Greetings to All:

This thread exposes ‘the truth’ that no 100-Ton Jetliner (Flight 77) ever crashed at the Pentagon on 9/11. You are encouraged to find us the picture of a crashed 100-Ton Jetliner anywhere near the Pentagon. Department of Defense Operatives planted plenty of evidence relating to this 9/11 HOAX, as the DoD carried out their own ‘self-inflicted’ wound on 9/11! Before anyone can haul out pictures of planted engines, they must show us how those things passed through the solid West Wedge Wall still intact after the original attack. Everyone here should review all of the pictures from this website ( http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/pent1/simulation.html ). Hit ‘Previous’ and ‘Next’ buttons, until your heart is content, but the only pictures of any 100-Ton Jetliner will be in the simulations. The most damning evidence to the Official Government Cover Story is revealed in these first two pictures:

http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/pent1/lawndamage.html



This picture shows a single impact hole in the West Wedge E-Ring Wall section of the Pentagon. However there are no impact holes for the multi-ton Rolls Royce engines some 50 feet apart. In fact, there is no place on the lawn or in the Pentagon wall for any crashed 100-Ton Jetliner.

http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/pent1/pentalawn.html



The fire has been extinguished for the first time, but the West Wedge Wall is still standing. Note the fire is still burning in two areas, but the firemen are dragging their hoses around like the job is done! Someone had to order these firemen away from the fire that you can still see burning in this picture. Look at the Pentagon lawn for any sign of Jetliner Debris to realize there is none!

http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/pent1/spools.html



The Official Bush Administration Cover Story says kerosene (Jet fuel is only kerosene) vaporized an entire Jetliner, but did not even melt the black plastic on these cables. This picture shows the masonry components of the outer E-ring wall still standing, which eliminates the possibly of any 100-Ton Pig passing through here.

http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/pent1/details.html



This schematic shows only seven feet between the tops of those cable spools and the bottom of the still intact second floor where only two windows are missing. Note the two windows to the left are not even broken, with the base of the second floor blown out from the blast inside. The first course of limestone is still attached to make dangling arms hanging off the wall only looking like columns. The Official Pentagon Cover Story attempts to squeeze their 125-feet wide 100-Ton Jetliner into a space that simply cannot contain any Jetliner. The DoD released the video footage from two security cameras ( http://www.pentagonresearch.com/dod.html ), from where this famous Frame1 image was taken:



Follow along and we will use this evidence to prove this contains the nose section of an object with the exact diameter of a Tomahawk Missile ( http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-109.html#_SLCM = 20.9 inches). Our first task is to identify that our camera lens, the top of the right hand column, the nose of the flying object and a point 5-feet above the horizon are all on the same level horizontal transit plane elevation. That means if we superimposed a flat sheet of glass 5 feet off the ground, then all four reference points would be touching along the same ‘line of vision’ from our perspective inside the camera lens. We take the five-foot dimension from the center of our flying object and measure down to the ground to realize the ‘clearance’ under the object is 3 times greater than the diameter. If the nose of the object is at 5-feet and the distance below that object is 3 to 4 feet, then the diameter of that flying object cannot possibly exceed 2 feet. These four reference points on the same level horizontal plane are demonstrated again here:



Cameras #1 and #2 are on the far left facing in the direction of the red 5-Foot Horizontal Elevation Plane to your right. The top of our column is very near the two cameras, even though it appears in only one set of images. The nose of the flying object is very low to the ground on this same 5-foot plane directly between the top of our 5-foot column and the horizon in the distance. If any of these reference points were higher or lower than our 5-foot elevation, then those points would not line up in the frame1 picture above. We are perhaps lucky that the missile is approaching on the same elevation as the three reference points and lucky again that the nose was captured meeting the top of the column. However, we are using these reference locations to our advantage, even though the laws of probability just happen to be on our side this time. :0).

