The Movement Will Now Have Smoking Gun Proof For An Inside Job...The PentaCon

[ThePentaCon]

Citizen Investigation Team is a brand new 9/11 research organization that is presenting groundbreaking eyewitness testimony in a documentary entitled The Pentacon: Eyewitnesses Speak, Conspiracy Revealed . They interviewed several eyewitnesses to the plane on location and have uncovered explosive evidence showing beyond a reasonable doubt that the plane could not have toppled the light poles and impacted the building. There has never been a comprehensive study presented in regards to the eyewitnesses. This thorough presentation uncovers a legitimate smoking gun making it painfully clear that the time to "ask questions" has passed and that 2007 will be a time for citizen action! www.ThePentaCon.com

[Bolo Boffin]

1. Quit spamming these boards, PentaCon.

Release your crummy movie, already. It's already been completely debunked.

[ThePentaCon]

2. I am just going to ignore you lady

You are a very negative and nasty person who will now be ignored.

Good day.

-Citizen Investigation Team

[Bolo Boffin]

3. Aw.

By the way, I'm a man, baby. Thank you for this demonstration of your investigative powers. I anticipate such prowess in investigation to be on full display in your crummy film.

< that is Molly Ivins

[ThePentaCon]

4. Back to the message at hand.

Anyways, if anyone has any questions please feel free to ask or contact us via e-mail.

[e-mail]

[SidDithers]

5. BTW, if you say you're going to ignore someone...

and then don't, it's a violation of DU rules. How could you reply to bolo in post #3 if you've ignored him in post #1?

You may want to edit your post in #1, unless it's already too late.

Sid

[Bolo Boffin]

6. Question

Is this picture from GoogleEarth north of the Citgo?

[Twist_U_Up]

7. Thans for the link. Ignore the zombies

You know who I mean, those who wish to either hide from truth or to hide it

[ThePentaCon]

9. You're welcome

The zombies are everywhere.

I just try to avoid them.

We just want everyone to understand the gravity of the situation.

The evidence we have is SOLID and is going to prove an inside job, without a doubt.

It is filmed on location at the Citgo as well...

[Bolo Boffin]

11. Then release it already! Jiminy Cricket.

You've said you were going to release this twice before, and those deadlines came and went, and you keep making promises.

Hey, how did you get permission to film at the Citgo? JohnDoeX told me specifically that only people connected with the Pentagon can stop at that gas station.

[Bolo Boffin]

10. Excuse me - zombies means people who have been banned and reregistered.

I am not a zombie, and you are clearly referring to me. I have never been banned here, I have never been tombstoned, and I've been here for four years.

[sabbat hunter]

13. i thought

he was putting you on ignore.

weird how he can respond to you after he has ignored you.

but that is a good question you posed. how did he get pics from the citgo station without breaking the law


pentacon care to answer how you got the pics?

[ThePentaCon]

14. No laws were broken

Hi Sabbat,

How are you? Well I hope.

To answer your question, yes it is VERY difficult to film there. I don't recommend trying it.

The BBC, NBC they even get kicked off the property.

On our first trip we got detained for hours. They took our footage/deleted pics, took polaroids of us, had bomb sniffing dogs go through our rentacar. Stared us down. It was pretty intense. We btw, being Dylan Avery, Russell Pickering and CIT.

But the second time around, we were with the right people, everything was taken care of and there were no problems.

[Bolo Boffin]

16. Is CIT your Christian name? n/t

[Twist_U_Up]

33. It does ?

I always thought they were dead people brought back to life for the sole purpose of wreaking havoc and promoting death and despair.
But then again you are the in-house expert on everything and anything.

[AZCat]

38. Naw, you've got it all wrong.

It's a dead movie genre brought back to life for the sole purpose of making lots of money.

[greyl]

47. Looks like the vast majority of non-OCTers in this forum are ignoring Pentacon.

As I've said here before, I don't think all conspiracy theorists are stupid.

[ThePentaCon]

48. Only Time Will Tell

They won't be able to forever.

Funny, you haven't refuted ONE THING.

Not one.

Do we intimidate you?

Do you notice how you guys just keep repeating useless, irrelevant things and using ad hominem?

I post facts that correct you, you act as if nothing happened and just keep plugging away.

[Bolo Boffin]

50. You keep saying that.

People can read this thread, you know. They are going to make up their own minds who's ducking and who's weaving and who's avoiding the facts.

You are your own worst enemy.

[greyl]

51. It's been fun to watch - great job.

:thumbsup:

[ThePentaCon]

8. Anybody?

Does anybody have any questions that are specific or based on the FACTS of the Pentagon attack?

[Bolo Boffin]

12. When you start dealing with facts correctly, you let us know. n/t

[wildbilln864]

17. Hello ThePentaCon...

Great to have you here! Welcome to the dungeon! :hi:
Good job avoiding the distractions here too!
I believe 911 was an inside job. Have for a long time!
Where's the plane if it didn't hit the pentagon? That's a frequent query.
Thanks!

[LARED]

15. So tell me about your business plan

Is there decent money to be made hawking this scam on the Internet? Are there that many people willing to fork over money to hear your speculation and sophistry?

[MervinFerd]

18. How much will this DVD sell for?

And, are you thinking of theater distribution?

[ThePentaCon]

19. No Theater

No Theater distribution.

Are you going to donate to the Elisha Gallop Fund when it's up? What they are doing to this poor lady's life is unspeakable.

[LARED]

20. Who's they, and what is being done to her? (n/t)

[ThePentaCon]

22. April's story is everywhere...

The gov't- and her story is all over the internet.

[LARED]

81. Ok, I got the story, she worked in the Pentagon, and

her son survived the crash. Now she is getting jerked around by some beauracrats, which of course raises the question of why this is important to your movie. Are you hoping an appeal to emotion will boost sales?

