911
See other 911 Articles
Title: Pentagon Hunt the Boeing! And test your perceptions!
Source:
aisle.org
URL Source: http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pentagone/erreurs_en.htm
Published: May 28, 2006
Author: unattributed
Post Date: 2006-05-28 11:11:23 by A K A Stone
Keywords: pentagon, 911, cover up
Views: 17064
Comments: 35
As everyone knows, on 11 September, less than an hour after the attack on the World Trade Center, an airplane collided with the Pentagon. The Associated Press first reported that a booby-trapped truck had caused the explosion. The Pentagon quickly denied this. The official US government version of events still holds. Here's a little game for you: Take a look at these photographs and try to find evidence to corroborate the official version. It's up to you to Hunt the Boeing!
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: All, ironsage (#0)
For your enlightenment.
Heres another game..... Find pictures of the towers after math. Find the planes.
What are you talking about.
blown up airplanes.
What about blown up airplanes?
Did you know the firemen who were there said there were bombs in the building. There ls lots of different of video of different firemen saying this Here is one of the video. http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/firefighters_bomb_in_building.wmv
So how would Bin laden have gotten the bombs in the building? Was the fireman lying? Did you know Bush's brother was running security for the WTC on 911?
http://libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=761 There is the article about Bush's brother.
I think the point AK was making is this. Go look at the site he posted. Look at the hole. It isn't big enough to fit a boeing in there. So the wreckage must be outside. You know seats, luggage etc. But it isn't there. A boeing did not hit the pentagon. Have you done much research on this subject? Or you one who just believes what the MSM tells you to believe? Thinking for yourself is an empowering experience.
Got the point, did you get mine? Look up, see the black helicopters.
Look up, see the black helicopters. I was shown a site last year sating all the facts and had videos on how it couldnt have been a palne that blew up the pentagon. There is actually a shot where you can see an objest that looks like a missle hurdling towards the pentagon. There is also a site where it shows a sloed down version of the towers being blown up almost as if bombs were set up on each level.
Schoolin Since Birth
Did you watch the clip in post 6 of this thread. The fireman cleaerly said there were bombs in the building. Here is another fireman saying the same thing. http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/FDNY-explosions.mov and another http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/heavy.duty.explosion.wmv and audio from CNN talking about bombs planted in the building. http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/SecondaryDevices.wma
Yeah that was part of the clip I saw. Hmmm interesting how they no longer show any 9/11 clips anymore. Something smells fishy oh wait its just Bush putting those corpses back in his closet.
Schoolin Since Birth
Propaganda site Photochop works wonders
works wonders Yeah but the way my mind works if I see evidence even if it is staged my curiosity is still perked.
Schoolin Since Birth
works wonders What are you talking about. The video the government released? I agree it was doctored. There are only four frames. The government also seized the video from the gas station across from the pentagon Here is the gas station http://www.defenselink.mil/news/May2000/20005022a.jpg Why would they seize this video? Answer coverup
Its really to bad Bush cant run another 4. The mans got enormous talent and power. Fixing elections, blowing stuff up, Hes here, hes there, hes everywhere. Better watch out, he just may get you next. Measure of a country.... How many want in? How many want out?
Better watch out, he just may get you next. Measure of a country.... How many want in? How many want out? what do you think about that comment.
I used to be a Bush believer too until the supposed hard on laws president took no stand against gay marriage , and now he wants illegal to be made legal. Yeah I guess they deserve it for breaking the laws. When all is said and done I still wouldnt want to live in a starving country like some African nations. Or a nation where you get your tongue cut out for slandering your leader.