Since the diameter of a real 757-200 Jetliner is just about 15 feet, there is no way this frame1 object can possibly be anything near that size. Remember our 3 to 1 ration of ‘clearance to object diameter' from the frame1 diagram above. If the diameter of that flying object is 15 feet, then the clearance underneath is 3 times that number or a whopping 45 feet! Those calculations place the nose of the 100-Ton Jetliner at the “52-6” dimension far up the wall on the right hand side of this diagram. In other words, even the released Department of Defense pictures prove the Pentagon was struck by white flying object with the dimensions of a Tomahawk Missile, which is verified by the military witnesses in the Pentagon:

http://web.archive.org/web/20040514141346/...ssesBlast.shtml

What I post here is only a few excerpts (read the site yourself):

Cordite + shockwave = Missile attack like Rumsfeld told Parade Magazine on 9/12 from the beginning:

http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics%20and%2...-Flight-77.html

Read the whole story from the link! These are only Rumsfeld’s words on this missile strike!

Remember that CNN Chief Pentagon Correspondent Jamie McIntire reported "No Plane" in his report on 9/11:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C02dE5VKeck

Anyone with any doubt that Flight 77 Never Crashed Anywhere Near The Pentagon need only watch this short video:

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

The Bush Administration lied about Weapons Of Mass Destruction in Iraq and they lied about Flight 93 crashing in the empty field outside of Shanksville (see my thread http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_F...showtopic=14794 ) on 9/11. He is also lying about Flight 77 crashing here at the Pentagon, which is proven by careful examination of all the evidence.

GL,

Terral

Edit = Added final video

So if the plane didnt crash into the Pentagon what are the security picture of the jet hitting the building then.

Hi Adi:

Thank you for writing.

Please forgive, Adid, but I am a 911Truther and not a mind reader. :0) Present your picture of a Jetliner hitting anything and I am happy to offer you my commentary. Since you reference a ‘security picture,’ then my best guess is you are referring to the Pentagon security frames from this website:

http://www.pentagonresearch.com/dod.html

Then you would likely be asking about Frame1, but that is precisely the frame already part of my Opening Post.



If the nose of the white flying object is just 5 feet off the ground AND the clearance under that object is three times the diameter (look at picture very closely under the flying object), THEN the diameter of the flying object cannot possibly be greater than just under 2 feet! Do you know of any “Jet” with a fuselage diameter of under 2 feet? No and neither do I. :0) You are looking at the approach of a Tomahawk Missile ( http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-109.html#_SLCM ) flying at just about the speed of sound to create this explosion:



Now watch the little video of another Tomahawk Missile attack ( http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/smart/tomahawk.mpeg ) and compare the two explosions to see a perfect match:



Perhaps Loose Change members have not seen the arithmetic associated with this famous ‘Frame1’ picture proving beyond all doubt that whatever struck the Pentagon cannot possibly be any 100-ton Jetliner. If anyone has an argument against my interpretation of the evidence placing these four points (camera lens, top of right-hand column, nose of missile and a point 5 feet above the horizon in distance) on the same 5-feet horizontal elevation plane, or the mathematics making this case, then please bring that to our attention ASAP. Thank you again for writing.

GL in the debates,

Terral

Sorry, but you have too many assumptions about your angles here. If we followed these rules, the trees in the distance are no more than 5 foot tall either.

The missile images look nice though.

My main problem with the Pentagon strike is that the area above the impact hole allegedly punched by the fuselage is undamaged, despite the fact that Flight 77 has a tail section 44 feet high. The window that would be in the direct path of the tail section is unbroken.

However, what we should focus on is something that we're sure of. The part of the pentagon that was hit was nearly empty and had blast resistant windows. Is that supposed to be dismissed as luck?

Hi fretwire:

The very first reference to ‘angles’ is made by you in this 3-sentence reply (Aug 31 2007, 01:34 PM ). There are no angels on a sheet of glass spread out five feet above the ground connecting the mentioned four locations.



Point #1 is either Camera #1 or #2 pointed from the left to the right side of this picture facing a point 5 feet above the horizon. The second reference point is the top of the right hand column determined to be 5-feet tall from the 28-inch construction cones. If the top of the column lined up with the grass anywhere on the lawn, then we would know the ‘camera lens’ was higher than the top of that column. Alternately, if the top of the column appeared above the tops of the trees on the horizon, then we would know the camera lens was ‘below’ the 5-foot elevation plane established by the top of the column elevation. However, the top of the column lines up with a point just above the horizon, which tells us the camera lens, top of the column and that point just above the horizon are all on the same level elevation plane.

