38

11/18/2005 9:47:50 AM

Here is what may be a very important piece to unravelling what is still unknown about 9/11:

http://www.rense.com/general68/doomed.htm

Quote :

"Family Members Of Doomed 911 Flights 'Strangely Silent' About Irregularities & Inconsistencies Of Official Government Story By Greg Szymanski 11-18-5 Except for Ellen Mariani, whose husband was reported on Flight 175, others who lost relatives on the airplanes have kept quiet in stark contrast to those who lost loved ones at Ground Zero. But when those from the 'airplane community' talk like Linda Gay and Frank Calley, who respectively had family members on Flight 11 and 77, they accept the government 9/11 story hook, line and sinker. [...] Why the difference? There are no polls or experts to figure this out, but one simple explanation is the flight families are hiding something. Although this may be jumping to conclusions, what other conclusion can be drawn when nobody wants to talk?"

Really good article.

11/18/2005 9:50:50 AM

HAHAHAHAHA

like they could keep 500+ families quiet about what happened to their family member(s)

OH HOW WE LOVE PRISONPLANET!!!1

11/18/2005 9:52:17 AM

http://www.rense.com/general68/ree.htm

Quote :

"Still More 'Miraculous 911 Evidence' Found! Independent Medical Investigation Not Allowed As Pentagon Controls Flight 77 Autopsy Results -But Lists Three People Not Even On The Flight! By Greg Szymanski 11-15-5 Flight 77 passenger, Suzanne Calley's, wedding ring and driver's license turns up in perfect condition from Pentagon wreckage. ATM card of Flight 11 passenger, Waleed Iskandar, also turns up unscathed, but he wasn't even listed as a passenger on the AA official flight list. "

[Edited on November 18, 2005 at 9:53 AM. Reason : 1]

11/18/2005 9:53:14 AM

Tucker Carlson: "Believe 9-11 Was an Inside Job? Leave the Country!"
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/november2005/171105leavecountry.htm

Quote :

"Swanson frozen food heir, Tucker Carlson, host of MSNBC’s The Situation with Tucker Carlson, believes you should get out of America if you believe nine eleven was an inside job. Responding to a caller after Brigham Young University physics professor Steven E. Jones—who believes there were “pre-positioned explosives” in all three buildings at ground zero—appeared on his show, Carlson declared: …if you really believe the U.S. government killed 3000 of its own citizens for no reason and lied about it and invaded Afghanistan as a result of something it did, you ought to leave the country… because that’s so terrible… so evil, that your tax dollars go in to support it make you complicit in it… if you really believe that, you ought to leave… "

11/18/2005 10:27:47 AM

Quote :

"Flight 77 passenger, Suzanne Calley's, wedding ring and driver's license turns up in perfect condition from Pentagon wreckage. ATM card of Flight 11 passenger, Waleed Iskandar, also turns up unscathed, but he wasn't even listed as a passenger on the AA official flight list."

u do know that things such as these items are stolen and pawned in this day and age, right? so there really is no significance cause for all we know these things were stolen, sold, pawned, etc by the real people.

11/18/2005 10:31:29 AM

NO NO NO

IF THEY WERE THERE THEY WERE PLANTED BY THE EVIL ZIONIST CONTROLLED GUBMINT!!!

OH HOW WE LOVE PRISONPLANET!!!1

11/18/2005 10:39:37 AM

Quote :

"...one simple explanation is the flight families are hiding something. Although this may be jumping to conclusions, what other conclusion can be drawn when nobody wants to talk?"

Oh, gee I don't know...maybe no one is talking because THEY DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY!

11/18/2005 10:42:06 AM

His point was that a large portion of the families of the victims who were in the towers have been speaking out against problems with the official government story and calling for independent investigations, etc....while the families of the victims of those supposedly on the hijacked planes have been noticeably silent. Why the discrepency? It's a particularly good article. It goes on to describe many of the problems with the official story surrounding the hijacked planes.

