of the kinder!

reply

We don't agree on squat and you can't say no frames are missing because you (Or your clique here) have nothing to do with the frames personally. Meaning none of you are in a position to say all the frames are there or none were removed.

What logic, making a claim with no evidence, PROVE THERE WERE FRAMES MISSING STEWIE!

Andromeda_XO-Hates Jews and Gays, Loves fans of the kinder!

reply

no one here said "there ARE missing frames"
Then what, exactly, did you mean by the part in red?
by Jerome66 3 days ago (Tue Jan 27 2009 14:45:09)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How can you say they didn't release to the public what they "wanted" the public to see? Or removed what didn't fit with their explanations?
I answered those questions, now it's your turn to answer ours.
by CKent2 11 hours ago (Thu Jan 29 2009 02:30:43)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[W]ho says there ARE missing frames? (i.e.: Who says they removed what didn't fit with their explanations?)

by Tom_Veil 8 hours ago (Thu Jan 29 2009 05:23:01)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[T]he damage pattern at the Pentagon was not consistent with any missile, ergo there was no missile to film. So why would any frames be deleted?

reply

You can't do that Tom. You asserted FIRST that you were told or heard, read somewhere that no frames were removed when I said we could've been shown only what they (The Gov't) wanted us to see concerning that footage so the onus is on you!!

Stewie, Get off the cat, how dumb are you, if you claim that the video may have been doctored in any way, it's up yo you to prove your claim.

Andromeda_XO-Hates Jews and Gays, Loves fans of the kinder!

reply

[deleted]

And how about Tom prove his claim that no frames were removed?

OK, Since you insist on not meeting your burden of proof ........

Please prove you were never medically removed from a cat via a crowbar Stewie!

Andromeda_XO-Hates Jews and Gays, Loves fans of the kinder!

reply

[deleted]

You're implying I have to meet mine but he doesn't have to meet his?

Stewie, You claim frames may have been removed but you state you need no proof.

The it is a fact you were pried out of a cat with a crowbar, no proof needed, MEeeee-Owwch!

Andromeda_XO-Hates Jews and Gays, Loves fans of the kinder!

reply

[deleted]

MEE-OWWWWW!

Andromeda_XO-Hates Jews and Gays, Loves fans of the kinder!

reply

[deleted]

You need to get outside kid

So you can be alone with the felines?

Andromeda_XO-Hates Jews and Gays, Loves fans of the kinder!

reply

no one here said "there ARE missing frames"
Then what, exactly, did you mean by the part in red?
by Jerome66 3 days ago (Tue Jan 27 2009 14:45:09)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How can you say they didn't release to the public what they "wanted" the public to see? Or removed what didn't fit with their explanations?

reply

[deleted]

I repeated myself because you addressed Shake instead of answering what you meant by "or removed what didn't fit with their explanations". Are you now acknowledging that you essentially did claim there ARE missing frames?

Anyway, I told you how to figure out for yourself as to how many frames there should be. We're talking about something that was traveling at over 730 feet per second and 5 frames were released from the parking gate camera. The camera's field of view at that distance is 450 feet, giving it a maximum of 1.667 seconds to record. 5 frames over 1.667 seconds is 3 frames per second. 2 or 3 frames per second is ideal for cameras intended for monitoring pedestrians and slow-moving vehicles.

See? We don't need to have anything to do with the tapes PERSONALLY, we just need to take what's available and use a little math.

reply

Answer my question Tom.

Prove there are missing frames Stewie!

Andromeda_XO-Hates Jews and Gays, Loves fans of the kinder!

reply

Tom_Veil (Thu Jan 29 2009 13:57:21)
UPDATED Thu Jan 29 2009 13:59:40
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First of all CKent no Truther has said the Gov't "always lies no matter what".
They don't need to because it's obvious from the stance they take, McMike for one. Also when they sarcastically say "the Gov't never lies, right?"
Case in point:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0469641/board/nest/122487907?p=5&d=129 756376#129756376
McMike1 2 hours ago (Fri Feb 6 2009 07:30:53)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Pentagon Eyewitnesses, (Kept short, there are 100’s more I have)"


Where is the source of the list? Did the government provide you with the list?

reply

Name those that said no frames were removed.

NAME THEM!!


No. Jerome, if you believe there are frames removed, please let us know who said that there were frames removed. You're just like Darkon in another thread, asking for evidence that something didn't happen. If you believe that frames were removed, provide some kind of evidence or a quote from someone reputable that stated that frames were removed.

The real answer is you have no evidence. For you to be right, frames have to have been removed or your belief doesn't hold up. Is there any evidence or proof of this? Of course not. But you doggedly cling to this because if you don't, then you just might have to admit that you've got nothing at all.




As a disciple of science, I don't believe a plane can fly into a building. - McMike1

reply

Jerome,

Thanks for your reply. Who's routine job is it to create and plant explosives at the base of buildings in major cities? I'm genuinly curious as to whether or not you feel we should be worried that other buildings in New York and/or other American cities have had explosives planted in them?

reply

Thanks Tom that helps a lot. I have invoked Occam's Razor, and he just kind of shrugs his shoulder, and says he believes his gut. It's funny because my gut tells me it is a conspiracy too (I really hate Bush LOL), but even the most cursory research shows how foolish the notion of a conspiracy is. Maybe we have a deep seeded need to believe that something like that can't 'just happen.' It's almost like believing in a conspiracy is my natural state, and I have to use my mind to turn that off. Any psychologists out there?

Anyone have further information? The more the better.

reply

Anyone have further information? The more the better.
Got anything specific in mind?

reply


"Maybe we have a deep seeded need to believe that something like that can't 'just happen.'"

So you believe extensive pulverization of concrete at Ground Zero, or implosion of WTC 7 can just happen? Without the aids of controlled demolition experts?



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bx1E2B5oAEs

reply

What sort of "implosion" drops a significant portion of the building atop another building across the street? I'm still waiting for you to explain that one, Mike. How does pile up and spill over damage the roof and upper floors a building across the street so heavily that it has to be demolished and reconstructed? How come the owners of that building never filed suit against anyone to recover the costs of demolition and reconstruction? Or for the renovation that had nearly been completed when it suddenly became uninhabitable?

reply

Note the quotes around 'just happen' Do I believe "extensive pulverization of concrete at Ground Zero, or implosion of WTC 7 can just happen without the aids of controlled demolition experts..." In general no I don't. When someone flies two planes into adjacent buildings then yes I do.

reply

"Do I believe "extensive pulverization of concrete at Ground Zero, or implosion of WTC 7 can just happen without the aids of controlled demolition experts..." In general no I don't. When someone flies two planes into adjacent buildings then yes I do."

Look into the hole. Do see you one single piece of plane debris? Don't let the tapes sent to the TV networks fool you.


http://www.dc911truth.org/images/woman_wtc.jpg

http://whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/wtc1_woman_impact-area_full_large .jpg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bx1E2B5oAEs

reply

http://www.dc911truth.org/images/woman_wtc.jpg

http://whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/wtc1_woman_impact-area_full_large .jpg
She's below the fire and heat goes up. Also, she jumped after that picture was taken. She'd rather jump than remain standing there, sounds real pleasant.

reply

Look into the hole. Do see you one single piece of plane debris?

McMike, the planes struck the buildings at 450mph and 550 mph... why do you think there should be a big chunk of plane sticking out?

If it's debris you want...

