Anti-Neocons

In addition to what is stated above it is important to understand Rabbi Dov Zakheim's role in all of this as well, something that doesn't get talked about enough. A full ten years before 9/11, the good Rabbi was the owner and President of Controlled Planning Systems. At CPS, the company successfully engineered technology that allowed them to remote control fly up to six commercial airlines at once from a control station, as well as perfecting technology that permitted the takeover of planes mid flight, in essence effectively thwarting the possibility of attacks similar to the ones carried out on 9/11. Who and where was Dov Zakheim on 9/11? In the Pentagon, at his job as the Undersecretary of Defense of the Bush administration. A rabid Zionist with means, motive and ability from within the current regime.

Frank stop defending the pentagon disinformation bullshit you tool! You know it's bullshit.

_________________

Notice how once again, that the average person who defends lies or refuses to look at the truth, resorts to name calling and has nothing to say about the actual issues presented. It brings me joy to know that none of you have a leg to stand on when it comes to defending your positions, and you actually expect intellectuals to get thrown off course by calling them names and using the scary word "disinformation". What disinformation? Disinformation like suggesting that a plane traveling 500 miles wouldn't have it's wings or 6 ton engines cause visible damage to the lawn or walls it is crashing into?
Because the wings are made of aluminum? Someone wants you to believe that the wings made gashes at the Twin Towers but not at the Pentagon because the buildings were very different in their construction. What about the lawn? Grass? And don't worry that the nose cone punched it's way through five walls of concrete and steel while making another 16 ft exit hole on the other side. The wings/engines caused no visible damage because Ry says so and someone else has called ma a tool. Wow, what a cogent argument. When you get to Oz and see the Wizard, let me know how it works out for you.

Why don't you actually read the posts before commenting. People on this forum are suggesting that a missile did not strike the Pentagon and the evidence is quite simply to the contrary. As for the name calling, again, read the posts and you will see that kassana called me a "tool" in the post directly above the one you are quoting, simply for stating fact. And Ry started the thread by calling everyone an idiot. I agree with the division analogy, but quite frankly it's important to discuss what happened in an accurate manner in order to properly disseminate who is responsible. Right? As far as discerning which situation regarding the "plane" is true (regardless of your aviation background) look at any picture the world over showing the aftermath of a bunker buster missile entering a building, then compare those photos to the ones at the Towers. Then look at plane crash site photos. This is easy, very basic stuff and it doesn't take an aviation background to decipher. Common sense and an open mind are all you need.
Is Israel involved? Of course. London based Int'l bankers? Well they dictate policy in every other way. Rogue elements within our on government? Of course. I'm not denying any of that. I'm pointing out that if you are going to refute an argument based in reason and logic, you need to use those same tools to defeat the position. Name calling doesn't do that, and neither does saying that something is "bullshit" or "unbelieveable". Let's stick to the facts. The crash site at Pentagon simply has more hallmarks of a missile attack than that of a commercial airline crash.

I'm not basing my findings solely on the photos, but since the wreckage doesn't jive with a commercial airline crash and does jive with damage caused by a missile it warrants further investigation. The building falling down has nothing to do with whether or not a missile was used, the evidence consitent with a missile being used is what matters. That is changing the subject entirely. I didn't say you need common sense to talk about the structural failure, I said you need common sense to compare photos. Until you have done this, how can you conclude that "more" than common sense is needed? The engine recovered from the pentagon was less than three feet in diameter, it did not come from a commercial airliner. And as I stated before, if it was a commercial airliner what happened to it's engines, and why did they not cause any damage? Your claims of concrete spiderwebbing and the notion that the plane might do the same thing does not address why there are no impact marks whatsoever from 2 six ton engines. I'll repeat myself as many times as is required, and will not be bested my semantics and circular logic. BTW bunker buster missiles have many subcategories and payloads can be detonated allowing the shell portion of the missile to continue on it's path to create an entry hole.

I agree 100%. What I'm saying is that if we aren't discussing the significance of Dov Zakheim, or the fact that the United States government has perfected the use of depleted uranium warheads because of their unique penetrating power and accuracy, then we aren't getting any closer to who did this. We need to look closely at what happened at the crime scene in order to connect the dots. If everything is speculation we will never bring the criminals responsible to justice. If we can discount the official story, but also show how our own government is complicit because of the exact weapons or tactics used, then we are that much closer to naming the guilty party or parties. Right?

Now there is a movie being promoted by AOL saying that a missile hit the pentagon. This is classic disinformation. Don't you guys wonder WHY loose Change films and the Pentagon strike got SO highly circulated on the web over other 911 films???? Why would AOL the second largest media corporation promote such garbage? because it is just that garbage.

Its is a set up, they will make a big hype about the conspiracy theories and then they will release the film showing a plane hitting the Pentagon.

Then it will be over for the 911 truth movement because no one will believe people who have to switch their story.


OK frank, the WTC were built to withstand two airline crashes and that is exactly why it wa slike misquito netting. It was supposed to give and yet retain support. It is like knocking a small hole in a screen window the screen stays up because it is not dependent on the screen below it. I have a quote of the Japanese engineers talking about it.

