The attack on the Pentagon

[Hazzard]

[ian neal]

[blackcat]

http://www.zen13564.zen.co.uk/filesoffered/pentplane.mp3

The BBC Radio 4 take on the release of the video!! Apparently we "conspiracy theorists" are all "Crazy people" and it is obvious that flight 77 hit the Pentagon!! So there you have it - balanced reporting!!

[Eckyboy]

ITV News were just as bad Reporter Robert Moore states "of course we all know what really happened on 911." The ignorance and arrogance of this plonker is unbelievable. The footage released is the same as the old footage and it shows nothing and does not help either side of this argument. Apparently the plane was flying too low and too fast to see. Is that even plausible? Whats happened too the previously mentioned 85 images that the pentagon has? This whole thing stinks. How do you explain this one CTS? Does this make sense too you.

[ConspiracyTheorySceptic]

Ian Neal writes:

[ConspiracyTheorySceptic]

Eckyboy writes:

[is]

CTS - It sounds to me like you becoming a little more concerned about the big lie. Is that accurate?

This whole pentagon thing only serves one purpose. It is ABSOLUTE PROOF that we are being lied to, that facts are being covered up, and the US government is acting extremely suspiciously.

And yet this video has been released to 'dispel the wacko conspiracy theoriests'!!

I'd like to see what the precious 9/11myths.com has to say about this. But they won't say a word; the author likes to stay away from nutrality.

God, this is making me so ANGRY. The fact that we are being lied to, blatantly and unrepentantly is staring everyone in the face, and yet the few (yet growing) number of people who question the OV, who are just trying to be objective in the face of a blatant lie, are sidelined, gagged, mocked, ridiculed and persecuted.

WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO TO STOP THIS TRAVESTY?!?!?

[brian]

ConspiracyTheorySceptic

Any idea why such an astute businessman as Silverstein would purchase the WTC only weeks prior to Sept 11 when it was clearly a financial albatross?

The WTC buildings 1&2 were in need of large scale renovation which involved the removal of asbestos, this was said to have been financially untenable. Yet Silverstein signs a lease with inbuilt insurance against terrorist attacks AND a rider giving him the right to any rebuilding contracts if the towers were destroyed.

A LENGTHY, PRE-9/11 LEGAL BATTLE OVER THE WTC'S ASBESTOS PROBLEMS

The WTC's original owner, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, had been concerned about asbestos-abatement issues for many years prior to 9/11.
According to Karl Schwarz [6] and other writers, the Port Authority in 1991 filed suit in U.S. District Court against insurers in the hope of recovering funds to help pay for needed asbestos-abatement work at the WTC and one of the region's airports. In the suit, "Port Authority of NY vs. Affiliated FM Insurance Co.," the Port Authority sought between 500 million and 1 billion dollars from the insurers.

Note that this suit was filed TWO YEARS BEFORE the first so-called "terrorist attack" on the WTC; the truck-bomb explosion in the Center's underground parking garage in 1993.

Schwarz reports that the U.S. District Court judge ruled against the Port Authority as of May 14, 2001.

Less than three months later, the Port Authority transferred ownership of the WTC buildings to private investors. -

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=4373

All very conveinent eh.

If you come across "technical reasons" explaining how such structures can fall at a rate approaching freefall give me a shout. Oh and give NIST a shout, they spent $20 million and still have no idea.

To be honest, I am rather sceptical of convincing someone who appears more than determined not to be. Maybe thats just me, we shall see.

[johnnyhotshots]

Why is the time and date wrong on the video footage of the Pentagon crash? September 12th?

[gypsum]

[johnnyhotshots]

The pentagon hit isn't even on the news any more. It was on bbc news 24 this morning (around 5am) and has now been buried by the Paul McCartney split...........................

[stateofgrace]

withdawn

[Sinclair]

[alkmyst]

Good Evening 'State of Grace',

Stateofgrace wrote:

[stateofgrace]

withdawn

[alkmyst]

State of Grace,

it is evident, from your first three submissions to this forum, that you are a graduate of the 'Rachel/Badger/Conspiracytheorysceptic/asharpmajor/solveetcoagula' school of cyber discussion.

If you want some respect for your posts, you might consider demonstrating that you have something meaningful to contribute!

Alternatively, please go mass debate elsewhere.

Al K Myst

[Pikey]

State of grace,

Not much grace in your hostile blog. Thankfully this website forum has facilitated civilised reasoned debate on the subject of 911 truthseeking.

Your blog makes it obvious that you have been following this website forum for some time or that you have blogged under another pseudonym.

Theres nothing about you either on your profile SoG.

The official version of 911 is a travesty of the truth, read David Ray Griffins "The New Pearl Harbour" if you really do want to know why. There are hundreds of smoking guns. This website forum highlights many of them.

I think that the website www.911myths would be a more suitable website for you but of course theres no accountability or forum there!

