When you look at the small list of people that are suspicious/bat-sh!t crazy just remember how many people think those people are nuts.
Because mainstream liars say they are crazy? And only talk about the ridiculous conspiracy ideas like the one you mentioned instead of the very plausible and real theories many are finding out about?
For the first time ever the NTSB didn't investigate plane crashes. The FBI took over and wouldn't let any other investigators near. The plane that crashed in PA was almost completely obliterated, but they were able to find two passports and a jihad letter?
The official photos and video footage of the Pentagon is just as ridiculous as some of the wacky theories anyone can find online. The official photos of the crash in PA and the story that goes with it are also just as ridiculous.
Like I said, all the government would have to do to dispel most of the conspiracy theories, is show the video footage.
Given how those three buildings in NY fell, and all of the testimony and video footage with the sounds of explosions, any true investigation would have tested for explosives, there would have been serious tests on as many beams as they could find. But instead the buildings were excavated and gotten rid of as quickly as possible.
Our government has proven themselves so trustworthy that we should just believe whatever crap they tell us?
-------------- And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.
Then there's also the fact that no other high rise has collapsed from ordinary office fires, but building 7 did.
FEMA and WPI both report corroded/melted steel beams like "swiss cheese" from building 7. FEMA and WPI both gave a cursory inspection of one of the beams and said more testing needs to be done to find out why that beam was like that. NIST says there was no beams recovered from building 7 for them to examine.
-------------- And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.
Because mainstream liars say they are crazy? And only talk about the ridiculous conspiracy ideas like the one you mentioned instead of the very plausible and real theories many are finding out about?
What does the media have to do with people thinking you truthers are crazy? You truthers do that all by yourself.
-------------- The people are masters of both Congress and courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert it!
And that video explains the things I have mentioned in which way?? The beginning of the video with the wreckage at the Pentagon, that's what I"m talking about. Seriously, barely any pieces whatsoever of a plane. Same with the crash in PA. And that surveillance video is completely laughable. The Pentagon is supposedly our main area of defense in the US and they have worse video cameras than Wal-Mart stores? And only one? BS. The part of your video explaining the explosions. CRAP. Witnesses heard and felt explosions long before the buildings fell. And nothing in that video does anything to explain building 7, except to point out that some theorists say that the owner talked about demolishing it. Again: a high rise building collapses due to office fires when no other building has ever done that. FEMA and WPI talk about metal beam melted and corroded that looks like Swiss cheese, but NIST says there were no beams recovered from building 7 for them to inspect. NIST had absolutely no physical evidence to inspect, so they just pretty much guessed how the building collapsed. And they also refuse to release their computer generated explanations to be peer reviewed or researched.
So with all that happened on that day at the Pentagon and PA crashes, there are hardly any video or photo's.
QUOTE
You truthers do that all by yourself.
Believing the official BS is what is crazy.
-------------- And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.
In regards to the Pentagon and Flight 77, the government and its defenders could, if they wished, put all the wild speculation as to the specifics of that event to rest. Surrounding the Pentagon, as one would expect with a building of its stature, sit numerous video cameras. On the morning of September 11, they were positioned at an adjacent gas station, on top of neighboring hotels, mounted atop an array of different lamp posts running along I-395 that encircle the building, and scattered across other buildings and positions within clear view of the Pentagon. All of those video cameras recorded the specific event of an aircraft crashing into the Pentagon on the morning of September 11. But the government will release none of those videos. The only thing they have released is a short burst of non-sequential still-frames that shows virtually nothing. Click here to view this supposed conclusive video evidence, and see if you can find the 757.
Why would the government release five individual, non-sequential still frames to the public, and not whole video clips of the event? What logical reason, besides suppression of what the full videos would show, can there be for this behavior? Some have suggested the government perhaps does not want to upset the public with more traumatic footage. Besides the fact that we are all adults who have, by now, seen far worse than a plane flying into the Pentagon, they did choose to release those individual five frames. So again, why those five frames? For a full, calm, sober analysis of this video and all things related to the Pentagon, again click here.
