Pentagon piece of debris

http://www.the-movement.com/Pentagon/mysterious_piece_of_debris.htm

Why the piece of debris can´t be from the letter "n".

Which letter can it have come from?

( Below is the picture from Eric Barts site, mentioned in the text. )

Using a 3/4 view of a plane against a perpendicular view of the debris produces the discrepancy. When you put the picture of the debris against a perpendicular view of the American Airlines jet, the discrepancy disappears.

Nice try.

I mean, your picture looks like less of a match than the one in the original post!

Look at the original "n". It consists of a down stroke on the left with the curve coming up and out from the side of the downstroke, just below the top.

In your picture, the left end of the part that would be the curve, is too long and overlaps the downstroke, and there would be no amount of bend you could do that would allow that part to match up properly.

Still, nice try.

This doesn't go to the n. It's a part of the c.

It's been so long since this was debunked, that I forgot the eventual conclusion.

The website in the first post compares the piece (in its correct alignment) to the c. It concludes that the piece doesn't fit, but I say that it does. I know that many here won't accept it because they don't want to see it, but that has no bearing on the reality of the situation.

That piece is a part of American Airlines Flight 77, which exploded when it was crashed into the Pentagon.

You said that FL 77 "exploded when it was crashed into the Pentagon".
If so, tell us what happened to the people on board, and provide a link to substantiate it. (don't bother with a link that merely says that the remains of FL 77 passengers were found and identified...UNLESS the linked info ALSO includes details of the above)

Questions for you:

1.) Were the remains of the people on FL 77 found inside the plane, strapped into their seats, or what?

2.) If the plane "exploded when it was crashed", why are their NO photographs of passenger seats? Or luggage, or cargo?

3.) Are you claiming that the explosion was so fierce that NOTHING was left that can be identified as passenger seats, luggage, or cargo?

It's been so long since anyone has posted anything that they claim supports the "Wacky Cave People Did It" Conspiracy. Maybe you'd like to refresh our memory.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

The piece could come from the "n"

Look at this pic, but imagine that it´s a "n", not a "c". Than you have it.



Bob

is out of the question.
If you download the closeup (linked in original message) and then a pic of the piece of debris, and then put the last on top of the first, on top of the "n", you´ll see that it doesn´t fit at all.

:kick:

Greetings DU 9-11 investigators.

First, the question of this piece of debris is important because

if the debris piece photographed over a hundred feed north of the crash is a piece that could only have come from the starboard side of a Boeing 757 in American Airlines livery

and if the aircraft that actually entered came at the west wall from the southwest so that its starboard side faced south or southeast

and since the wind, by the subsequent smoke movements, was from the northwest

and since the piece could not have gone through the fast compacting fuselage of a Boeing 757 (had a Boing 757 actually been crashing there that day)

we must conclude that the piece was planted where it was found by some means other than the crashing exploding killer jet.

Remember, the piece is light and not aerodynamically shaped for flight -- it would be like throwing an opened newspaper page across the room, even if it was thrown in the right direction.

And so the cover-up must discredit the finding that the fragment could only have come from the letter "n" on the starboard side.

I haven't read all of the articles in this thread, but the first few show clearly that the rivets are not being taken into account, the scaling to size is wrong (look at the thickness of the overlayed lettering fragment compared to the comparison photos in each case.

Now look at the alignment of rivets in the the critical blank space of bare aluminum following the fragment letter and you will see at once that this fragment could only have come from the "n" on the starboard side.

Go here:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/9-11-demonstrative-evidence-of-frameup/message/70

===================

Clearly the piece was planted for Faram and the other photographers to find and capture -- a disinfo op supporting the frame-up story from the front page of Time -- and notice that this piece is like a polar bear in the Amazon insofar as it is so different from the smithereens and shards lying in the same vacinity -- those smithereens being nothing other than the exploded missile casing from the warhead that produced the white flash into which the Boeing (overflying the crash) disappeared into as it headed for Reagan National one mile beyond.

-----------

And yes, the "planting of the piece is consistent with everthing else that is known, including:


1. Pentagon security camera shows
a. Too short a plane
b. Smoke trail of a missile being fired
c. White-hot flash explosion consistent with a missile warhead

2. Photos show wrong crash imprint in the wall

3. Photos show and wrong flash-powder burn darkening the wall

4. Downed lampposts and witnesses each identified a different
approach path to the Pentagon, the Boeing's and the killer jet's

5. Wrong kind of debris

6. Single piece of right kind of debris shown to have been
found on the opposite side of the approach path from
the side of the plane where that particular piece had
to have come from.