11/18/2005 10:51:38 AM

maybe the people who had family in the planes have a higher percentage of what we like to call SANE PEOPLE

OH HOW WE LOVE PRISONPLANET!!!1

11/18/2005 11:11:45 AM

Quote :

"His point was that a large portion of the families of the victims who were in the towers have been speaking out against problems with the official government story"

11/18/2005 11:57:21 AM

CHILDISH HUMOR PWNS AND WINS ARGUMENTS!!

11/18/2005 12:16:17 PM

CHILDISH LOGIC TRUMPS FACTS!

Can we get some numbers regarding this "large portion"?

[Edited on November 18, 2005 at 12:36 PM. Reason : i love you spartacus]

11/18/2005 12:19:05 PM

Quote :

"Can we get some numbers regarding this "large portion"?"

Hmmm. Here's what you posted in response to me asking a similar question.

Quote :

"Mr. Joshua: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=david+irving Its not hard to find."

11/18/2005 12:38:16 PM

Quote :

"CHILDISH LOGIC TRUMPS FACTS!"

LOL. As if you and your buddies who believe the 9/11 official lie have been focussing on providing facts. I think everyone can see that it is I who has been providing evidence. You guys just primarily post childish garbage responses.

11/18/2005 12:40:16 PM

AHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

whew that was funny

OH HOW WE LOVE PRISONPLANET!!!1

11/18/2005 12:42:07 PM

Quote :

"You guys just primarily post childish garbage responses. "

point

11/18/2005 12:44:21 PM

^^^^ Awwww, are you still pissed that I could point out how ridiculous David Irving is? I'm asking you to back up your claims with facts, and once again you are trying to worm your way out of it.

What exactly is a "large portion" in your mind?

^^^ We've been over this before. Your evidence is laughable and has yet to convince a single rational person.

^ How is that any worse than your childish name calling?

[Edited on November 18, 2005 at 12:46 PM. Reason : .]

11/18/2005 12:44:58 PM

Quote :

"Your evidence is laughable and has yet to convince a single rational person. "

No. That statement is laughable, as is most of what you post.

11/18/2005 12:51:23 PM

Ooooooh. Good comeback.

11/18/2005 12:54:55 PM

You operate primarily by posting "combacks" and childish rubbish. That's why you focus on it. I operate primarily by posting facts and aiming to tell the truth. That is what that statement is. A simple statement of the truth. While you're trying to win the "pwn/comeback game", I'm trying to post the truth.

[Edited on November 18, 2005 at 1:07 PM. Reason : 1]

11/18/2005 1:05:53 PM

right.

OH HOW WE LOVE PRISONPLANET!!!1

11/18/2005 1:07:54 PM

point

11/18/2005 1:08:17 PM

You operate by posting articles that have little to no factual basis and are primarily composed of wild speculation. You refuse to have an intelligent discussion about your ideas, instead choosing to ridicule anyone who questions you. I operate primarily by refuting your idiocy.

11/18/2005 1:16:59 PM

these threads are good high comedy

11/18/2005 2:06:55 PM

Quote :

"You refuse to have an intelligent discussion about your ideas, instead choosing to ridicule anyone who questions you."

Oh, right. I've never participated in an intelligent discussion. I'm always ridiculing people, and I never have rational discussions.

11/18/2005 2:24:49 PM

And the truth will set you free!

Well done, little buddy!

11/18/2005 2:31:10 PM

^^ pretty much hit the nail on the head right there.

remember, acceptance is the first step on the road to recovery.

OH HOW WE LOVE PRISONPLANET!!!1

11/18/2005 2:35:33 PM

11/18/2005 2:37:45 PM

Sydney Morning Herald Hit Piece Against 9/11 Truth Movement
http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/no-evidence-it-must-be-conspiracy/2005/11/20/1132421549267.html

The 9/11 truth movement is growing. More and more people are likely to be exposed to the evidence which points to the truth here shortly. The MSM could just ignore the 9/11 truth movement in the past when it was small. Now, they have to act to attempt to discredit those in the 9/11 truth movement. And notice the condescending/patronizing/negative tone of the article towards this particular group of people. The end of the article even tries to lump the 9/11 truth movement with those who think Elvis is still alive and who believe in UFOs. When else does the MSM adopt this sort of tone, except when trying to smear those who question the official story on an event or issue? This kind of childish, smear by association tactic ought to alert the intelligent observer of the weakness of their argument.