If you watch the frames again ( http://www.pentagonresearch.com/dod.html ), or review that from the Frame1 picture above . . .



. . . then you will see the nose of the flying object touches the top of the column perfectly. This means the flying object is flying at the same 5-foot elevation as the other three reference points on the same level elevation plane. Again, there are NO ANGLES involved in this explanation at all, because we are dealing with a ‘straight line’ on the same 5-foot elevation transit line. The final calculation requires you to determine the ‘diameter’ of the flying object by comparing that to the clearance to the ground. Look at the picture again to realize the clearance ‘under’ the flying object to the ground is three times the diameter of the flying object. If the nose of the missile is only 5 feet off the ground AND the clearance below is three times ‘greater’ than the diameter, then this flying object cannot possible be greater than just under 2 feet. The idea that this is a 100-ton Jetliner is foolishness. :0)

Your “height of the trees” statement is ludicrous, because the heights of all the objects in this picture are relative to their distance from the camera lens. The Pentagon is 77-feet tall, but appears taller near the camera than in the distance. That is why my calculations for the diameter of the flying object are based upon the ‘proportion’ of that measurement relative to the distance to the ground ‘directly under the object.’ The only ‘constant’ in the picture is the level 5-foot elevation plane extending from the center of the camera lens, through the top of the right hand column and the nose of the missile, to that point just above the horizon in the distance. Note the larger “5 Feet” dimension from the top of the column to the sidewalk. Then compare that to the “5 Feet” dimension drawn over to the ground under the missile. The distance from the nose of the missile down to the ground appears one fifth the size, because the missile is farther away from the camera lens. If we drew a “5 Feet” height dimension for anything on the horizon, that measurement would be represented by nothing larger than a straight line. Hopefully these clarifying statements help you (and others) to see the point of this exercise.

GL,

Terral

Yes, you are.

Because I could make an argument for the exact oposite.

What if the part of the Pentagon that was hit was FULL and didn't have blast resistant windows?

I could say what are the odds of THAT?

Wow Terral!

Excellent post.

Hi from NZ, haven't been on site much lately, but thought i would add something on this that i saw on tv tonight. Currently watching a doco on tv about the so called plane flying into the Pentagon. What has convinced me is on this doco is they have said that just before impact the plane was in a slight left bank, with a short section of left wing and engine shearing off as it makes contact with the ground,just as the nose of the aircraft hits the building. So if that's the official version, where is the gouge mark and debris from the left wing? as i have not seen any evidence of this in any photos to date.

How do you get the '5 feet off the ground' figure? You're surely not measuring it from the shadow?

You know, the shadow that remains in the frame even after the impact?

If it was a missile that blew the hole in the "C" Ring wall - how did it decelerate in the 41 feet of the A/E Drive and not strike the opposing "B" Ring wall?

If it was a missile, what did the north of CITGO witnesses see?

:wacko:

Terral is taking the 5' "clearance" of the plane relative to a shadow much closer than the plane, taking this as the height of the plane above the ground, then using this to calculate the size of the plane. (I believe -- I went dizzy reading his explanation).

By this technique, we could calculate that The Pentagon itself is only about 10' high, as the facade facing the incoming object is only about 5x the height of the object itself.

But then, Terral lives in a world uncontaminated by evidence or logic OR he's a psychology student experimenting on how people react to lengthy gibberish on internet forums.

But does Terral think that the shadow is the missile/plane? And if so, why does he think it's still there after the impact?

And why am I asking you? :D

How can you make such a statement? Do you know what they are doing with the hoses? Were they moving them somewhere else maybe? Do you think that is the sum total of all the fireman there? Did the fireman who appears to be running think his job was over?