7. Witnesses also

a. heard a missile

b. heard a sonic boom prior to blast

c. smelled burning chordite after the blast

d. saw a radar blip behaving like a jet-fighter blip

8. No photos of wreckage from inside consistent with the crash

9. Evidence of only one engine and one seat , a pilots seat.

10. A distraction plane, ur engine plane making dives over D.C.
both photographed, videotaped and shown on BBC, and
reported (erroneously) by many wintesses as the actual plane
"diving at an irrecoverable angle)

11. The attack was made almost horizontally into the first-floor
level -- consistent with a countour-hugging jet-fighter attack

12. Normal rescuers were prevented from entering the building
while only certain people, including Rumsfeld himself, conducted
(screened) victims from the building

13. Rumsfeld had recently been given exclusive power to
OK air interceptions -- and yet he was in his office the whole
time the twin towers were hit, and when the Pentagon was
hit he went to oversee "rescue" instead of going to the situation
room where his interception authority could be given -- he
arrived at the situation room at about the time the Pennsylvania
plane (backup for the Pentagon) was finally shot down.

14. The various drills and practices for an air attack on the Pentagon
including some kind of simulation on 9-11-01 itself, coupled with
denials that such an attack had been considered possible.

15. Impossible stories by, for example,Republican John Judge
(regarding his amazing stewardess friend who claims to
have seen the Boeing inside the hole, recognized the
plane as the one she always flew, recongized her
stewardess friend as a victim by a photo of her
severed arm with the matching "friendship bracelett"
they both wore; that she was passing out doughnuts
and coffee to the rescue workers with the salvation
army when the salvation army was nowhere in evidence at the
scene -- John Judge who is a professional JFK conspiracy
theory debunker and discloses that this same stewardess
friend is also a JFK theory investigator, the same
John Judge who launched the phony "People's Investigation
of 9-11 with a press conference by stating that the Pentagon
attack is not something responsible investigators should bother
investigating etc. since we "know" the Boeing hit the Pentagon
and don't want to be a laughing stock etc. -- the People's
investigation that never once reviewed any of the evidence
packages I posted to them -- the same John Judge who to this
day refuses to debate Dick Eastman on any internet forum and
whom all -- dare I use the term -- "responsible" 9-11
investigators think is a John Judge who is working for
the coverup, for obstruction of justice, and because he
does it so badly is himself become one of the proofs of
the frameup along with the known-only-to-himself flight
attendant who works one of the flights that most definitely
had to have been regularly monitored by US intelligence
operatives, probably flight attendents, and this one just
happened not to take Flight 77 that day by happenstance etc.
-- so how about it, Mr. Judge? (I should add that John Judge,
is the man who undertook himself to be the intermediary between
the families of survivors and the 9-11 investigating community,
John not wanting families bothered by "irresponsible"
investigators, whom he defines as those who do not accept
the official story of the Boeing crashing at the Pentagon.
A really sweet guy, that John Judge, right? taken me up on offer for debate -- maybe some of you at
DU could encourage him, especially those of you who take
accept the cover-up story as gospel.]

16. The deaths of only the CIA's indepdendent intelligence
revivals , the Offices of Naval Intelligence personel, and
auditors of defense spending contracts etc. alone moved
into the "newly renovated" section that was hit -- on the side
where most of the witnesses would be the Arlington Cemetery
dead or people involved with driving their cars. Naval
Intelligence would have independently investigated 9-11
had they lived -- the investigator that no official has
yet conducted -- Wolfowitz sure bin Laden had done it
and ready with the solution of invading Afganistan on
the very first day -- even as they were allegedly taken
by complete suprise only a few hours before that determination.


See the evidence photos and witness testimony confirming all of the above and further analysis in support of these conclusions by respected men of science here:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TRUTHBAZOOKA/message/5

and here

http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/911/Eastman/m18h05.html

Dick Eastman
Yakima, Washington
Every man is responsible to every other man.

I have described how you can see for yourself that the picture that Boloboffin posted (post#1)(and that you trust in your link) is totally misleading.

I´m sending you an e-mail with a picture (the result that shows how misleading this picture is).

The "n" just isn´t an option.

You have put together a mountain of evidence which makes the only conlusion possible: Gov't complicity in the "attacks" of 9-11.