[Edited on November 21, 2005 at 2:46 PM. Reason : 1]

11/21/2005 2:39:28 PM

OMG!!! AN OPPOSING VIEWPOINT!!!

They must be out to get you.

11/21/2005 3:17:30 PM

Well-stated summary of what 9/11 really was: a massive psy op:

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=205

Quote :

"Are You Brainwashed? [...] Here are the essential facts of what happened on Sept. 11: According to Democratic Presidential pre-candidate Lyndon LaRouche, whose assessment is shared by many competent specialists on terrorism and irregular warfare, in this country and around the world, what took place was not a terrorist attack, but strategic, covert special operation, organized to have the appearance of a “terrorist” attack. Mr. LaRouche and others concur that, given both its scope, and the extent of the cover-up and misdirection which followed, such an operation could not have been organized by any Arab terrorist cells or networks, nor by an Arab or Middle Eastern state, nor any combination of the above; it had to be organized from within the United States, with the participation and connivance of a rogue network within the Anglo-American intelligence and military establishment. As with any such covert special operation, there is a psychological warfare component, intended to maximize its effectiveness against a targeted enemy, to confuse that enemy and misdirect him. In the case of the Sept. 11 attack, the targeted enemy is the POPULATION OF THE UNITED STATES AND ITS CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNMENT. The “psywar” component of the operation is being carried out by the American media-machine, with the intent to brainwash the American people INTO ACCEPTING THE ONGOING COUP D'ETAT AGAINST OUR CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNMENT. "

It was intended, of course, not only to make us accept the loss of our liberties and the tranformation of the country into a police state....but also to serve as the pretext for the ensuing wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and who knows where next.

11/24/2005 12:23:03 PM

Szymanski: Two 911 Planes Were Never Deregistered, Two others never existed
http://www.rense.com/general68/911h.htm

Quote :

"Two 9/11 Airliners, Flight 93 and 175, Were Only Just Recently Taken Off The FAA 'Active' List Are Both Jetliners Still Flying in United's 'Friendly Skies'? By Greg Szymanski 11-25-5 Two of the 9/11 airliners were never 'deregistered' and remained on the 'active' flight list until Sept. 28. 2005, the classification officially changing only a month after two inquisitive flight researchers made repeated calls to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), inquiring about the strange irregularity. The two planes in question were Flight 93 and Flight 175, both owned and operated by United Airlines and, according to the official story, both destroyed on 9/11, one in Shanksville, Penn., and the other crashing into the South Tower of the WTC. [...] Besides the FAA deregistration issue, solid evidence has also come forward that two of the 9/11 flights, Flight 11 and 77, never even existed at all, according to Bureau of Traffic Safety (BTS) records. According to BTS statistics, both 11 and 77 officially never took-off on 9/11. The meticulous data kept on every airliner taking-off at every airport in the country also showed no elapsed run-way time, wheels-off time and taxi-out time, not to mention several other categories left blank on 9/11 concerning the two flights. Although Flights 11 and 77 have the above data meticulously logged on 9/10, it was suspiciously absent on 9/11, even when every other plane that took of that day had been recorded and logged by the BTS. Why the discrepancy? No one has ever given an official explanation for the BTS missing flight data, even though it is well known that airports are extremely concerned about recording accurate BTS data for each and every flight in and out of its airport for liability purposes. More importantly critics contend this is another clear indication Flight 11 and 77 were only 'phantom flights," adding even further doubt to the credibility of the official government story concerning 9/11."

