Did a Plane hit the Pentagon

1. 60

   Jokyluposted 13 years ago

   We were out to dinner last night when a very lively debate started about whether or not a plane actually hit the Pentagon. When I came home I googled the subject only to find myself more confused. I watched the documentary "Loose Change" ( WORTH A LOOK)
   It is interesting how the parts of a plane could not be identified but the bodies of the people could. Also the fact that there would have been a great deal of cctv but there is no real evidence of a plane hitting.
   However there are phone records of people calling home. There was a hole and a fire but the hole didn't really fit with the amount of plane that should have gone in.
   I also found there were many questions about the Twin towers and the fact that they were only insured a short time prior. The planes hit the tops of two buildings but about 5 buildongs came down and straight down.  Then as I looked further I found questions being asked about the legitimacy of the Gulf Oil Spill.
   I know it is some time down the track but it would not have been the first time a country sabotaged its own to justify a war.
   I was surprised when I watched the footage of 9/11 that George Bush when he was told, barely blinked an eyelid, there was no element of surprise evident in his demeanor.  There are many other questions but the one I really want answered here IS "WAS IT A PLANE THAT HIT THE PENTAGON OR WAS IT NOT?

   replyreport
   1. 60

      couturepopcafeposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I'm sorry, but do you really believe that some of the most expensive real estate in Manhatten was not insured? Even if you believed all the conspiracy theories going around, that right there would put a monkey wrench into it all.
      
      The fact that Bush didn't blink an eye - in front of a classroom full of very young children - speaks volumes about his statesmanship.
      
      So the American government paid the owner of the Valdiz to 'throw the game'. Hmm. And we wonder why the wrong man is president.

      replyreport
      1. 52

         newstart1posted 13 years agoin reply to this

         couture, the twin towers were insured the whole time, but the point I think Jokylu was trying to make was that Larry Silverstein had terrorist insurance put on them several months before 9/11. he got paid double because it was considered, in court, to be 2 separate acts of terrorism.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            couturepopcafeposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Wow! I wonder what gave him the nudge to do so. Maybe just a creepy feeling that something was going to happen. No seriously. They were bombed once before.

            replyreport
   2. 52

      newstart1posted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Jokylu, do a search for  "van of explosives under the George Washington bridge". That is the smoking gun of 9/11 IMO. Also, research "Urban moving systems" .  It is a waste of time to discuss how the towers came down and how a plane might or might not have hit the pentagon. Did you know, that 16 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia?

      replyreport
      1. 52

         newstart1posted 13 years agoin reply to this

         http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTkYOhiefRs

         replyreport
2. 62

   recommend1posted 13 years ago

   Out of all the conspiracy theories this is interesting in that at the time the pictures in the media clearly showed a plane crashed into the building, but pretty much laid out on the ground beside it rather than twisted into the place.  At the time it looked a bit photoshopped, as in what we might make if we were told to draw a plane hitting a building.  On reflection the image does not make much sense and I have been unable to find it since - this may just be because I have not enoughh interest and am not tryuing hard enough  -  can anyone put that news image up here ?

   replyreport
   1. 60

      couturepopcafeposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Reportedly, the plane never did actually hit the Pentagon full on. They had enough time, because of the phone calls of people on the other planes, to thwart the effort. I know someone who worked there at the time. Believe me, there was a plane that came close to destroying the Pentagon.

      replyreport
3. 60

   Jokyluposted 13 years ago

   http://youtu.be/mcWT2lQszEE
   This youtube video throws some light on the subject

   replyreport
4. 63

   Nouveau Skepticposted 13 years ago

   Yes it did.  There was a plane with a huge number of people, it went near the Pentagon.  Then something huge hit the pentagon and bits of plane and people were in the wreckage.  I suppose you could argue an alien spaceship abducted the entire plane while something else hit the pentagon and left behind genetically identical clone body parts. But it seems less than plausible to me.

   replyreport
5. 75

   Uninvited Writerposted 13 years ago

   Hubpages really does need a conspiracy theory forum.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      logic,commonsenseposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Thought it had one called Religion and Philosophy!

      replyreport
6. 61

   knolyourselfposted 13 years ago

   "Then something huge hit the pentagon and bits of plane and people were in the wreckage." What wreckage?
   Film taken immediately after shows almost no wreckage and a hole in the pentagon about 50 feet wide and 20 feet high.

   replyreport
   1. 63

      Nouveau Skepticposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      There was wreckage--bits of metal that came from the plane. I think expecting to see large pieces of fuselage is inconsistent with the speed and angle of that collision.
      
      I am more curious, if you don't think that is where the plane went, where did it go and how did the body parts end up on the ground?  That seems distinctly unlikely without the plane going with them.
      
