Did a plane really hit the pentagon?

[Aeson]

There is always the chance that someone not involved in the WTC attacks decided to use those attacks as a cover for a seperate hit on the Pentagon. Reasons for that could be various. This would probably denote previous knowlege that the WTC attacks were going to take place, as 1 hour isn't enough time to plan and organize such a thing. It is possible that this information was in the hands of someone who could act upon it in time. I would have to agree that it is much less likely that two seperate conspiracies were at work though.

The attack on the WTC was a conspiracy (ie. secret plot) or part of one. Otherwise it was just an accident. The official story is that it was an Al-Qaeda conspiracy.

[Dis]

Alabama isn't inhospitable. There are hicks living in the swamps . I won't say anything bad about that. some people like swamps.

And I do remember some eyewitness accounts of people seeing the plane come down in Washington. But of course I believe many people make up eyewitness accounts for attention. Yes I'm a distrusting MF'er.

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by ravagon


The 4th plane was supposed to have gone down over fairly inhospitable terrain in Alabama (IIRC?). ie: few or no eyewitnesses. The Pentagon attack was in DC. ie: a whole (potential) city of witnesses.

I thought it was 2 planes into WTC, 1 to Pentagon, and 1 in fields of Pennsylvania

what are you guys smoking

Jon Miller

[Aeson]

I think that there is a misunderstanding of what the conspiracy explanations are getting at. It isn't that everyone is claiming that this is a conspiracy of the US government (some may be), just that there is a possibility that it could have been. At least that's my position.

I rarely accept that the carpet in my computer room is cranberry colored without wondering if somehow I could be wrong. I can look at the carpet and see it's color, an eyewitness account as it were. It makes sense to me logically that it is cranberry, that my eyes are relaying "clean" signals to my brain, but I'll never accept it as absolute truth. I also don't worry about it that much, as there is nothing I can do. I do find it interesting to debate about though.

I apply the same rational to every event in my life. Perhaps I just have too much spare time. Nothing should be taken as absolute in my estimation. The discrepancies in the photos and stories explaining 9/11 should lead to questions. Those people who won't question the official story at all are the ones who make good subjects for totalitarian regimes. By saying that, I in no way mean to imply that anyone here fits that description. The amount of questioning and debate that each of you have been through on this subject, and with what degree of certainty you hold your veiws, is beyond my speculation.

[ravagon]

Originally posted by Jon Miller


I thought it was 2 planes into WTC, 1 to Pentagon, and 1 in fields of Pennsylvania

what are you guys smoking

Jon Miller

Ok on the Pennsylvania thing (I did say IIRC? though) but I don't remember anything about a field...

[Aeson]

Originally posted by Aeson
Nothing should be taken as absolute in my estimation.

Just thought I would comment on this before someone else did.

The great paradox...

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Aeson


Just thought I would comment on this before someone else did.

The great paradox...

talking to yourself says something about your sanity I am sure

Jon Miller

[Aeson]

Leave my sanity (or lack thereof) out of it.

Honestly, if I was insane and said 1 + 1 = 2 does it make it false? Any idea or theory should be judged on it's own merits, not on the merits of those who propose/support it. So why should my sanity have any bearing on this discussion?

[Tingkai]

The existence of the conspiracy theory is proof that the government is trying to hide something. You see if the government does something evil, it knows that eventually some of the evidence will leak out. So to cover its trail, it deliberately publicizes a conspiracy theory so that people will automatically discount the evidence when it appears, or they will spend years talking about whether a conspiracy exists or not. And of course, the landing on the moon conspiracy and Kennedy murder conspiracy are all part of the government's conspiracy to discredit conspiracies.

[Victor Galis]

BTW, I never alleged a conspiracy of any sort. I just found this cool link in a newsgroup I read related to my college. That's all.

Now to threadjack. Some conspiracy theories generated by a conspiracy theory generator some years back (URL long lost), which I found on my computer:

"The radio in my head is telling me that the Alpha Centauri Expeditionary Force is trying to subvert the justice system for evil purposes while Charlton Heston is being persecuted by Tony Blair to draw attention away from the vile plans of the Alpha Centauri Expeditionary Force. "

"The local supermarket is a front for the evil works of the Illuminati Organisation. It's part of a national chain of illegal racketeering outlets, whose final aim is to subvert the justice system for criminal purposes. They've already claimed victims - everyone from Charlton Heston to Harry Browne have been caught out. Only Elvis has seen through the scam, which is why the FBI, in cahoots with the Illuminati Organisation, is trying to hide the evidence of CIA mind experiments with a view to putting an end to Elvis.