The noose is tightening, and the spinners are getting nervous.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

The picture that you present as a better picture is actually totally misleading.
You can check this out for yourself.
What you do is :
Click on the link down at the bottom of the article in the original post.
Download the closeup of a 757-223.
Then download a picture of the piece of debris.
Then "cut out" the piece of debris and put it on top of the closeup.
Scale the piece of debris so that the lines of rivets fit with those on the closeup.
And there you have it, it gets obvious that the picture you posted is totally misleading.

( I can also send you the result. )

Planting evidence as part of a conspiracy to frame an innocent party.

Notice that they didn't bother to try and plant MUSH from the carnage that would have resultd if FL 77 had crashed into the Pentagon.

Incompetence? Negligence? Intelligence failure? Or, NO CRASH of FL 77 at the Pentagon?

Who would plane it?

Why does it matter?

Most likely, that piece of an airplane was planted on the Pentagon lawn.
So, it really doesn't matter WHAT letter it came from. The important point is that it was planted there, as part of a conspiracy to frame the Cave People and fool the murikan people.

Why does it matter?
Well, the point is that once you start having a closer look, to find out which letter it might have come from, the question if it really came from flight 77 at all, becomes very real.

That might be true if one discounts every other piece of evidence that flt 77 did hit the pentagon.

Other than that you are left with two (perhaps more) alternative theories.

1. It was planted.

2. It was a different jet.

Neither is a credible theory. Both have been thoroughly discredited in this forum at least a dozen times.

There is no evidence that FL 77 crashed at the Pentagon, or anywhere else. If you believe you have some, kindly post it.

The evidence has been posted and reposted. You just don't accept it as evidence. That's fine - but most others do.

Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. This is beyond rational dispute. This is beyond a reasonable doubt. You can blind yourself to the evidence as much as you want, but the truth remains true.

There is no way of absolutely proving that Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon and you posit it as a fact. In that witnesses onserved a plane that looked like an AA commercial jetliner no way proves that it was AA #77.

The eyewitnesses saw the large American Airlines jet crash into the Pentagon.

The ATCs tracked this very plane on radar. This plane flew a path consistent with being Flight 77.

Investigators recovered the mortal remains of Flight 77's passengers from the wreckage.

Investigators recovered the pieces of Flight 77 from the wreckage.

And I will add, though you all howl against it, that two cell phone calls from Flight 77 indicated that the plane had been hijacked.

Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. This is beyond rational debate. It's a fact.

"Investigators recovered the mortal remains of Flight 77's passengers from the wreckage."

I've never seen a photo of what is claimed to be FL 77 wreckage, that is large enough to contain any human remains.

Do show us what you're talking about.

Ted Olson's claims about cell phone calls have been debunked so many times that it's beyond rational debate that any such calls were made. It is factually incorrect to say otherwise.

Plane wreckage, building wreckage, all of it is wreckage!

Catch up, dude, you're missing out.

Re: cell phone calls:

So let's leave it alone
Cause we can't see eye to eye
There ain't no good guy
There ain't no bad guy
There's only you and me and we just disagree."

WHAT plane wreckage? WHAT passenger seatS? WHAT wreckage large enough to have possibly contained a human body?

C'mon dude. Who you trying to fool? Don't be pedaling that nonsense here. We read, and we THINK, too.

The eyewitnesses saw the large American Airlines jet crash into the Pentagon.No Proof Here

The ATCs tracked this very plane on radar. This plane flew a path consistent with being Flight 77.The plane was lost on radar for approx one half hour...

Investigators recovered the mortal remains of Flight 77's passengers from the wreckage.So they allege...the bodies were probably transferred onto the planebomb that crashed via remote or there weren't any bodies. Why no body parts on the Pentalawn? So much of the plane was scattered on the lawn and the highway raining down like confetti? Where are the bodies???

Investigators recovered the pieces of Flight 77 from the wreckage.Pieces probably of a Boeing 757 not necessarily #77.

And I will add, though you all howl against it, that two cell phone calls from Flight 77 indicated that the plane had been hijacked.Voice morphing.

Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. This is beyond rational debate. It's a fact.A plane similar in appearance to #77 crashed setting off shaped charges and a bomb which preceded the actual explosion of the fuel. A detailed analysis of the physical properties of the crash scene will prove this out. You have neglected in your analysis to thoroughly examine the physical evidence of the explosion/crash.

Round and round and round we go...