[LARED]

82. Kick

[ThePentaCon]

83. Stop slandering us.

Is there a problem with debating the facts, Lared?

Do you have an allergy to discussing facts?

Yeah we're going to "boost sales" and buy you a clue.

Where was she located and have you spoke with her personally?

Are you going to help her avoid destitution?

Are you going to help Elisha with his developmental issues?

Were you inside the Pentagon when the attack happened?

Do you know any other survivors, like she does?

[AZCat]

84. We'd like to help you with your developmental issues...

but you seem strangely resistant to our assistance.

[Grateful for Hope]

85. IMO

This is a personal attack. I am seeing a pattern of posting here (towards other posters also) where there is innuendo about the poster's mental health and/or the poster's developmental maturity.

This does seem to be a not-so-subtle attempt at discrediting the messenger based on the frailties of the messenger's psyche.

I admit, because I do have an advanced degree in the psychology field, I have a personal issue with posts that seem to try to discredit using pop psychology.

However, at the very least, it should be obvious to you that this is against DU rules.

[ThePentaCon]

86. Thank You.

Well said. These people work on emotions rather thans facts and details.

[Bolo Boffin]

87. That is not true.

We work on facts and details, and you frame it as an emotional attack.

You have done this time and again. We bring out the facts and you flash pictures of a cute kid and his mom.

[AZCat]

94. The "alert" button is in the lower left-hand corner of my post.

Use it if you feel this my post is a personal attack.

Regarding your "advanced degree in the psychology field" - should I show you the same level of respect regularly shown here by the CTers to those with advanced degrees in engineering? After all, what's good for the goose is good for the gander, right? Or are you only interested in calling out "personal attacks" when they're directed at people that you consider to be on "your side"? It wouldn't take me long to pull up numerous examples of far nastier innuendo or outright slander by the CTers, so perhaps some of your vitrol should be directed at them, rather than me. And as for the "mental health" innuendo question, I've posted my rationale for the alleged attack against a now-banned poster and I stand by my reasoning (and by my post).

Your argument is crap and your attitude is crap.

[Grateful for Hope]

96. Thank you very much for your considerate reply n/t

[LARED]

92. What the hell are you babbling about

I simply asked how these people fit into your movie? You don't seem to have an answer. You post nice looking pictures of them. They seem to be getting the run around from some bureaucrats. They both survived the Pentagon attack. Is there something else germaine to your story? Are you selling this movie to help them? Are they simply props for generating interest in your movie?

Why is it not possible for you to explain how they fit into your story of a cover up, con, whatever it is your humping?

[Bolo Boffin]

21. Do you have any witnesses that say the plane pulled up?

In this picture, the blue path is labeled the witness flight path, and then it is marked "Pulls up here".

That implies you have witnesses that saw the plane pull up.

Is that true?


PS: Extra bonus question - did you allow for time shifts in your analysis of the FDR data?

PPS: Extra extra bonus question - are you still assuming a straight line path for the plane - no accelerations that would curve the path?

[ThePentaCon]

23. You are off ignore.

If your questions and comments remain civil, I will respond to them.

Yes, we have a witness who said it pulled up.

As for your bonus questions.

Let me state this again...

The witness data and FDR data are seperate pieces of evidence. They DO NOT correspond with each other.

[Bolo Boffin]

24. You have a witness - a single witness - who said the plane pulled up...

AND flew over the Pentagon? That witness stated that the plane flew OVER the Pentagon?

Because everybody else there, EVERYBODY ELSE THERE, including the REST of your witnesses say that the plane flew into the Pentagon. You realize this, right?

What is the name of this witness? Will you be releasing every witness interview unaltered and unedited? Will you be providing accurate and verifiable accounts of your complete interactions with these people?

[ThePentaCon]

25. Relax

No that witness didn't state that the plane flew over the pentagon.

That witness stated they saw the plane:

-on the North side of the Gas Station.

-pull up over the highway (motioned with their hand like a plane taking off)

-did not look like an American Airlines.

Their names will be released and the interviews will be played in near full.

If you need to, contact the witnesses yourself after the movie comes out. Or you can certainly make an appointment, fly to the L.A. and we will show all the raw footage-the unimportant stuff we edited out for time purposes.

But I have a feeling when you learn who these witnesses are, you won't be doing anything but wanting to find the people who really pulled this off.

[Bolo Boffin]

26. So the plane flew into the Pentagon, according to this witness who motioned?

The plane pulled up, but it hit the Pentagon, according to this witness, according to you.

So you have absolutely NO evidence for your assertion that the plane flew over the Pentagon. In fact, that assertion flies in the face of every eyewitness out there, including the ones you yourselves interviewed for this film, and yet you still assert that the plane flew OVER the Pentagon.

Is that correct?

Thank you for your generous offer of possibly allowing me an appointment so that I can buy a LA-area plane ticket and rent a car and get a hotel room in order to see the unaltered evidence that will prove you manipulated the witness interviews. Oh, let me guess, if I buy the plane ticket and fly on out, the appointment will have be worked around your kids and your lives, correct? Why don't you just upload the unaltered witness interviews to YouTube for free and save everyone the hassle?

PS: Bonus question - did the witness make a motion like a plane taking off, or a plane banking?

[ThePentaCon]

27. Your emotions are starting to show again

Again, the plane was on the north side of the gas station. Whether you want to believe the witness about the pull up (before you've even seen it :rolleyes: ) or not is irrelevant.

