Evan Burton
-
Posts
4,419 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
16
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Evan Burton
-
-
No plane hit the Pentagon? Tell that to Mickey Bell, Sean Boger, Omar Campo, Michael DiPaula, Frank Probst, and Jack Singleton, all of whom saw flight 77 approach and came within feet of being struck as it roared across the Pentagon lawn. Probst dove out of the way to avoid being hit by the 757's right engine, which tore through a fence and damaged a construction generator trailer.
Frank Probst, an information management specialist for the Pentagon Renovation Program, left his office trailer near the Pentagon's south parking lot at 9:36 a.m. Sept. 11. Walking north beside Route 27, the 6'2" Vietnam Veteran looked up, directly into the right engine of a 757 commercial airliner cresting the hilltop Navy Annex. It reached him so fast and flew so low that Probst dropped to the ground, fearing he'd lose his head to its right engine."Had I not hit the deck, the plane would have taken off my head."Mark Willams:"When Williams discovered the scorched bodies of several airline passengers, they were still strapped into their seats. The stench of charred flesh overwhelmed him.'It was the worst thing you can imagine,' said Williams, whose squad from Fort Belvoir, Va., entered the building, less than four hours after the terrorist attack. 'I wanted to cry from the minute I walked in. But I have soldiers under me and I had to put my feelings aside.' ""I did see airplane seats and a corpse still strapped to one of the seats."–Capt. Jim Ingledue, Virginia Beach Fire Dept. -
136 people saw the plane approach the Pentagon, and
104 directly saw the plane hit the Pentagon.6 were nearly hit by the plane in front of the Pentagon. Several others were within 100-200 feet of the impact.26 mentioned that it was an American Airlines jet.39 others mentioned that it was a large jet/commercial airliner.2 described a smaller corporate jet. 1 described a "commuter plane" but didn't mention the size.7 said it was a Boeing 757.8 witnesses were pilots. One witness was an Air Traffic Controller and Pentagon tower Chief.2 witnesses were firefighters working on their truck at the Pentagon heliport.4 made radio calls to inform emergency services that a plane had hit the Pentagon.10 said the plane's flaps and landing gear were not deployed (1 thought landing gear struck a light pole).16 mentioned seeing the plane hit light poles/trees, or were next to to the poles when it happened. Another 8 mentioned the light poles being knocked down: it's unknown if they saw them hit.42 mentioned seeing aircraft debris.4 mentioned seeing airline seats.3 mentioned engine parts.2 mentioned bodies still strapped into seats.15 mentioned smelling or contacting aviation/jet fuel.3 had vehicles damaged by light poles or aircraft debris. Several saw other occupied vehicles damaged.3 took photographs of the aftermath.Many mentioned false alarm warnings of other incoming planes after the crash. One said "3-4 warnings."And of course,0 saw a military aircraft or missile strike the Pentagon.0 saw a plane narrowly miss the Pentagon and fly away. -
-
There is one "conspiracy" regarding this that I believe: that there was no attempt to capture him. I can see that they knew if he were captured and brought to the US there would be some satisfaction, but "due process" and do-gooders would just make things a spectacle, draw attention to him, possibly provoke a release attempt / terrorist attack, etc. I think that there was no intention of bringing him back alive. Killing him then and there avoided some problems and sent a very clear message: it doesn't matter how long or how far; if you $%&! with us we will hunt you down, kill you and your family, and rape your dog just for good measure. If you hurt us, there WILL be retribution.
An interesting piece in todays paper:
-
The footage from the CITIGO was released, as was all the other footage.
People seem to be ignoring the over 100 witnesses who SAW an airliner hit the building! Not 100 government employees, not 100 military personnel, but over 100 citizens ranging from government employees to military personnel to everyday people who just happened to be there at the right time.
Don, can you provide any evidence that there were CCTV cameras at the Pentagon that should have captured the footage but have not been released? Not your belief that there should have been cameras in this location but actual proof there were cameras in operation?
-
Come on Duane - that's a fair call.
Show proof that all the witnesses were wrong.
Show proof that none of the wreckage found matched that would be expected from the aircraft.
Show proof that those who claim to have seen bodies were lying.