Schoolin Since Birth
There are provisions in the patriot act that allow for secret arrests, and secret executions. also check out the definition of a "domestic terrorist" Hell jaywalking fits the bill http://www.aclu.org/natsec/emergpowers/14444leg20021206.html Section 802 of the USA PATRIOT Act (Pub. L. No. 107-52) expanded the definition of terrorism to cover "domestic," as opposed to international, terrorism. A person engages in domestic terrorism if they do an act "dangerous to human life" that is a violation of the criminal laws of a state or the United States, if the act appears to be intended to: (i) intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping. Additionally, the acts have to occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States and if they do not, may be regarded as international terrorism. Section 802 does not create a new crime of domestic terrorism. However, it does expand the type of conduct that the government can investigate when it is investigating "terrorism." The USA PATRIOT Act expanded governmental powers to investigate terrorism, and some of these powers are applicable to domestic terrorism. The definition of domestic terrorism is broad enough to encompass the activities of several prominent activist campaigns and organizations. Greenpeace, Operation Rescue, Vieques Island and WTO protesters and the Environmental Liberation Front have all recently engaged in activities that could subject them to being investigated as engaging in domestic terrorism. One recent example is the Vieques Island protests, when many people, including several prominent Americans, participated in civil disobedience on a military installation where the United States government has been engaging in regular military exercises, which these protesters oppose. The protesters illegally entered the military base and tried to obstruct the bombing exercises. This conduct would fall within the definition of domestic terrorism because the protesters broke federal law by unlawfully entering the airbase and their acts were for the purpose of influencing a government policy by intimidation or coercion. The act of trying to disrupt bombing exercises arguably created a danger to human life - their own and those of military personnel. Using this hypothetical as a starting point, we will go through the USA PATRIOT Act and explore the new governmental powers that could be brought to bear on Vieques Island protesters whose conduct falls within the overbroad definition of domestic terrorism. Seizure of assets - Sec. 806: Section 806 of the Act could result in the civil seizure of their assets without a prior hearing, and without them ever being convicted of a crime. It is by far the most significant change of which political organizations need to be aware. Section 806 amended the civil asset forfeiture statute to authorize the government to seize and forfeit: all assets, foreign or domestic (i) of any individual, entity, or organization engaged in planning or perpetrating any act of domestic or international terrorism against the United States, or their property, and all assets, foreign or domestic, affording any person a source of influence over any such entity or organization or (ii) acquired or maintained by any person with the intent and for the purpose of supporting, planning, conducting, or concealing an act of domestic or international terrorism against the United States, citizens or residents of the United States or their property or (iii) derived from, involved in, or used or intended to be used to commit any act of domestic or international terrorism against the United States, citizens or residents of the United States, or their property. This language is broad enough to authorize the government to seize any assets of any individuals involved in the Vieques Island protests or of any organization supporting the protests of which the person is a member, or from any individuals who were supporting the protesters in any way. Possible supporters of the protesters could include student organizations that sponsored participation in the demonstration, the Rainbow/Push Coalition, the Rev. Sharpton's National Action Network, and religious or community organizations that provided housing or food to the protesters. The civil asset forfeiture power of the United States government is awesome. The government can seize and/or freeze the assets on the mere assertion that there is probable cause to believe that the assets were involved in domestic terrorism. The assets are seized before a person is given a hearing, and often without notice. In order to permanently forfeit the assets, the government must go before a court, but at a civil hearing, and the government is only required to prove that the assets were involved in terrorism by a preponderance of the evidence. Because it is a civil proceeding, a person is not entitled to be represented by an attorney at public expense if they cannot afford to pay an attorney. The time between seizure and forfeiture can sometimes be months; meanwhile, organizations or individuals whose assets are seized are forced to make do without the assets. Only the most financially flush non-profit organizations would be able to successfully defend themselves against government forfeiture. In short, without the full due process afforded in criminal cases, the U.S. government can bankrupt political organizations it asserts are involved in domestic terrorism. Disclosure of educational records - Sec. 507: This provision of the USA PATRIOT Act requires a judge to issue an order permitting the government to obtain private educational records if the Attorney General or his designee certifies that the records are necessary for investigating domestic or international terrorism. No independent judicial finding is required