The plane was on the North side. The ONLY ALTERNATIVE is flyover. The damage to the facade, the trailer-THE DIRECTION OF THE TRAILER, all of that is now out the window. The ASCE Report has all the damage in a direction that lines up *exclusively* with a plane on the South side of the gas station, coming in low. THE PLANE NEEDS TO BE ON THE SOUTH SIDE TO HIT POLE 1 TO MAKE THE CAB DRIVER'S STORY TRUE!!!

Here:

(That new mound covers the view of the bridge. Convenient for them)


Looking at the plane's OFFICIAL flight path approaching:



Do you understand?

Again, people saw it fly over.

I've already told you that. And you know who told me that as well.

Tell me this, what was the "second plane" that was "chasing the first", "shadowing on top" as if to "prevent the other from appearing on radar." "Then veering off as the other impacts"?

Sounds like our flyover plane and a planted story to confuse people who saw plane, then an explosion, then the plane flying over/through the explosion while screaming away and ascending.

[Bolo Boffin]

28. What Witnesses Say The Plane Flew Over The Pentagon?

You keep talking about them. I have yet to hear about them. Now would be a good time to say their names.

What witnesses say the planes flew over the Pentagon?

No bonus question here - just this single, solitary, make or break, put up or shut up, question:

What eyewitnesses say the plane flew over the Pentagon?

If you come back here with stories about that C-130, the ghosts of that National Geographic field trip will haunt you.

What eyewitnesses say the plane flew over the Pentagon?

[Twist_U_Up]

34. Buy a ticket.

Your going to have to wait . If he doesn't produce, the ball is in your court.
But to slam the eyewitness that you haven't even heard from yet just makes you look as silly as the OCT.

[Bolo Boffin]

37. Hell, no.

Not one cent of mine goes to that outfit.

And you're not reading me correctly. I'm not slamming the eyewitnesses, I'm calling into severe question the treatment of these witness by the makers of this crummy movie.

Now, at this moment, finally, I have really gotten my hackles up, because PentaCon can't be bothered to type the eleven characters Penny Elgas. No, I didn't know that name until I Googled it and got it from this page, a listing of 132 eyewitnesses to the crash (is that enough to call "dozens"? I think it is.):

http://www.geocities.com/someguyyoudontknow33/witnesses.htm

And now it's clear WHY PentaCon didn't want to cop to that name, because PENNY ELGAS RECOGNIZED THE JET AS AN AMERICAN AIRLINES JET!

This movie is so full of bullshit, it squeaks. No wonder they can't upload it to GoogleVideo yet - Google's mantra "Don't Be Evil" probably keeps kicking the video off the upload queue.

[Bolo Boffin]

39. Oh, this is great, this is so rich. It is Penny Elgas.

Penny mentions that the plane, excuse me, the AMERICAN AIRLINES JET she sees is flying up Columbia Pike. She says that Columbia Pike runs perpendicular to the road she's on. She then says the AMERICAN AIRLINES JET is beside the Citgo. And then it flies into, NOT over, the Pentagon.

INTO.

Let me guess. Because Columbia Pike goes north of the Citgo, and hits Washington Blvd at a perpendicular angle, you are going to say that Penny Elgas was on Washington Blvd. So when the plane flies up Columbia, it is north of the Citgo.

Except Penny was on 395.



As you can see, Columbia Pike loops around the Citgo. It then takes up the course that is roughly the actual course of Flight 77, which is SOUTH of the Citgo. And Columbia Pike is perpendicular enough to 395 at that point to be described that way in an everyday way. I doubt that Penny got out a protractor to measure the angle.

Do us all a favor, including yourselves. DON'T release your crummy movie. Go drive a stake into it and bury it at a crossroads under a bundle of garlic. You still have plenty of years left to do something meaningful and useful with your lives. You can still turn this thing around. You have the power to become productive members of society.

Instead, by releasing this crummy movie, you are just enabling the people in power to continue their evil ways. You are making real questions and dissent ludicrous by association with this tripe.

You have met the enemy, and he is you.

On edit: hold up, she is on Washington. She says that the plane was four or five car lengths ahead of her as it crossed the highway. So she has just gotten off of 395.

But the point remains - she could still easily be back five car lengths from the actual flight path south of the Citgo. Everything else remains. You are counting on people not realizing that Columbia curves around behind the Citgo, and that its path there matches the Flight 77 path south of the Citgo.

Please, for the sake of your children's future pride in you, give it up now.

[ThePentaCon]

55. Do you have Proof about Elgas?

Do you have proof Elgas was on the highway?

Other than a Dodge Neon on the highway seen in photos, do you have any proof that Elgas was on that highway at that exact moment?

The only people who can be proven to be there on that highway or on the scene that day is Lloyd, Mike Walter, Rick Renzi, and possibly even Steve Riskus.

Because our witnesses have PROOF they were where they say they were and the plane is where they say it was.

[Bolo Boffin]

57. You think that only three - maybe four - people were on the highway or scene that day.

And you question whether Steve Rickus, who got the first pictures of the Pentagon, was even there.

You are serious about that - you are saying that at the most, only four people were right there?

[William Seger]

29. "The plane was on the North side..."

"... The ONLY ALTERNATIVE is flyover." Well, no, the rational alternative is that the plane actually flew over the bridge as dozens of other witnesses say and the physical evidence proves, but after five years your witnesses' "north of the Citgo" memories are simply not accurate. When that far greater number of witnesses includes many who were not likely to be mistaken about a plane that flew right over their heads and hit the light poles, and the huge amount of physical evidence proves them right, then calling your three witnesses a "smoking gun" is laughable. You're under some delusion that you will become a rich "movement" leader because your three witnesses are so incredibly credible that their 5-year-old memory will not only prove that dozens of other witnesses are wrong or lying, and that the perps not only faked the light poles and the plane crashing into the Pentagon, but they were clever enough to even fake the top of a tree being clipped and spreading leaves on the highway, to fake a scuff mark on the traffic camera pole shaped like a wingtip, and to fake a huge dent in the top of the generator where the engine would have hit it (and other details) -- while the real plane just flew away and nobody noticed. The only "smoking gun" evidence I see is that which confirms the extent of your delusions.