"Isn't it obvious that Charlton Heston has been killed by the Alpha Centauri Expeditionary Force and replaced by an agent of Saddam Hussein who has undergone extensive plastic surgery? Clearly the Alpha Centauri Expeditionary Force is planning to hide the evidence of CIA mind experiments when the agent of Saddam Hussein assassinates Harry Browne. The only solution is for Leonardo DiCaprio to stop the Alpha Centauri Expeditionary Force and Saddam Hussein, which is impossible unless Congress will pass a resolution to allow the public to own nuclear devices. "

"Isn't it obvious that Charlton Heston has been killed by the Venusian envoy and replaced by an agent of the Martian commander-in-chief who has undergone extensive plastic surgery? Clearly the Venusian envoy is planning to create a Master Race when the agent of the Martian commander-in-chief assassinates Harry Browne. The only solution is for the Vietnam Veterans Association to stop the Venusian envoy and the Martian commander-in-chief, which is impossible unless NATO will pass a resolution to allow the public to own main battle tanks. "

"Obviously Bill Clinton is carrying out a covert war against the armies of Charlton Heston in London. Very soon the KGB, who is currently only supplying weapons to Bill Clinton, will join in. Harry Browne has a number of nuclear devices hidden in the Rockies which the KGB is trying to steal to help win the war and prevent the return of the Messiah. We must help Robocop to stop them, or we are all doomed! "

[MrFun]

So much bulls**t in here, so little time. I want to try to win the Worst Bulls**ter Award, so here is something I thought of.

President Bush hired Martians to come to Earth secretly, and asked for some of them to volunteer to sacrifice themselves to destroy the World Trade Center, and try to destroy the Pentagon.

After the kamikaze Martians completed their horrible missions, President Bush cried out that the terrorists have originated from the Al-Queda. He secretly corresponded with Osama Bin-Laden and had him produce a staged "confession" on video, gloating about how his attacks were successful.

But then after the United States entered a war against the Taliban and Al-Queda in Afghanistan and after the Martians left Earth, President Bush was still not sure if his cover-up was complete.

So he has Yates go on trial and at the same time, convinced Israel to attack the Palestinian territory so that the news media cannot focus 100% of their time on the war against terror. It's all true, I tell ya.

Oh, and one more thing -- the Martians are expected to return upon President Bush's request when he wants to have the White House and the Sears Tower destroyed.

Do I get the award for dumb bulls**tting, or does someone else win??

[Gatekeeper]

Everyone:

Hmm ... a wee bit past the six month anniversary of Sept. 11, 2001, and the conspiracy theories are running amok. Can't wait to see what the conspiracy followers have cooked up by the one year anniversary of Sept. 11, 2001.

Anyway, back on-topic. The part of the Pentagon that was hit by the jetliner had recently been renovated and its "innards" hardened against such an attack. Basically, the terrorists hit the one side of the five-sided Pentagon that had been structurally reinforced against a terrorist attack (although I don't think the brass had a civilian airliner in mind ... more like a bomb or missile strike of some sort). It's quite possible that the strengthening in this part of the Pentagon played a role in "limiting" the extent of the damage outside the immediate impact zone (much of the interior was incinerated by jet fuel fires, though).

Had the airliner struck any of the other parts of the "normally-built" Pentagon, the destruction would have been much more extensive. And, undoubtably, more lives would have been lost.

To remind some, there were four airliners involved:

Two slammed into the World Trade Center Towers 1 and 2.
One slammed into the Pentagon.
One slammed into a Penslyvania field. (I am willing to give more credence to "conspiracies" that U.S. fighters shot this airliner down ... why? Not sure. Just a hunch that's building more and more stronger as I watch the War on Terrorism unfold. If it was shot down, Bush, et al., would've been wiser to simply admit to it than cover it up. I think folks would have been understanding, considering the situation.)

CYBERAmazon

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by CYBERAmazon
Everyone:

Hmm ... a wee bit past the six month anniversary of Sept. 11, 2001, and the conspiracy theories are running amok. Can't wait to see what the conspiracy followers have cooked up by the one year anniversary of Sept. 11, 2001.

Anyway, back on-topic. The part of the Pentagon that was hit by the jetliner had recently been renovated and its "innards" hardened against such an attack. Basically, the terrorists hit the one side of the five-sided Pentagon that had been structurally reinforced against a terrorist attack (although I don't think the brass had a civilian airliner in mind ... more like a bomb or missile strike of some sort). It's quite possible that the strengthening in this part of the Pentagon played a role in "limiting" the extent of the damage outside the immediate impact zone (much of the interior was incinerated by jet fuel fires, though).

Had the airliner struck any of the other parts of the "normally-built" Pentagon, the destruction would have been much more extensive. And, undoubtably, more lives would have been lost.

To remind some, there were four airliners involved:

Two slammed into the World Trade Center Towers 1 and 2.
One slammed into the Pentagon.
One slammed into a Penslyvania field. (I am willing to give more credence to "conspiracies" that U.S. fighters shot this airliner down ... why? Not sure. Just a hunch that's building more and more stronger as I watch the War on Terrorism unfold. If it was shot down, Bush, et al., would've been wiser to simply admit to it than cover it up. I think folks would have been understanding, considering the situation.)

CYBERAmazon

but the way things are described as happening gave us important heroes for that time (in the plane which crashed in the Field)

Jon Miller

[Dis]

and a snazzy catch phrase and song by neil young.

[ZoboZeWarrior]

Originally posted by Sandman
I think a plane really hit the Pentagon. Often in normal aircrashes the debris is spread over a wide area as the plane totally disintegrates. That is why there is not much debris.

Then the area should have be filled with debrits and burning oil.
It was not the case, I believe.

But the biggest question for me : They have reported casualty from this official plane crash ? How can a crash fake if the human casualty is real ?