Portion of fuselage from United 175 on roof of WTC 5:

http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics/Image:Fema-12390.jpg

Piece of landing gear found at West and Rector:

http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics/Image:NISTNCSTAR1-2-fig7-69.jpg

Piece of landing gear found embedded in one of the exterior panels of the North Tower:

http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics/Image:NISTNCSTAR1-2-fig7-70.jpg

Engine fragment found at Church and Murray:

http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics/Image:Engine_fragment_at_church_a nd_murray.jpg

Seat cushion from American 11 found on roof of 130 Liberty Plaza:

http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics/Image:Flight11-seatcushion.jpg

I can tell you what McMike (or any other conspiracy theoriest) would say... "All that debris was planted." Of course he couldn't tell you who planted it, when they did it or how they did it without anyone seeing anything. Conspiracy theorists are good at throwing out anomalies left and right but they fall short when it comes to actually explaining how it might work.




As a disciple of science, I don't believe a plane can fly into a building. - McMike1

reply

Look into the hole. Do see you one single piece of plane debris? Don't let the tapes sent to the TV networks fool you.


http://www.dc911truth.org/images/woman_wtc.jpg

http://whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/wtc1_woman_impact-area_full_large .jpg


It's the lighting, the hole is black inside, do you see a single desk, floor or wall in the hole, my god, don't listen to what the government tells you, THE TWIN TOWERS HAD ONLY ONE 110 STORY EMPTY ROOM!

Andromeda_XO-Hates Jews and Gays, Loves fans of the kinder!

reply

Do see you one single piece of plane debris?


Jesus f'ing christ Mike, the planes were traveling at 450+ mph... of course you aren't going to see any appreciable bits of airplane at the impact point.

WTF... your posts are such a waste of electrons.











Clamo, clamatis, omnes clamamus pro glace lactis.

reply

It's funny because my gut tells me it is a conspiracy too (I really hate Bush LOL), but even the most cursory research shows how foolish the notion of a conspiracy is.

I think that Bush hatred fuels a lot of conspiracy theorist fires. I don't care for him either, but the idea the government could pull something like this off strains belief.

Maybe we have a deep seeded need to believe that something like that can't 'just happen.'

No, what it is is we have a deep seated need to believe that there was some grand plan... some large scheme in place and everything was always under control. We don't want to believe that fanatical terrorists could strike at any time and no matter how much money we put into our security, they might find a way under the radar, so to speak. It's more reassuring to believe that yes, our defenses were impenetrable, but we knowingly lowered them to let this happen.



As a disciple of science, I don't believe a plane can fly into a building. - McMike1

reply

cfennell, I'm not going to give you much in the way of evidence, but I will share with you what I have noticed in my time dealing with conspiracy theories. Sorry if this sounds rambling or repetitive, but I'll make it up to you at the end with something you might actually find useful.

The thing about conspiracy theorists is that all they have in the way of "evidence" are questions and speculation. They search out things that look out of the ordinary and then create their own answers with the assumption already in mind that it has something to do with controlled demolitions ore secret societies. The fact is though, with an event like 9/11 there are going to be a lot of things out of the ordinary that seem to defy logic. However, when one actually investigates (and you have been given some good sources here to start with) the evidence leans overwhelmingly toward Al Qaeda as the culprit. The unfortunate thing is that most people don't actually have the scientific knowledge or facts about 9/11 to be able to correctly respond to the seeming flaws raised by conspiracy theorists, so when they hear their speculations it seems plausible. The first thing to keep in mind is that The most die hard conspiracy theorists behind this movement want the conspiracies to be true very badly. They have a deep level of hatred and paranoia against the US Government and various "secret societies" and to them all of the world's ills can be attributed to these entities. They cannot imagine a world where devastating acts like 9/11 are not the result of a secret plot by the world's elites, and to them this includes not just Bush, but Obama and countless others in both the public and private sector (bankers and businessmen especially). This is what these people believe. I've spoken to many of them and I know. These types of people will subconsciously twist anything they can so that it fits this worldview, and this is where films like Loose Change come in. As mentioned, most people are not knowledgeable in the facts or science related to 9/11, and this leaves a large blank slate for the conspiracy theorists to work with. They try to draw parallels that aren't there, use selective interviews and images, and in general just present things that will cast doubt on the official version of events. The primary goal is to cast doubt by asking tough questions and pointing out flaws, because once a person has lost confidence in what seems to be reality they are free to come up with their own version. In fact, if you look through enough 9/11 conspiracy websites you will find that there is hardly any agreement on what actually happened, just that it was the US Government/secret societies responsible (the rift between Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice being a classic example). This is because they just don't have the evidence to put together a definitive theory based on their beliefs like the 9/11 Commission was. All they have really are questions about what seem to be flaws. Look over the sites that Mastershake and CKent have given you (and look around here: http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/home#Debunking). They will help sort out many of the seeming problems of 9/11 brought up by the conspiracy theorists. This is the knowledge people need before seeing something like Loose Change, otherwise the viewer's ignorance of the topic will leave them susceptible to the glaring distortions of truth, and it is much more difficult for a person to be swayed away from conspiracy theories with these facts once they have begun to accept the conspiracies than it is to prevent the person from falling into the conspiracy in the first place by arming them with knowledge. Unfortunately, debunking sites are not as viral as conspiracy videos. And as mentioned, the true die hard conspiracy theorists want desperately for their delusions to be true. I don't mean that in the sense that they really want the government to do things crash planes into buildings. What I mean is that it gives these people a great sense of satisfaction to feel "above" everyone else, who are just "sheeple." Besides, a conspiracy theory is far more sexy than the reality that we lived in a messed up world where bad stuff can happen at any time. It's like a movie plot, and these guys think they are fighting the villian. Just look at Jerome and his talk about the Matrix and "thinking for himself."

Now, here is something you may be able to actually use. The conspiracy theorists like to ask questions about what they see as flaws in the Al Qaeda version of events, leaving us to try to answer these questions. Keep in mind, their theory is full of holes and here is a good question that you can ask them right back. I have brought this up with numerous conspiracy theorists and have never actually gotten a decent answer (and usually just get ignored or called names). The following are a few videos of actual controlled demolitions:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79sJ1bMR6VQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-WvQbFMIWU&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XG-l3N1YfQ&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dkfv0e2GCk&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKkYKa1XMTI&feature=related

The first thing that is blatantly obvious is that every genuine controlled demolition is preceded by a series of loud, steady, consecutive blasts. I did not just select a few which have this characteristic to show you either. There are plenty more of these videos on Youtube and they all share this trait.

Now here is a video of one of the towers coming down:

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

Note the lack of loud, steady, consecutive blasts before the collapse. Conspiracy theorists like to discredit the real version by pointing out what they see as inconsistencies in it. This however is a pretty glaring inconsistency in their theory that they usually try to dodge when I bring it up. If the towers were brought down by controlled demolition, then why is it missing the loud, steady, consecutive blasts unlike every other controlled demolition? There should have been tens of thousands of people who heard explosions like that, but in reality there were zero. Instead, conspiracy theorists like to point out how a few people report hearing “a blast.” Of course, in a building full of transformers, gas tanks, and other things that could blow up it would be odd if there weren’t a few people who reported blasts. But again, “a blast” is far from the loud, steady, consecutive blasts that have been present in every other controlled demolition ever conducted. Another theory they like to use is experimental “silent explosions” that the government keeps top secret, exactly the sort of deus ex machina that doesn’t require any real evidence beyond speculation (and the burden of proof for these unknown explosives rests on them).

Just thought I’d give you some ammunition to throw back so you aren’t the one being asked all the questions.