[ThePentaCon]

31. Please

Dozens of eyewitnesses? List them.

Physical evidence? Uh the physical evidence is what we were questioning to begin with.

Again, one of our witnesses IS a published account, the same one you people love to throw in our faces.

This person has been saying the plane was on the North side PUBLICALLY since 2003. Googlegooglegoogle.

5 yr old memory? Ha! Ask yourself where you were on 9/11. EVERY Person can remember where they were and how they felt, now compare that to being 10's of feet from the plane at the Citgo.

Do you really believe they are going to mix up a simple right or left detail like that? All 3 of them, and the 4th on Columbia Pike who corroborates their account???

Trust me I have researched this inside and out/

A tree being clipped? You have proof? Or just staring at pics too long like Pickering?
Leaves? Yeah I think they would do that, because people like you would find it so unbelieveable and make their job so much easier.

Scuff on the pole?

Oh you mean like this one off of 395 near Army Navy drive knocked over by high winds:



Does that mean a 757 wing hit this pole too?

And just for comparison:

Pole 1:


Pole 2



Base of pole 1:



Base of Pole 4:

[William Seger]

32. Please, yourself

You're promoting a for-sale DVD by claiming it's "smoking gun" evidence, but you're telling a story that the average fifth-grader could see through. And I'm sure you know damn well which witnesses will be cited to debunk your claims, which tree was clipped and which photos show the leaves on the highway, which dent in the traffic camera pole (which wasn't knocked down) was made by a wingtip, which dent in the top of the generator was made by one engine, which chunk of the low concrete wall by the heliport was taken out by the other engine, which path is confirmed by both the FDR and the radar data, and in fact a great deal of the other stuff that will be brought out to debunk your film. You probably even know what Pickering is going to say about your "manipulated" witnesses. You know all this because your DVD has already been debunked on JREF and on LCF, and you've had nothing to reply but the same lame claim that your witnesses are so unbelievably believable that that won't matter. And of course, you know that nobody including your own witnesses saw a plane fly over the Pentagon, which all by itself completely refutes your fantasy hypothesis. If the plane hit the Pentagon (which everyone says and which is abundantly proved by the real "smoking gun" physical evidence), then your witnesses are either lying or simply wrong about it flying north of the Citgo. But, so what, you also know that you'll finally get a cut of the 9/11 conspiracy market that you have so long desired just by telling the gullible rubes that this nonsense is a "smoking gun."

[ThePentaCon]

40. Ok William

More of these delusional declarations of victory I was talking about.

I simply don't have the time to respond to posts of little or no substance.

[Bolo Boffin]

30. Please point out the plane in this picture.

As you can see, this picture was taken in the seconds after Flight 77 hit the Pentagon.

A link to Google Maps helps to place this picture (framegrab, actually):

Google Maps



The X marks where the picture was taken. The video itself continues underneath that overpass on 395.

The eyewitnesses in this car were in a prime location to see any plane fly over the Pentagon. Their camera was filming mere seconds (five, perhaps?) after the explosion. Being that quick, they had to have actually seen any plane fly over the Pentagon - indeed, it should be in that shot. A large plane streaking away from the Pentagon after an explosion, and these people didn't see it or film it?

Impossible.

How does it feel to have wasted all of that time, and harassed all of those people, just to have your crummy film debunked before you can even release it?

[ThePentaCon]

41. Such hate, such venom.

What was the EXACT time of that photo, dear?

[Bolo Boffin]

43. Oh, get over yourself.

You must get over yourself right this very minute. The only hate and venom in this conversation is what you are injecting into it.

You are transparently trying to frame my answers as emotional ones.

Why should I tell you the exact moment that picture was taken? I took it a couple of hours ago. Tell me the names of your witnesses.

PS: Unless you are sharing my bed, you don't have any business calling me "dear."

[MervinFerd]

35. Did your witnesses see any evidence of the Dustification Beam?

This is the only logical conclusion! No missiles! That never made sense! But, the same Dustification Beam from the International Space Station that took out the Twin Tower could -certainly- blow an 18 foot hole in the Pentagon!!!

So simple and so obvious!! And -such- a coverup!!

Notice that the MSM and the Pentagon --never-- mentioned the location of the Space Station on 911!! NEVER!!!! TOTAL SILENCE!!!!

HOW SUSPICIOUS IS ---THAT---????

[jschurchin]

36. Thank You for the link ThePentaCon.

I very much look forward to the release of your film.

[ThePentaCon]

42. You are so very welcome, JS

Well good, I hope you enjoy this in the meantime...

Here is the movie trailer:

http://video.google.it/videoplay?docid=6090580274514984618

(Go for it Jrefr's)

[Bolo Boffin]

44. Google Italy?

So your strategy is to force visualization of the lies you're telling, the way that crappy psychologists lead people into false memories of ritual Satanic abuse.

I take it back. Your movie isn't crummy. It's evil.

[Bolo Boffin]

45. I see your 13 witnesses (spooky number!) and raise you 119.

That's 132 witnesses, in case you're keeping count.

http://www.geocities.com/someguyyoudontknow33/witnesses.htm

[ThePentaCon]

46. O'RLY

132?

Count them again, and then analyze them and where they were located, oh and what they actually saw.

I think you'll find the results quite interesting.

Like Susan Carroll...

"I was standing on the platform high above the airport awaiting a Metro subway train to my office in the heart of the district, on Constitution Avenue, admiring the lovely blue skies when I saw the plane hit and the fireball and explosion at the Pentagon.