to verify that the records are relevant. This means that the Attorney General may obtain the private educational records of a student involved in the Vieques protests by asserting that the records are relevant to a domestic terrorism investigation. These records may include information such as a student's grades, private medical information (counseling, abortions), which organizations the student belonged to, or any other information that the educational institution collects about its students. Disclosure of information from National Education Statistics Act - Sec. 508: This provision of the USA PATRIOT Act requires a judge to issue an order for the government to obtain educational records that have been collected pursuant to the National Education Statistics Act. NESA includes a vast amount of identifiable student information from academic performance to health information, family income, and race. Until now, this information has been held to strict confidentiality requirements without exception. Again, all the government needs to certify is that the information is relevant to a terrorism investigation and the court has no choice but to issue the order. Single-Jurisdiction Search Warrants (Sec. 219): This section of the USA PATRIOT Act amends Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure to authorize the government to go before a singe Federal magistrate judge in any judicial district in which activities relating to the terrorism may have occurred, to obtain a warrant to search property or a person within or outside the district. This means that the government could go to a single judge to get a warrant to search the property or person of the Vieques activists in New York, Chicago, California, or wherever else the protesters were from. If the government chose to go before a magistrate in New York, a person in California, who wished to seek to have the warrant quashed because he or she believed it was invalid, would have to find a way to appear before the New York court that issued the warrant. This would be a daunting task for most. Post-PATRIOT Act Laws Since passage of the PATRIOT Act, two other new laws have passed that implicate domestic terrorism. Taxpayer Information - 26 U.S.C.A. Sec. 6103(i)(3)(C) requires the Secretary of the Internal Revenue Service to provide taxpayer information to the appropriate Federal law enforcement agency responsible for investigating or responding to the terrorist incident. If abused, this provision could be used by law enforcement to gain access to confidential taxpayer information of political protesters. Regulation of biological agents and toxins - 42 U.S.C.A. Sec. 262a and 7 U.S.C.A. Sec. 8401 regulate biological agents and toxins. If a person is involved with an organization that engages in domestic or international terrorism, he or she is not permitted to gain access to these regulated agents. Under the law, the Attorney General identifies individuals involved in "terrorism" to the Department of Agriculture. Once the person is listed, he or she cannot get access to any of the regulated agents or toxins. This provision will probably not impact most people, however, it might impact someone such as a scientist who might regularly use biological agents or toxins in their work. Conclusion - The ACLU does not oppose criminal prosecution of people who violate the law, even if they are doing it for political purposes. However, we do oppose the broad definition of terrorism and the ensuing authority that flows from that definition. One way to ensure that the conduct that falls within the definition of domestic terrorism is in fact terrorism is to limit the scope of the conduct that triggers the definition. Thus, domestic terrorism could include acts which "cause serious physical injury or death" rather than all acts that are "dangerous to human life." This more narrow definition will exclude the conduct of organizations and individuals that engage in minor acts of property damage or violence.
Well I dont know where to start, all i"ll say is that can be severe in a severe situation but not quite as bad as just saying saddam sucks and being beheaded.
Schoolin Since Birth
Great provisions all of them. Put in order to protect and bypass all the redtape type bullshit when trying to arrest/investigate bad people. Thanks for posting that stuff, I feel better protected already.
That is what it is designed to do. Make you feel good. So while your feeling good they are destroying the constitutional protections that our forbearers fought and died for.
Man you are really fishing for something. I watched the videos with the fireman, and both talk of explosions when inside the building, NO TALK OF BOMBS BEING PLANTED AS YOU SAY......NONE! Explosions will occur when a building that large is on fire, when explosive material burns or is induced it explodes. This is the evidence your clinging to? This evidence helps against your case.
Here is another fireman saying the same thing. http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/FDNY-explosions.mov and another http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/heavy.duty.explosion.wmv and audio from CNN talking about bombs planted in the building. http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/SecondaryDevices.wma The great evidence that Bush bombed the WTC.
No. Just a very small part of the puzzle. Thousands of more things like this. LIterally. It is evidence of a possiblity of bombs being planted. The official government story is that the beams failed because of heat. Even though this never happened in ANY steel framed building in the history of the world.
How many steel framed buildings as large as the world trade center were hit by airplanes in the history of the world?
Old news.... I guess well have to agree, we disagree.
