Is anyone interested in Apollo missions...

[Bill Miller]

Yeah, I'd LOVE to see the evidence of the plane that hit the pentagon other than a "well Marge down the street lost her uncles' grandsons' nephew in that crash and...."

Maybe instead of focusing on wanting to see more wreckage photos - why not read the 100+ eyewitness accounts that saw the plane crash. These were mostly witnesses on the roads who have no reason to have lied about what they saw. But I agree with the others .... we have enough of Jack's nonsense to put up with in the JFK community - there is no need to bring the 9/11 plane crashes into it as well.

Respectably,

Bill

"The debris from the aircraft is shown here:"

Looks like the drinks will be on Evan ... if he ever collects his money.

Bill

[Evan Burton]

and here

and here

and here

Shall I PM you the address to send your $1000 to?

[William Kelly]

Bill,

You seem to suggest that John O'Neill was complicit in 9/11. Do you think that his differences with the FBI were a cover story for him to leave the FBI and handle WTC "security" in preparation for the attacks? Do you think he was murdered, made to look like one more victim of the attacks?

I've always thought it was quite a coincidence (oh no, not another one of those!) that O'Neill, in conflict with the FBI over terrorism, happened to take the WTC security job, winding up dead as a result. If he was part of an inside job, why would he be so careless as to get himself killed?

I have the book about him (The Man Who Warned America), but have not had time to read much of it.

Ron

Hi Ron, I don't think he was complicit, I think he was really after Bin Laden before we ever heard of the guy, and he was prevented from getting him by his superiors at FBI, who also set up the theft of his briefcase from the FBI meeting in Florida and then leaked his personal FBI file to the NYT, which published the details of the theft - which remains unsolved to this day - and the fact that he was taking the job at the WTC. If Bin Laden read the NYT he knew his #1 arch nemesis spy/vs/spy was going to work there in the first week of September, and may have planned the date of the attack around JPO beginning his work there. Even if the timing of the attack was not based on JPO being there, the identify of those who leaked JPO's file to the NYT was a criminal act that should have been given the same attention that the administration is applying against those who leak info disfavorable to the government.

Also, among those who are calling the loudest for the execution of Mousaoui are the FBI administratiors who refused to look into his computer and pass on the info to O'Neill, who never got it.

BK

[Bruce Cormier]

It is utter nonsense. A close friend of mine was on the Memorial Bridge and saw the plane hit the Pentagon. She is neither a pyschopath, nor a CIA plant, nor a card carrying member of the military industrial complex. Nor am I.

Regrettably, the post is relevant because similar foolishness pervades much of has been written and posted on JFK's death. One call fill a bus with purported Dealey Plaza snipers -- and several Airbuses with conspirators before and after the fact. It is unfortunate, though perhaps inevitable, that the same degree of skepticism that is properly brought to the WC and HSCA findings is not applied by people who write cavalierly on this topic before they write. This has more easily enabled those who parrot the offical line to pillory and marginalize those who don't buy it.

[John Simkin]

It is utter nonsense. A close friend of mine was on the Memorial Bridge and saw the plane hit the Pentagon. She is neither a pyschopath, nor a CIA plant, nor a card carrying member of the military industrial complex. Nor am I.

Regrettably, the post is relevant because similar foolishness pervades much of has been written and posted on JFK's death. One call fill a bus with purported Dealey Plaza snipers -- and several Airbuses with conspirators before and after the fact. It is unfortunate, though perhaps inevitable, that the same degree of skepticism that is properly brought to the WC and HSCA findings is not applied by people who write cavalierly on this topic before they write. This has more easily enabled those who parrot the offical line to pillory and marginalize those who don't buy it.

I agree Bruce. I believe that the CIA/FBI have encouraged this view of JFK researchers. For example, see the forced FBI document that suggests that Monroe and JFK were murdered because of information they had about UFOs.

I have now moved this thread to the "Political Conspiracies" section.

[Jack White]

Despite Burton's "impressive" collection of "wreckage" at the Pentagon,

there was no such wreckage there initially.

The "uninvited" firemen who were first on the scene were nearby

working an accident at National Airport. They were on the scene

in less than ten minutes. There is NO WRECKAGE in their photos!

See attached photo taken by the firemen within the first ten

minutes. The fire is already out...YET IT CONTINUED TO BURN

FOR 72 HOURS WHILE "WRECKAGE" BITS WERE PLANTED.

Look carefully at the attached photo and show us the wreckage.