Which also poses a problem for Allen Cleveland and Meseidy Rodriguez as well...




Cleveland could have seen the C-130 30 seconds later at a high altitude as he stated, but how did he see the plane and see it impact? How did Meseidy?

Susan Carroll, Allen Cleveland, and Meseidy Rodriguez could not have seen the plane hit with the Crystal City highrises in the way.

Here is a clip of Cleveland and Rodriguez:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/mmedia/nation/091101-9v.htm

Looks like you just lost 3.

[Bolo Boffin]

49. Yes, 132 (adjusted for duplicate names/accounts)

Such as Mitch Mitchell, who was coming from National Airport on I-395 towards the Pentagon:

Just as we got even with the Pentagon, I looked out to the front and saw, coming straight down the road at us, a huge jet plane clearly with American Airlines written on it, and it looked like it was coming in to hit us. I told my wife, 'It's going to hit the Pentagon.' 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, and there was no indication whatever that it was doing anything other than performing a direct attack on that building. The landing gear was up. There were no flaps down and it looked like a deadly missile on the final phase of its mission into the building."
"We saw what I estimate to be about the last seven seconds of the flight. It was a straight-in flight, angled slightly down, and there was--there was no intent to turn or to maneuver in any way. It was headed straight for its target and we were helpless to do anything about it but watch.

And Steve Rickus, who was southbound on Washington Blvd (just north of Penny):

I am sorry to rain on your parade, but I saw the plane hit the building. It did not hit the ground first.... It did not hit the roof first... It hit dead center on the side... 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... 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 in its way... I did not see any smoke or debris coming from the plane. I clearly saw the "AA" logo with the eagle in the middle... I don't really remember the engine configuration, but it did have those turbine engines on the wing... and yes, it did impact the Pentagon... There was none of this hitting-the-ground first crap I keep hearing... It was definitely an American Airlines jet... There is no doubt about that... When I got to work I checked it out.

And Steve Storti, who was on his apartment balcony in Crystal City a mile from the Pentagon:

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. It was way off the normal flight pattern for Reagan National, said Storti, who had been living in the Crystal City section of Arlington for about two years. The plane was also alarmingly low, passing behind nearby apartment buildings that were only several stories high. ... 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.

Of course it would be a silent collision a mile away.

And then there's Joel Sucherman, the editor of USAToday.com:

Well while listening to the radio reports of the World Trade Center problem, there was a sonic boom, and 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. It was Route 110 on the west side of the Pentagon. The plane went west to east, hit the west side of the Pentagon. Immediately flames were searing up into the air. There was white smoke, and then within seconds, thick black smoke. ... Then there was another plane, that was off to the southwest, and that made a beeline straight up into the sky and then angled off and we weren’t sure if that was going to come around and make another hit or if it was just trying to get out of the way. That disappeared and we didn’t see it again. ... I did not see the engines, I saw the body and the tail and it was a silver jet, with the markings along the windows that spoke to me as an American Airlines jet. This was not a commercial, excuse me, a business jet, right it was not a Learjet, Gulfstream something like that. It was a bigger plane than that.

Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon.

[ThePentaCon]

59. Your witnesses

-"Mitch Mitchell":

who was coming from National Airport on I-395 towards the Pentagon:

Just as we got even with the Pentagon, I looked out to the front and saw, coming straight down the road at us, a huge jet plane clearly with American Airlines written on it, and it looked like it was coming in to hit us.

Already busted. On i-395 coming from National Airport, even with the pentagon. Looked out his front windshield and saw the Plane come straight down the road at them? Totally wrong. Obviously an improvised story.

"Clearly with American Airlines written on it".

That's not what most of our witnesses told us.


-Steve Riskus actually supports our flight path. He claims he is 100 ft from the plane and points out his location-on the official flight path it would have been 350-400 ft away. That jives with our North side flight path. Whether it looked like an AA or a hybrid of one is still debateable, and you will soon see why it is debateable.


-We tried contacting Steve Storti, no luck. We could not find him with a working number. We would love to talk to Steve. We would like to know how he was able to tell it was a silver AA with AA stripes(witnesses 10's of feet away could not) and see it "slide silently into the Pentagon "like a car entering a garage." all the way from Crystal City (look it up on a map sometime- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_City,_Virginia).


-Joel Sucherman. Yes well guess what? We interviewed Mr. Sucherman. And another employee of the USA Today. Their accounts are conflicting and problematic to say the least. And please can someone tell me the odds of 6-8 USA Today reporters and editors sitting less than a 1/4 mile of each other, just stuck in traffic at 9:38, at the exact moment "Flight 77" passes in front of them?

[Bolo Boffin]

62. Man, you just repeat the mistakes of years before and pile them on.

Which road do you think Mitchell was talking about? Could have been Columbia Pike and not the road he was on.

So Rickus made a mistake in estimating the distance. You're treating the 100 feet as gospel because it serves your purposes, but why are you not using his absolute statement that the plane went into the building? Because it does not. So you're going to say, "I'm doing the same," but number one, that doesn't excuse you doing it, and number two, which would be more likely for him to confuse, estimating a distance or watching the plane hit the building? It's more reasonable to conclude that the 100 ft is just a guess, but he actually saw the plane go into the building.

USA Today editors/reporters stuck in traffic: I don't know, CIT. Do they have a office closeby? Are they all on their way to work? Oh, yes, they do and are! So pretty dang high odds, it looks like. And, by the way, some of them were already at work. The offices give a clear view of the Pentagon. Man, you guys are toast.

Stotri's apartment was a mile away from the Pentagon. What, did you measure from the geographical center of Crystal City so you wouldn't have to listen to Steve's clear statement? This movie is a total joke.

Oh, man, you must release all interviews unedited and unaltered. You guys are perpetrating a fraud on history. A fraud on history and the memories of Flight 77's passengers.

[Laurier]

52. Pretty crappy looking there, TPC

That 'trailer' doesn't do you any favors if its intent is to try to make you look credible. If your full video is no better than that, and i suspect it isn't, I predict that you're going to get dumped on big time and, frankly, will deserve the full weight of derision that follows. It's really, really, really lame. Really.

The whole "inside job" conspiracy theory is just nonsense. ShrubBoy is a moron and a buffoon, without question, but no way could his admin have pulled off 9/11 in the 8 months or so that they were in power before it happened, and no way in hell did the Clinton admin plan it and pass along the plans to ShrubBoy. No wonder DU created a sub-basement for this crap.

edit add: Ack. I intended not to contribute to this thread in the sub-basement forum because the fantasies of conspiracy inclined folks here are just too crazy for me to lend any credence to, but obviously I just did contribute to it by posting this.

I'll go back to GD now.

[jschurchin]

54. Wait, wait don't go.................

you forgot your bucket of sand!!!!

[ThePentaCon]

56. Opinions are like...

Nuff said.

[wildbilln864]

58. Hey, don't forget ....

your sand!
:hi:
www.newamericancentury.org
"Rebuilding America's Defenses"

[Beam Me Up]

88. There are many words for people such as yourself:

Prejudiced is one polite one that comes to mind. Another, less polite, perhaps, but appropriate is ignorant -- as in someone who deliberately, intentionally ignores information and evidence in order to sustain the illusion of their superiority.

[Bolo Boffin]

53. William Lagasse

Radio interview

Lagasse was at the Citgo. He saw an American Airlines 757 fly into the Pentagon.

Beginning at 6:51 on that RealPlayer file:

And the unusual thing is, I can play it back in my head.

And when I was talking with the FBI investigators, maybe a half an hour to 45 minutes after the attack, um, I was able to recall details about the plane that were, you know -- I, I could -- I knew the landing gear was up, I knew the flaps were retracted, I could see the windows had had the shades pulled down, um, so the people couldn't see out.

Um, things like that just kind of stick in my head.

I remember being on the scene and seeing a -- a chunk of the plane that just said, "AMERI." It didn't say "AMERICAN," it just said "AMERI," 'cause that's the biggest piece that I saw of the aircraft.

Um, I remember seeing the light poles that the plane hit, that knocked it down, it just -- it's absolutely surreal.

He also says that the plane hit the light poles. Therefore, process of elimination, he saw the plane south of the Citgo.

[ThePentaCon]

60. Ah yes, Lagasse.

Fine man that Sgt.Lagasse. ;)

Yes, notice he said he saw the light poles, not the plane hitting the light poles.

Was there anything else you learned about Lagasse's account? Perhaps an important detail you're missing?

[Bolo Boffin]

63. He doesn't dispute the light poles being hit by the plane.

He says the jet was an American Airlines jet.

He says it went into the Pentagon.

He says he saw wreckage.

He pulled people out of the construction area.

Your coy bullshit is getting tiresome. Seeing as how you are about to commit massive fraud, why don't you just say what you know? I have no interest in indulging the excesses of someone who would produce a movie like this. Drop the coyness and talk.

[ThePentaCon]

64. I want you to learn on your own

Again, read more about Sgt. Lagasse.

[Bolo Boffin]

66. Screw your pedantic pedagogery

The day I need you to teach me anything is the day I die. Quit your chickenshit dancing and start talking.

On edit: Thought I would use the term "screw" instead. Come on, Rob. The quicker you get your film out there, the quicker "Screw The PentaCon" gets into production.

[The Lone Groover]

61. I have a few questions...

The official Flight 77 story is a little weird but I have trouble with some aspects from the people who disagree with it too.

Q) When was it first noticed that the lampposts were knocked down and did anyone witness something other than a plane knocking them over.

Q)Why go to the trouble of knocking lampposts over to make it look like a plane did it when you could have picked another less troublesome flight path like north of the gas station?

Could someone explain please?

[ThePentaCon]

65. Thank you for your questions

The poles were noticed in many different ways. Some publications, like the VDOT's Roads to the Future say only two poles were knocked down. National Geographic's Seconds From Disaster ( which has the plane on the North side BTW), says three poles. One of our witnesses said they only saw two poles knocked down and only referenced there. So it was kind of slowly built publically and seen acknowledge locally by anyone on the scene. If you want a theory on how they were planted...

http://z9.invisionfree.com/Pilots_For_Truth/index.php?showtopic=4581

Why go through faking poles?

To sell a low impact of a 757 into the building.

A plane that was remoted guided and probably totally empty.

Why would you want that crashing into the Pentagon for all to see?

Some believe 9/11 was meant to be exposed.

Seems like a good possibility.

[Bolo Boffin]

67. Where are the passengers of Flight 77, PentaCON? n/t

[ThePentaCon]

68. Why don't you ask your gov't.>

That's what we're doing.

[Bolo Boffin]

70. I know where they are. They are in their graves.

What you are doing is pissing on those graves.

[ThePentaCon]

71. You have no idea Bolo

April Gallop too?

I can tell you if you were really a concerned citizen you would speak with victims and witnesses. There is more to the story than meets the eye.

You're pissing on April Gallop and the other victims that were there on the first floor with her.

E-Ring. First floor. 50 ft from the alleged "impact", yet her, her baby, and others survive incineration.

[Bolo Boffin]

73. You are denying the last moments of the lives of Flight 77's passengers.

There were many fatalities in the Pentagon as well. Are you denying this now as well?

You are now using April Gallop and her child as a human shield.