----
Movie News, Reviews, etc:
http://www.nukethefridge.com/

reply

"There should have been tens of thousands of people who heard explosions like that, but in reality there were zero."

William Rodriguez heard the basement explosion going off before the explosion in the upper floors went off.

"Tens of thousands of people" were not in the basement; William Rodriguez was.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bx1E2B5oAEs

reply

See what I mean? These people completely ignore the obvious fact that in all real controlled demolitions the sound can be heard for thousands of feet around. Instead he uses a guy who heard one or two bangs in the basement (which could have been anything). Sorry, but unless Rodriguez heard this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79sJ1bMR6VQ) then the sound was not that of a controlled demolition, and if that is what he heard, then it would have been heard far beyond just the basement by thousands of people in the area.

And as for that video, are you kidding me? Do you think that a 110 story building collapsing would be quiet? There were countless tons of steel and concrete smashing together and compressing the air below it instantaneously (have you ever filled a bag with air and squeezed it? Not the quietest sound).

If you people want to talk about the first time steel is ever destroyed in a situation, then this would have to be the first time that the explosions started going off after the building started collapsing .

----
Movie News, Reviews, etc:
http://www.nukethefridge.com/

reply

William Rodriguez heard the basement explosion going off before the explosion in the upper floors went off.
William "What's My Story Today?" Rodriguez didn't say a thing about any explosions in the basement until he talked to Alex Jones and tried to sue the US Government.

reply

William Rodriguez heard the basement explosion going off before the explosion in the upper floors went off.

After he sued.

HIS FIRST STATEMENT

"The fire, the ball of fire, for example, I was in the basement when the first plane hit the building. And at that moment, I thought it was an electrical generator that blew up at that moment. A person comes running into the office saying 'explosion, explosion, explosion.' When I look at this guy; has all his skin pulled off of his body. Hanging from the top of his fingertips like it was a glove. And I said, what happened? He said the elevators. What happened was the ball of fire went down with such a force down the elevator shaft on the 58th (50A) – freight elevator, the biggest freight elevator that we have in the North Tower, it went out with such a force that it broke the cables. It went down, I think seven flights. The person survived because he was pulled from the B3 level. But this person, being in front of the doors waiting for the elevator, practically got his skin vaporized."

Andromeda_XO-Hates Jews and Gays, Loves fans of the kinder!

reply

MasterShake, don't you ever get sick of repeating this same crap to different people? I was here 3 years ago and you were arguing about the same thing.

reply

Facts are facts.

Andromeda_XO-Hates Jews and Gays, Loves fans of the kinder!

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

Some around here don't like facts. Some would rather repeat crap in hopes of a different outcome.

Say, isn't that pretty much the definition of "crazy"?

reply

[deleted]

Are there any videos at all that actually show a jet-liner flying at precision altitude over Washington-Arlington, pin-pointing the wall of the Pentagon?

Not video, the videos show nothing either way, ATC records, communication, the hijackers at the airport, DNA, etc seal the facts. Also ...

Pentagon Eyewitnesses, (Kept short, there are 100’s more I have)

Elaine McCusker:
”I saw a very low-flying American Airlines plane that seemed to be accelerating.”

James Mosley, 4 stories up on a scaffold outside the Navy Annex:
”The building starting shaking, and I looked over and saw this big silver plane run into the side of the Pentagon. It almost knocked me off.”

Christopher Munsey:
”A silver, twin-engine American Airlines jetliner gliding almost noiselessly over the Navy Annex, fast, low and straight toward the Pentagon, just hundreds of yards away. It was a nightmare coming to life...The plane, with red and blue markings, hurtled by and within moments exploded in a ground-shaking "whoomp," as it appeared to hit the side of the Pentagon. A huge flash of orange flame and black smoke poured into the sky. Smoke seemed to change from black to white, forming a billowing column in the sky.”

Vin Narayanan (saw C-130):
”Then I looked up to my left and saw an American Airlines jet flying right at me. The jet roared over my head, clearing my car by about 25 feet. The windows were dark on American Airlines Flight 77…The tail of the plane clipped the overhanging exit sign... The windows were dark on American Airlines Flight 77 as it streaked toward its target, only 50 yards away. The hijacked jet slammed into the Pentagon at a ferocious speed. But the Pentagon's wall held up like a champ. It barely budged as the nose of the plane curled upwards and crumpled before exploding into a massive fireball.. The plane exploded after it hit, the tail came off and it began burning immediately...Within five minutes, police and emergency vehicles began arriving.”

Alan Wallace, fireman who had to run for his life and reported molten metal due to extreme heat:
"Firefighter Alan Wallace was standing outside his fire station when he looked across the nearby interstate and saw a white airplane with orange and blue trim heading almost straight at him. It slammed into the building just a couple hundred feet from him." (Scripps Howard News Service on 9/11)
”We have had a commercial carrier crash into the west side of the Pentagon at the heliport, Washington Boulevard side. The crew is OK. The airplane was a 757 Boeing or a 320 Airbus.”

Madelyn Zakhem, executive secretary at the Smart Traffic Center (Arlington), had just stepped outside:
"...she heard what she thought was a jet fighter directly overhead. It wasn't. It was an airliner coming straight up Columbia Pike at tree-top level. "It was huge! It was silver. It was low -- unbelievable! I could see the cockpit. I fell to the ground....I was crying and scared." (Roads of the Futute - September 21, 2001 - The Friday Report)

Tim Timmerman, a pilot in his home near the Pentagon:
”I was looking out the window; I live on the 16th floor, overlooking the Pentagon, in a corner apartment, so I have quite a panorama. And being next to National Airport, I hear jets all the time, but this jet engine was way too loud. It didn't appear to crash into the building; most of the energy was dissipated in hitting the ground, but I saw the nose break up, I saw the wings fly forward, and then the conflagration engulfed everything in flames…. It was a Boeing 757, American Airlines, no question….It added power on its way in, the nose hit, and the wings came forward and it went up in a fireball…A piece of twisted aircraft fuselage lay nearby...It was so close to me...” (London Guardian - September 12, 2001)

Joe Harrington, installing new furniture in Wedge 1, walked out on the parking lot before crash:
”One of my guys pointed to an American Airlines airplane 20 feet high over Washington Blvd. It seemed like it made impact just before the wedge.”

Joseph Royster, in his car:
"I was on the street driving, and then the plane went over the top of my car, just over the treetops ... It was a big aircraft just on its course."

