Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all.
Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage") |
|
Post Reply 
|
Page <1 56789 18> |
| Author | ||
Blacksword 
Prog Reviewer 
Joined: June 22 2004 Location: England Status: Offline Points: 16130 |
 Posted: May 24 2006 at 14:45 |
|
|
^ No, but questioning the official line on something so unbelievable, is essential IMO.
|
||
|
Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy!
|
||
 |
||
|
billbuckner
Forum Senior Member 
Joined: May 07 2006 Status: Offline Points: 433 |
Posted: May 24 2006 at 13:12 |
|
|
So, I guess that failing to trust the public story of anything is a better view?
|
||
|
||
|
Blacksword
Prog Reviewer
Joined: June 22 2004 Location: England Status: Offline Points: 16130 |
Posted: May 24 2006 at 08:04 |
|
'Let the dead rest' What you really mean is, shut up, dont talk about it. Accept what you've been told. Great attitude. |
||
|
Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy!
|
||
|
||
|
VanderGraafKommandöh
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 04 2005 Location: Malaria Status: Offline Points: 89372 |
Posted: May 24 2006 at 07:59 |
|
|
Fitzcarraldo, you should read the two articles I cited on the previous page, both by the same guy. He has the most convincing argument of all. He doesn't conclude what hit the Pentagon, but he rules out a 757 and a missile. He is even anti a lot of the conspiracy theorists. I am not trying to get you to alter your decision, but those articles are the best I've read about The Pentagon and the WTC buildings.
As I also said, he debunks his first article, after reading more into it and has altered his view, but he still denies a 757 hit The Pentagon. Oh and your example isn't exactly correct, an aircraft taking off over a congested road, is not the same as an aircraft going a lot faster, with it's undercarriage up, heading away from the road (but of course, nobody seems to mention it before it gets to the road, except those who viewed it from a building, but then don't clarify that they saw it before the road either). Edited by Geck0 - May 24 2006 at 08:06 |
||
  
|
||
|
||
|
Fitzcarraldo
Special Collaborator 
Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 30 2004 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 1835 |
Posted: May 24 2006 at 07:50 |
|
It was not a missile, full stop.:
(from an anti-establishment site, to boot.)
Have you been on the perimeter road of an airport right at the end of a runway when a large jet airliner takes off? When a large jetliner thunders over a public road at *very* low altitude with a traffic jam on it, I think we can safely say the people in the cars and those not in cars who also saw it (see numerous articles plus the post by billbuckner) can tell the difference between it and a cruise missile (the length, diameter and wingspan of which are about 6 metres, 0.5 metres and 2.7 metres, respectively). If you wish to believe that some, or all, of the physical evidence was falsified and/or that some, or all, of the hundreds of witnesses (close by and at a distance) were confused, misguided, brainwashed or whatever, then that is your prerogative. But the more I read, watch and ponder, the more far-fetched the claims of something other than Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon seem to be, to me. The debris was apparently that of a 757 (refer to the various URLs posted previously, plus other references you can find on and off the Web). The human remains were DNA-identified as those of the passenger list of Flight 77 (ditto). The Perdue University computer modelling and dynamic simulation showed the building damage (internally, too) was consistent with an aircraft the size and shape of a 757: http://news.uns.purdue.edu/UNS/html4ever/020910.Sozen.Pentagon.html
One can spend days on the Internet reading thousands of sites covering this one crash alone, and discussing it as nauseam: claims, debunking, counter debunking, counter counter debunking. At the end of the day, one has to make one's own mind up, making sure one reads as many as possible of the articles and papers on both sides of the argument and considering all the points carefully. If I get some time, I'll do some calculations on the velocity and video frame issue (my earlier post refers) and post the result here. For me, that's it for the time being. Back to music. (Actually, back to the grindstone.) |
||
|
||
|
VanderGraafKommandöh
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 04 2005 Location: Malaria Status: Offline Points: 89372 |
Posted: May 23 2006 at 16:54 |
|
|
I agree with your first statement actually Ghandi. It wasn't a missle (not one going post Mach 1 anyhow) and it wasn't a 757 either.
|
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
Ghandi 2
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 17 2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1494 |
Posted: May 23 2006 at 16:27 |
|
I haven't been following much of this too closely, but you must have made a mistake. There is no way a cruise missile going Mach 2 hit the Pentagon. If it was going above the speed of sound there would be a very loud sonic boom which everyone would have heard, and the glass in the cars that were on the highway that it passed over would have shattered. I don't think a missile hit the Pentagon, but if one did it was not going Mach 1 or faster.
