What is the deal with the Pentagon?
Why is the truth movement divided on this subject? Why does as prominent a truther as Jim Hoffman discourage focusing on the Pentagon-is it really, as he claims, a honeypot issue?
If in fact we who doubt that a jumbo jet flew into the Pentagon are right, why might someone who is OK with 9/11 truth generally either believe or promote the belief in this aspect of the entire fake narrative of 9/11?
What DID happen to the people listed as having been on Flight 77? Was there a flight 77 to begin with? Did a plane with Barbara Olson on board crash anywhere that day aside from the Pentagon? Did such a plane exist?
»
- Login to post comments
What I know, and what I might imagine:
The documented damage to the Pentagon is irreconcilable with the impact of a 757 -- fact.
Now what distinguishes the controlled demolition of the WTC with the attack on the Pentagon is this: The latter, if proven as staged, directly incriminates government insiders, while the former might be blamed entirely on less connected individuals, such as Larry S. -- it's a stretch, yes, but conceivable. The biggest obstacle to this copout would be explaining the utter failure of NIST et al.
I agree, I think the Pentagon is really the weakest link
I actually think the hole in the Pentagon story, pun intended, is even more important than the WTC controlled demolition for the 9/11 truth movement. Why? Because the military plane/missile that hit the Pentagon could not possibly be blamed on Al-CIA-duh without the entire world cracking up in ridicule. "A bird cannot even shit on the Pentagon without Rummy and the other scum in the Pentagon allowing it to happen", as someone so elquently put it on 911blogger recently. On the other hand, the majority of people in Amerika might be persuaed to accept the cover story that Al-CIA-duh somehow was able to get bombs planted in the relatively accessable WTC.
Actually, Bush even alluded to this potential cover story last September, "[Khalid Sheikh Mohammed] told us the operatives had been instructed to ensure that the explosives went off at a high -- a point that was high enough to prevent people trapped above from escaping."
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/09/20060915-2.html
Was this a trial baloon to see how this cover story might play should too many people find out about the bombs in the WTC?
On the other hand, look at the perpetrator's full court press on damage control regarding the Pentagon part of the story by disinfo artists both inside and outside the 9/11 truth movement, truely a gargantuam effort! There's practically a new "eye-witness" coming out of the woodwork every week claiming they say AA77 crash into the Pentagon. They are obviously extremely nervous about this weak link.
(This is Keenan, I registered but am awaiting my account approval)
Fox Breaking News! Al-CIA-duh hijacks cruise missile
Try this:
Fox Breaking News! New information about 9/11 Pentagon attack has just come to light. Sources confirm that the object that hit the Pentagon wasn't AA77 after all. Apparently Al-CIA-duh took over a US missile frigate, then forced the crew to launch a cruise missile into the Pentagon. Then, they forced the US military to hide AA77 and all its passengers...
Nobody's buying it?
Ok, try this:
Fox Breaking News! New information about 9/11 Pentagon attack has just come to light. Sources confirm that the object that hit the Pentagon wasn't AA77 after all. Apparently Al-CIA-duh took over a US Air Force Base, then forcefully took an A3 Skywarrier, forced the crew to give them lessons on flying it, then painted it to look like an American Airlines plane, and then hid AA77, er, forced the FAA and other agencies to pretend that AA77, uh....
Hmmm, just ain't gonna work, is it?
Either way you slice it or dice it, the Penta-Con is the perp's achilles heal. Just no way around it. No cover story could possibly work to cover the fact that it wasn't AA77. Therefore they have to prop up the official myth of AA77 at all costs.
welcome Keenan!
all new user requests have been approved! I think you're right about the Pentagon--NOTHING should have hit it!
i tend to agree
I wonder if because the Pentagon is a military/government building, the consequences of the truth coming out would be more serious than in the case of the destruction of the WTC and murder fo the people inside, since it would be an act of war instead of just a massive crime....