11/26/2005 1:32:19 AM

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/november2005/281105partyline.htm

Quote :

"Hollywood, Iraq and 9/11: Reinforcing the Party Line Paul Joseph Watson | November 28 2005 Moviegoers in the upcoming months will be bombarded by films about the Iraq war and 9/11. These movies will uniformly reinforce the official party line that 9/11 was carried out by 19 Arabs with box cutters and that the invasion of Iraq was a heroic act of liberation in the defense of America. The Associated Press reports that several productions are set to hit both big and little screens, including the dramatized story of what happened on Flight 93. The official story that passengers intercepted hijackers and crashed the plane into an empty Pennsylvanian field as the ultimate sacrifice has been thoroughly discredited by the alternative media. Numerous credible individuals including former military and commercial pilots have come forward and stated that the plane was shot down. However, the movie version will reinforce the "let's roll" myth, ignoring such obvious evidence of a shoot down as the fact that the debris field of Flight 93 was eight miles wide, which is impossible unless it was shot down in mid-air and then traveled for a short period, raining down debris as it descended."

11/28/2005 10:44:26 AM

I saw it in the news a while back where BYU Professor Steven Jones announced that he wouldn't be giving media interviews any longer (for at least a while). This was only a few days after his interview on MSNBC with Tucker Carlson. At the time, I thought that that was very suspicious.

http://www.arcticbeacon.com/articles/article/1518131/38233.htm

Quote :

"BYU Brass Discredit Physics Professor for Saying WTC Brought Down by Controlled Demolition Professor Steven E. Jones only was in the public eye for five days before BYU told him to stop giving interviews. Now the university has issued a public statement distancing itself from Jones and even discrediting his work. Critics suggest Bush administration had its dirty hand in forcing BYU to 'shut up' its professor. 29 Nov 2005 By Greg Szymanski Brigham Young University (BYU) issued a public statement this week, discrediting and distancing itself from physics Professor Steven E. Jones for publicly claiming the WTC was brought down by explosives not jet fuel like the government contends. Jones, a tenured BYU professor, went public two weeks ago after releasing a 19 page academic paper, essentially showing how the laws of physics do not support the WTC’s freefall and, consequently, the official government story. While expressing doubt about the government’s version of 9/11, he called for an independent investigation concerning the strange collapse of the towers and Building No. 7, something the 9/11 Commission failed to do and something the Bush administration adamantly opposes. However, Jones’ notoriety turned out to be short lived as only days after giving numerous press interviews, including a six-minute spot on MSNBC, BYU officials twisted his arm and convinced him to stop appearing publicly. Critics quickly pointed out that Jones must have been ‘silenced quickly’ after the Bush administration pressured BYU to end any further embarrassment while, at the same time, reminding officials about the numerous government grants swinging in the balance. But before the situation turned ugly, Jones himself tried to immediately end the controversy, claiming all parties reached an amicable agreement without anybody strong arming anybody. “I want to thank everyone for the attention, but it is best that I limit my appearances at this time,” said Jones in a telephone conversation from his BYU office only five days after first appearing publicly about his controversial 9/1 statements. “University officials and I have come to an understanding that in the best interest for all parties involved, it is better that I limit my speaking on 9/11 to academic peer reviews.”"

I thought this was too good to be true. A prominent physics professor speaking out that the official story on the WTC tower collapse is bogus. The elite and the government couldn't allow that to go on much longer. If so, more and more in the academic world would start to speak out and pretty soon a mass movement to discredit the official story on 9/11 would explode. They had to nip this in the butt.

11/30/2005 8:42:14 AM

AHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

whew that was funny

OH HOW WE LOVE PRISONPLANET!!!1

11/30/2005 10:14:21 AM

AHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

whew that was funny

OH HOW WE LOVE PRISONPLANET!!!1

12/1/2005 4:14:44 PM

More eyewitness testimony of "flashes" and explosions just before the collapse.

