New Research Contradicts Pentagon 9-11 Story

It's still waiting to explode. It's going to happen though soon. The evidence was conclusive then, but now it's just insane. Have you seen The Northside Flyover and the other videos they've released since The Pentacon?

I've noticed that there has been a relentless disinfo campaign against these guys going on since day one, and it continues to this day. Anywhere this information is discussed the same handful of posters pop up and tell ridiculous lies that anyone who has seen the information would see right through. But they say it with such a confident tone that onlookers are often willing to take their word for it.

People need to wake up to how this game is played and learn to look into things for themselves.

Twenty-Five Ways To Suppress Truth, The Rules of Disinformation
http://www.whale.to/m/disin.html

Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist
http://www.whale.to/b/sweeney.html

But you're wrong on so many levels in this post that it's hard to know where to begin.

This is not "just another "angle" to pile in with the rest of the angles."

This is THE smoking-gun proof that 9/11 was a military black op, not just a "let it happen on purpose" event where the military was stood down (though that did happen too).

"Who cares about approach angles?"

Anyone who cares about the truth and has any familiarity with the attack, because the north side approach PROVES that the plane did not hit the building.

Thirteen eyewitnesses from the five most critical vantage points all independently and definitively place the plane on this flight path.

One eyewitness saw the plane FLYING AWAY SECONDS AFTER THE EXPLOSION.

One witness right across the street from the Pentagon saw the plane "pull up" at the last second.

NO ONE saw the plane hit a light pole.

The cab driver -- whose car was allegedly hit by one of the poles and whose story is blatantly physically impossible -- has had to resort to trying to claim he was ON THE NORTH SIDE even though there was many photos proving exactly where his cab was, and despite the fact that EVEN IF he was on the north side that would also PROVE that the plane didn't hit. Also NO ONE saw a light pole in his cab. NO ONE.

The reason there were so many different "angles" is because everyone was SPECULATING. This is not speculation. This is hard evidence that DEBUNKS the "angles" such as "it was a missile" while proving what really happened. It is independently verified; these are real witnesses on record. It is independently verifiable. Anyone can call them. They can be subpoenaed. They all corroborate each other completely and they are all sure of what they saw, and what they saw proves that the plane did not hit the Pentagon.

It's beyond obvious that you haven't watched the interviews and don't understand the implications of this information. Please do it, and you'll see what I mean.

Does this mean we are all in agreement that there WAS in fact a plane?

Yes, there was a plane that flew at treetop level over Arlington straight at the Pentagon timed perfectly with an explosion. Anyone who doubts that has not studied the attack very closely at all and definitely has not watched the interviews covered in this article.

Pre planted explosives with a flyover, or missle launched?

The former. No one saw a missile. Everyone in a position to tell saw the plane on a flight path that proves that it did not hit the building.

How are we explaining the parts of the plane left over at the site? Planted there?

There were a few relatively small pieces of scraps that appeared to belong to an AA jet on the lawn, but none of them have been positively identified as belonging to AA77. (In addition, AA77 dropped off the radar near the Kentucky/Ohio border roughly 40 minutes before the alleged impact, and the attack jet was never positively identified as AA77.) There are also a conspicuously small amount of other pictures of alleged debris inside the Pentagon, but there is no proof that these pictures were taken inside the Pentagon, and even if they were, then that relatively small amount of debris would have been planted as well, yes.

If pre-planted explosives, how are we explaining the impact pattern along with HOW they were planted?

Impact pattern? The damage was never consistent with a 757 impact. This is why so many people speculated that a missile hit in the first place.

Also, what idiot decided instead of running the plane directly into the building, that it was easier to plant lots of explosives and then pretend to hit it and then FLY AWAY hoping no one saw him.

You'll have to ask the planners, but the evidence conclusively that the plane flew north of the Citgo gas station and therefore did not hit the building. If I were to speculate I would say that it was so that they could assure complete control over the damage and make sure that no top Pentagon brass was taken out.

They didn't just "hope" that no one saw the plane flying away. Besides the fact that the Pentagon is right next to Reagan National Airport and there are large commercial airliners flying extremely low over the area every 2-3 minutes all day every day, they went out of their way to put out proven-fraudulent media reports about a "second plane" that allegedly "shadowed" the attack jet. That way anyone who did see it and did think it was suspicious would just assume that it was the "second plane".

Please watch the videos instead of jumping to erroneous conclusions and you will see the proof of all of this.

If Missle Launched, how are we explaining all these people who saw a plane.

No one saw a missile launched. Everyone saw a plane. There was clearly a plane and no missile. The plane flew over the Navy Annex and NORTH of the former Citgo, nowhere near the light poles and on a flight path that is incompatible with the notion that it hit the building.

Please wach the videos for yourself.

You're being duped by a few anonymous, lying commenters.

1) They do not ask leading questions, except that sometimes they try to lead the witnesses TO the official story after the witnesses tell them otherwise.

They'll say something like "Are you sure it didn't fly over there on the south side of the gas station?" And they'll say "Yes". "How sure?" "100% sure. If anyone says that they must not have really seen it."

They get responses like this over and over and over. The witnesses are extremely lucid and 100% confident. Sgt William Lagasse, who was AT THE GAS STATION, said he would bet his life on it.

2) The witnesses are obviously reliable as you will see if you watch the highly detailed interviews. To say otherwise is a blatant lie. He's relying on you taking his word for it and not watching the interviews.

3) They do not "disregard" any part of the rest of the testimony of a witness. Most of the witnesses who saw the plane on the north side of the Citgo gas station and/or over the Navy Annex DID NOT see the plane hit the building. They ASSUMED that the plane hit because they heard a big boom. You must choose whether they are ALL WRONG IN THE SAME WAY in their placement of the plane on this flight path even though they all say they are 100% sure about that, or they are wrong about their ASSUMPTION that the plane hit because they were deliberately fooled. If you watch the interviews you'll see that it's obviously the latter.

4) In responses to this: "what about the other supposed "100" people they interviewed? Why show only 13 flight paths as opposed to showing them all?"

They only show 13 flight paths because ONLY THIRTEEN OF THE WITNESSES WERE IN A POSITION TO TELL WHERE THE PLANE FLEW IN RELATION TO CITGO AND THE NAVY ANNEX. The other many dozens of people they interviewed were not. They have published many of these interviews as well. Please go to their site and watch them.

in agreement that a 757 hit the pentagon. Where in the photo evidence does it show the 2 holes for the engines?
A simple question.
The relatively soft nose of the jet penetrates 6 reinforced walls (bunker like) of the pentagon, yet the relatively hard engines don't even penetrate one!!!

There is lots and lots of footage, but It's well worth the time it takes to watch the videos. If you're only going to watch a couple I recommend watching "The Pentacon Smoking Gun Version" first, and then The North Side Flyover. The other ones are very important/daming too though, and some are quite short (10 min or so).