The thing that punches holes for me is the phone calls. If they're real than that means the official line is more or less true, and if they're fake, I ask you this: wouldn't people who are smart enough to manage to fake somebody's voice in real time so that nobody can tell that it's not the person calling (which I don't think is possible, but we'll assume it is for the sake of debate) don't you think they would deliberately avoid all the "holes" that "proves" the calls were undoubtedly fake "no ifs, ands, or buts"? Or is it more likely that Mark was incredibly stressed out and/or had a somewhat weird relationship with his mother, which caused him to state his full name? And they were calling from Airfones, so that "cellphones can almost never connect at that height" nonsense (and I don't even see how he got that data, as you can't get to 30,000 in a small private plane) is ridiculous.
|
||
|
||
|
VanderGraafKommandöh
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 04 2005 Location: Malaria Status: Offline Points: 89372 |
Posted: May 23 2006 at 15:56 |
|
|
Well, in that case, we would like to hear their witness statements. But then again, it's a bit late now.
|
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
billbuckner
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 07 2006 Status: Offline Points: 433 |
Posted: May 23 2006 at 15:50 |
|
|
By the way, my friend's company is based in Washington. Some of his
coworkers saw the plane hit on their commute. Not a missle, but a plane.
|
||
|
||
|
Greg W
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 24 2004 Location: Chicago Status: Offline Points: 3904 |
Posted: May 23 2006 at 15:46 |
|
|
The wheels on the bus go round and round.
We never landed on the Moon either!!
 So, if all these conspiracies are true....why? What motive would the US government have deciding to carry through such a rash and most unreasonable act, or even allowing such a thing to occur. It just doesn't make sense.
...and don't say it was the old cliched oil either!!
 Let the dead rest!!!
 |
||
|
||
|
billbuckner
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 07 2006 Status: Offline Points: 433 |
Posted: May 23 2006 at 15:26 |
|
|
Gannett News is based in Washington DC, also known as USA Today. It
would not surprise me if they new how to get their interviews posted.
|
||
|
||
|
VanderGraafKommandöh
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 04 2005 Location: Malaria Status: Offline Points: 89372 |
Posted: May 23 2006 at 15:11 |
|
|
Indeed, the truth will never come out.
It's so ludicrous, that not even a novelist would have come up with it! Yet, I am more convinced than ever now, that at least the Pentagon was not hit by a 757. The Addendum sections of that article are very interesting reading indeed, covering things I've never come across before, yet, seem remarkably well researched. Most of the witnesses seem to be hoaxes and are liars. Ten of the witnesses apparently all worked for the Gannett news outlet. There are more holes in the true story than a bathmat. |
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
Blacksword
Prog Reviewer
Joined: June 22 2004 Location: England Status: Offline Points: 16130 |
Posted: May 23 2006 at 14:52 |
|
|
^ Yes, it is Andy
There are so many (conspiracy) theories out there, that the whole picture has become ever more blurred. It's inevitable that when something like this happens people will theorise. The more that happens the further we get from the truth. So, the conspiracy theorists are working - inadvertantly - for the authorities. A conspiracy theory in itself, I guess. What's been peddled as the official line is so full of holes you could fly a 757 through it, but the authorities can sit back, happy in the knowledge that no one can ever touch them. There is no way the truth can ever come out. Can you imagine what would happen in America if somehow it was revealed that the Whitehouse was complicit in the worlds worst ever 'terror' attack? |
||
|
Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy!
|
||
|
||
|
VanderGraafKommandöh
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 04 2005 Location: Malaria Status: Offline Points: 89372 |
Posted: May 23 2006 at 14:39 |
|
|
Thank you for your insight, Andy (it is Andy isn't it?). Yes, I am not-convinced about the 757 either. I'm still undecided about what happens.
What I quite like about this article, is he is even against other conspiracy theorists, which is quite refreshing. |
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
Blacksword
Prog Reviewer
Joined: June 22 2004 Location: England Status: Offline Points: 16130 |
Posted: May 23 2006 at 14:31 |
|
|
^ It is a very interesting and convincing article. I've struggled with the idea of a 757 hitting the building, and there is too much that does not add up. I'm warming to the missile theory. The author, as you say doesn't reach a conclusion as such, but I'm convinced that a passenger jet was not involved.
|
||
|
Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy!
|
||
|
||
|
VanderGraafKommandöh
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 04 2005 Location: Malaria Status: Offline Points: 89372 |
Posted: May 23 2006 at 13:56 |
|
|
The articles I've just cited, especially the latter, are actually against a cruise missile and also against a 757. He makes no actual conclusions, which is why I think it's an important article to read.
|
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
Blacksword
Prog Reviewer
Joined: June 22 2004 Location: England Status: Offline Points: 16130 |
Posted: May 23 2006 at 13:53 |
|
The Russians and Chinese have 'Sunburn' missiles which fly horizontally, at 30 feet above the ground at Mach2. They are deadly and completely untraceable. I'd be surprised if the US military didn't have an equivelant system to counter that. Not that I'm fully signed on this missile theory.. |
||
|
Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy!
|
||
|
||
|
VanderGraafKommandöh
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 04 2005 Location: Malaria Status: Offline Points: 89372 |
Posted: May 23 2006 at 13:43 |
|
|
Have you read the said newsletters?
|
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
billbuckner
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 07 2006 Status: Offline Points: 433 |
Posted: May 23 2006 at 13:34 |
|
AA planes have a very distinctive shiny chrome color scheme. It is possible that someone could have figured it out.
|
||
|
||
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21596 |
Posted: May 23 2006 at 13:33 |
|
Maybe he'll even write a third newsletter which debunks the second one?  |
||
|
||
|
Post Reply
|
Page <1 56789 18> |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
9/11 Pentagon Video finally released...
Topic Options
Greg W wrote: