Comments (19)
sorted by:
bcfromfl 14 points ago +14 / -0

I have seen video taken from a helicopter of the moments leading to the Pentagon incident, still filmed through a potato, but better than the security camera on the ground. It's clearly a cruise missile painted to look like a commercial airliner.

AngelCole 5 points ago +5 / -0

Interesting, I hadn't thought of the paint part.👍

Wtf_socialismreally 1 point ago +1 / -0

Care to find and show?

bcfromfl 2 points ago +2 / -0

I can't seem to find the better-quality version of the video I mentioned. This is it, but the quality is horrendous: https://defendingthetruth.com/threads/update-a-cruise-missile-slammed-into-the-pentagon-on-911.27808/

The thread does show the model of the cruise missile used.

DeathRayDesigner 2 points ago +2 / -0

Well, one thing is for sure: it wasn't a cruise missile. The scale is all wrong. The streak of light was about as long as the Pentagon was tall, which would have made it 71 feet long. An ALCM is only 20 feet long. No signs of wings, which means the streak of light is probably exactly that: a sunlight glint off the fuselage of the 767. The camera resolution is crappy.

You guys will never learn. The evidence is right in front of your faces and your ignorance blinds you to it.

bcfromfl 1 point ago +2 / -1

Have you ever seen what happens to an object at high speed on a VCR tape? It lengthens as the frames can't resolve the image correctly.

Collect your shekels for your post.

DeathRayDesigner 2 points ago +2 / -0

Then the image cannot overlap itself during the motion, which is what it was doing.

I happened to work for most of my career right across the street from the building in which the ALCMs were manufactured. Dummy shapes would be in the cross-hallways leading to one of the cafeterias. It wasn't an ALCM.

Or, go find the missing passengers.

bcfromfl 1 point ago +2 / -1

I would consider Christopher Bollyn the most eminent investigator of these details. You may be right that the missile in question is not an ACLM, although the other possibility, the Global Hawk, has an obvious wingspan -- which is not apparent in the video.

The only engine part found inside the Pentagon was an unidentified turbine disc, but Bollyn was able to determine that it was NOT part of a Honeywell engine for a 757. You can read his findings here: https://www.bollyn.com/is-the-pentagon-mystery-disc-from-a-global-hawk-2

I would suggest that we don't know EVERYTHING about every single part ever installed on every single cruise missile, engine et al, and perhaps a one-off design for a very specific covert purpose may have unusual non-standard parts.

At any rate, before the floors of the Pentagon collapsed opening up a much larger hole, there was a very small, round entry point into the building consistent with a cruise missile...and not a 757. The fireball visible from the security camera is an exact match for a cruise missile detonation. In addition, there is a photograph of a 757-like plane exiting the Pentagon airspace immediately following the impact.

I challenge you to explain "the evidence right in front of our faces," and ignorance blinding us. Clearly, there was no debris from, or damage consistent with, a 757. On the other hand, there is good evidence of something quite nefarious.

I'm out.

DeathRayDesigner 1 point ago +1 / -0

According to Wikipedia (caveat...but keep with me), they identified the nose cone of the aircraft and the nose landing gear. Recovered an intact pilot's seat and two black boxes (voice and data recorders). Passenger remains were collected and identified,along with personal effects. Eyewitnesses clearly identified the crash as by an American Airlines 757. (There is no way to make a cruise missile look like a 757 by a paint job.) No explosion. Plenty of fire (lots of fuel).

The fact that Christopher Bollyn wasn't able to identify a part is no evidence of anything except his inability to identify a part. It could have been the drive disk for a ram air turbine. In any case, that is a weak thread when there was plenty of positive evidence that would have been impossible without an actual passenger-bearing aircraft.

Young_Patriot 11 points ago +11 / -0

Maybe they were using the super efficient cremation techniques done by the Nazis?

deleted 7 points ago +10 / -3
mengderen 4 points ago +4 / -0

Look up the 737 plane crash at Colorado Springs on March 3rd 1991, it was slower but because of the rudder problem it dove straight into the ground on landing approach. The Shanksville plane was going around 500 MPH when it hit.... I refer you all to a video of an F-4 on a rocket sled slamming into a huge block of reactor concrete; there was dust and 2 wing tips..

swimkin 3 points ago +3 / -0

Well I do know there were human fragments they used DNA to find out who they were. Some fragments were never matched to this day.

deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
AquaEyes777 3 points ago +4 / -1

Not if they are in tiny pieces.

formerdemfortrump 2 points ago +2 / -0

I believe Cheney ordered for the plane to be shot down.

DeathRayDesigner 2 points ago +2 / -0

What---the crap that argues no airplane hit the Pentagon? Pretty obvious to me. Like the stupid remark about cremation temperature. The flame temperature for burning kerosene (jet fuel) is 2093 C. Chemical reactions accelerate rapidly as the reaction temperature increases. If the aluminum airframe begins to burn, it goes up to 3732 C, so don't give me this crap about the bodies not being there.