-21 votes

The 9/11 Pentagon Challenge

This is an open challenge to anyone who believes that American Airlines flt 77 was not flown into the Pentagon in a kamikaze attack by hijackers. This challenge has nothing to do with any other theories concerning 9/11, only the theory that a plane did not hit the Pentagon.

Provide ANY real evidence to support that claim. Opinions of what flight path is possible or not, or opinions of what a kamikaze attack scene "should" look like, are not real evidence. Sorry to those who that may seem a little condescending to, but there are people on this site that not only think opinions are real evidence, some call a persons opinion "irrefutable evidence".

For example, this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5FhQc-LJ-o
I know some people love it, but there is not one piece of evidence in this whole documentary that is not an opinion. And it attempts to build a case that a plane did not hit the Pentagon from eyewitness testimonies that SAW THE PLANE. And they intentionally do not interview any of the many people who saw the plane hit then Pentagon, because that doesn't fit there story.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cT8WWt61eg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ue6PniAv0r8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbhbXMfh6eQ

Real evidence would include but not necessarily be limited to:
Eyewitness accounts of something other than a plane hitting the Pentagon.
Photo or credible documentation of any piece or part of a missile or anything else, other than the American Airlines plane found in the wreckage of Pentagon.
Any eyewitness account to the scene afterwards during the cleanup or investigation that either say they saw no plane wreckage, or they saw plane wreckage being planted.
Real video of something other than a plane hitting the Pentagon.

Comments that are solely insults and/or personal attacks and that have no links to evidence, will be assumed to be because YOU COULD NOT PROVIDE ANY REAL EVIDENCE. I understand some of you are frustrated by that inability and will personally attack me anyway, that's fine, expose your inability to produce anything to defend your argument. That's why I challenge you to do it.

For evidence that American Airlines did indeed hit the Pentagon on 9/11, see these links:
http://therightbloggerbastard.blogspot.co.nz/
https://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/911pentagonflight77ev...
https://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/pentagonattackpage2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkqLTpnyBd0

That is a good summary of my real evidence. You can look through this thread and compare the evidence for the differing theories and make your own decision.
UPDATE:I am done answering repetitious comments asking questions or showing evidence I have already addressed. So if you don't get a reply, it's probably because I have already addressed what you state/show and you can find my answer in this thread already. Anything new I will eventually reply to.



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

"The witnesses are adamant

"The witnesses are adamant about where they saw the plane"

Is there really reason to go beyond there? There is not a single eyewitness in that video that saw anything other than a plane hit the Pentagon, that is what I stated, and that is 100% fact. True, some eyewitnesses only saw the plane and not the impact, never said that wasn't the case. What is the case is that I am still waiting for anyone to produce a single eyewitness that saw something other than a plane hit the Pentagon.

Please provide any evidence of even a single eyewitness that say they "seen the plane fly away" if you are going to make that claim, because no one in the CIT documentary does.
Roosevelt Roberts did not say he saw the plane "fly away", he said he "thinks" he saw "a second plane fly away". Check your facts.

As for the personal attacks, I addressed them in the post, I know you're frustrated at your inability to provide any real evidence.

Here comes your backpedaling and smokescreens

YOU IN THE OP: "[National Security Alert] attempts to build a case that a plane did not hit the Pentagon from eyewitness testimonies that SAW THE PLANE hit the Pentagon"

ME (QUOTING CIT SITE): "...while they each had an excellent view of the plane as it passed by them at treetop level, many of the witnesses in question did not have a clear view of the impact point, or in some cases any view of the Pentagon at all, and/or they admit to running, flinching, or ducking for cover. This is explained and documented very clearly in National Security Alert. For example, 'No one was really trying to look see if it actually was gonna hit the building or not hit the building. So everyone was running in the opposite direction for their lives' --Darius Prather, ANC maintence worker."

YOU NOW: "True, some eyewitnesses only saw the plane and not the impact, never said that wasn't the case"

* * * *

ME: "National Security Alert contains proof beyond a reasonable doubt that: 1) There was a large plane on the scene. 2) This plane approached on a "north of Citgo" flight path which makes it impossible for it to have struck the five light poles or caused the directional damage to the building itself. ... You are setting up a FALSE DILEMMA -- either AA77 impacted or "something else" impacted -- which assumes that SOMETHING impacted, when in reality as you well know there is only evidence for ONE flying object on the scene, a large plane, which did NOT hit. NOTHING "hit". So you misrepresent and handwave the overwhelming evidence for what really happened (flyover timed with internal explosion) and demand evidence for what didn't happen (missile impact). Nice try."

YOU (in your response): "There is not a single eyewitness in that video that saw anything other than a plane hit the Pentagon ... I am still waiting for anyone to produce a single eyewitness that saw something other than a plane hit the Pentagon."

