The same old stuff, same old photos of 9/11

Over the past 4 years we still see the same photos the same videos, nothing has changed. Perhaps someone might come forward with some new information and photos from 9/11? If I see that video clip of 'something' moving towards the Pentagon again I'll scream!

Many people who were at the 'scene of the crime' probably are sitting on some really good evidence.

http://911revisited.com

they show a lot of footage from that day (mostly WTC towers) that was never shown again. i even remember ALL of this, as it was being reported on the news. these parts are never talked about to this day. there is NO denying any of this, it is straight from the news THAT DAY. I ordered the DVD, it's free you just pay for shipping. it's good to have personally rather than just watch it online.

I'll order it and spend hours fast forwarding and rewinding and saying "oh my God!". It sounds great, I have heard that there is a lot of footage that was never shown again.

I thought it would have been worthwhile to respond (on behalf of the grand duchess) to respond to a certain young woman who hadn't a clue and who had something to say -

After the confrontion, things changed.....

(for the better, truth be told)

http://www.criticalthrash.com/terror/crashthumbnails.html
http://www.rcfp.org/moussaoui

You probably have, I'm just trying to make sure.

That's when you have to start shelling out money for all of the DVDs. I watched them - they're all good. Plus the books. You never know, might find some details that surprise you.

www.pentagonresearch.com

I found out new little tidbits by going through the site. One thing was of a video showing what would happen to a car if it was in its path behind the plane. I thought it was great because no cars were thrown off the freeway by the supposed plane flying over it and into the pentagon. A taxi was hurt...but only by a fallen lamp post that supposedly only hurt the windshield. Another thing is the eyewitness what supposedly had the plane fly right above him...he should have been thrown too, maybe even killed, right? (I could be wrong though) Anyway, you may find some new things on there...

what do you think that is? my guess is,"thermite cutter charges"

I'm not sure if they would have used thermite in the pentagon, cuz I think they mostly used it for cutting steel, and the pentagon was mostly concrete wasn't it? but that is a pretty interesting image, weird.

http://www.terrorize.dk/911/pentagon4/ maybe you already seen it but in case you didn't check out the page.
maybe the debunker's will weigh in?

was that the impetus to collapse the pentagon?

they link to airplane crashes, so you can compare. I also thought the images of what happens to a plane (albeit smaller) that hits a lamp post -totally wrecked. They do a very good job of showing the Pentagon from all different angles and the alleged path of whatever went through there. I thought it was strange that the plane "leftovers" would not have taken out all those columns. Also there was no damage ACROSS from the "exit" hole, like the "plane" just stopped middair and fell like in a roadrunner cartoon without landing on the wall across from the exit hole. Oh, and the way the exit hole is CENTERED between two columns how likely is that? but the official drawings changed it to make it look like it was off center, so as to make it less suspicious.. so many things..

Performance Report say that? Someone posted something on here awhile ago about a wall breeching kit which look like what they could have used. Also the columns near the AE drive or exit hole were more damaged than the ones before it, which only makes sense if that hole was a separate event. But why wouldn't they just say that?
why would they cover it up? Maybe something happened in the event of the "rescue" blast?

Maybe for the same reason.

... following your recommendation. I really do not get the exit hole.
(1) I had previously suggeted it was made by the landing gear, but the piece of landing gear visible outside the hole appears not to be in the first photo taken (on 9/11). So I guess I may well have been wrong about that.
(2) I really doubt it's a punch in hole. Bricks from the wall can be seen on A-E drive, as if the blast came from the inside. Plus, look at the edges.

(3) The hole is nearly in line with the path the centre of the fuselage would have taken, if it had carried straight on, although it's not the same as the path of most damage:

(4) Why would a shaped charge/piece of aircraft debris/rapid wall-breaching kit not damage the floor? The objection applies to all three causes that have been suggested.
(5) Hole between two columns: if it was caused by plane debris, then the debris could have hit the wall at several points, but the wall only gave at the weakest point it was hit.
(6) The sign on the wall right by the hole says "No parking any time".
(7) The hole isn't round. It's more a sort of rectangle with rounded corners. The left edge is straight, as is the top. I have no idea what this means.
(8) Whatever did it managed to smash the wall on the left side (as we are looking at it from A-E drive), without completely destroying the steel mesh in front of it - pieces of plaster are even visible on the mesh.

How the hell did that happen?
(9) The mark on the opposite wall may well have been caused by the debris fire against it, you can see a guy putting it out here:


There's probably some wierd explanation for all of this (it was a former arched gateway or something - don't worry, I'm half joking), but it beats me at the moment.

http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build03/PDF/b03017.pdf

This is the Pentagon Damage report.

Also, look at all of the interior pictures...funny that all columns remain basically untouched as a HUGE airplane passes through, yet, the WTC's fall.