And there is 'some' damage from the wings of the plane at the Pentagon. There is also lugage and peices of plane all over the crash site. I dont think they hit it with a missile and then scattered lugage around to make it look like a plane.

*Plenty of people saw a plane go Towards the pentagon NO body saw a plane leave.

*The engines did leave holes, That is the big damn hole in the building. The plane came in on an angle it didn't hit the building at a pefect 90 perpandicular angle. Chances ar high that were the wings exactly parrelle to the ground but also slightly angled.

*It did not hit the ground to make any marks probably because it was guided by remote control as were the other planes.

*They make a big deal about how the polits could not fly and they could not have made such complex flying manuvers. Well, the pilots who could not fly do not mattetr because there were no terrorists only patsies. That plane was guided in, no one could cruise in and hit a building of such a small height right near the center at 500 plus miles and hour.





That is a false claim. There are several holes and each gets smaller starting from about 20ft to ~11ft

This is the most famous hole.



That is not the only hole at the pentagon. It is the last hole out of a series of walls. That hole if from the fuselage. The entry hole was about 16-20 feet wide.

A 757 is basically a cylinder that is 13 feet across. It then should not be surprising that it would create something around a thirteen foot hole in the side of the building. It is not the 40ft measurement given from the wheels to the top of the tail, which is the hanger clearence.



The right engine also clipped a generator and knocked down the section of a fence. The generator was actully moved and bent down, hard to image a misile doing that.




To me it is clear. AOL is pushing a film that says a missile hit the Pentagon. At the same time we have a film about 93 which reinforced the idea of terrorist and a heroci take over of the plane by the crew. Nevermind that debris was throw over a mile and people witnessed it blowing up in the air. What is going to happen is they are going to give media attention to the weakest theories like the missile theory when we have solid evidence aout building 7 ect. Then they can simply release film of a aircraft hitting the building and the 91 truth movement is dead. No one will listen to the other argument if they think people have to keep changing their theories. When the second larest media corporation is promoting a missile theory film and when the films on 911 that mention the missile theory are some how ALL over the web (while they ignore the SIrael Angle) PNAC was written there Israel has been caught spying on the US the OSP was made of the same PNAC authors and they lied us into war with Iraq the Niger forgeries are proof of that. Israel is calling for the war with Iran and all 6 oil pipeline in Iraq go to Israel but never mninde all that. Lets just balme Bush, and "the administration" and go with the missile of which there is no fricking motive or reason to use when they could just use a plane.

_________________
This site is against war, Zionism, (or any other form of racism), profiteering, and all forms of government corruption, mass media deception, and cover ups. This is not a site to flail on about space aliens-illuminati-masonic-deathcult-jewish-catholic-lizard-lucifarian-jesuit-queen-barvarian-etc bull hockey. Take that junk somewhere else.
My Twitter
"It doesn't matter who we are underneath. It is what we do that defines us." Batman

Google version of War by Deception
Pass HR 1207 and S604 audit the Fed



ry ryan dawson author politics political antineocon anti-neocon antineocons anti-neocons raising the volume of peace - news the media is paid not to tell you how they blep you

I've carefuly scrutinized every Pentagon witness report that is available online at least 18 times - and that's a conservative estimate. The Pentagon Flash, like all other intentional disinformation campaigns by Counter Intelligence Professionals, was designed to poison the well with easily refutable facts, such as the unbutchered witness testimonies, in which nobody - not one witness - reports seeing a missile.
Witness: "it looked like an American Airlines jet, and it passed overhead like a missile".
Pentagon Flash: "It looked like....a missile."
That's how it works.

Who benefits from misrepresenting the witnesses?


I find it astonishing, in this digital age, that "truthseekers" could call for release of Pentagon impact footage 5 years after the event, and claim that it will "seal the deal" for them on the 757. Curiously, none of these seekers of truth appear to have read the correspondence between the operator of flight77info and the FBI pertaining to that supressed footage, for if they had, they would have been made aware--for at least a year--that the FBI claim the footage hasn't been released because it is to be used as evidence in the Moussaoui circus. They might also be aware that the FBI says it will release publicly that footage when the circus is over. I look forward to it, knowing that the accompanying C-130 will have been scrubbed.

"Nobody knows about the second plane, or if they do, they're hiding it for some reason"
C-130+757 witness, Kelly Knowles.
"I personally believe the government is hiding something a lot bigger than they are willing to let out
C-130+757 witness, Allen Cleveland
"It flew directly above the American Airlines jet, as if to prevent two planes from appearing on radar--while at the same time--guiding the jet towards the Pentagon."
C-130+757 witness, Keith Wheelhouse

Allen Cleveland --- who was there --- thinks the video was suppressed because of the other plane.
I agree with Allen.
Allen says his testimony was censored by the washingtonpost to exclude the C-130.


And Frank, I can't understand why you would bother arguing against the phrase "mosquito netting" to describe the design of the towers:



addendum/p.s.: I think your best point, Frank -- a really good one in terms of plausible scenarios -- is not "the significance of Dov Zakheim", but of the military technology marketed by the company he headed prior to joining the Pentagon. And not just those "Flight Termination Systems" you referred to.