Steve Storti, on the balcony of his apartment building which is less than a mile away from the Pentagon in Crystal City:
"Then he caught the glint of silver out of the corner of his eye. He looked up to see a passenger plane with the trademark stainless-steel fuselage and stripes of American Airlines...Time seemed to slip into slow motion as he watched the plane cross over Route 395, tip its left wing as it passed the Navy annex, veer sharply and then slice into the Pentagon. "I remember thinking that whoever is flying this knows what they're doing," Storti said. "The plane traveled straight as an arrow. It didn't waver and it didn't flip from side to side." Storti watched the plane slide silently into the Pentagon "like a car entering a garage." (The Providence Journal - September 12, 2001)

Master Sgt. Noel Sepulveda, who received a Airman’s Medal and Purple Heart for his actions near the Pentagon:
"The plane’s right wheel struck a light pole, causing it to fly at a 45-degree angle, he said. The plane tried to recover, but hit a second light pole and continued flying at an angle. "You could hear the engines being revved up even higher," Sepulveda said. The plane dipped its nose and crashed into the southwest side of the Pentagon."The right engine hit high, the left engine hit low," Sepulveda said. "For a brief moment, you could see the body of the plane sticking out from the side of the building. Then a ball of fire came from behind it." An explosion followed, sending Sepulveda flying against a light pole." (Master Sgt. Dorothy Goepel Air Force Print News - April 15, 2002)

Cheryl Hammond, at the Pentagon's south parking lot:
"I thought they'd put out an alert or something," Hammond said. "We saw the big American Airlines plane and started running." (The Pentagram)

Mike Walter, USA Today, on the road when a jet slammed into the Pentagon:
"I was sitting in the northbound on 27 and the traffic was, you know, typical rush-hour -- it had ground to a standstill. I looked out my window and I saw this plane, this jet, an American Airlines jet, coming. And I thought, 'This doesn't add up, it's really low...And I saw it. I mean it was like a cruise missile with wings. It went right there and slammed right into the Pentagon...Huge explosion, great ball of fire, smoke started billowing out. And then it was chaos on the highway as people tried to either move around the traffic and go down, either forward or backward...We had a lady in front of me, who was backing up and screaming, 'Everybody go back, go back, they've hit the Pentagon...It was just sheer terror." (http://archives.cnn.com/2001/CAREER/trends/09/11/witnesses/)
...it turned and came around in front of the vehicle and it clipped one of these light poles ... and slammed right into the "Pentagon right there." "Now there are some people who say that it skipped and went into the Pentagon and it may have gone that way, but that’s not what I saw. What I saw was the jet went very low into the Pentagon and it went straight." "It seemed like it was a slow, graceful bank and then once it straightened out, that's when it sped up." "...you could see chunks of the wreckage on the ground, pieces of the plane.... It literally disintegrated on impact. It hit, and as it went into the side of the building it sheared off the wings." (Digipresse interview, May 22, 2002)

Joel Sucherman:
"It came screaming across the highway, route 110…I did not see the engines, I saw the body and the tail; it was a silver jet with the markings along the windows that spoke to me as an American Airlines jet, it was not a commercial, excuse me, a business jet, it was not a Lear jet, ... it was a bigger plane than that." [Suchmacher said more, you’ll see it below]

Mary Ann Owens, on a highway between Arlington National Cemetery and the Pentagon:
"The sound of the engines came so quickly I thought it was another helicopter landing. I looked left to see a large plane barely clear the I-395 overpass. Instantly I knew what was happening, and I involuntarily ducked as the plane passed perhaps 50 to 75 feet above the roof of my car at great speed. Street lights toppled as the plane barely cleared the Interstate 395 overpass. ... Gripping the steering wheel of my vibrating car, I involuntarily ducked as the wobbling plane thundered over my head. Once it passed, I raised slightly and grimaced as the left wing dipped and scraped the helicopter area just before the nose crashed into the southwest wall of the Pentagon. The impact was deafening. The fuselage hit the ground and blew up. I could see office walls through the broken outer walls, then smoke and flames engulfed the west wall. Perhaps 10 seconds had passed since I first saw the plane. At first no one moved. Then debris began falling over the cars." (Gannett News Service & This is Local London - 9/11)

Robert A. Leonard, driving northbound in the HOV lanes on I-395 (His car passed the crest of the hill, at the point where Washington comes fully into view and the Pentagon is on the left):
"I braked, looked out my left window and saw a large commercial aircraft aiming for the Pentagon."The aircraft, so close to the ground, was banked skillfully to the right, leveled off perpendicular to the Pentagon's southwest side, then went full throttle directly toward the building. The plane vanished, absorbed by the building, and there was a slight pause. Then a huge fireball rose into the sky." (The Washington Post)

Omar Campo, gardener, working on the grass on the other side of the road:
"I was cutting the grass and it came in screaming over my head. I felt the impact It was a passenger plane. I think an American Airways plane."

Alfred S. Regnery, northbound on I-395:
"As I approached the Pentagon, which was still not quite in view, listening on the radio to the first reports about the World Trade Center disaster in New York, a jetliner, apparently at full throttle and not more than a couple of hundred yards above the ground, screamed overhead...I knew it was about to crah." (Human Events Online - September 17 2001)

Mary Lyman, driving northbound on the I-395:
"I actually saw the plane in front of me, coming in at a very steep angle toward the ground and going fast -- I think I actually heard it accelerate -- and then it disappeared and a cloud of smoke started billowing." (The Washington Post - September 16, 2001)

Michael James, who was in his car:
"The plane came over the top of us and brushed the trees. Then it looked like it hit the helicopter pad and skipped up and went right into the first and second floors." (Rocky Mountain News - Lexis-Nexis - M. E. Sprengelmeyer)

Afework Hagos, a computer programmer in the traffic jam at Columbia Pike:
”There was a huge screaming noise and I got out of the car as the plane came over. Everybody was running away in different directions. It was tilting its wings up and down like it was trying to balance. It hit some lampposts on the way in… I saw American Airline insignia and when it made impact with the Pentagon initially I saw smoke, then flames”

Phillip Thompson, stuck in traffic, gulf war veteran:
”I saw an American Airlines jet come overhead and slam into the Pentagon. The plane looked as if it were coming in for a landing - cruising at a shallow angle, wings level, very steady. But, strangely, the landing gear was up and the flaps weren't down….. and the blast hit us in a wave…..”

Levi Stephens, 23, courier Armed Forces Information Service:
”what looked like a 747" plowed into the south side of the Pentagon, possibly skipping through a heliport before it hit the building.”

Personnel working in the Navy Annex:
”I was driving away from the Pentagon in the South Pentagon lot when I hear this huge rumble, the ground started shaking … I saw this [plane] come flying over the Navy Annex. It flew over the van and I looked back and I saw this huge explosion, black smoke everywhere.”

Unanymous person live on television, shown in "Painful Deceptions" from Eric Hufschmid:
"No doubt about it, it was an American Airlines. It slammed right into the building."

Jack Singleton, president of Singleton Electric Co. Inc:
”The plane's left wing actually came in near the ground and the right wing was tilted up in the air. That right wing went directly over our trailer, so if that wing had not tilted up, it would have hit the trailer.”


Jeromes Favorite Dream -

reply

Dave Winslow, Associated Press reporter, from a 10th floor apartment of a 17-floor block in Pentagon City:
"I heard this enormous sound of turbulence. . .As I turned to my right, I saw a jumbo tail go by me along Route 395. It was like the rear end of the fuselage was riding on 395. I just saw the tail go whoosh right past me. In a split second, you heard this boom. A combination of a crack and a thud. It rattled my windows. I thought they were going to blow out. Then came an enormous fireball." (The Washingtonian - Lexis-Nexis)

Steve Anderson from the USA Today building:
”I watched in horror as the plane flew at treetop level, banked slightly to the left, drug it's wing along the ground and slammed into the west wall of the Pentagon exploding into a giant orange fireball.”

Mark Bright, Defense Protective Service officers and one of the first on the scene:
”I knew it was going to strike the building because it was very, very low -- at the height of the street lights. It knocked a couple down…. I heard the plane power-up just before it struck the Pentagon.”

James Ryan, in his car:
"On my left, right above me - a little over. I see an American Airlines plane, silver plane, I could see AA on the tail. I noticed the landing gear was up...[How heigh was it] Within a hundred feet. It was very low. At that point he tilted his wings this way and this way (mimics), And the plane was slow, so that happened concurrently with the engines going down. (mimics) And then straightened out sort of suddenly and hit full gas. (mimics) It was so loud it hurt my ears. It was just so loud. He just went straight in at that point. ...[went over a hill and he heard an explosion]...The plane was low enough that I could see the windows of the plane. I could see every detail of the plane..." (Digipresse interview)

Kim Flyler, in the car trying to get on a nearby parking lot:
”At that moment I heard a plane and then a loud cracking noise.... Right before the plane hit the building, you could see the silhouettes of people in the back two rows. You couldn't see if they were male or female, but you could tell there was a human being in there."