I would classify the nature of your blog as an attack on away ground!

If you have any hard evidence to support the "official" conspiracy theory of 911 then by all means supply it here. None of the stuff you have supplied to date is by my own judgement hard evidence.

[Jane]

[Newspeak International]

stateofgrace, I take it the timing of your appearance is to uphold the official version of events,that a Boeing did indeed crash into the Pentagon.
It may turn out that this was indeed the case,and that this Pentagon event is a distraction from the task at hand,and possibly the PTB devised this plan to discredit the overall aims of the Truthseekers.

I feel I must add that the Pentagon case is probably the weakest of the cases against the Official Version of events that day,as it has been manipulated thus by the USG.

The other events of that day are not as discrete,and open to challenge as the holding back of a videotape or 3.

NI

[stateofgrace]

withdawn

[alkmyst]

Stateofgrace wrote:

[stateofgrace]

withdawn

[Hazzard]

State of Grace. Ask any CIA empoyee working the case against bin laden and terrorist insugrency in the US who was working during the opening years of the War on Terrorism. They will tell you they didnt fail, they didnt have a choice, they were told to look the other way.

Im sorry buddy, its hard I know when you look around and everbody seems crazy but you, ive been there. We all have. But the fact is the CIA didnt fail, it has more money funneling through it DAILY than the US economy can muster im sure. Its apart of a global intelligence service. Infact it doesnt even realy answer to the president. PROVE ME WRONG I BEG OF YOU.

You think people do this stuff out of boredom? Out of hate? Common dude, please realise that these allegation arnt groundless. And at least deserve investigation by a public commity, and not by a government appionted one, if you knew whats realy going on you would understand why.

Man I cant even begin to tell you where to start. Fact is we all start somewhere, so just realise that the conspiracy is large for a reason, the bigger the lie, the easier it is to believe it.

I cant be bothered to post link after link of information. The proof is in the pudding.

I refuse to justify your ignorants. Im not calling you names, im genuinly pionting out the fact that you obviously dont know whats truly going on here. Read your history books. Just find out the truth please.

[stateofgrace]

wrong post sorry

edited

[stateofgrace]

So now all the insults are out of the way is anybody actually address the photographs and links I have posted?

[Pete J]

Hi stateofgrace

Welcome to the forum ! (You're not by any chance the drill sargeant from 'Full Metal Jacket' who's stumbled in here looking for his platoon are you ?)

To the extent that the 9-11 issue is a 'debate' as you put it, it is more than anything else one about government accountability since that's who has fed us this 'nonsense' about arab hijackers that they just had 'no idea' about before 9/11/2001. It is also 'their' pre-declared agenda which is now playing out throughout world politics - not ours, or your's nor the terrorists, nor anybody else's.

Although you'll likely find a diversity of opinions on here about what actually happened on 9-11 and whether a 757 hit the pentagon or not/bombs were used or not/missiles were used or not etc, the one thing that most are agreed on is the need for much greater government accountability on an issue which has already formed the pretext for 2 Middle East Wars and continues to shape world events as well as those in our own individual lives.

Examples of what are being requested in terms of 'accountability' include:

- an account of why so many warnings from foreign nations and from individuals in their own inteligence agencies were ignored prior to the attacks

- an explanation of why the attacks were not prevented at the planning stage (when the identities of some of the alleged hijackers were known and under surveilance: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Danger#Assertion_that_Able_Danger_id entified_9.2F11_hijackers)

- an explanation of why the attacks were not prevented at the execution stage (when there was a relative eternity to intercept the off-course planes)

- an explanation of how the 9/11 planners could know that the aircraft were not going to be intercepted (when, under normal circumstances a 9/11 planner could only know that they were GUARANTEED to be intercepted)

- an account of how the hijackers were identified (something a bit more believable than passports surviving the tower collapses and flight manuals 'accidentaly' left in parked cars)

- an explanation of why aeronautical investigations of the crashes have to be carried out by policemen and not proper aeronautical investigators as with every other air crash in history (terrorist action or not)

- an explanation of why throwing away all the evidence from the tower collapses was more important than making forensic or engineering analyses of it

From your swashbucking entrance to this discussion, I take it that you will be debating for the cause of 'less' government accountability, however, perhaps you could consider applying your adopted motto equally to the government's own case, since that's the one in who's cause many thousands of civilans (and a smaller proportion of military personal) are dying.

Let me just remind you of it....

[stateofgrace]

withdawn

[blackcat]

[Andrew Johnson]

[Banish]

Amazing the way the freaks have landed on all the boards immmediately on release of this (fake) video.

BBC Newsnight were all over it last night, 340,000 downloads from their server in the first hour, they are * it. They realise their active covering up of the crime has been exposed.


Next stop Shanksville.

http://www.letsroll911.org/phpwebsite/files/documents/Day_1_-_Pittsbur g_Crash_01.swf