I can't force you to believe the evidence. You are free to believe what you want and rationalize it the way you wish (the bodies were probably transferred onto the planebomb that crashed via remote? Voice morphing?).

But your beliefs are not rational. Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. Flight 77 denial is irrational prima facie.

about the actual existence of a building known as the Pentagon.

THAT part checked out.

Have you ever seen the actual Pentagon?

Or the WTC for that matter?

Maybe the entire attack was contrived so as to stop all those New Yorkers and Washingtonians from asking where those mythical buildings were supposed to be.

Don't be too hasty in your conclusions, Dulce...

bolo says that "the evidence has been posted and reposted" and that most people believe the Gov't's Official Version story ("The Wacky Cave People Did It").

The definition of "most people" would mean far more than 50%, right?

I don't believe there are more than a handful of people who believe it.


C'mon, DUers: do YOU believe the Official 9-11 Conspiracy Theory? boloboffin thinks you do.

I'm talking about the Flight 77 denial theories. Most DUers do believe that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon? Why? Because it's true - because it happened.

Do most DUers believe that al-Qaeda planned and carried out these attacks? That I don't know. Do most DUers suspect Bush administration involvement in the attacks? I'm sure most (including myself) are open to the hypothesis. But as long as theorists continue to push controlled demolition and Flight 77 denial, the MIHOP hypotheses remain discredited and discreditable.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Res ipsa loquitur - "The thing speaks for itself"

In the words of then-President Bill Clinton, when asked for evidence of the "vast right-wing conspiracy": "Isn't it obvious?".

down to General Discussion to conduct a poll.

If he generates 4000 reponses of people who have been registered longer than three months who believe the official story, then I just might have to bow out of the Democratic Underground.

(Y'all better not hold yer breath none. Ain't gonna happen this millenium nowhow.)

If you're so confident, accept DD's suggestion. We're countin' on ya and waiting for you. Let us know when the poll is ready.

If Dulce wants to leave, Dulce is free to leave Democratic Underground at any time. I don't need a poll to force Dulce off.

So the poll is supposed to be 4000 DU members who believe that Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon, correct? That is the official story...

(Y'all better not hold yer breath none. Ain't gonna happen this millenium nowhow.)

You mean bolo will decline to conduct the poll that he wants us to believe will show the majority of DUers support the Official Version Conspiracy Theory of 9-11, or do you mean that if he summons the courage to actually conduct a poll, he won't get anywhere near the support for the viewpoint he is promoting?

Boloboffin will supply the answer.
The difference is the same.

I've been too busy to come down here and see how the fires of hell are doing but apparently it's business as usual.

There's so much straw in use you're driving up the price of hay.

You state there is no evidence that flight 77 hit the Pentagon. You are certainly entitled to hold that view.

But this view in order to be consistent with reality means that very little of the day to day information communicated to you is believed to be reliable by you. You discount eyewitness testimony, published images, newspaper accounts of victim recovery efforts -- the list goes on.

So how do you manage to believe anything you read, view or listen to? Nearly none of it will ever meet the standards you set to acknowledge that flight 77 did hit the Pentagon. How do manage to figure out if anything is true or false?

Last night the Phillies won on an eight inning three run homer. I have no evidence (per your standards) that that really happened. Yet I know it's true.

Do you believe it happened?

edit for clarity

If you're so convinced of the "Cave People Did It" Conspiracy Theory,
see message #28, and do what bolo apparently is afraid to do.

that you changed the subject, nor did you answer my question.

Not believing the "Cave People did it" and not believing flight 77 hit the Pentagon are two distinctly different things in a reality based world.

There is ample reasons to question to what level OBL is involved. I think he planned the attacks, but I can certainly respect the opinion of others that think he was not responsible; as there REALLY is some questionable evidence to his culpability and not lots of hard evidence that he is culpable.

But this still leave flight 77. There is no question about the evidence. It hit the Pentagon.

your position? When you decide to soften your views of Osama? WHAT made you decide that?

Now, go back to message #28 & take the challenge bolo is afraid of.

What made you think that?

BTW, I noticed you still have not answered my question. Am I surprised? No.

911 days 17 1/2 hrs(approx)

Huh? What are you talking about?

911 days 17 1/2 hrs(approx)

Figure it out yet??

I figured out a long time ago that trying to be a prophet can be a risky business. That's why I never try numerology as it tends to make one look silly

I had no idea that it was 911 plus days until it happened. But I do believe now that it was planned that way by whoever did it.