At a major disaster like this...ONLY FOUR FIRETRUCKS RESPONDED,

and two of them were UNINVITED ones! The fire was allowed to

burn for 72 hours for a photo backdrop showing planted evidence.

Jack

[Bill Miller]

Despite Burton's "impressive" collection of "wreckage" at the Pentagon,

there was no such wreckage there initially.

The "uninvited" firemen who were first on the scene were nearby

working an accident at National Airport. They were on the scene

in less than ten minutes. There is NO WRECKAGE in their photos!

See attached photo taken by the firemen within the first ten

minutes. The fire is already out...YET IT CONTINUED TO BURN

FOR 72 HOURS WHILE "WRECKAGE" BITS WERE PLANTED.

Look carefully at the attached photo and show us the wreckage.

At a major disaster like this...ONLY FOUR FIRETRUCKS RESPONDED,

and two of them were UNINVITED ones! The fire was allowed to

burn for 72 hours for a photo backdrop showing planted evidence.

Jack

Oh Brother! In post 15, Burtons's bottom photo shows the building burning clear down past the fire trucks with most of the debris near the point of impact. I hope I misread the caption and that it is not being implied that the photo Jack has used is supposed to be the impact site, as well. This par fpr the course .... a photo taken just beyond the debris field is supposed to represent that the firemen were on scene and there was no debris, not even debris from any explosion (plane or otherwise?) ... give me a break! Camera angle and distance from the building are the two most deciding factors as to what is not being seen in Jack's photo illustration. Thesxe are the same types of 'rush to judgment' mistakes that have been made of the JFK film and photo alteration claims.

Bill

Edited April 29, 2006 by Bill Miller

[Jack White]

Bill...It would be interesting to file a FOIA on the photo

of the severed arm and bracelet seen by your friend.

It seems very bizarre that the Pentagon summoned

someone to view such a grotesque and morbid photo.

Why not the family? How did the arm and bracelet survive

the alleged intense fire which was "hot enough to

vaporize metal" according to the official story? Why

could they not identify "the arm" by DNA testing?

What is the documentation of the finding of the arm

and photographing of it? Were other bodies and body

parts photographed? The FAA requires much documentation

on the locations of recovered bodies in air crashes. Are

there such records? There are MANY unanswered

questions. I have no doubt about your friend seeing

the photo. My question is WHY? And how did this

severed body part survive when the corpse did not?

Why was it not consumed by the fire which burned

for 72 hours?

Jack

Edited April 28, 2006 by Jack White

[Brendan Slattery]

Off-topic and decidedly insane. Remove.

ooh 6 posts and giving orders.

very cool.

(laughs)

I love it when people give orders and they go completely ignored.

Six posts or 6,000, I know bullsh*t when I see it. The only connection between the two events exists in your fevered, anti-AmeriKKKan imagination. In the words of Jack Nicholson, "Go sell crazy somewhere else."

[Evan Burton]

Alan Wallace usually worked out of the Fort Myer fire station, but on Sept. 11 he was one of three firefighters assigned to the Pentagon’s heliport. Along with crew members Mark Skipper and Dennis Young, Wallace arrived around 7:30 in the morning... (snip) ...Wallace and Skipper were walking along the right side of the truck (Young was in the station) when the two looked up and saw an airplane. It was about 25 feet off the ground and just 200 yards away—the length of two football fields. They had heard about the WTC disaster and had little doubt what was coming next. “Let’s go,” Wallace yelled. Both men ran.

Don Fortunato, a plainclothes detective with the Arlington (Va.) Police Department, was walking into his office, when he heard a muffled explosion—construction, he thought. Then his radio started squawking news of a plane crash at the Pentagon. “I grabbed my radio, ran to my car and pulled on my bulletproof vest and headed toward the thick, black smoke billowing out of the sky,” he said. “Traffic was at a standstill, so I parked on the shoulder, not far from the scene and ran to the site. Next to me was a cab from D.C., its windshield smashed out by pieces of lampposts. There were pieces of the plane all over the highway, pieces of wing, I think.”

Source: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3069699/

When do I get my $1000?

[Evan Burton]

Actually, I have a better idea.

Blair, you can send the $1000 to John and Andy for use in maintaining the forum. That way everyone can benefit from your brash post.

[Blair Dobson]

" i HAVE A FRIEND who said THEY SAW....yadda yadda.."

Go tell your friend they need a checkup ok? They obviously saw something that the marines didn't..