To be clear, full videos do exist. The FBI, by its own admission, has 83 such videos. They confiscated all of them shortly after the impact of Flight 77. "A security camera atop a hotel close to the Pentagon (the Sheraton) may have captured dramatic footage of the hijacked Boeing 757 airliner as it slammed into the western wall of the Pentagon. Hotel employees sat watching the film in shock and horror several times before the FBI confiscated the video as part of its investigation. (Also) the attack occurred close to the Pentagon's heliport, an area that normally would be under 24-hour security surveillance, including video monitoring." (Washington Times, 9/21/01)
The FBI also confiscated a video camera from the local Citgo gas station that sits just outside the Pentagon. The employee on duty that morning was Jose Velasquez. "Velasquez says the gas station's security cameras are close enough to the Pentagon to have recorded the moment of impact. 'I've never seen what the pictures looked like. The FBI was here within minutes and took the film.'" Why is the FBI so concerned with a gas station's video camera, there 'within minutes', when a giant airliner has just flown into the Pentagon, the building is burning, people are dying, and confirmed reports are detailing a fourth hijacked plane still airborne and flying toward an unknown target?
Undoubtedly, the confiscated videos show conclusive evidence as to the type of aircraft, and the manner in which it flew, that crashed into the Pentagon. If the government and the defenders of the 'official story' want to clear up some of the confusion and speculation that is racing around regarding Flight 77, why not just release the confiscated videos and be done with it? These are the types of questions that a serious, independent investigation into the matter would have asked. But so far, the government has not been held accountable to explain its incriminating behavior.
This refusal to release the videos (and all the other definitive information that is being withheld in regards to so many details of 9/11) is, in fact, the very behavior that creates the speculation the government claims to so abhor in the first place. Investigators interested in coming up with a more logical narrative as to the actual events of 9/11 are given no choice except to speculate when the official given story conflicts with existing evidence and makes no sense. Which is why so many people who have investigated the crash at the Pentagon refuse to believe that it was AA Flight 77 flown by Hani Hanjour that actually smashed into the western wall. Was it a missile? Was it a military plane dressed up as a civilian airliner - just like the government had planned with Operation Northwoods back in the early 1960s? Could the plane somehow have been swapped in the confusion and convenience of its transponder being turned off? Could the 'AA 77' that hit the Pentagon have been a military 'drone' or large 'global hawk missile' painted in the colors of an American Airlines jet? If it was a military plane transponding a friendly military beacon, this would explain why the aircraft did not alert the Pentagon's surface-to-air missile defense system that has been reported in place and fully operational on the morning of 9/11. Was it any of the possibilities raised on this site? http://www.911hardfacts.com/report_15.htm
-------------- And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.
The beginning of the video with the wreckage at the Pentagon, that's what I"m talking about. Seriously, barely any pieces whatsoever of a plane.
Do you realize how big those parts are? Do you think they trucked those parts in and stuck them in a hole a cruise missile had created?
A large jet traveling at 100's of miles per hour slammed into a reinforced concrete building bursting into flames and you think there should be more big pieces laying around?
-------------- The people are masters of both Congress and courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert it!
A large jet traveling at 100's of miles per hour slammed into a reinforced concrete building bursting into flames and you think there should be more big pieces laying around?
Yeah actually, I do, and so do many other people. And I also find it extremely odd that in PA the plane was pretty much obliterated, but they found two terrorist passports and a letter. Like I said, all they'd have to do to stop rumors is release photos and video. Your Bill Maher video is another ridiculous response. Just like the mainstream liars pointing out insignificant stupid things and deflecting from very real issues many people have with things that happened that day. Did you try to find legitimate proof of anything to explain what I am saying about 911, or did you just jump to name-calling BS? I have a feeling you DID look for info to discredit what I have been saying, but you weren't able to find any. The only reason I have even started bringing up the 911 things is because I have spent a very very long time looking at all of this information and trying to discredit it myself- and the more someone searches, the more they are convinced that the official story is pure BS.