      As Sherlock would say: When you eliminate the impossible....

      replyreport
      1. 62

         recommend1posted 13 years agoin reply to this

         I am only mildly curious about all this - but the more obvious explanation would be that it was a missile and not a plane.

         replyreport
         1. 63

            Nouveau Skepticposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            The explanation fails to cover what happened to the plane, and how body parts of the passengers ended up in the pentagon.  The best explanation is the one that covers all the facts.

            replyreport
            1. 62

               recommend1posted 13 years agoin reply to this

               The explanation that it was a missile in the first place pretty much covers how it was not a plane   body parts are easy to supply, as are the pictures taken at that time and the videos from the cameras that must have been around this highest security building.

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  couturepopcafeposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  I'm not sure ya'll are understanding what went down that day. The U.S. took the third plane out of the air before it could hit full on. They had to. They had no choice. Those people were going to die anyway and in the interest of national security, they decided to try to save the Pentagon.
                  
                  That's part of the reason you never knew exactly what happened and what hit where. There would be huge public outcry about taking that plane out.

                  replyreport
7. 61

   knolyourselfposted 13 years ago

   There were no body parts on the lawn. It is similar to the JFK magic bullet theory. Their theory you are left with is: that a plane hitting reinforced concrete at 600 mph, the wings and tail fold in and go inside the building. That is as impossible as the big bang.

   replyreport
   1. 63

      Nouveau Skepticposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      There were genetically confirmed body parts and personal belongings at the crash site. Unless your conspiracy theory covers the entire emergency response and analysis teams and everyone one the plane who all flew invisibly away and were never heard from again.  IMHO, plane breaks up on impact makes more sense than plane vanishes without a trace in mid air within a mile of the Pentagon.

      replyreport
8. 60

   pedrogposted 13 years ago

   There you go:
   
   http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Loose_Change

   replyreport
9. 61

   knolyourselfposted 13 years ago

   "There were genetically confirmed body". Out of dozens of cameras that would show the plane or whatever it was, all confiscated by the FBI, only a 3 second clip has been released and even that shows the plane or whatever was inside the pentagon, of which everything was burned away, no evidence except the bodies which somehow survived for genetic testing. Interestingly of the so-called bodies there were no
   Arabs. I am not sure what hit the pentagon but a plane with all its passengers would be easy to dispose of. Just send it out over the Atlantic where it disappears.

   replyreport
10. 61

    knolyourselfposted 13 years ago

    Not hardly - there would have been wreckage all over DC. Interesting that the plane hit the just renovated finance department, where most of the workers hadn't returned yet. What was it, that same day or the next they were going to announce one billion gone missing. Oh well - all the records were destroyed so no need for that.

    replyreport
    1. 60

       couturepopcafeposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       What exactly are you trying to say?

       replyreport
11. 75

    sabrebIadeposted 13 years ago

    What gets me is that the Pentagon is one of the most secure buildings in the world.
    There should be security video footage of said plane hitting it from at least five different angles.
    Unless they hit the Pentagon in a "blind spot" where there was no video surveillance.
    Simply releasing the footage to the public clearly showing a plane hitting the building from like five different angles would end all this.
    We have seen the towers hit thousands of times, but no Pentagon footage.
    (Yes I have seen the "streak" footage where you can't actually make out anything but a blur hitting it)
    Except now, of course, people would say that the government had plenty of time to fake the footage since they waited years to release it.
    Possibly they think that the footage would show holes in the Pentagon's security that future attacks might exploit.

    replyreport
    1. 63

       Nouveau Skepticposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       You might think that those cameras should exist, but they don't. There was footage from the one camera that does. 
       
       None of which even tries to address the fact, if the plane didn't crash--where did it go?
       
       If you can;t explain that.... well, plane went boom.

       replyreport
    2. 60

       couturepopcafeposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       It was not a direct hit. They knew it was coming. They took it down before it could do maximum damage. They had to take it down. You won't see any footage of the U.S. taking down a public airliner loaded with passengers that is about to hit the Pentagon. The public, however well intentioned, would not stand for it.

       replyreport
12. 56

    SanXuaryposted 13 years ago

    I think there is a million and one questions begging for some real answers on 9/11. I do not believe that you have to be a conspiracy freak to have such questions or demand answers to them. I could probably ask a hundred questions off the top of my head at this very moment. Never in the history of any disaster has there been such a lack of true investigation and such a removal of any evidence. Every major air disaster is sitting in a building and has been put together like a puzzle piece. The questions continue to this day and they are not going away.

    replyreport
13. 85

    lovemychrisposted 13 years ago

    I have a link that doesn't seem to be working at this computer...grrrr. But it compares the size of plane engines, and the really huge plane that is supposed to have hit the Pentagon....it could not have left such a small hole. Not to mention the route it had to take to get there! Through trees and electrical lines, the directional longitudes and latitudes, etc. Anyway, it's on "Goon Squad: comparing engines that hit the pentagon" if it works on google?
    