First off, if you do your homework instead of posting the same six photos of of the four pieces of "rubble" that are claimed to be from a 757 (which upon closer inspection shows they are not from a 757 at all, or a 747 for that matter) you will notice there strange lack of the following:

wings

engines

bodies

IDENTIFYING MARKINGS

black boxes

tail section

LUGGAGE

SEATS

shall i go on?

ok..

now again, lemme explain some LOGIC here:

it's not up to me to prove to you that a plane DIDN't hit the pentagon, it's up to you to prove it DID.

nowhere in those pictures is there any compelling evidence that wings, tails, nose or any other part of a commercial airliner hit that building. Period.

That "rubble" you call evidence is like looking at a spec of tomato sauce and calling it a spagetti dinner.

Go hit the NTSB site and look at the EXTENSIVE COLLECTION of plane crashes and the HUGE CHUNKS OF IDENTIFIABLE PIECES they leave behind.

answer these questions for me as well you brainiacs:

wheres the plane?

wheres the landing gear?

where are the skidmarks on the lawn?

how come these crappy pilots can to a ten point landing on a dime, not scratch the lawn and turn the plane and its contents to invisible dust AND manage to keep a plane that big from appearing on any security cameras???

oh...wheres the footage of the "plane" hitting the building again?

how did they fit a 757 into a 15 foot hole?

was david copperfield there?

all of your "evidence" of "my mom was in nam and she saw a piece of metal on the highway" is total and utter BS so save it for when you tell stories over drinks..

the fact that none of you can show a wing strike, a tail piece, a tire or anything of NOTE for that matter makes you look foolish.

MSNBC is a propaganda machine for right wingers and fear mongers and not a valid source for anything whatsoever.

when used for quotes i liken it to CNN in as far as its bull sh*t factor.

where is this plane then?

wheres the rest of it?

you havent shown me anything that proves a 757 hit that building....

go google on over to ntsb and see what a real plane crash looks like.

you guys remind me of david belin and the way he thought.

your "witnesses" who "saw" or "heard" something are no doubt wrong in what they "think" they saw.

and as far as the validity of their statements versus THE MARINE PICTURES THAT SHOW NO PLANE WHATSOEVER WITHIN MINUTES OF THE STRIKE I would have to call no contest there as well..

shut your imagination off for a second and go look at the marine pics.

there is no plane there.

anywhere.

again, you all have nothing.

Edited April 30, 2006 by Blair Dobson

[Blair Dobson]

funny, the airforce had no problems intercepting paine stewarts plane and shooting it down within 17 minutes of a civilian airport receiving notice that it's beacon was going off.....

that plane was off course for less than 15 minutes from what i understand...

funny that...

makes you wonder.

i gotta say, i find it funny when people use the concept of "the big blundering elephant " that is the american government "couldn't pull something like this off" and that these "errors" in response are due to general stupidity or neglect.

i just think it's erroneous to say "government" when we are talking about dept of defense, the air force and the navy as well as norad etc who are actually in control of these things....NOT the "government" as such....

my two cents

[Evan Burton]

Okay, I see where you are coming from.

All the witnesses lied.

All the wreckage was planted.

All the images are faked.

It's not evidence if you don't accept it.

If people don't agree with you, it's a conspiracy.

Always claim that the other guy is "closed-minded" and that you're as free-thinking as a newborn baby.

Talk authoritively about subjects you don't have any expertise in.

There is no sense in talking about the subject to you, because you have already made up your mind and nothing will change it.

[Matthew Lewis]

funny, the airforce had no problems intercepting paine stewarts plane and shooting it down within 17 minutes of a civilian airport receiving notice that it's beacon was going off.....

that plane was off course for less than 15 minutes from what i understand...

funny that...

makes you wonder.

i gotta say, i find it funny when people use the concept of "the big blundering elephant " that is the american government "couldn't pull something like this off" and that these "errors" in response are due to general stupidity or neglect.

i just think it's erroneous to say "government" when we are talking about dept of defense, the air force and the navy as well as norad etc who are actually in control of these things....NOT the "government" as such....

my two cents

Actually it was more than an hour and fifteen minutes before Payne Stewart's plane was intercepted. It was orginally reported incorrectly by various sources due to the time change in the NTSB report when his plane crossed from Eastern to Central time zones. You can see for yourself in the NTSB report here.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?ev_id=...A00MA005&akey=1

Notice the change in the middle of the intercept from EDT to CDT. That adds another hour between those two entries.

Also of note is the plane that first intercepted Stewart's plane was a plane already airborne for another mission and diverted and not one dedicated to air defense. They also never shot Stewart's plane down. They followed it until it crashed on its own.