____
â™
Real Truther
I believe the paramount motivation
now is damage control. It's clear that CD @ WTC can not be denied, so be on the lookout for limited hangout. Convicting Larry and some of his expendable associates appears like a desirable lid to this can of worms.
_________________________________
happiness is either here or nowhere
could be... so the next question is--are there factions?
that is, people competing against one another to expose the other group's responsibility while shielding their own group? I would think that there may be an American/Israeli rift that could develop, given that I believe both American and Israeli individuals played important roles. We could add Patsystan to the list but it's not clear exactly what they were complicit in, and whether or not they were knowingly complicit...
Absolutely
I think it was Napoleon who once said: "There are only two forces that unite people -- fear and interest"
At first, the perps were united in interest -- and while now, they're certainly united in fear, I could well imagine that within the conspiracy, the top tier would be more than willing to sacrifice lower tiers if they thought it convenient. I consider Larry lower tier...
_________________________________
happiness is either here or nowhere
interesting...
I don't know, billionaires tend to be slippery...
hey if anyone has any good RSS feeds they want to see
feel free to suggest... does 911blogger have one? I think infoclearinghouse is a 911 gatekeeper of sorts, I do like most of their stories though...
Flight 77 Hit the Pentagon! A Parody
Top Secret!
Clear Evidence that Flight 77 Hit The Pentagon on 9/11
- a Parody -
by
Simon Sackville AKA
The Pied Piper of Swindle...er...Swindon
http://www.signs-of-the-times.org/signs/Pentagon_Parody.htm
very good synopsis of the government's case
thanks Keenan--sometimes we forget that we are indeed nuts. clear expositions like this one are necessary to remind us of just how solid the case is for flight 77 hitting the Pentagon, piloted by wild-eyed fanatic Hani Hanjour and taking the life of Barbara Olson. God rest her sould and those of all the other folks who vanished--I mean were atomized into barely recognizable bits of DNA, along with the huge plane they were riding in that horrible day in September.
Where is Arabesque when you need a long list of highly credible and well sourced eyewitness reports that confirm beyond question what the many security cameras around the Pentagon MUST have captured that day?
Arabesque, who also replaced John Albanese as the expert on disinformation by pointing out how holograms and space beams are used to distract from the fact that REAL passenger planes piloted by REAL wild eyed arab muslim religious fanatics with boxcutters wrought the devastation on that clear (and horrible) September morning.
Racism and the Pentagon
I do not think Hanni Hanjour Flew the Plane into the Pentagon and nor do any legitimate 9/11 truth activists. If it was done with a 757, it was done with remote control. Isn't that obvious? I don't know what happened to the passengers, and you can't claim to either.
Claiming that I think religious fanatics carried out 9/11 is pure unadulterated --even offensive BS. Please quote me where I say that.
If you have a problem with the eyewitness statements, then why don't you do some research and find some compelling statements of your own. An honest researcher would report that there are no contradictory statements at the Pentagon. An honest researcher wouldn't claim that the physical evidence "contradicts" the testimony. Not when there are knocked down light poles and plane parts, and a straight line of damage inside of the Pentagon that lines up perfectly with the light poles. Physical evidence is only valuable when people know how to evaluate it by not taking photos out of context and assuming what can and can't happen at a plane crash.
If the questions at the Pentagon are so "obvious" and so "incriminating", why is it that sites like 911truth.org, scholars for 9/11 truth and justice (not their disinfo cousin "9/11 truth"), 9/11 research (linked to on the several credible 9/11 research sites including the front page of 911truth.org) do NOT make no-757 at the Pentagon claims.
Perhaps because they've done more "research" than sitting on their ass watching Loose change 15 times in a row, and staring at the same photo with the firefighter water covering the bottom part of the Pentagon hole.
welcome arabesque!
i bet we could be friends if we agree to disagree on this one. in any case, i have trouble with eyewitness testimony that is contradictory. I think that what happened at the Pentagon was VERY staged and could well have involved more than one plane, including a 757 (flying over not hitting the Pentagon), a missile, a remotely navigated drone, light poles being popped out with small explosive charges detonated by remote. the plan was clearly to create a mess of muddied waters and contradictory claims. the bottom line though is that nothing should have hit the pentagon and al qaeda was not responsible for whatever did.