Show proof that the DNA matching was falsified.
I'm not asking for much - just show proof of what you claim.
-
US officials say they used facial recognition software and even DNA testing to confirm with 99.9 per cent confidence that Osama bin Laden had in fact been killed, but nothing short of photos of the body will satisfy the internet's army of conspiracy theorists.
The same bloggers who have questioned US President Barack Obama about his birthplace and even his university marks are now drumming up internet conspiracies claiming that, rather than being buried in the Arabian Sea as claimed, bin Laden is either alive or has been dead for years.
*
*
*
*
Michael Barkun, professor emeritus of political science at Syracuse University and an expert on conspiracy theories, told the Chicago Tribune that, even if there were images of the corpse, there would still be conspiracy theories.
"Those people who don't accept it and have generated alternative explanations now have a way of communicating those alternative explanations more broadly than would have been the case 25 or 30 years ago because they have the internet," he said.
-
If a jumbo passenger jet really hit the Pentagon...
It's not a Jumbo Jet - that's the 747. It's called a widebody.
... the survivors inside the building would have seen it coming in...How would they "see" it coming in? The first they would have known about it is when the building exploded because of an aircraft hitting it.
Then again, over 100 witnesses DID see an airliner hit the building.
The light weight aluminum wings of the jet would have also been sheared off during impact with the building...No, they disintergrated. Has happened in severe impacts before.
...Nor was there any evidence of any plane wreckage being removed from the building.. No seats, bodies, etc...Except for the wreckage that was found on the lawn and in the building, and the first responders reports of bodies, some still in seats. Apart from all those, yeah - nothing.
-
IRC? I probably said IIRC - If I Recall Correctly.
IRC used to stand for Internet Relay Chat, an archaeic for of chat when the internet first started (I spend hours on IRC in the 90s!).
-
So when is someone going to claim that it wasn't him and the photos are faked?
Edited to add:
Ooops! I didn't notice that Duane seems to be already hinting at it. Predictable as ever!
-
Alexey Leonov, the first man to walk in space talks to Russia Today about space, the Moon and hoax claims. Leonov was in training to be the first Russian on the Moon when the Soviet lunar programme was cancelled.
RT: The US is often accused of not actually going to the moon and faking the images from there. What’s your take on that?
AL: That is ignorance, total ignorance on the part of those who say so. These people don't know anything about technology. Or they just seek popularity. Only two countries did not monitor the orbiting of the moon and landing on it. It was during the Cold War. There were systems, monitoring planes as well as rockets. Our radars monitored everything. We did not have a mission control center. There was a space communication military base in Moscow. Americans announced the start of Saturn-5 with Frank Borman as the commander. We observed the start of the rocket, Americans were transmitting it to the whole world, and only two countries were not watching – the Soviet Union and China. Out of stupidity. We saw all four adjustments. Our systems saw how a huge meteor came from the south and landed.
One interesting fact: Frank Borman came here some time after the flight. Crowds surrounded his hotel every day. The government held a great reception for him, there was a press conference. Our people greeted Frank Borman just like they had greeted Gagarin. It was pure joy!
We could have orbited the Moon before Frank Borman. All the tests were going great. We were asking to go on L-6. “No, let's do more tests.” Korolev had died, and Vasily Mishin took over. He was an excellent engineer, but he didn't have Korolev's strong leadership skills.
Our engineers didn't like the risk. So they launched the sixth unmanned craft, which landed 600 meters away from the launch. Precision, all systems worked perfect, but it was unmanned. This was the most painful thing. We had all the chances to orbit the moon before Frank Borman did it. As far as landing goes… We were supposed to orbit the moon three times and then pick two crew members. Americans planned for two people to land, we planned one.
I was the lunar team commander and in charge of the group training. We had three crews on the team altogether. So, when the Americans announced their mission, we all gathered at this military base. We sat there, holding our fingers crossed. We wished all the luck to the guys. We personally knew them, and they knew us. Radars were monitoring the whole process. When the ship landed, their external cameras began to show the surroundings. We saw it all. Then the hatch opened, the next camera turned on (they really had thought it all through). Armstrong goes down the steps. The last step was about 50 cm above the Moon's surface. He was moving his foot carefully. We all froze, waiting to see what was going to happen next. He jumped off the step, then bounced and began to walk. He had an antenna that transmitted everything to the Earth; we saw everything that they did.