Here's the testimony of Stephen Gregory, Assistant Commissioner (F.D.N.Y.) from the 9/11 emergency personnel tapes released in August:

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110008.PDF

Quote :

"A. ...I thought that when I looked in the direction of the Trade Center before it came down, before No. 2 came down, that I saw low-level flashes. In my conversation with Lieutenant Evangelista, never mentioning this to him, he questioned me and asked me if I saw low-level flashes in front of the building, and I agreed with him because I thought -- at that time I didn't know what it was. I mean, it could have been the result of the building collapsing, things exploding, but I saw a flash flash flash and then it looked like the building came down. Q. Was that on the lower level of the building or up where the fire was? A. No, the lower level of the building. You know like when they demolish a building, how when they blow up a building, when it falls down? That's what I thought I saw. And I didn't broach the topic to him, but he asked me. He said I don't know if I'm crazy, but I just wanted to ask you because you were standing right next to me… He said did you see any flashes? I said, yes, well, I thought it was just me. He said no, I saw them, too. [...] Q. On the television pictures it appeared as well, before the first collapse, that there was an explosion on the upper floors. A. I know about the explosion on the upper floors. This was like eye level.""

(see pp. 14-15 of PDF file for above quotes)


Reference:

More Evidence of Demolition Charges In WTC 2
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc2_cutter.html

12/2/2005 9:39:44 AM

The 9/11 WTC Collapses: You Want the Truth?
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc_9-11_truth.html

http://seattle.indymedia.org/en/2005/11/250220.shtml

Quote :

"Posted by: Flash Spart at Nov 30, 2005: Fact: FEMA was in New York on September 10. Fact: Giuliani was warned of the WTC collapses. Fact: The OEM issued a collapse warning. Fact: There were no raging infernos in the buildings. Fact: Firefighters in WTC 2's impact zone saw little fire and did not report any structural failures seconds before the collapse of the building. Fact: The core of WTC 1 was solid after the aircraft impact. Fact: Numerous 9/11 news videos show eyewitnesses reporting explosions. Fact: Firefighters transmissions document explosions before each collapse. Fact: A video shows smoke at the ground level of WTC 1 seconds before its collapse. Fact: Larry Silverstein said of WTC 7 "The smartest thing to do is pull it," and the building subsequently collapsed perfectly into its footprint. Are all of these facts purely coincidental?"

Well stated.

Quote :

"Posted by: Ima Nutjob at Dec 02, 2005 You nut-jobs that keep thinking that the 9/11 deal was part of some vast government conspiracy - I'll bet you're the same people who think the Warren Commission Report was full of doo-doo! And I'll bet you're the same ones who think there weren't any WMDs in Iraq? You all know how bad camel dung is when it gets in your eyes? huh? Do-ya? "

LOL

12/2/2005 9:46:16 AM

Daryl Bradford Smith interviews Ray McGovern (ex-CIA)
http://www.iamthewitness.com/DarylBradfordSmithInterviewsMcGovern.html

Quote :

"McGovern attacks the press. More importantly, he goes further than any high ranking government official has gone before on 9-11, and on identifying the real criminals behind our money system and our government."

Audio of interview at link.


Flashback:

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0922-01.htm

Quote :

"Former CIA Agent Says Bush to Blame for 9/11 [...] "There might be a real or staged terrorist attack in order to postpone the elections," McGovern said. "This might seem outlandish; I hope it is." He mentioned how the Bush administration wanted to involve the country with the war in Iraq for certain reasons other than fear of weapons of mass destruction, which was just a more media-friendly explanation for the war. "I have initials for why I think we went to war in Iraq," McGovern said. "O.I.L. O-I-L, O is for oil, I is for Israel and L is for logistics, as in when we have Iraq we have a foothold and a number of bases strategically placed in the Middle East so we can be in control over there and also to protect Israel." Next he brought up civil liberties in the United States and how they have declined in the past few years. "I used to say when I was a kid growing up when someone told me not to do something, 'It's a free country,'" McGovern said. "I ask you to think about it now." "

12/2/2005 9:54:52 AM

Media Published Fake Passenger Lists for AA Flight 11
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/flight_11_passengers.html

Quote :

"The fact is - that in nearly three years - the media has tried to give the impression that they have published valid passenger lists, when all that has been provided is the contradictory rubbish exposed in this investigation. We are left with no choice but to conclude that these AA11 lists are fabrications. Personal stories of those allegedly involved have been built on the basis of these fabricated lists. As qualified earlier, some or all of them may be real people who are really missing, and may have friends or families who genuinely believe that they got on to a flight called AA11. We don't know at this stage. But the passenger lists as complete entities are lies. "

12/5/2005 9:03:03 AM

12/5/2005 9:04:19 AM

"9/11: Possible Motives Of The Bush Administration" by Dr. David Ray Griffin
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=GRI20051202&articleId=1391

********************************************************************

FOX affiliate airs story on 9/11 cover up

FOX 40 of Binghamton, NY ran a 2-part story on "Loose Change", a student documentary on 9/11, alleging government involvemnent in the 9/11 attacks. The story is notable in that it did not portray these skeptics of the official story as "nuts", but was unbiased (for the most part) and allowed the skeptics to present their argument.

Here's the links to the story and video from the FOX 40 website.

Part 1 of story
http://www.wicz.com/news2005/viewarticle.asp?a=282

Part 2 of story
http://www.wicz.com/news2005/viewarticle.asp?a=291

Another source for the video of the FOX 40 "Loose Change" story
http://tree3.com/video/fox.wmv (part 1 only)

Reference source:

9/11 Story Pulled--then restored
http://www.stopthelie.com/911_story_pulled.html

********************************************************************


[Edited on December 5, 2005 at 12:19 PM. Reason : `]

12/5/2005 12:18:29 PM

im impressed with all the formatting in that last post, good job!

12/5/2005 12:48:55 PM

http://www.rense.com/general69/bogus.htm

Quote :

"Commercial Pilot & Aeronautical Engineer Explains Why Official 911 Story About Pentagon Is Bogus By Greg Szymanski 12-6-5 [...] "Let's look at it plain and simple," said Sagadevan in an extended telephone conference this week from his home near San Diego. "The government wants us to believe that a person who couldn't even solo a small Cessna took over the controls of a Boeing 757 jetliner and performed complicated maneuvers even myself or other experienced pilots could have never performed. "It's just not going to happen and, from my point of view, is impossible. If this was fabricated by the government so was the rest of the 9/11 story." But staying on point, Sagadevan wanted to further illustrate the absurdity of a small, inexperienced 5'8" Arab terrorist, taking over the controls of the jetliner from a burly, well-trained former military pilot. "You mean to tell me, the supposed terrorist overpowered the pilot, who weighed more than 185 lbs and trained in the military. And then after that overpowered the co-pilot in the same manner, a person who also weighed upwards of 185 lbs," said Sagadevan, emphasizing experts aren't needed to explain the absurdity of this portion of the government story. "I am not sure if anyone has been in the cockpit of one of one of these big jets, but I will tell you there isn't much space. How in the world would one man pull out two big pilots in cramped quarters while, at the same time, maintaining control of the airliner. Again, it's just not going to happen. "In the beginning right after 9/11, like most people, I believed most of what I heard about 9/11, not really giving much thought to a government conspiracy. However, about a year ago when I began gathering information related to my expertise as an aeronautical engineer and pilot, I began to see clearly how the government story regarding the four flights, their paths and their pilots didn't make sense. "Now I am firmly convinced after looking at an enormous amount of evidence, as well as using well-establishing aviation principles, that something else crashed into the Pentagon since it couldn't have been a commercial jetliner." Besides calling attention to the impossibility of a untrained pilot performing complex flight maneuvers and navigation, Sagadevan said the flight path taken near the Pentagon was also impossible for a large jetliner to perform without crashing before reaching the Pentagon. "First of all, the supposed pilot would have been overwhelmed just looking at the complexity of the cockpit dash board and the computerized controls," said Sagadevan. "He would have had no idea what to do, but we are led to believe that he was able to turn the jet around, head back to Washington D.C. and then bank at high speeds and at a low altitude, hitting a target which would have looked as small as thimble from the air. Again, it's impossible and you don't really need an expert to make this final determination." Sagadevan was quick to point out one of the main problems with the government story is the low trajectory of the airplane, flying at high speeds and roughly only 20 feet off the ground for a long distance, another impossibility defying the standard principles of aviation. "The evidence indicates that the airplane was flying low before it reached the Pentagon lawn since several light poles were sheared off several hundred yards away form the building," explained Sagadevan. "With that in mind, the plane was traveling at about 400 knots at about 20 feet off the ground for a long distance prior to hitting the Pentagon. "This in itself is an impossibility in itself since the airplane would have been forced to the ground well before hitting the Pentagon. No pilot in the world would have been able to control the plane while maintained that air speed at 20 feet off the ground for that long a distance. Again, it's just impossible but here I will admit that an expert is needed in order to explain the standards of lift and drag associated with flying a large airliner." From the beginning of the supposed hijacking of Flight [77] and to its eventual crash into the Pentagon wall, Sagadevan presents a compelling case, essentially cruising the official story. "I really don't understand how anyone could give the government's story any credibility after seeing the original pictures taken of the small hole left in the Pentagon wall by whatever flew into it," said Sagadevan. "I am not totally sure what the military used but one thing for sure, it wasn't a 757 jetliner." Sagadevan is referring to the tiny circumference of the hole left in the Pentagon wall, illustrated on pictures taken right after the crash scene, but immediately taken out of circulation and never widely distributed by the news media to the American people. "I think if someone just looks at the hole left and then looks at the size of 757, experts aren't needed to determine it was an impossibility that a big jet hit the Pentagon wall, especially when there was very little wreckage visible after the crash," added Sagadevan. Regarding the Pentagon crash, as Sagadevan aptly points out, there are "so many holes in the story" that it becomes, as the English say, rather a laughing matter, making one believe even the bungling Inspector Clouseau, made famous by Peter Sellers, could crack the case wide open if given half a chance."

12/6/2005 8:19:07 AM

MSNBC News VIDEO CLIP: Police found "suspicious device" and believed explosive devices may have been planted in the WTC Buildings
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2005/051205foundbombs.htm

Quote :

"The report you're watching and hearing was filed by an MSNBC news anchor Rick Sanchez on the morning of September 11th 2001. [...] Sanchez states, ”Police have found what they believe to be a suspicious device and they fear that it may lead to another explosion." "I spoke with some police officials moments ago, Chris, and they told me they have reason to believe that one of the explosion at the besides the ones made with the planes, may have been caused by a van that was parked on the building that may have had an explosive device in it.”"

[Edited on December 6, 2005 at 8:47 AM. Reason : `]

12/6/2005 8:32:29 AM

CBS VIDEO CLIP: Bryant Gumble interview around 8:55am on 9/11 with eyewitness who says he saw a "small, non-commercial” plane hit WTC1 (the North Tower, 1st tower to be hit)
http://www.911hoax.com/GumbleClip.wmv

[Edited on December 6, 2005 at 8:46 AM. Reason : `]

12/6/2005 8:44:15 AM

9/11: The Watershed, Eye-Opening Event
http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=ll_chat&Number=294202755&page=&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=21&part=1&vc=1&t=0

Quote :

"9/11 will end up going down in history as the event that changed the world forever, not because it was believed, but because it wasn't. The big mistake, was in not understanding how far the internet would go in undermining the MSM's ability to keep the masses on track."

Quote :

"9-11 was the watershed event orchestrated by Jews that awakened 100's of millions round the world."

Quote :

"There are those who know the truth, and those who don't. I have difficulty associating with those who are stuck in the matrix, they seem like they are blissfully caught up in cult where there all of their thoughts are handed out to them on a plate (TV set and news print). I don't know if the ruling elites know just how far their brainwashing mechanism has fallen apart because of the internet. I think it must be dawning on them by now."

12/6/2005 10:25:05 AM

http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=consp_911&Number=294196826&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=21&part=

Quote :

"Some people will deny what really happened all the way to their deathbeds. They no longer count. The future will be ruled by those with the intestinal fortitude to acknowledge the truth and act in accordance with it. So it has always been, so it will always be."

12/6/2005 11:21:15 AM

if you think this is bad, wait 'til i'm president.

12/6/2005 11:30:35 AM