Steve Eiden from his truck on a nearby road:
”You could almost see the people in the windows, he said as he watched the plane disappear behind a line of trees, followed by a tall plume of black smoke.”

James R. Cissell, former photo journalist stuck in traffic:
”I saw this plane coming in and it was low - and getting lower. If you couldn't touch it from standing on the highway, you could by standing on your car…. I thought, 'This isn't really happening. That is a big plane.' Then I saw the faces of some of the passengers on board…'It came in in a perfectly straight line…It didn't slow down. I want to say it accelerated. It just shot straight in.”

Steve Riskus from the nearest highway. He saw this plane pass at a distance of about a 100 feet (Interview conducted by email by "Agent Fescado"):
"I saw the plane hit the building. It did not hit the ground first... It did not hit the roof first... It did dead center on the side... I was close enough that I could see the American Airlines logo on the tail as it headed towards the building... The plane looked like it was coming in about where you have the "MAX APPROACH" on that picture... I was at about where the "E" in "ANGLE OF CAMERA" is written when the plane hit... It was not completely level, but it was not going straight down, kind of like it was landing with no gear down... It knocked over a few light poles on it's way..."

Christopher Bollyn of the American Free Press on Steve Riskus (compare with the statement above):
"Because the Global Hawk is a surveillance drone, the engine is contained in a heavily insulated housing, which makes it extremely quiet. This corresponds with eyewitness reports. American Free Press asked eyewitness Steve Riskus, who said he was within 100 feet of the aircraft, what he heard. He said he did not “recall hearing anything.” (http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/citizen_grand_jury.html)

Linda Plaisted, in office at home in Arlington less than one mile from the Pentagon:
"The sound of the plane grew louder and louder...I looked out the window to the West just in time to see the belly of that aircraft and the tail section fly directly over my house at treetop height...I started to run toward my front door but the plane was going so fast at this point that it only took 4 or 5 seconds before I heard a tremendously loud crash and books on my shelves started tumbling to the floor." (Wherewereyou.org contribution #1148)

Oscar Martinez:
”I saw a big jet flying close to the building coming at full speed. There was a big noise when it hit the building.”

Allen Cleveland, from a Metro train going to National Airport (Also saw the C-130):
”I looked to the right of the train as we were coming into the station, and noticed a jet flying in real low, about a mid-sized passenger jet flying in. I know it was silver, that's the only thing I know.” (Washington Post video)

Bobby Eberle, looking from his car on the road:
”Riding in a convertible ... I looked back and saw a jet airliner flying very low and very fast.”

Kat Gaines, route 110 approaching the parking lots:
”I saw a low-flying jetliner strike the top of nearby telephone poles.”

Skarlet, webmaster of punkprincess.com:
”As I came up along the Pentagon I saw helicopters. That's not strange. It's the Pentagon. Then I saw the plane. There were only a few cars on the road, we all stopped....It was headed straight for the building. A huge jet. Then it was gone. A massive hole in the side of the Pentagon gushed smoke. The noise was beyond description. "Buildings don't eat planes. That plane, it just vanished. There should have been parts on the ground. It should have rained parts on my car. The airplane didn't crash. Where are the parts? There was a plane. It didn't go over the building. It went into the building. I want them to find it whole, wedged between floors or something. I want to make it make sense. I want to know why there's this gap in my memory, this gap that makes it seem as though the plane simply became invisible and banked up at the very last minute.” (http://punkprincess.com/archives/002150.html)

Penny Elgas, looking from her car from a nearby road:
”Traffic was at a standstill. I heard a rumble, looked out my driver's side window and realized that I was looking at the nose of an airplane coming straight at us from over the road (Columbia Pike) that runs perpendicular to the road I was on. The plane just appeared there- very low in the air, to the side of (and not much above) the CITGO gas station… then it banked in the slightest turn in front of me, toward the heliport… the plane seemed to be not more than 80 feet off the ground and about 4-5 car lengths in front of me… that other wing rocked slightly toward the ground... an American Airlines plane… gently rocked and slowly [She claims because of the adrenaline and shock she saw everything in slowmotion without registering the sound from that moment on] glided straight into the Pentagon…. At the point where the fuselage hit the wall, it seemed to simply melt into the building. I saw a smoke ring surround the fuselage as it made contact with the wall. It appeared as a smoke ring that encircled the fuselage at the point of contact and it seemed to be several feet thick. I later realized that it was probably the rubble of churning bits of the plane and concrete. The churning smoke ring started at the top of the fuselage and simultaneously wrapped down both the right and left sides of the fuselage to the underside, where the coiling rings crossed over each other and then coiled back up to the top. Then it started over again -- only this next time, I also saw fire, glowing fire in the smoke ring. At that point, the wings disappeared into the Pentagon. And then I saw an explosion and watched the tail of the plane slip into the building.”

Father Stephen McGraw:
”Washington Boulevard… The traffic was very slow moving, and at one point just about at a standstill…waited in the left hand lane of the road, on the side closest to the Pentagon…I did not hear anything at all until the plane was just right above our cars… passed about 20 feet over my car… The plane clipped the top of a light pole just before it got to us, injuring a taxi driver, whose taxi was just a few feet away from my car…. My only memories really were that it looked like a plane coming in for a landing. I mean in the sense that it was controlled and sort of straight. That was my impression… There was an explosion and a loud noise and I felt the impact. I remember seeing a fireball come out of two windows (of the Pentagon). I saw an explosion of fire billowing through those two windows.”

Shari Taylor, Pentagon parking lot:
"I looked over my shoulder and you can hear the plane coming in, it was just so loud...descending lower and lower, until he was almost on top of Route 27 that runs alongside the Pentagon. And then he just slammed into the Pentagon." (We Were on Duty documentary)

Wanda Ramey, stood at the Mall plaza booth and had an excellent view on the crash:
"I saw the wing of the plane clip the light post, and it made the plane slant. Then the engine revved up and crashed into the west side of the building," she said. "It happened so fast. One second I saw the plane and next it was gone." Recalling those moments again, Ramey said it appeared the building sucked the plane up inside. "A few seconds later, I heard a loud boom and I saw a huge fireball and lots of smoke," she said." (MDW News)

Terrance Kean, architect, from a 14-story building nearby:
”I heard the loud jet engines and glanced out his window. I saw this very, very large passenger jet. It just plowed right into the side of the Pentagon. The nose penetrated into the portico. And then it sort of disappeared, and there was fire and smoke everywhere. . . . It was very sort of surreal.”

David Marra, 23, an information-technology specialist:
”I saw an American Airlines jet swooping in, its wings wobbly, looking like it was going to slam right into the Pentagon: "It was 50 ft. off the deck when he came in. It sounded like the pilot had the throttle completely floored. The plane rolled left and then rolled right. Then he caught an edge of his wing on the ground." There is a helicopter pad right in front of the side of the Pentagon. The wing touched there, then the plane cartwheeled into the building.”

Bruce Elliott, form. commander of the Iowa Army Ammunition Plant, from the south parking lot:
”I looked to my left and saw the plane coming in…It was banking and garnering speed...It clipped a utility pole guide wire, which may have slowed it down a bit before it crashed into the building and burst into flames.”