(This is taking us away from the subject, but it´s better than this "shouting", "There is evidence!" & "No, there isn´t!")
It´s very clear that what for some people is evidence, is not so for others.

For example, is the surveillance camera pictures evidence?
Not for me, that´s for sure.
For many reasons. Here is one more :
(Look at the two pics below)

"The pattern of damage to lamp poles has demonstrated, rather convincingly, that the plane hit the Pentagon at an angle of 45-50°. This means that, in relation to the position of the security camera, the plane was angled somewhat towards the camera as it approached. The lingering exhaust plume seen in the later frames provides a useful measure of the trajectory of the craft in frame one. Using this as a guide it becomes clear that the plane is not approaching at anything like the angle suggested by the lamp pole evidence. Far from being angled toward the camera , the plane is angled slightly away from it and striking the Pentagon almost head on."
http://serendipity.ptpi.net/wot/pentagon/spencer05.htm
( I don´t agree with a lot of what´s said in this article.)

You can tell this is a wide angle lens taking the picture. Look at the curve of the top of the Pentagon, and the righthand box on the concrete median in the foreground.

In Frame One, the large American Airlines jet is behind that right hand box. The further back an object in the picture, the greater the distortion. The closer to the edge of the picture, the greater the distortion. The plane is very far back and along the righthand side of the picture. It's also coming at an angle that has the nose forward of the tail in this picture.

That's why every picture you've seen superimposing a plane into that space is wrong - because it ignore some or all of these factors. The best I've seen so far has the plane at the proper angle, but still doesn't take the lens distortion into account.

Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon.

the sly grin on the face of "Captain & Pilot" Hanjour.

It is absolutely absurd that some people continue to try & sell such an obviously lie about FL 77. If FL 77 had crashed at the Pentagon, the Gov't would have released video images that surely show what happened there.

Since FL 77 didn't crash anywhere, the Gov't and its supporters have to resort to appealing to the "flat earth" crowd with lies from Ted Olson.

Not one supporter of the "Wacky Cave People Did It" Conspiracy theory can give a rational account of what happened at the Pentagon. No one who knows even a little bit more than what they've been "sold" about FL 77, believes the "Cave People Did It" version.

The notion that

"The plane is very far back and along the righthand side of the picture."

to explain how such a big plane can be hidden in so little "space".
And at the same time say that the smoke plume is in the right position, but seems to be hitting straight on because of the wide angle lens.
It´s absurd.

6/10th down on this site :
http://membres.lycos.fr/applemacintosh/pentagon.htm
there is a very interesting picture of what seems to be a part of a wing, inside the Pentagon.

I´d like to have some second opinions on it.

And also on the picture of a piece of plane debris. (8/10th down)
(Does look very suspicious.)

Thank you very much for posting this disturbing, vital information. One hopes that maybe some insiders who have grown to loathe the bushes will find a way to get more previously unseen evidence "outed".

I'm curious.

You find that highly speculative information very, very compelling, yet the gigantic mountain of information that establishes that flight 77 did hit the Pentagon is not compelling in the least.

Please explain.

When you call this information highly speculative.

I assume that you mean the conclusions that they draw.
And that you are not questioning if such a piece was really found.
( The part of a wing (?) inside, and the piece of debris outside. )

Do you hold that what seems to be a part of a wing can actually be something else?

The generator outside the building that seems more likely to be the GHawk guidance system.

My first thought on that part of the article was, well, that´s just over the top. I sure found the two parts further down much more compelling. First impression...

That's an interesting take. Never thought of that.

Speculative is one word to describe the conclusions. There are other words that are not as kind.

No, I am not questioning the pictures.

The items that is called a wing clearly could be a piece of wing and it is also quite conceivable it could be something else. If it is a wing, I would not be surprised at all, as a jet jet did impact the Pentagon.

that it is something else, then it will not bring us any further.

But if it really is a part of a wing, it´s hard to see how it can be from a 757. The shape is all wrong.

I just got in a suggestion that it might be a flap from one of the wings. Don´t know, isn´t it too big?

I just got in this :

"I was initially very excited by that object, but after looking at all the high resolution pics from the FEMA archive (...) I became convinced that this is only a collapsed air conditioning duct. You can see that the other object hanging down in that shot is then a similar duct."