* * * *

YOU: "Roosevelt Roberts did not say he saw the plane 'fly away', he said he 'thinks' he saw "a second plane fly away'. Check your facts. "

Misleading phrasing. Yes, he assumed that the large commercial aircraft that he saw flying away at less than 100 feet altitude just seconds after the explosion (alleged impact) must have been a "second plane", but there was no second plane in the area at the time, even according to the official story and radar data, let alone one fitting that description. The plane he saw could only have been THE plane -- the ONLY plane -- the same one seen by the witnesses on the west side of the building, which is alleged to have crashed. It did not. It continued on. It was a black op deception. All of this is very clear when one watches National Security Alert. Now that Roberts understands the implications of what he saw, he won't talk about 9/11 anymore. "Some people were yelling that a bomb hit the Pentagon and that a jet kept on going." --Erik Dihle, describing what he overheard when he ran out of his office across from the Pentagon immediately after the explosion.

YOU: As for the personal attacks, I addressed them in the post, I know you're frustrated at your inability to provide any real evidence.

Pointing out your well-documented behavior is not a personal attack. You DO "show up in every 9/11 thread purposely trying to confuse people on the issue", and as I said "here you are yet again in a thread of your own." The evidence presented in National Security Alert is not only "real" evidence -- it is conclusive: The plane seen by all of the eyewitnesses did not hit the Pentagon and 9/11 was a false flag operation.

How many times do you want me

How many times do you want me to repeat my comments on the CIT documentary? It is nothing but opinions. Every eyewitness in the documentary saw a plane, not all saw the impact, but those that did saw a plane hit the Pentagon and those that didn't saw a plane. No one saw a plane shoot a missile, no one at all.

Roosevelt Roberts does not contend that a plane did not hit the Pentagon, he merely contends he believes he saw another plane after the first plane had hit.
from http://911blogger.com/node/20826
Craig Ranke:
Right, but from what direction did it seem like it came from?

Roosevelt Roberts:
It seemed like that it came from uh... it... hold on a second... it seem like it came from uh... south west.. look, the same way it came in or appeared that it came in, almost right where that first plane had uhm..., fell into the Pentagon right there, it.. it.. the.. it looked like it came from that direction.

So your position is that a large commercial aircraft shot a missile at the Pentagon?

Where did AA flt 77 go then? How'd the black box to it and body parts and some belongings of it's passengers end up in the Pentagon wreckage? Where is any physical evidence of a missile like there are plane parts? When did missiles stop exploding on impact and instead fly like a bullet through multiple walls?

Wrong

You are employing your usual tactic of relentlessly repeating the same debunked canards.

I have told you over and over and over that there WAS NOT a missile or any other flying object on the scene. I explicitly said, "there is only evidence for ONE flying object on the scene, a large plane, which did NOT hit. NOTHING 'hit'". I also explicitly told you exactly what happened: a "flyover times with internal explosions." This is exactly what is advocated by CIT in the National Security Alert documentary as well.

Yet after all of that you are now once again asking me: "So your position is that a large commercial aircraft shot a missile at the Pentagon? ... Where is any physical evidence of a missile like there are plane parts? When did missiles stop exploding on impact and instead fly like a bullet through multiple walls?"

Keep it up because you are making it extremely clear that you are disingenuous and that your only goal is to deceive and confuse people, just like I said in my first post.

You ask, "Where did AA flt 77 go then?" Frequently Asked Questions >> If Flight 77 did not hit the building what happened to its passengers and crew?

YES, again, anyone who has watched the documentary knows Roberts assumed that a plane must have hit the Pentagon (even though he did not personally see it) and that commercial aircarft that he saw flying away at less than 100 ft altitude seconds after the explosion (alleged impact) must have been "another plane". I already explained this in my previous post, as you know. See above. The plane he saw flying away could only have been the same plane that is alleged to have impacted. Roberts now knows this and refuses to talk about 9/11 anymore. Millions of other people around the world now know it too, despite people like you trying to confuse them.

Well sorry to have confused

Well sorry to have confused you there pal. I asked a question, I am replying to other people in this thread and some of them are contending a missile hit the Pentagon. So accept my apology for the question about the missile, all the other questions stand. There's no evidence of AA flt 77 going anywhere else.

The internal explosion theory seems even more implausible to me than a missile. Over a hundred people saw a plane fly into the building, are they all delusional? Or do you seriously believe they are all lying and in on it? And you think the wreckage is consistent with internal explosions? What about the videos from the side, you may not be able to make out what flies into the building but you do see something fly into the building? And the plane wreckage, do you believe all that plane wreckage was somehow immediately planted?

Saw the plane???