After the planes hit, the wtc stood for more what 45 min hour or whatever. The load was already shifted and stabalized. Buildings don't just fall straight down either. Add to the explosions that can clearly be seen going off during its collapse. Add to that building 7 which wasn't even hit that day also collapsed. That was where some government spooks worked out of. Also this According to Hyman Brown, a University of Colorado civil engineering professor and the World Trade Center's construction manager, 1 and 2 World Trade Center were designed to survive an impact and resulting fires from a collision by the largest commercial aircraft at the time, a Boeing 707-340. 1 Contrary to widely promoted misconceptions, the 767-200s used on 9-11 were only slightly larger than 707s. The above graphic from Chapter 1 of FEMA's Report shows the sizes of a 707 and a 767 relative to the footprint of a WTC tower. 2 Flight 11 and Flight 175 were Boeing 767-200s. Although a 767-200 has a slightly wider body than a 707, the two models are very similar in overall size, weight and fuel capacity. property Boeing 707-340 Boeing 767-200 fuel capacity 23,000 gallons 23,980 gallons max takeoff weight 328,060 lbs 395,000 lbs empty weight 137,562 lbs 179,080 lbs wingspan 145.75 ft 156.08 ft wing area 3010 ft^2 3050 ft^2 length 152.92 ft 159.17 ft cruise speed 607 mph 530 mph Given the differences in cruise speeds, a 707 in normal flight would actually have more kinetic energy than a 767, despite the slightly smaller size. Note the similar fuel capacities of both aircraft. The 767s used on September 11th were estimated to be carrying about 10,000 gallons of fuel each at the time of impact, only about 40% of the capacity of a 707. Like All Skyscrapers, the Twin Towers Were Over-Engineered One aspect of engineering that is not widely understood is that structures are over-engineered as a matter of standard practice. Steel structures like bridges and buildings are typically designed to withstand five times anticipated static loads and 3 times anticipated dynamic loads. The anticipated loads are the largest ones expected during the life of the structure, like the worst hurricane or earthquake occurring while the floors are packed with standing-room-only crowds. Given that September 11th was not a windy day, and that there were not throngs of people in the upper floors, the critical load ratio was probably well over 10, meaning that more than nine-tenths of the columns at the same level would have to fail before the weight of the top could have overcome the support capacity of the remaining columns. There is evidence that the Twin Towers were designed with an even greater measure of reserve strength than typical large buildings. According to the calculations of engineers who worked on the Towers' design, all the columns on one side of a Tower could be cut, as well as the two corners and some of the columns on each adjacent side, and the building would still be strong enough to withstand a 100-mile-per-hour wind. 3 Frank Demartini's Statement Frank A. Demartini, on-site construction manager for the World Trade Center, spoke of the resilience of the towers in an interview recorded on January 25, 2001. The building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it. That was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door -- this intense grid -- and the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting. Demartini, who had an office on the 88th floor of the North Tower, has been missing since the 9/11/01 attack, having remained in the North Tower to assist in the evacuation. 4 The Richard Roth Telegram On Feburary 13, 1965, real estate baron Lawrence Wien called reporters to his office to charge that the design of the Twin Towers was structurally unsound. Many suspected that his allegation was motivated by a desire to derail the planned World Trade Center skyscrapers to protect the value of his extensive holdings, which included the Empire State Building. In response to the charge, Richard Roth, partner at Emery Roth & Sons, the architectural firm that was designing the Twin Towers, fired back with a three-page telegram containing the following details. 5 THE STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS CARRIED OUT BY THE FIRM OF WORTHINGTON, SKILLING, HELLE & JACKSON IS THE MOST COMPLETE AND DETAILED OF ANY EVER MADE FOR ANY BUILDING STRUCTURE. THE PRELIMINARY CALCULATIONS ALONE COVER 1,200 PAGES AND INVOLVE OVER 100 DETAILED DRAWINGS. ... 4. BECAUSE OF ITS CONFIGURATION, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY THAT OF A STEEL BEAM 209' DEEP, THE TOWERS ARE ACTUALLY FAR LESS DARING STRUCTURALLY THAN A CONVENTIONAL BUILDING SUCH AS THE EMPIRE STATE BUILDING WERE THE SPINE OR BRACED AREA OF THE BUILDING IS FAR SMALLER IN RELATION TO ITS HEIGHT. ... 5. THE BUILDING AS DESIGNED IS SIXTEEN TIMES STIFFER THAN A CONVENTIONAL STRUCTURE. THE DESIGN CONCEPT IS SO SOUND THAT THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER HAS BEEN ABLE TO BE ULTRA-CONSERVATIVE IN HIS DESIGN WITHOUT ADVERSELY AFFECTING THE ECONOMICS OF THE STRUCTURE. ... At the time the Twin Towers were built, the design approach of moving the support columns to the perimeter and the core, thereby creating large expanses of unobstructed floor space, was relatively new, and unique for a skyscraper. However, that approach is commonplace in contemporary skyscrapers.