I believe he is right. When you look at the bend in that thing, a part of a wing wouldn´t bend like that.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Are you unable, or simply unwilling to respond without hitting the alert button whenever you are asked to provide some of that "mountain of information" you and your partners claim establishes that flight 77 did hit the Pentagon?

Please explain why you have never once even attempted to give a plausible explanation for why you believe in the "Wacky Cave People Did It" Conspiracy Theory. I don't understand why an OBJECTIVE person who is even moderately informed, could continue to try and sell that such an obviously inaccurate story.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

like someone didn't like my reply.

I'll summarize again.

I have never hit the alert button in this forum. Sorry to disappoint you.

I will not respond to any requests for evidence regarding flt 77 hitting the Pentagon. There is no point to it. You have seen it all and rejected it all. Your choice.

Regarding the Cave man theory. Sorry the alternative that the USA government planned 9/11 is not on my plate. MIHOP is not on my plate and LIHOP is a side dish that mean at worse incompetence let it happen.

Lifes about choices. I've made mine and you've made your.

Enjoy

Would it be unkind to ask you to refrain from trying to undermine those of us who are here because we don't believe the PR campaign that promotes the "Wacky Caveman Did It" Conspiracy theory and we want to know the truth about 9-11?

You've made your choice, now why do you want to interfere with those of us who don't share your viewpoint nor your agenda?

Surely, you have better things to do than antagonize people simply because the rules permit you to. Run along. Please.

I was thinking you guys should appreciate me a little bit more.

Having a skeptic and one who challenges your rationalizations should be encouraged. It's a good way to prevent "group-think."

I demand a raise.

You said:
Having a skeptic and one who challenges your rationalizations should be encouraged. It's a good way to prevent "group-think."

We're skeptical of the rationalizations of those who promote the "Wacky Cave People Did It" Conspiracy Theory. See, there's this thing about facts, evidence, and logic --- and it doesn't take much to see through the fallacious BS that some claim in support of the "Cave People Did It" story.

Let me be very careful here, because I want to say something to you that won't cause the censor bells to begin ringing: I think there are definitely some "guys" who appreciate what you are doing...if appreciate is the right word.

It's the "straw man" you use as the black-white alternative to your own "wacky" theories.

Part two of this is now online.

And even though it turned out that some parts of the first article was really farfetched speculation (The part about the "wing section", and the part about the generator (in my opinion)), I still find that I can recommend people to have a look at part two.

http://membres.lycos.fr/applemacintosh2/Pentagon2.htm

I´d like some second opinions on the bottom picture. Is this actually a chunk of the aircraft that has been covered with something?

On edit : In light of all the eyewitnesses it is hard to believe that a global hawk hit the Pentagon and not a bigger plane. It must have been something bigger. But the questions remain : Why is what we see on the cctv pictures no such thing as a 757 coming in? Why did they put lock on the videos? Etc.

The pictures off those cameras are so fuzzy they're almost useless except to show that a big airplane hit the Pentagon, throwing pieces of debris over the top of the building.

Most of what he is trying to prove is derived from video artifacts caused by blowing the pictures up beyond their capability of retaining a coherent image.

The pictures show that a very small plane (probably an F-16) hit the Pentagon...following the missile it launched to open a hole in the building.

"In light of all the eyewitnesses it is hard to believe that a global hawk hit the Pentagon and not a bigger plane. It must have been something bigger"

The eyewitness accounts are useless. Please read up on what Dick Eastman and many others learned about the alleged eyewitness accounts.

The only proof of what hit the Pentagon are the five images from the parking lot video. They show a small aircraft that is the size of an F-16 fighter jet. It even shows the missile plume from when it was launched by the plane to open up a hole in the Pentagon.

I believed in the GOP's reason for going to War with IRAQ , but as the time has gone by and there Has NEVER Been any WMD Found- I have changed my mind.

This is the Same Bull-Shit that was given in Viet-Nam and the Gulf War.

When are Americans going to wake up and see the Government for what it really is?? A Bunch of Lying Thugs.

There should be alot more Done back here at Home, instead of wasting Billions of Dollars on people who don't even care about their country, their fellow men, or who runs their Country?

America should pay more Attention to the people here at Home.

The Eldery, the uneducated, medical care for every-one, social security. And Stop wasting money on some God-Forsaken 5th world country ??


George W. Bush Lied to America, and we have to get this person Voted out of Office. He himself is Loser, cocaine user, AWOL from the National Guard :


VOTE 4 John Kerry in 2004