Eyewitnesses saw a plane, some saw a big passenger plane, some a small commuter plane, a big white plane was photographed flying above the White house.
Please mrbengal, with your endless knowledge, WHICH plane did eyewitnesses see? Maybe the biggest plane went in first, to make a 16 or so foot hole for the smaller "eye witnessed" planes to fly into. I await with baited breath for your insightful answer. http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200704/911MysteryP...

mrbengal is a tenured professor at OKCU

who is required to force feed the "official story".

poor hapless suck up!

get him off the stage... I think it is unanimous!

If he is a professor

I can understand why much of the US education system is in disarray and ranked
only 17th.
Got the thread for you mrbengal http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/07/us-falls-in-world-e...

sharkhearted's picture

LMAO!!

That was HILARIOUS.

~Chris
Norfolk, VA

Time to INVESTIGATE the investigators of 9/11. PROSECUTE the prosecutors. EXPOSE the cover-up.

We have the second person to

We have the second person to concede folks!

"Comments that are solely insults and/or personal attacks and that have no links to evidence, will be assumed to be because YOU COULD NOT PROVIDE ANY REAL EVIDENCE. I understand some of you are frustrated by that inability and will personally attack me anyway, that's fine, expose your inability to produce anything to defend your argument. That's why I challenge you to do it."

I went to the first

I went to the first URL you provided to support your position and what got my attention was a total lack of any photographs of the blue tarp covered items that were removed from the Pentagon. Why were there no photos of those and no mention of them either?

Probably no photos or mention

Probably no photos or mention of items under a blue tarp because a photo of a blue tarp is not evidence of an American Airlines plane, and that's what the photos on that site are for. They are a collection of photos from the Pentagon where the plane parts can be seen, not a complete collection of all photos taken at the Pentagon.
My guess is that body parts are involved with what's under a blue tarp, but that's just a guess. Do you have a suspicious pic of a blue tarp or something? Let me check it out.

Here we go again!

Lets not look at planes, holes in walls, theory, conjuncture, and all the rest of the information, misinformation, lies and propaganda.For every witness who saw a plan, there is one that didn't.
Lets look at what did happen, without planes.
9/10...Donald Rumsfeld announced that "the Pentagon could not account for 2.3 TRILLION dollars".
9/11, something blew up the newly strengthened section of the Pentagon that housed the accountants that were looking for the missing trillions. They died and any evidence was destroyed.
Dick Cheney was FULLY in charge of EVERYTHING that day. The 1st time in US history a civilian was in full control of the armed forces. This was put into place 3 to 4 months before 9/11.
9/11 enabled the Pentagon to receive the extra funding it wanted.
War has raged ever since, making the Bush family, Rumsfeld, Cheney and others
wealthy beyond measure.
Of course all of this is just a coincidence.

Blah, blah, blah So show some

Blah, blah, blah

So show some evidence, this thread isn't for people just to spout there beliefs, it's to provide evidence for those beliefs. Don't waste your time commenting again without some kind of evidence attached as I won't waste my time replying.

Do you want threads? Are you brave enough to

look at them intelligently?
Missing 2.3 trillion http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xU4GdHLUHwU
Dick Cheney in charge http://911truthseeker.webs.com/911wargames.htm
Carlyle Grouphttp://www.sfgate.com/business/article/CalPERS-Carlyle-profit-from-Afghan-war-2847638.php
Halliburton and Cheney's bastard love child, Blackwater Security http://rense.com/general39/sky.htm . http://rt.com/usa/blackwater-security-iri-report-300/
Is that enough for you to start with, or would you like me to spoon feed you
the research you don't want to "waste" your time finding?

Ok so you apparently have a

Ok so you apparently have a reading problem, reread what this thread is about and get back with me.

I've done the research, that's why I've issued this challenge. Because I know the only thing anyone can produce as evidence is opinions.

are his claims not facts?

what makes them beliefs in your eyes? would be helpful if you could answer the same way you ask others to answer your claims wouldnt it?

Are whose claims not facts?

Are whose claims not facts? If you are asking about Jill Booth, then no his claims are not facts.
For instance: "For every witness who saw a plan, there is one that didn't."
Is far from fact. The fact is not one eyewitness saw anything other than a plane hit the Pentagon. That's why it is specifically the first thing I ask for.

Last one.

I figure that you are, for whatever reason unable to find out information for yourself. Have a nice day.
http://rense.com/general25/missa.htm.

There is not a single person

There is not a single person in that article that say they saw anything other than a plane hit the Pentagon. Different descriptions of the plane are to be expected, it was flying 500 mph and people were at different distances and angles away from it.

Where is the plane?

Well most of it is in the

Well most of it is in the building. There's pieces in the lawn you could see if this wasn't a picture taken from so far away. Like this:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JRoSNX6CDVA/UFQJ4wGpAjI/AAAAAAAAAE...