William Middleton, sweeper who was less then a mile from the Pentagon:
”I looked up and spotted a commercial jet whose pilot seemed to be fighting with his own craft. Middleton said the plane was no higher than the tops of telephone poles as it lurched toward the Pentagon. The jet accelerated in the final few hundred yards before it tore into the building.”

Scott P. Cook and Ray Verle from fifth floor of the Portals building, at theTidal Basin and Maine Avenue [also described C-130 very detailed]:
”It was a 757 out of Dulles, which had come up the river in back of our building, turned sharply over the Capitol, ran past the White House and the Washington Monument, up the river to Rosslyn, then dropped to treetop level and ran down Washington Boulevard to the Pentagon.”

Bob Dubill, employee of USA today looking from his car on the road [pulitzer price winner]:
”I saw a jetliner fly over the roadway. It filled his field of vision. The jet was 40-feet off the ground speeding toward the Pentagon…the wheels were up..and I brazed myself for the explosion.”

Dan Creed and 2 collegues at the naval annex, next to the Pentagon:
”We saw the plane dive down and level off. It was no more than 30 feet off the ground, and it was screaming. It was just screaming. It was nothing more than a guided missile at that point. It's just the most frightening thing in the world, going full speed, going full throttle, its wheels up.”


Jeromes Favorite Dream -

reply

Sgt. William Lagasse, a pentagon police dog handler, the son of an aviation instructor, at a nearby gas station:
”I saw the aircraft above my head about 80 feet above the ground, 400 miles an hour…I thought the plane was about to drop on top of me, it was that close. I knew the plane was not going to land. The 757's flaps were not deployed and the landing gear was retracted… It was close enough that I could see the windows and the blinds had been pulled down. I read American Airlines on it… I got on the radio and broadcast. I said a plane is, is heading toward the heliport side of the building.”

Sgt. William Lagasse in an email conversation with "my good friend" Dick Eastman:
"Dear Sir rest assured it was a Boeing 757 that flew into the building that day, I was on duty as a pentagon police sgt. I was refueling my vehicle at the barraks k gas station that day adjacent to the aircrafts flight path. It was close enough that i could see the windows had the shades pulled down, it struck several light poles next to rt 27 and struck a trailer used to store construction equipment for the renovation of the pentagon that was to the right of the fueselage impact point. The fact that you are insinuating that this was staged and a fraud is unbelievable. You ask were the debris is...well it was in the building..I saw it everywhere. I swear to god you people piss me off to no end. I invite you and you come down and I will walk you through it step by step. I have more than a few hours in general aviation aircraft and can identify commercial airliners. Have you ever seen photos of other aircraft accident photos...there usually isnt huge amounts of debris left...how much did you see from the WTC?...are those fake aircraft flying into the building. I know that this will make no diffrence to you because to even have a websight like this you are obviously a diffrent sort of thinker." (Another email conversation between these two can be found here)

Army Captain Lincoln Leibner, south parking lot:
”I saw this large American Airlines passenger jet coming in fast and low... I was about 100 yards away…You could see through the windows of the aircraft. It was accelerating, It was wheels up, flaps up, engines full throttle... The plane completely entered the building… between the second and third floors… I got a little repercussion, from the sound, the blast. I've heard artillery, and that was louder than the loudest has to offer....Captain Lincoln Leibner says the aircraft struck a helicopter on the helipad, setting fire to a fire truck…” [The truck was indeed on fire but I haven’t read anything about a chopper on the helipad, although there was a chopper above the building.]

Lt Gen Ron Kadish, Director of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization at the Navy Annex:
”I walked in the office and stood peering out of the window looking at the Pentagon. As I stood there, I instinctively ducked at the extremely loud roar and whine of a jet engine spooling up. Immediately, the large silver cylinder of an aircraft appeared in my window, coming over my right shoulder as I faced the Westside of the Pentagon directly towards the heliport. The aircraft, looking to be either a 757 or Airbus, seemed to come directly over the annex, as if it had been following Columbia Pike - an Arlington road leading to Pentagon. The aircraft was moving fast, at what I could only be estimate as between 250 to 300 knots…The aircraft was at a sharp downward angle of attack, on a direct course for the Pentagon. It was "clean", in as much as, there were no flaps applied and no apparent landing gear deployed. He was slightly left wing down as he appeared in my line of sight, as if he'd just "jinked" to avoid something. As he crossed Route 110 he appeared to level his wings, making a slight right wing slow adjustment as he impacted low on the Westside of the building to the right of the helo, tower and fire vehicle around corridor 5.”

Terry Morin, form. United States Marine Corps Aviator, from Federal Office Building [Navy Annex]:
”…The noise was absolutely deafening. The aircraft was essentially right over the top of me and the outer portion of the FOB (flight path parallel the outer edge of the FOB). Everything was shaking and vibrating, including the ground. I estimate that the aircraft was no more than 100 feet above me (30 to 50 feet above the FOB) in a slight nose down attitude. The plane had a silver body with red and blue stripes down the fuselage. I believed at the time that it belonged to American Airlines, but I couldn't be sure. It looked like a 737 and I so reported to authorities. Within seconds the plane cleared the 8th Wing of BMDO and was heading directly towards the Pentagon. Engines were at a steady high-pitched whine, indicating to me that the throttles were steady and full. I estimated the aircraft speed at between 350 and 400 knots. The flight path appeared to be deliberate, smooth, and controlled. As the aircraft approached the Pentagon, I saw a minor flash (later found out that the aircraft had sheared off a portion of a highway light pole down on Hwy 110). As the aircraft flew ever lower I started to lose sight of the actual airframe as a row of trees to the Northeast of the FOB blocked my view. I could now only see the tail of the aircraft. I believe I saw the tail dip slightly to the right indicating a minor turn in that direction. Elapsed time from hearing the initial noise to when I saw the impact flash was between 12 and 15 seconds.” [rest of his testimony can be found in other parts]

James S. Robbins, a national-security analyst and 'nationalreviewonline' contributor, watched from his 6th story office window in Arlington:
"I was standing, looking out my large office window, which faces west and from six stories up has a commanding view of the Potomac and the Virginia heights. The Pentagon is about a mile and half distant in the center of the tableau. I was looking directly at it when the aircraft struck. The sight of the 757 diving in at an unrecoverable angle is frozen in my memory, but at the time, I did not immediately comprehend what I was witnessing."

Michael Tinyk, at work on the 10th floor of the U.S. Trademark Office in Crystal City:
"he saw a dark orange and blue commercial airliner just above the tree line "coming in lower and lower" on what he instantly registered as the "wrong side" of the flight path to the airport. "There was no reason for a plane to come in that low, that fast" ... The plane took "a flight path straight up 395..." (The Providence Journal-Bulletin - Lexis-Nexis)

Thomas J. Trapasso, on the deck of his house about 1 mile away from the Pentagon and just west of I-395:
"The engines were just screaming, and the wheels were up," Trapasso said. "It disappeared over the trees, and I heard a boom. I knew something awful had happened--that an airplane had crashed somewhere in Washington, D.C." (Aviation Week - September 17, 2001)

Army Brig. Gen. Clyde A. Vaughn, in his car on I-395:
"Vaughn said "I was scanning the air" as he was sitting in his car. "There wasn't anything in the air, except for one airplane, and it looked like it was loitering over Georgetown (many miles west of the Pentagon), in a high, left-hand bank," he said. "That may have been the plane. I have never seen one on that (flight) pattern." Georgetown is a sector of the District of Columbia jammed with shops and restaurants - it is one of the city's most vital tourist draws. Commercial aircraft that are either approaching or departing from nearby Ronald Reagan National Airport do not fly over Georgetown, and rather trace their flight route over the nearby Potomac River, which separates the district from South Arlington, Virginia, location of the Pentagon. A few minutes later, Vaughn witnessed the craft's impact."