I also think that Prof. Griffin agrees with my take on the Pentagon, or perhaps I should say I agree with his!
Finally, I hereby apologize (on the condition and assumption that you are sincere) for criticizing your work on disinfo so harshly. I wish only to stress how important it is to make the distinction between blatant disinfo like no planes hit the towers and subtle disinfo like pretending to be a truthe only to promote a version of the "truth" that exonerates whoever one is trying to protect. The "big tent" mentality has made the latter a very effective and dangerous tactic I'm afraid.
One more thing--you are now a registered user here and I want to take the opportunity to extend an olive branch because I do think that you contribute a worthwhile point of view regardless of whetehr I agree with it. Casseia and Bruce are hereby requested to take note of my promise to be civil when I disagree with you and reprimand me if I run afoul of that promise... :)
My Pentagon Review...
Well, I still haven't tracked down the original source of the stopped clock account from the Pentagon, the one that puts the first explosion there (whether from plane impact or whatever) at around 9:32. In part because reviewing the Pentagon facts leads one in all sorts of directions (surprise!)
But I think some of these directions are bound to be the right ones. I went back to Paul Thompson's Terror Timeline and noticed a few funny facts. Apparently the first pass made by "flight 77" was at around 9:32, at which point it was allegedly 7000 feet above the ground. Could it be that at this first pass there was an explosion and that the funny (impossible) maneuver alleged to have taken place later did not?
There is also evidence in PT's timeline of several accounts of the radar blip presumed to be AA77 being on course to strike the Pentagon at around 9:32, not 9:37 or 9:41. Read the timeline yourself for this time period and see if it makes sense. We know that the transponder was off, so it was only presumed to be flight 77 that was seen on radar making this trajectory, and that it disappeared from radar at around ten miles out, presumably because it dropped to an altitude below FAA radar's ability to track (where is military radar in all of this?). Then, at around 9:32 we have some reports saying that 77 approached the Pentagon too high and proceeded to fly off and circle back for the later "hit".
This is all very confusing of course, as it was presumably meant to be--what I'm suggesting is that whatever was on the radar and whatever struck the Pentagon was probably not AA77 but was meant to be believed, in real time and after the fact, to be it. This by both muddying the facts about times and probably also by means of explosives at the Pentagon, a fly over (or two) and either a false radar blip or drone pretending to be 77 and impacting (or "pretending"to impact) at 9:32.
Would love for a few more pairs of eys to look over the Thompson timeline with an eye to sorting out possible scenarios, and if anyone can track down the original accounts of the stopped clocks that would be great!
____
â™
Real Truther
"Truth will have no gods before it.- The belief in truth begins with the doubt of all truths in which one has previously believed."
Friedrich Nietzsche (1844 - 1900)
Here's Barbara H on the stopped clocks:
http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=182642&fr
I'm skeptical -- I think that's a lot of weight to put on stopped clocks.
you know though
that screw loose change seems to have it in for her, and she does seem.... eccentric. given what we know of the tactics of coverup however I find this to be a compelling reason to put stock in what she says, if not in her personally...
Michael Moore calls for the tapes!
something is surely going on... there are those who think that somehow this is a setup and that tapes will be provided showing AA77 hitting the Pentagon. I think MM is right though that first and foremost on our minds should be WHY the tapes haven't been released until now. Even if they DO release something, forged or not--the question will remain--WHY DID THEY WAIT?
____
â™
Real Truther
"Truth will have no gods before it.- The belief in truth begins with the doubt of all truths in which one has previously believed."
Friedrich Nietzsche (1844 - 1900)