|
Note: This is a Text only archive. Go directly to the real forum.
The Pentacon
- Click HERE to go to the original thread with graphics
banner
| The Pentacon
- Click HERE to go to the original thread with graphics
|
| FatesWebb |
This video sufficiently proves the 9/11 official story false. There are many aspects of 9/11 but this movie focuses specifically on the events as they happened at the Pentagon.
This testimony was obtained by Citizen Investigation Team in a persistent effort to find the truth in light of a myriad of questions. We contacted as many previously published eyewitnesses we could obtain numbers for and we canvassed the neighborhoods of Arlington on foot in a quest to find unpublished eyewitnesses. Our goal was to establish the final flight path of the plane before it reached the pentagon as seen by the eyewitnesses.
The results are devastating as we now know for sure that the plane could not be what damaged the Pentagon.
We first present the “Smoking Gun Version” featuring quadruple corroborated testimony showing beyond a reasonable doubt that the plane flew on the north side of the CITGO station completely contradicting the official story. This simple fact makes it impossible for the plane to have toppled the light poles and damage the building as outlined in the ASCE report.
We will soon release the much longer “Researcher’s Edition” which will feature many more eyewitnesses and take a comprehensive look at the many other dubious circumstances surrounding the Pentagon attack.
This evidence will be taken to the authorities and the media but in light of how these institutions have ignored, marginalized, and demonized questions about 9/11 in the past; we have chosen to simultaneously release it to the public.
So without further ado……..Citizen Investigation Team presents:
The PentaCon: Eyewitnesses Speak, Conspiracy Revealed.
http://www.thepentacon.com/divxsmokinggun.htm
if it doesnt play
http://download.divx.com/player/Div...erInstaller.exe |
|
|
| FatesWebb |
Do "collapsing" buildings explode UPWARDS and OUTWARDS? Look at the separate trails here. Obviously several demolition blasts going off at the same time, creating several different "paths" of dust, which can be plainly seen. It doesn't take a physics professor to look at this and ka>now that these aren't "collapses." It only takes an open mind and a quick look at the pictures. It's really pretty simple. The buildings were brought down with explosives, which means our gov't had to be involved. There's no other explanation.
 
This is a ground angle from the collapse of the 1st tower shown by the BBC in a programme ..9/11The Twin Towers.., broadcast in the UK on 7 September 2006. This is an extremely rare, yet important piece of footage that needs to be analyzed by the 9/11 Truth movement. Notice how the second building flares up during the collapse of the first building. Listen to the clear "popping" explosions as the building collapses. Notice the close up shot of the squibs.
http://video.google.com/googleplaye...825099435530591
LOOK CLOSELY AT THE ABOVE PICTURE, NOTICE THINGS ARE FLYING STRAIGHT UP WITH SMOKE STREAMERS FOLLOWING THEM??? EXPLOSIVE FORCES!!!
Does this look like a "failure" caused by the force of
gravity? Remember the Towers stood 55 minutes, and 1 hour 41 minutes respectively, before THIS happened. To Both.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ueyV4aGwYU0
NOT POSSIBLE! |
|
|
| FatesWebb |
the video in post 1 uses eyewitness testimony, to prove the official story to be bogus, these witness testimonies also agree with the flight path that was put out, that also disagrees with the official story, also it begs the question as to HOW DID THE LIGHT POLES FALL DOWN? THE PLANE WAS NOWHERE NEAR THEM!!!
there is a video on this page that shows what these witnesses are saying IS TRUE AS PER THE FLIGHT PATH!
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/pentagon.html |
|
|
| FatesWebb |
BBC Error! Huge smoking gun of pre-knowledge collapse of WTC7
On September 11th 2001, BBC World reported at 4:57pm Eastern Time that the Salomon Brothers Building (more commonly known as WTC7 or World ... all » Trade Building 7) had collapsed.
This even made the 5pm EST headlines, what is bizarre is that the building did not actually collapse until 5:20pm EST.
9/11 was unusual enough, without BBC World being able to foretell the destiny of WTC 7.
What is even stranger, is that the women reporter is telling the world that the building had collapsed when you can see it in the background over her left shoulder.
Then at 5:15pm EST, just five minutes before the building did actually collapse, her live connection from New York to London mysteriously fails.
So the question is, on 9/11 how did the BBC learn that WTC7 collapsed 23 minutes before it actually did.
Building Seven was 47 storeys, modern in design with structural steel throughout, yet symmetrically collapsed in 6.5 seconds, was someone leaking information.