The question about the wind on the moon: There is a copy of that American flag in the museum. The flag was taken out of the case and unfolded. And this unfolding looked as though the flag was being moved by the wind.
The rumor started when Stanley Kubrik's wife commented on her husband's work. She said that it was very difficult to make the film about Americans landing on the moon. Well, it is understandable. There are two ships left on Earth. One is at the Smithsonian museum. It is not allowed to even take pictures there, because the displays there are extremely valuable. And the second ship, the exact copy, is in Hollywood. So he did some of the shots there, things like landing, opening of the hatch. Because otherwise viewers would not get the whole picture. So that's how the rumor about the landing on the moon footage being fake started. Two people even went to prison for bearing false witness.
When it got to our journalists, they began to spread all kinds of nonsense. There were two idiots showing pictures of the Earth taken from the moon. They said they were optics specialists, and apparently it was impossible to take such a detailed picture of the globe with all the continents and even rivers. The funny thing is we ourselves took this picture from our unmanned craft, using the camera made by one of Moscow's optical labs. We did this! How dare they say things like that! And we had two unmanned vehicles for nine months there. It is such ignorance to say that Americans were never there, but we controlled our vehicles from the Earth. It is simply impolite. But it is even more impolite that only two countries did not watch the mission – China and the Soviet Union, both Communist countries. It is just idiotic nonsense; they robbed their own people off this experience. It is like if we didn't show it, that means it never happened. Like a cat that sneaks in somewhere with closed eyes, thinking it is invisible. It was wrong for such a great country to do something like this.
-
Okay Duane,
I've reviewed what I know and I'll withdraw my assertion that you were banned from a 'pro-hoax' forum. You had a falling out with the owner of the forum (elsewhere_man) and you were removed as an administrator.
-
Well, this thread is dead!
You asked - now you got.
-
And these are the same people who accepted only witness statements that agreed with their theory, disregarded all the other witness statements that disagreed with their theory (which were the majority), and of the witness statements they accepted ignored the later part of the same witnesses who SAW the airliner hit the Pentagon.
-
Once again Duane, for your edification: over 100 witnesses who SAW an airliner fly at the Pentagon, a majority of them actually seeing it HIT the Pentagon.
-
When I joined this discussion, one of the Apollogists claimed that there were tons of photos showing the Rover either stowed on the side of the LM, or being unloaded and assembled.. Jack then asked any of you to provide just one still photo of the Rover stowed, or being unloaded or assembled on the Moon .. but to date, none of you have been able to provide that one photo.. I don't see how that equates to "moving the goalposts", other than that excuse is often used when any of the Apollogists have lost the argument.
See? You're wrong again. Just read what was actually asked for:
Burton sidesteps the question and attempts to change the subject. All he has to do is produce a photo of ANY LRV
ON ANY APOLLO MISSION WHICH IS ATTACHED IN POSITION ON THE OUTSIDE OF A LUNAR MODULE, AND ANY
PHOTO OF ANY ASTRONAUTS ASSEMBLING A ROVER FROM ANY MISSION. TAKING SUCH PHOTOS WOULD HAVE
BEEN A GIANT STEP FOR MANKIND. I cannot locate such photos from any of the three missions. I must have missed
them. Please give me the file numbers so I can look at them. When I see them, I will admit being mistaken.
Jack
There were images of the LRV stowed on the LM, both on the ground and in space. There were images of the LRV being unstowed and assembled on Earth. There was video of the LRV being unstowed and assembled on the Moon.
Problem is that Jack is too obdurate, and refuses to admit he made a simple error as to which side on the LM the LRV was stowed. If he can't admit such a small, simple error like that, what other things does he refuse to admit error in? Being obstinate in this matter simply damages his credibility.
-
It is a fake. There are just so many things wrong:
1. As has been pointed out, if this film were genuine, wouldn't it disprove the truther claim that anything in the airspace would be shot down?