[Woody Box]

76. How can one deny the "last moments"?

If A is sentenced to death for murdering B, but new evidence appears that A can't be the murderer, how can this be interpreted as disrespect for B?

Strange logic. It occurs to me that your best times are over, bolo.

[Bolo Boffin]

77. Woody, thank you for your concern for my "best moments."

However, the CIT doesn't have any new evidence. They have old, misunderstood evidence. They have manipulated and harassed people sun up and sun down. They have not exculpated al-Qaeda of this crime, though they continue to try to do so. They defend the actions of murderers and make the sacrifices of the innocent disappear.

This movie is evil. It is no less evil because the makers have convinced themselves that they alone know the truth. In reality, they just have used the tragic events of 9/11 to create their own secret little secret mystery-solving club and feel special about having wasted the past few years of their lives for nothing. It is sad they are running interference for al-Qaeda in all of this, but that is the truth. The movie is evil.

[rman]

69. If 9/11 was meant to be exposed

then who was behind it? The same people who now benefit from exploiting it?

Or are there two groups: one that did it, meaning to have it exposed - and another group that exploits it. If so, were the actions of the latter (exploitation) expected by the former?

And more importantly: why would anyone do such a thing for the purpose of having it exposed?

[ThePentaCon]

72. Look at the current climate

If you understand the whole NWO/One World aspirations of the internationalists who run our country, then you would understand that they want a weakened America, an despised America, a bad guy 'imperialist' America.

Some believe it was a trojan horse, designed to implode on itself and help bring down America. Think about it, what would happen if the news started covering trials/investigations that determined 9/11 was a military operation executed against the American public? I predict chaos, great depression type stock crash, Fed calls in the loand. End game.

Again, it's just a theory.

Unlike the plane being North of the Citgo, that is fact.

[rman]

74. I see.

I think it's possible, but i also think the same goal can be achieved by escalating the 'war on terror', which seems to be well on its way. Between a new world war and peak resource, economic collapse seems almost inevitable.
And in exposing 9-11, would people not become extremely suspicious of "what else" governments have done and are doing?


About the flight data that was released:
As i understand it, there was a plane swap at some point. Didn't the plane go off radar for some time?
Even that left aside, it's not hard to manipulate data in file. It's probably manipulated anyway - so why would they leave in such an obvious anomaly as the flight path north of Citgo?
Perhaps this does lend some credence to the idea that 9/11 was meant to be exposed.

[MervinFerd]

75. Wow! JUST WOW! No further comment.

[The Lone Groover]

78. Pentacon

I don't have permission to view that link.

I really think that faking the lampposts doesn't work.. I mean why bother.. really.

I think the Government are covering up on 9/11, but this just doesn't make any sense. They really didn't need to go to this extreme when they could have just chosen the north gas station flight path.

[MervinFerd]

79. Sense! Don't confuse Pentacon with sense. He's on a mission---

to sell DVDs.

[ThePentaCon]

80. Hey Merv

Make sure you donate to the Elisha Gallop Fund, ok? The poor little guy can use the help.

[Beam Me Up]

89. Here is what was in the link you couldn't access:

The Five poles are removed at night through a phony late night road construction detail the week(s) or months prior to 9/11.

Then EARLY on the morning of 9/11 laid out poles 2-5 in the grass. Everyone drives by not noticing 4 poles laid out, inconspicuously, in the grass.

Then shortly before the entrance of our mystery flyover plane...



Perps drive large truck with cab on trailer northbound throw crushed up glass out by the off ramp by pole 3, and go under bridge drive up on the south bound loop.

Right after the plane flies over explosion goes off...

Police(blue) get diverted from gas station, the truck/trailer perps stop on loop as if they are shocked. Taxi is unloaded off trailer(yellow) while all are staring at the Pentagon. Truck continues up on the on ramp drops pole 1(green) in the fast/middle southbound lane street on bridge and perhaps bulb/glass debris. Cab eases his way up on the highway with "damage". Our police officer was adamant when he said he was sure the cab was over near that overhead sign (the one the plane flew over), near the on ramp...not on the bridge.

As everyone is distracted, the cabbie pulls up to the final point, the faceless guys in the Saturn pull up and move the pole making the scratch in the asphalt, so they can park their car. And with the assistance of the faceless shirt and tie men in the fire dept Saturn he turns his cab sideways near the pole, giving the appearance that he is helping block traffic going soutbound. They, perhaps the shirt and tie guys in the Saturn stand around and maybe even drop the glass, bulb pieces perhaps even the little pieces of leaves.

You can see the trailer, the suit and tie men, their Saturn with the FD license plate, pole 1 and the scratch in the asphalt, and loyd and his cab. Look at lloyd on the phone. Note the trailer in the background on the loop:

>

[Bolo Boffin]

93. Lloyd England: the cab driver that Beam Me Up just accused of treason

Moderators and adminstrators - you may want to maintain a link to the above post so that when the civil suit subpoena comes, you can easily access the user information and posting time.

[Beam Me Up]

90. Why they "bothered"

First, lets get a few things straight.

We have recently been able to decode the additional data 'slipped' into our package through the FOIA (Thanks UT!).

The main purpose of getting this data decoded was to confirm or contradict our initial altitude findings regarding True altitude as shown in the animation and original csv file which can be seen in http://z9.invisionfree.com/Pilots_For_Truth/index.php?showtopic=3895>Chapter Two.

The last recordings of radar altitude shown in the newly decoded .fdr file is as follows.



In the spirit of keeping this simple, we will use the argument side of the analysis prior to us getting the decode of the raw file.

Many of you have read our analysis regarding the altitude being too high based on True Altitude. However, the argument side says that there could be up to 2 seconds error and possible lag due to instrument error.

Quote as follows from a self-proclaimed anonymous internet FDR Expert.