Rodney Washington, stuck in stand-still traffic a few hundred yards from the Pentagon:
"It was extremely loud, as you can imagine, a plane that size, it was deafening," Washington said. The plane was flying low and rapidly descended, Washington said, knocking over light poles before hitting the ground on a helicopter pad just in front of the Pentagon and essentially bouncing into it. It "landed there and the momentum took it into the Pentagon," Washington said. "There was a very, very brief delay and then it exploded." Washington speculated that it could have been worse: "If it had kept altitude a little bit higher it probably would have landed in the middle of the Pentagon, in that court." (http://www.boston.com/news/packages/underattack/globe_stories/0912/After_assault_on_Pentagon_orderly_response+.shtml)

Ian Wyatt, 24, is walking to his job:
"All of a sudden I hear incredibly loud jet engines flying very low over the highway. I duck, I look up, it looks like a silver American Airlines, twin-engine plane and then boom. I couldn't see from the bridges but then there was this plume of smoke coming up from the Pentagon...It was going so fast and it was so low" (The Free Lance-Star - video)

Some 'Barbara' at a CNN audio interview on the morning of September 11:
"We were trying to get off of the exit for the Memorial Bridge. On the left-hand side, there was a commercial plane coming in, and was coming in too fast and the too low, and the next thing we saw was a go-down below the side of the road, and we just saw the fire that came up after that...[Was there a sound as well?]...that I can't verify, because the windows were up in the vehicle...[So you believe it was a commercial airliner that was hitting the Pentagon?]...Yes, and I'm not sure exactly where the Pentagon, where it was in relationship top where the plane went down. You know, but it was relatively close to one another...No, I did not see what kind of an airline."

'K.M.', a Pentagon City resident:
"I live in Pentagon City (part of Arlington) and can see the Pentagon when I look out my window. ... It was so shocking, I was listening to the news on what had happened in New York, and just happened to look out the window because I heard a low flying plane and then I saw it hit the Pentagon. It happened so fast... it was in the air one moment and in the building the next..." (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/1537530.stm)

'Steve' ([email protected]), who was about half a mile away, posted in a google groups message:
"I saw the jet just before it crashed. Something big and silver, nose down going aimed like a dart straight into it. The fireball was huge, 10 stories high and our building shook hard. Everyone in our two towers ran to the fire escapes. Most not knowing what exactly was happening. I had more fear because I saw what happened." (http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.food.drink.beer/msg/d37c10da4bf8fae2?oe=UTF-8&output=gplain)

Whisper2i ([email protected]):
[did you see the plane there?? or parts of it?]...No, but I saw the plane hit the building on 9/11. It was a plane. it was big it was flying low, and it hit the pentagon. I saw it from the front seat of my car on the highway that passes that side of the pentagon. There are parts all over the place, they are all smaller than a US nickle because of the force of the crash." (http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.folklore.urban/msg/5d5cc167a660e256?output=gplain)

Radio Transmissions tape, released by the Arlington Police Department:
"Motor 14, it was an American Airlines plane, uh, headed eastbound over the Pike, possibly toward the Pentagon." (C-span audio file)

Unnamed Navy admiral, who was walking outside the Pentagon:
"It was a good size jet aircraft. I saw it clip a light pole but keep coming and then slam into the front of the building." (Houston Chronicle - Lexis-Nexis - Michael Hedges)

Dennis Clem:
"There was a commercial airliner that said American Airliners over the side of it flying at just above treetop height at full speed headed for the Pentagon."


Jeromes Favorite Dream -

reply

Richard Benedetto"It was an American Airlines airplane, I could see it very clearly."

Omar Campo, a Salvadorean" "It was a passenger plane. I think an American Airways plane. I was cutting grass and it came in screaming over my head."

Joseph Candelario: "I noticed a large aircraft flying low towards the White House. This aircraft then made a sharp turn and flew towards the Pentagon and seconds later crashed into it."

James Cissell: "I saw this plane coming in and it was low - and getting lower. ... Then I saw the faces of some of the passengers on board."

Dennis Clem: "There was a commercial airliner that said American Airliners over the side of it flying at just above treetop height at full speed headed for the Pentagon."

Michael Dobbs: "It was an American airlines airliner. I was looking out the window and saw it come right over the Navy annex at a slow angle."

Penny Elgas: "... the plane was directly over the cars in front of my car .... I remember recognizing it as an American Airlines plane -- I could see the windows and the color stripes."

Cheryl Hammond: "We saw the big American Airlines plane and started running."

Joe Harrington: "... one of my guys pointed to an American Airlines airplane 20 feet high over Washington Blvd."

Albert Hemphill: "The aircraft, look[ed] to be either a 757 or Airbus."

Terrance Kean: "I saw this very, very large passenger jet. It just plowed right into the side of the Pentagon."

William Lagasse: "It was close enough that I could see the windows and the blinds had been pulled down. I read American Airlines on it. ... I saw the aircraft above my head about 80 feet above the ground."

Robert Leonard: "I ... saw a large commercial aircraft aiming for the Pentagon."

Lincoln Liebner: "I saw this large American Airlines passenger jet coming in fast and low."

Elaine McCusker: "I saw a very low-flying American Airlines plane that seemed to be accelerating."

Mitch Mitchell: "I ... saw, coming straight down the road at us, a huge jet plane clearly with American Airlines written on it .... It crossed about 100 feet in front of us and at about 20 feet altitude and we watched it go in. It struck the Pentagon."

Terry Morin: "The plane had a silver body with red and blue stripes down the fuselage. I believed at the time that it belonged to American Airlines."

Christopher Munsey: "I couldn't believe what I was now seeing to my right: a silver, twin-engine American Airlines jetliner gliding almost noiselessly over the Navy Annex, fast, low and straight toward the Pentagon ...."

Vin Narayanan: "I looked up to my left and saw an American Airlines jet flying right at me. The jet roared over my head, clearing my car by about 25 feet."

John O'Keefe: "I don't know whether I saw or heard it first -- this silver plane; I immediately recognized it as an American Airlines jet ...."

Steve Riskus: "I was close enough (about 100 feet or so) that I could see the ‘American Airlines' logo on the tail as it headed towards the building .... I clearly saw the ‘AA' logo with the eagle in the middle."

James Ryan: "I see an American Airlines plane, silver plane, I could see AA on the tail. ... The plane was low enough that I could see the windows of the plane. I could see every detail of the plane. In my head I have ingrained forever this image of every detail of that plane. It was a silver plane, American Airlines plane, and I recognized it immediately as a passenger plane."

Joel Sucherman: "... looking straight ahead there was a jet, what looked to be an American Airlines jet, probably a 757, and it came screaming across the highway ... [and] hit the west side of the Pentagon."

Donald "Tim" Timmerman, a pilot: "I live on the 16th floor, overlooking the Pentagon ... and so I have quite a panorama. ... It was a Boeing 757, American Airlines, no question."
Mike Walter: "I saw this plane, this jet, an American Airlines jet, coming. ... It went right there and slammed right into the Pentagon. I saw the big ‘AA' on the side."