I guess well have to agree, we disagree. Thats ok, we can disagree. Now what is the evidence that the governments story is true. Tell me what you think happened and what is the evidence to support that. I've showed you some things that support my argument. For example why no photos released except a couple of the "terrorists" at the airport. Why did the passenger list released on sept 12 in USA Today not have any of the hijackers names on it.
Umm, maybe video of airplanes crashing into the building.
Ok so some airplanes crashed into the wtc. On that I think we can agree. But now we have to find out who did it. But what were these airplanes. Were they the planes that were hijacked or something else. Video from 911 would suggest something else. The people who WERE THERE said that it wasn't a comercial airliner. They also said the plane had no windows. But don't take my word for it here is the video from fox news
I am one of those people who wont take a side on this, but is pretty suspicious that Bush's fateher failed to gett Saddam, then as soon as Bush jr. gets in there we head into war 1 year later.
What do you find suspicious about it? Do you think Bush 1 was thinking long term when he didn't go after saddam? Is there a Bush Clinton axis that is running the country? Was there some kind of deal for Bush to lose, then have his son become president? How does the electronic voting machines that are being put into place play into this. Was the whole bush gore election really about getting electronic voting started everywhere. That would mean Gore could be part of it too. Maybe it will be like this Bush1, clinton, W., hillary, Jeb...I can't see further than that.
Did you watch the video in post 32? If so what did you think about it?
#2. To: A K A Stone (#1)
#3. To: IronSage (#2)
Find pictures of the towers after math. Find the planes.
#4. To: A K A Stone (#3)
#5. To: IronSage (#4)
#6. To: IronSage (#4)
#7. To: master_of_disaster, Ironsage (#6)
#8. To: All (#7)
#9. To: IronSage (#4)
#10. To: _V_ (#9)
#11. To: IronSage (#10)
Got the point, did you get mine?
#12. To: master_of_disaster, ironsage (#11)
#13. To: A K A Stone (#12)
#14. To: master_of_disaster (#11)
#15. To: IronSage (#14)
Propaganda site Photochop
#16. To: IronSage (#14)
Propaganda site Photochop
#17. To: All (#14)
#18. To: IronSage, Jhorra_ (#17)
Its really to bad Bush cant run another 4. The mans got enormous talent and power. Fixing elections, blowing stuff up, Hes here, hes there, hes everywhere.
#19. To: IronSage (#17)
Its really to bad Bush cant run another 4.
#20. To: master_of_disaster (#19)
Or a nation where you get your tongue cut out for slandering your leader.
#21. To: A K A Stone (#20)
#22. To: A K A Stone (#20)
#23. To: IronSage (#22)
Great provisions all of them. Put in order to protect and bypass all the redtape type bullshit when trying to arrest/investigate bad people. Thanks for posting that stuff, I feel better protected already.
#24. To: A K A Stone (#12)
#25. To: A K A Stone (#12)
Did you watch the clip in post 6 of this thread. The fireman cleaerly said there were bombs in the building.
#26. To: IronSage (#25)
The great evidence that Bush bombed the WTC.
#27. To: A K A Stone (#26)
#28. To: A K A Stone (#26)
#29. To: IronSage (#27)
How many steel framed buildings as large as the world trade center were hit by airplanes in the history of the world?
#30. To: IronSage (#28)
Old news....
#31. To: A K A Stone (#30)
#32. To: IronSage (#31)
#33. To: IronSage (#31)
#34. To: RangeRider (#33)
I am one of those people who wont take a side on this, but is pretty suspicious that Bush's fateher failed to gett Saddam, then as soon as Bush jr. gets in there we head into war 1 year later.
#35. To: RangeRider (#33)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]