Your not worth wasting time

Your not worth wasting time on.All the evidence is staring you right in the face but you refuse to see it.

I asked this in another post,

But what is the logical reason to withhold all the video clips their own security camaras filmed as well as the private property of many nearby establishments?

Not having these available is not evidence of no plane, but its got to be one of the strangest facts about this event that I can think of. There must be something to it since we are so far removed from 2001 at this point and they still have them classified.

What is your opinion of this Bengal? I can prove nothing but I'm interested in your thoughts. Sorry if you posted this elsewhere. I didn't see it.

Here's the info I have found

Here's the info I have found on the videos. I think if there were clear videos of what happened they would show them. Either way, how could I expect to see anything other than a plane fly into the Pentagon when every single eyewitness (over 100) all say it was a plane.

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/FBI_hides_84_Pentagon_videos
http://web.archive.org/web/20080208102217/http://www.flight7...

Check out my links jaded41 look at all the pictures and watch the videos of the eyewitnesses.

So here's my follow-up question...

Here's the best synopsis from the two links you provided.

-----------------------------------------

The FBI are talking about 85 videos, but this is just the result of an initial search that includes (for example) all videos obtained by the Washington Field Office. If we move on from that then the numbers begin to fall dramatically.

56 "of these videotapes did not show either the Pentagon building, the Pentagon crash site, or the impact of Flight 77 into the Pentagon on September 11."

Of the remaining 29 videotapes, 16 "did not show the Pentagon crash site and did not show the impact of Flight 77 into the Pentagon."

Of the 13 remaining tapes, 12 "only showed the Pentagon after the impact of Flight 77."

Only one tape showed the Pentagon impact: the Pentagon's own security camera footage, that would later be released.

------------------------------------------

So are these tapes that caught nothing on camera available for viewing by the public? I didn't see that noted in the links but may have missed it.

And do you really believe that the Pentagon itself doesn't have multiple top of the line camera views of all sides of the building?

Are you asking me to believe that the only Pentagon camera that caught anything related to the damage of this building was the one in the kiosk of the parking lot that records a single frame every half second (or whatever poor-quality rate it is)?

Is this what you are asking me to believe? Because I just want to make sure. I have to be missing something because if this is what I'm being asked to believe then this country can't protect a cardboard box let alone the biggest office building in the country.

Please, I hope I am missing something and don't go on about eye witnesses. I will admit their testimony is worth exploring but there's got to be something that is even more obvious when that big an object hits that big of a building.

I'm sure at some point the

I'm sure at some point the videos they have will be released, by FOIA if need be. You can believe whatever you want to believe.
Some have speculated that if they do have good video, it has been held in case there was alot of public pressure for a new investigation building up. They could release the video of the plane hitting the Pentagon, thus proving one claim by 9/11 "conspiracy theorists" wrong and many would just assume they were wrong about the rest as well (controlled demo or CIA/Mossad involvement).

Many would just say any video released showing a plane hitting the Pentagon is faked anyway.

To cut and dry this for you, EVERY single eyewitness (over 100 people) say they saw a plane hit the Pentagon, and 26 of them specifically said it was an American Airlines plane. Add with that several pieces of an American Airlines plane found in the wreckage, including the black box from AA flt 77. Add to that body parts found in the wreckage identified by dna to be passengers of AA flt 77. Add to that radar tracking from 4 different sources of AA flt 77 flying to and ending at the Pentagon. And I conclude that A flt 77 hit the Pentagon. Better video of it would be great, but not necessary to me.

let's ask this a different way

if there were no eye witnesses and you were presented with the same details we are discussing here, would you be more inclined to believe the no plane theory? Just wondering. Because there is a lot of eye witness testimony from the basement of the WTC that points to something more than only planes taking down those buildings. So if eye witnesses are the main argument then do you think there were explosives in the WTC? I only ask because it seems like a logical jump since you are so hardcore with the pentagon witnesses. Sorry to go off topic. Couldn't help but make the parallel.

It's not just the witnesses,

It's not just the witnesses, but yes the fact that every single eyewitness say they saw a plane hit the Pentagon, does contribute to my belief. Just as all the American Airline plane parts (including the black box for AA flt 77) found in wreckage contributes. Just as dna of the passengers contributes. Just as radar tracking from 4 different sources contributes.

Then the lack of any evidence to believe otherwise also contributes. No parts of anything else found at the scene. No evidence of American Airlines flt 77 going anywhere else. No real evidence whatsoever.

Yes I question the official story of the WTC collapses. That's what started me researching 9/11 many years ago. I also highly suspect that the CIA and/or Mossad infiltrated and aided the hijackers. This to me is the mo. Like with WTC in 93 and OKC bombing, those groups were infiltrated, put up to the action, and then aided to do it. And I think 9/11 was done the same.