QUOTE
And unless they had ultra high speed cameras running any plane traveling that fast at that close range would be invisible on conventional video.
Yes, that is very true, but it would still be better to have all the video released (or at least more) instead of a few frames of crappy video that the Pentagon has released so far. The pathetic bit of video they have released is in itself a HUGE reason for many more "truthers" having been created. Until that stupid video came out there weren't as many people who questioned the Pentagon crash. So, maybe the government DOES want conspiracy theories. ------------- In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft — and in most cases the precise cause of the accident. This is because every military and civilian passenger-carrying aircraft have many parts that are identified for safety of flight. That is, if any of the parts were to fail at any time during a flight, the failure would likely result in the catastrophic loss of aircraft and passengers. Consequently, these parts are individually controlled by a distinctive serial number and tracked by a records section of the maintenance operation and by another section called plans and scheduling. http://physics911.net/georgenelson/
Capt. Daniel Davis, U.S. Army – Former U.S. Army Air Defense Officer and NORAD Tac Director. Decorated with the Bronze Star and the Soldiers Medal for bravery under fire and the Purple Heart for injuries sustained in Viet Nam. Also served in the Army Air Defense Command as Nike Missile Battery Control Officer for the Chicago-Milwaukee Defense Area. Founder and former CEO of Turbine Technology Services Corp., a turbine (jet engine) services and maintenance company (15 years). Former Senior Manager at General Electric Turbine (jet) Engine Division (15 years). Private pilot.
Statement to this website 3/23/07: "As a former General Electric Turbine engineering specialist and manager and then CEO of a turbine engineering company, I can guarantee that none of the high tech, high temperature alloy engines on any of the four planes that crashed on 9/11 would be completely destroyed, burned, shattered or melted in any crash or fire. Wrecked, yes, but not destroyed. Where are all of those engines, particularly at the Pentagon? If jet powered aircraft crashed on 9/11, those engines, plus wings and tail assembly, would be there. http://patriotsquestion911.com/
The initial impact hole of the Pentagon was nowhere near big enough for the size of the plane. No government source has even attempted to explain that. Debunkers like the silly Popular Mechanics article and others have said "Maybe one of the wings scraped the ground and fell off before impact". So where's the marks in the lawn? Where's the wing pieces? Here's an FBI video. There's even concrete blocks in front of the impact zone. None of them look disturbed in the least. A few minutes into the video the screen goes all weird. Why? http://vault.fbi.gov/911-videos?b_start:int=8 ------------------------
The neat round exit hole in the Pentagon. What made that? Like I said before, either the government is lying about a few things, or they actually want a lot of "conspiracy theories" running rampant, otherwise all they'd have to do is release video and pictures, or even give some concrete explanations. Another thing that occurred to me just lately: if the Pentagon knew for so long (like they said they did) that a plane was heading for the Pentagon, why didn't they warn the workers inside? No siren? No warning or attempt at evacuation whatsoever? That's kind of weird. Especially since they were confiscating surveillance video from every where within minutes of the crash. Another interesting thing about that second video you posted: every time it used news footage of the towers falling it muted audio. Why? Because every mainstream news footage at that moment has broadcasters giving their initial reaction to the way the towers fell. All of them comment as to how it looks like a controlled demolition. (I'm not saying news broadcasters are experts, I'm just pointing out that the first idea that popped into most peoples minds was "controlled demolition" and in the very least, there should have been some sort of testing for explosives, if for no other reason than to rule that possibility out and snuff a lot of rumors.
And then there's also still the other things mentioned before that there is no explanation for. Hundreds of witnesses reporting hearing and feeling explosions long before the buildings collapsed. "Swiss cheese" like metal beams that WPI and FEMA both say surprised everyone who saw them and could offer no real explanation. Both saying tests need to be done on them...but no tests were done. The mad rush to get rid of all the debris right after 911. You honestly don't see a problem with these things? You honestly don't have a problem that the government just shrugs these things off, and the media lets them?
Liberal, be honest, you honestly don't have a problem with any of these things?
-------------- And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.