    And I just heard recently that Silverstein is trying to get more money out of those buildings....the gift that keeps on giving.
    
    Can't link but it must be on google too.
    
    The Magic Airplane...Magic Bullets too: and they call US crazy!

    replyreport
    1. 52

       newstart1posted 13 years agoin reply to this

       this is supposedly the leaked footage of the missile hitting the pentagon http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRPWLqc5T20

       replyreport
       1. 59

          Druid Dudeposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Could have been a plane...could have been a missile...I don't know...I lost my honorary CSI membership, and was kicked out of the NCIS fanclub for non-payment of dues...personally I think Gibbs and Zeva did it.

          replyreport
14. 61

    knolyourselfposted 13 years ago

    I can't make a thing out of the video. The strike happened in the daytime. I can't even tell if it is the pentagon or whatever that is. The round hole they show is not the outer wall hit, but the most inside ring.
    The following image is what the external unholy hole
    looked like.
    http://www.google.com/imgres?q=image+fi … mp;bih=407

    replyreport
15. 71

    Reality Bytesposted 13 years ago

    U.S. Military Wanted to Provoke War With Cuba
    
    In the early 1960s, America's top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba.
    
    Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.
    
    The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel Castro.
    
    http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662 … zBUHcVO_g8
    
    The Federal Government would never even think of performing "false flag" operations in order to provoke a war?

    replyreport
    1. 59

       Druid Dudeposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       They wouldn't even blink.

       replyreport
       1. 71

          Reality Bytesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          I do not understand how people could hold such blind faith in their Government.
          
          Even though history shows what Government is capable of doing to pursue an agenda.
          
          People seem to hold on to an overwhelming case of denial.

          replyreport
16. 56

    SanXuaryposted 13 years ago

    Denial of what we have 50 years of lies and many of them proven. There are hundreds of well proven cases. We have reached a peak of so much deception and corruption that the Government would be shut down if all these cases demanded answers at the same time. Only a month ago did they even admit that the bail out cost six trillion dollars and it was made public knowledge that they had no intention of letting the public know this at the time. Just how big do the lies have to get before you discover that there is nothing to trust.

    replyreport
17. 61

    knolyourselfposted 13 years ago

    However it is not the government per say. It is the private interests that control the government.

    replyreport
    1. 60

       Hollie Thomasposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       Why is it that there are only so many people that *get that*? Are the government stronger than the private interests? Are there still people that are actually naiive enough to believe that?

       replyreport
18. 61

    knolyourselfposted 13 years ago

    The most pervasive misconception abounding. However the private interests spend fortunes promoting these misapprehensions, so the finger is never pointed at them. Most people don't even know they exist.

    replyreport
    1. 60

       Hollie Thomasposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       I believe they exist in the form of lobbyists, or presidential funders? The two equate to the same.

       replyreport
19. 61

    knolyourselfposted 13 years ago

    No they are teeny-weeny fish.

    replyreport
    1. 60

       Hollie Thomasposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       They are the teeny-weeny fish of ??

       replyreport
20. 61

    knolyourselfposted 13 years ago

    “A super-state controlled by international bankers, and international industrialists acting together..."

    replyreport
    1. 60

       Hollie Thomasposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       MIC, CORPs, Israel. The wonderful Rothchilds, Rockerfella's and Bilderbergs..ish.

       replyreport
       1. 60

          Hollie Thomasposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Oh, and the Kochs!

          replyreport
21. 61

    knolyourselfposted 13 years ago

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php? … ;aid=25080

    replyreport
    1. 60

       Hollie Thomasposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       Bookmarked, thank you.

       replyreport
22. 77

    IzzyMposted 13 years ago

    I remember 9/11 as if it were yesterday.
    
    Half a world away and still tuned in.
    
    It was my understanding at the time that a plane did hit the Pentagon.
    
    As I was watching, a plane was expected to hit the Pentagon.
    
    Media attention was easily diverted with the goings on in Manhatten.
    
    It was reported a plane did hit.
    
    I, too, have watched videos suggesting it was all lies, all totally made up by the government of the day.
    
    I just don't believe it.
    
    It is easier to hate Moslems than it is to believe it might all be lies, especially when Moslems have been proven in several Western courts to have instigated investigations.
    
    I am no follower of Moslems and their  antiquated beliefs of women's role in society, but at the same time, let's give them some leeway.
    
    Do you, Moslem readers/writers, solemnly swear that you give us female writers any credence whatsoever.
    
    Where is the poll capsule on comments?

    replyreport