No steel framed skyscraper has ever collapsed due to fire, before or after 9/11, most people who find out about WTC7, believe it was brought down by a controlled demolition, even demolition experts agree.
http://video.google.com/googleplaye...985581749234824 |
|
|
| FatesWebb |
the bbc video of them telling that wtc7 had been destroyed BEFORE IT HAPPENED, has been removed from the link above at google video but can be found
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=49f_1172526096
and
http://www.esnips.com/doc/47ae2fd7-...ilding7Collapse
Skip forward to around the 14:30 minute mark
and here
http://www.prisonplanet.com/video/9...ng7Collapse.flv
Although there is no clock or time stamp on the footage, the source claims the report was given at 4:57pm EST, 23 minutes before Building 7 collapsed at 5:20pm. While the exact time of the report cannot be confirmed at present, it is clear from the footage that the reporter is describing the collapse of WTC 7 while it clearly remains standing behind her in the live shot.
The fact that the BBC reported on the collapse of Building 7 over twenty minutes in advance of its implosion obviously provokes a myriad of questions as to how they knew it was about to come down when the official story says its collapse happened accidentally as a result of fire damage and debris weakening the building's structure. |
|
|
| FatesWebb |
| yep you should ignore it, since you know damn well you cannot debunk it... |
|
|
| frogball |
i explained this optical illusion to you once before...when you take a single frame an arching cloud and tell people it's a trail of something that ejected outwards it seems plausible....but if you watch the entire sequence of events you'll realize that the arc is caused by the vacuum created by the collapsing core of the building:
|
|
|
| Stickman |
| Frog?! How you been? You disappeared after our infamous debate. |
|
|
| frogball |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
Frog?! How you been? You disappeared after our infamous debate. |
it took too much out of me...deadlines, research, manipulation of data (on your part :D )...
i've just been too busy with life.... |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by frogball
it took too much out of me...deadlines, research, manipulation of data (on your part :D )...
i've just been too busy with life.... |
You did seem to be beaten up by it. We did what we had to do. I won't argue with you about it. You got my respect for participating.
I just try to post any news that I see, like the EPA chief article that I posted. Check it out. I'd be curious what you think about it. |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
Yeah any thing regarding it....Does not constitute proof of a conspiracy.
Facts , not opinions! |
|
|
| frogball |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
You did seem to be beaten up by it. We did what we had to do. I won't argue with you about it. You got my respect for participating.
I just try to post any news that I see, like the EPA chief article that I posted. Check it out. I'd be curious what you think about it. |
i completely admit that i felt defeated...not because i thought you proved me wrong, but because i felt like i didn't convince anyone to change their position...it was a good lesson for me though... |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by frogball
i completely admit that i felt defeated...not because i thought you proved me wrong, but because i felt like i didn't convince anyone to change their position...it was a good lesson for me though... |
Seriously, that's big of you to say.
Completely out of curiosity, was there any particular item or detail that really made you think? Was there some part of the official story that you have to admit does not add up?
Especially from you, I'm really curious, since you did spend a lot of time and effort into presenting your side of the argument.
There's plenty about "conspiracy theories" that make no fucking sense to me, and I've even called Fates on what I thought was BS. |
|
|
| frogball |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
Seriously, that's big of you to say.
Completely out of curiosity, was there any particular item or detail that really made you think? Was there some part of the official story that you have to admit does not add up?
Especially from you, I'm really curious, since you did spend a lot of time and effort into presenting your side of the argument.
There's plenty about "conspiracy theories" that make no fucking sense to me, and I've even called Fates on what I thought was BS. |
HA! YOU'RE TRYING TO TRAP ME!!!
everything that you presented made me think and i seriously got mentally drained trying to respond with a neutral tone, it was damn near impossible...
i admit that if i had one thing that didn't fit it would make the entire story not add up, but there are answers on both sides of the argument for every little detail and we're simply putting together a different puzzle...
i said it before, this whole argument really comes down to what's going on in each persons subconscious and is driven by subconscious desires that are probably not even apparent....that's why you'll find some people who will choose to believe that there were not even any planes hitting the towers and that all of the footage from that day has been manipulated...
i think FW is a good example (this is not a slam)....he recently posted the claim that the BBC was aware of the WTC7 collapse before it happened...let's limit the explanation to 2 theories...first is that the BBC was informed by the conspirators and mistakenly released the information 20 minutes before they were supposed to...second is that (as they claim) they received bad information from their own reporters through a series of miscommunications....
are both theories plausible? sure...why does FW believe the former rather than the latter? i believe because it fits into his subconscious puzzle...why do i believe the latter rather than the former? for the same reason...
i think that what bothers me the most about the conspiracy theorists is that they have gotten to a point where NOTHING can be simple human behavior and EVERYTHING is now part of the conspiracy....
even if you believe that it was an inside job, why can't you believe that the BBC reporters miscommunicated? why can't this one event simply be a mistake? how would the BBC and/or the conspirators benefit from this pre-knowledge? have you never seen a false report in the news?
so anyway, i'm trying to keep myself from expecting people to change their position and i'm just posting the counterpoint to items that bother me.... |
|
|
| booybob |
| Welcome back fates :D |
|
|
|
|
|