Ian Wyatt: "I duck, I look up, it looks like a silver American Airlines, twin-engine plane and then boom."


Jeromes Favorite Dream -

reply

Were the amateur student flunky pilots really that good? Instead of dispelling questions, these "explanations" tend to raise several more.

They had commercial pilots licenses and the head instructor said they were, of course everyone brings up an early quote BEFORE when the were beginning their training.

I guess they had some training on some simulators at flight school and had no problem flying them as well as they seem to. Or did they?

They trained on simulators and small planes, they neither had to take of and land and there was sue of autopilot. Did they have problems flying, see the text in red, plays out just as one would think.


Atta and Shehhi finished up at Huffman and earned their instrument certificates from the FAA in November. In mid-December 2000, they passed their commercial pilot tests and received their licenses.They then began training to fly large jets on a flight simulator. At about the same time, Jarrah began simulator training, also in Florida but at a different center. By the end of 2000, less than six months after their arrival, the three pilots on the East Coast were simulating flights on large jets.
http://www.faqs.org/docs/911/911Report-244.html

In 1996, Hanjour returned to the United States to pursue flight training,after being rejected by a Saudi flight school. He checked out flight schools in Florida, California, and Arizona; and he briefly started at a couple of them before returning to Saudi Arabia. In 1997, he returned to Florida and then, along with two friends, went back to Arizona and began his flight training there in earnest. After about three months, Hanjour was able to obtain his private pilot's license. Several more months of training yielded him a commercial pilot certificate, issued by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in April 1999.
http://www.faqs.org/docs/911/911Report-242.html
http://www.faqs.org/docs/911/911Report-243.html

Settling in Mesa, Hanjour began refresher training at his old school,Arizona Aviation. He wanted to train on multi-engine planes, but had difficulties because his English was not good enough.The instructor advised him to discontinue but Hanjour said he could not go home without completing the training. In early 2001, he started training on a Boeing 737 simulator at Pan Am International Flight Academy in Mesa.An instructor there found his work well below standard and discouraged him from continuing. Again, Hanjour persevered; he completed the initial training by the end of March 2001.
http://www.faqs.org/docs/911/911Report-243.html
http://www.faqs.org/docs/911/911Report-244.html

Jarrah and Hanjour also received additional training and practice flights in the early summer.A few days before departing on his cross-country test flight, Jarrah flew from Fort Lauderdale to Philadelphia, where he trained at Hortman Aviation and asked to fly the Hudson Corridor, a low-altitude "hallway" along the Hudson River that passes New York landmarks like the World Trade Center. Heavy traffic in the area can make the corridor a dangerous route for an inexperienced pilot. Because Hortman deemed Jarrah unfit to fly solo, he could fly this route only with an instructor.

Hanjour, too, requested to fly the Hudson Corridor about this same time,at Air Fleet Training Systems in Teterboro, New Jersey, where he started receiving ground instruction soon after settling in the area with Hazmi. Hanjour flew the Hudson Corridor, but his instructor declined a second request because of what he considered Hanjour's poor piloting skills. Shortly thereafter, Hanjour switched to Caldwell Flight Academy in Fairfield, New Jersey, where he rented small aircraft on several occasions during June and July. In one such instance on July 20, Hanjour--likely accompanied by Hazmi--rented a plane from Caldwell and took a practice flight from Fairfield to Gaithersburg, Maryland, a route that would have allowed them to fly near Washington, D.C. Other evidence suggests that Hanjour may even have returned to Arizona for flight simulator training earlier in June.
http://www.faqs.org/docs/911/911Report-259.html

As I've explained in at least one prior column, Hani Hanjour's flying was hardly the show-quality demonstration often described. It was exceptional only in its recklessness. If anything, his loops and turns and spirals above the nation's capital revealed him to be exactly the *beep* pilot he by all accounts was. To hit the Pentagon squarely he needed only a bit of luck, and he got it, possibly with help from the 757's autopilot. Striking a stationary object -- even a large one like the Pentagon -- at high speed and from a steep angle is very difficult. To make the job easier, he came in obliquely, tearing down light poles as he roared across the Pentagon's lawn.

It's true there's only a vestigial similarity between the cockpit of a light trainer and the flight deck of a Boeing. To put it mildly, the attackers, as private pilots, were completely out of their league. However, they were not setting out to perform single-engine missed approaches or Category 3 instrument landings with a failed hydraulic system. For good measure, at least two of the terrorist pilots had rented simulator time in jet aircraft, but striking the Pentagon, or navigating along the Hudson River to Manhattan on a cloudless morning, with the sole intention of steering head-on into a building, did not require a mastery of airmanship. The perpetrators had purchased manuals and videos describing the flight management systems of the 757/767, and as any desktop simulator enthusiast will tell you, elementary operation of the planes' navigational units and autopilots is chiefly an exercise in data programming. You can learn it at home. You won't be good, but you'll be good enough.

"They'd done their homework and they had what they needed," says a United Airlines pilot (name withheld on request), who has flown every model of Boeing from the 737 up. "Rudimentary knowledge and fearlessness."

"As everyone saw, their flying was sloppy and aggressive," says Michael (last name withheld), a pilot with several thousand hours in 757s and 767s. "Their skills and experience, or lack thereof, just weren't relevant."

"The hijackers required only the shallow understanding of the aircraft," agrees Ken Hertz, an airline pilot rated on the 757/767. "In much the same way that a person needn't be an experienced physician in order to perform CPR or set a broken bone."

That sentiment is echoed by Joe d'Eon, airline pilot and host of the "Fly With Me" podcast series. "It's the difference between a doctor and a butcher," says d'Eon.
http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/2006/05/19/askthepilot186/

Experienced pilot Giulio Bernacchia agrees:
In my opinion the official version of the fact is absolutely plausible, does not require exceptional circumstances, bending of any law of physics or superhuman capabilities. Like other (real pilots) have said, the manoeuvres required of the hijackers were within their (very limited) capabilities, they were performed without any degree of finesse and resulted in damage to the targets only after desperate overmanoeuvring of the planes. The hijackers took advantage of anything that might make their job easier, and decided not to rely on their low piloting skills. It is misleading to make people believe that the hijackers HAD to possess superior pilot skills to do what they did.


FBI report, "Summary of Penttbom Investigation," Feb. 29, 2004, pp. 5257. Hanjour successfully conducted a challenging certification flight supervised by an instructor at Congressional Air Charters of Gaithersburg, Maryland, landing at a small airport with a difficult approach. The instructor thought Hanjour may have had training from a military pilot because he used a terrain recognition system for navigation. Eddie Shalev interview (Apr.9, 2004).

And as chief flight instructor Marcel Bernard pointed out, the hijackers wouldn't have required all the skills of a regular pilot:
"Despite Hanjour's poor reviews, he did have some ability as a pilot, said Bernard of Freeway Airport. "There's no doubt in my mind that once that [hijacked jet] got going, he could have pointed that plane at a building and hit it," he said"

http://www.pentagonresearch.com/Newsday_com.htm


Jeromes Favorite Dream -

reply

That is a curious statement, that the gas station-hotel videos have "since been returned...they don't show anything of interest." The converse implied statement to this is, "if they showed anything of interest, they would not be returned." Am I right about that?
Anything of interest would likely be retained for legal proceedings, yes. That is what happened with the Citgo and DoubleTree footage.

reply

the question I'd ask is why there is nothing of interest on the gas station video and of course the big one is why such a small hole in the pentagon.

HAs any passenger bodies of any aircraft ever been positively identified?

reply

[deleted]