However, A radar altimeter presents no lag. The 273 feet you see above is a hard number above the ground.

Now we will disregard when it was recorded and use the argument side that there could be 'up to' 2 seconds missing (ie. the 273' was recorded 2 seconds prior to the pentagon wall).

Backing the data out from the pentagon wall 2 seconds based on speed, the aircraft is at this location...

(again using the govt loyalist argument of the south flight path)


The ground elevation at this point is ~60 feet above sea level. Add that to 273 and you get 333 feet above sea level. (this figure does not match True altitude at this point because we are using the govt loyalist hypothetical that 273 was recorded 'up to' 2 seconds out from the pentagon.. we are using their argument of the largest margin for error).

The elevation of the 'hole' in the pentagon is 33 (ground elevation of pentagon, established) plus 12' (center of hole) = 45 feet above sea level.

When we subtract 333 from 45, we get a number of 288 feet above the 'impact hole' at a spot 2 seconds away from impact.

Divide 288 by 2(seconds) and this aircraft would need a steady linear descent rate of 8,640 feet per minute to impact the hole in the pentagon (remember, this is using the argument that 273 was recorded up to 2 seconds prior to impact). This is in direct conflict with the DoD video showing an object level across the lawn.





Now, lets look at the light poles.

We will again use the govt loyalist argument that the height of the poles was 66(ground elevation, although the USGS shows 43) + 40 feet for pole height (liberal figure) = 106 feet.

Based on forward speed, the light poles were ~1 second from impact (its more like 1.3 for poles one and two, but we're giving the govt loyalists every chance possible here).

So, that being the case, if we were using the 273 AGL altitude as recorded by the radar altimeter 2 seconds from the pentagon wall, that would make the 273 agl recorded 1 second prior to the poles. The top of pole height was 106 feet above sea level. The "2 second recording" was 333 feet above sea level. Subtact the two and you get 227 feet this aircraft would have had to descend in order to hit the very top of pole 1 within one second(again, using liberal numbers for pole height... its actually more than 227).

To descend 227 feet in one second, this aircraft would need 13,620 feet per minute dive to clip the poles. And then level off from that dive to be level with the pentagon lawn.



To level off from that dive, the aircraft would need to pull (227/32 (ft/sec, accel due to gravity) =7+1G's (earths gravity) = 8 total G's for 1 second sustained to be level with the lawn.

There is no indication anywhere in ther FDR file showing this aircraft pulling 8 G's sustained during the last second, Matter of fact, it shows less than 1 G.. Not to mention, aircraft structural limitation would not let it get that high. IE. The wings would rip off and/or High speed buffet/stall.

Conclusion:

Using the govt loyalist own argument of 'up to' 2 seconds of error, we can see this aircraft was too high to hit the poles and the pentagon.

However, using the actual data that was recorded 1 second prior to the pentagon wall as provided directly from the NTSB (and not making excuses like there may be 'up to 2 seconds missing'), it is further in conflict with the govt story.

Cheers!
Rob

"If his true altitude is accurate, he may be on to something" - Anonymous Self-Proclaimed FDR Expert and Govt Loyalist.

(if you want to repost this whole article, pictures and all, hit the quote button and copy and past the quote to your new post in another forum. Spread it everywhere if you like).

I'm posting the above because I want to make sure you understand that although we were told that American Flight 77 "slammed into the Pentagon" -- this conclusion can not be drawn from the evidence made available via a FOIA of the NTSB. On the contrary, the conclusion drawn from the evidence is that this is strictly impossible because the plane from which this data came was both too high and on the wrong heading.

There is more, though, that has to be put into the picture for it to begin to "make sense."

First, we know that the Pentagon had MASCAL exercises as late as October, 2000, which involved the potential for mass casualties at the Pentagon resulting from a plane impact. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_MASCAL

Second, it should be clear that the best way to generate the most 'death and destruction' at the Pentagon would be to plow into it from above -- a rather shallow approach right into the roof line. We would think this would be obvious to anyone planning a kamikaze terrorist attack using a commercial airplane.

However, what we see is something quite different: An impact at ground level (not through the roof) through a very solid wall which, ironically, had just been reinforced to minimize precisely such an impact.

In other words, this was a TARGETED AND CONTAINED IMPACT. It was not a matter of random chance. A plane coming in from the roof line would have done far greater damage and could have led to uncontrolled fires throughout the complex.

So, there was a problem here. On the one hand, the damage had to be contained within a certain area and, on the other, the event had to appear to be a LOW FLYING hijacked commercial airliner.

The light poles were the subliminal evidence presented to the public to "prove" the official narrative. That it does no such thing is irrelevant. It is USED in that way uncritically -- ACCEPT BY individuals of the Citizens Investigation Team and Pilots For 9/11 Truth.

[RedSock]

91. you have made one hell of a claim

The evidence we have is SOLID and is going to prove an inside job, without a doubt.

That's a pretty big claim:

Solid proof of an inside job that will not raise any doubts.

Good luck!

[wildbilln864]

95. Indeed! I have heard this claim quite a few times now.

I remember when seismic time discrepencies would be the smoking gun. :shrug:
And maybe it is. I don't know. Who'll listen? Who'll bring charges? So far no one with the authority to do anything about it is looking into any of this as near as I can tell.
We'll see!

[Lithos]

97. Locking per DU rules

Please obtain DU Administration approval prior to selling merchandise or services.

Do not use our message board for personal fundraising, for-profit advertising, or selling products or services, except in the specially-designated "DU Marketplace" forum. We will occasionally make an exception in cases where the product or service contributes to the Democratic or progressive cause, provided that you ask an administrator for permission before you post.

Please note that posting 9/11 material in the DU Marketplace is also against DU rules concerning proper content.

Lithos
DU Moderator