2. The size of the object does not match that of a cruise missile.
3. How did the missile knock and buckle the lamp posts?
4. How do you account for the over 100 witnesses who saw an airliner strike the Pentagon? And please, don't give me that also faked image of a missile painted in AA markings.
5. How do you account for the 757 aircraft debris seen on the crash site? (http://www.911myths....7_wreckage.html)
6. How do you account for the human remains from the passengers in the aircraft, found on the crash site by first responders? Some of these first responders testify that they walked among burnt bodies still strapped into their seats and carried with their own hands the body parts of the passengers. ("When [Army Staff Sgt. Mark] Williams discovered the scorched bodies of several airline passengers, they were still strapped into their seats. The stench of charred flesh overwhelmed him." http://www.usatoday....ntagon-usat.htm)
It's another truther inconsistancie how they ascribe the government powers of great planning, organisation and the ability to conduct a massive cover-up.... and yet unable to see major flaws?
Government: "Let's hijack a commercial plane and crash it into the Pentagon."
Other Government people: "No, no. That wouldn't make sense. How about, we hijack a commercial airliner, land it secretly on a secret base, THEN fire a cruise missile at the Pentagon, THEN after that we crash an A-3 Skywarrior into the building!"
Government: "Great idea! But we'll need to plant bodies and DNA of the passengers and hijackers, personal effects, light poles, eyewitnesses who say they saw a large American Airlines airliner, airliner debris matching AA, landing gear, engine debris, etc..."
Other Government People: "That shouldn't be too hard."
-
Duane - you do agree that Jack is wrong about the location of the LRV stowage, do you not?
Evan - you do agree that you're wrong about me being banned from some pro hoax forum called IRC, do you not?
Stop trying to dodge the question - regardless of whether the landings were faked or not, Jack was wrong about the location of the LRV stowage on the LM descent stage. He can't admit that he was wrong on this point, and it seems neither can you.
As regard to your banning from another site, I'll recheck my facts and post my results here.
-
As has been previously mentioned, we are asking people to restrict using the attachment function unless absolutely necessary.
To assist Forum members, I have set up a Forum image website via Photobucket. If you like an image placed there so that you can link to it, please contact myself or other Mods and we will upload the image for you.
Mods - if you have forgetton the details of the website, just PM me.
-
Duane - you do agree that Jack is wrong about the location of the LRV stowage, do you not?
-
Jack might be wrong about the quad number, but he isn't wrong about there being no photos of the Rover being assembled.
Ah - now we are getting somewhere. At least we can agree that Jack is wrong about where the LRV was stowed.
Forget if one ever drove on the Moon, forget if astronauts actully went there... we can agree that Jack is wrong regarding where it was supposed to be stowed.
-
Yeah, we've seen this game before. The HBs love to play it - it's called "Heads I Win, Tails You Lose".
In the past Jack has found suspicious pictures taken from the LRV's onboard camera, pictures taken by the astronauts which also show the onboard camera in frame, pictures taken when the camera was chest mounted, etc, but now because no picture was taken that is also suspicious.
No Duane, no Jack - it's called confirmation bias.
BTW Duane - you still haven't been able to explain how every image, every diagramme, every piece of documentation says that Jack is wrong.
-
Welcome Harold!
-
I can't believe it. Someone over at BAUT has pointed out a website which claims that - wait for it - Vostok was FAKED!!!
The Russian TV documentary "Cosmonaut Cover-Up" (2001) also claims that on 7 April, 1961, Vladimir Ilyushin left for space, got into trouble during the first orbit, and crash-landed in China during the third orbit. Ilyushin was badly injured. He was returned to the Soviet Union a year later. Ilyushin was killed in an engineered car accident in 1961.
The Soviet Union did not have a spare capsule at that time and in Moscow it was decided to orchestrate a huge bluff, a cosmic lie.
Read the whole thing, if you dare!
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/gagarin.htm
I guess Jack and Duane are going to proclaim this as truth? I await their verdict!
Film of Missile Going into Pentagon
in 11 September 2001 attacks
Posted
Eyewitness accounts:
http://video.google.nl/videoplay?docid=-3276504405806014195&hl=nl
http://video.google.nl/videoplay?docid=-1153640577241576235&hl=nl