Why would anyone expect to see anything other than maybe a stray piece of debris in front of the pentagon. The plane did not hit the lawn it hit the building and it was traveling at several hundred miles per hour in which direction would you expect most of the debris to go.

The so called official version does not claim the heat from the jet fuel vaporized the plane. Do you really not know this or do you purposely mislead?

Hi Kiwidad:

Thank you for writing.

Please send any number of the Official Bushie Disinformation Artists to write rebuttals against my Opening Post Thesis, Claims and Conclusions told by the Evidence in this Pentagon Case. This “left wing and engine sheering off” nonsense has no basis in reality whatsoever.





These are great shots of the Pentagon Lawn from the port side of the 20-feet diameter entry hole. Do any of the people look interested in saving anyone from a crashed 100-Ton Jetliner?



The entry hole is visible beyond the smoldering vehicles and any wing tipped in our direction would have sent the massive 6-ton port-side engine directly into them. The clear evidence against that nonsense is clearly visible in the temporary construction fencing with two poles standing to the left of the vehicles. The distance from these poles to the middle of the entry hole is just about fifty feet. We know that because the first floor damage was estimated to be 75 feet ( http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/augus...ctsstraight.htm ) across, which places the end of the port-side wing approximately at the left hand side of our picture. In short, any Jetliner wing must have passed ‘over’ the top of these vehicles AND below the bottom of that second story floor. And yet, only two windows are missing from the second floor ( http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c266/Ter...mpact_scale.jpg ) and the two on our side are not even broken.

The fact is that the 911Truth, the whole 911Truth and nothing but the 911Truth is steadily catching up to the out-of-control Bushie Administration and all of his disinformation cronies. In case you are unaware, our ‘do-nothing’ Congress has refused to offer any “Congressional Oversight,” which makes them accomplices in these crimes against We The People. The entire lot needs to be taken down “to the brook Kishon” (1Kings 18:40) and dealt with accordingly without the shedding of a single tear . . .

Terral

Hi Patches:

Thank you for writing and for asking questions:

Many have difficulty confirming the measurements in this DoD Frame1 demonstration. I need to you imagine for a few minutes that you are a surveyor using a tripod apparatus to hold a Transit Level shown here:

http://www.bobvila.com/HowTo_Library/The_T...vel--A2060.html

Once your tripod is set up with the leveling plate near horizontal to the ground, then you fix the Transit Level on top with leveling screws; until the leveling bubble reads dead center all the way around. Looking through your level instrument will reveal a ‘crosshair’ like this ( http://www.themcdonalds.net/richard/astro/...arCrosshair.jpg ) with everything on the ‘horizontal’ line precisely on the same height elevation. If you spin your Transit Level around 360 degrees, then everything you see touching your ‘horizontal’ axis line is exactly the same elevation. This is the kind of instrument many contractors use today for leveling the four corners of even the simplest buildings. Now look into the Frame1 picture again and imagine the “Camera Height Is Also 5 Feet” represents the horizontal line of your ‘crosshair.’ We know this camera is positioned perfectly level, because we can see a point 5 feet above the horizon in the distance. That reference point is on the same horizontal elevation plane matching the top of the right hand column AND (more importantly) the nose of our flying object. I admit that we just happened to get lucky, but that is the way the cookie crumbles for the bad guys attempting to deceive us with these photos. :0) Since the nose of the missile is on the same precise 5-feet elevation plane AND the distance below the missile is three times the diameter, THEN the diameter of the object cannot possible be greater than just under 2 feet.

Many people believe the dark line under the flying object is a shadow from the flying object, but that is not true. Since the sun is coming from behind the Pentagon at about a 35-degree angle (telling us the time), any shadow cast by this object has not even entered the Frame. You are looking at the shaded edge of raised concrete slab like the ones pictured with the cable spools ( http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c266/Ter...fire_spools.jpg ) actually nearer to us than the flying object, but close enough to use for this demonstration. Since the nose of the missile is exactly on the 5-feet elevation plane, then OBVIOUSLY this cannot be the picture of any 100-ton Jetliner. The reason, again, is that the distance ‘below’ the object is far greater than the diameter. Begin subtracting from 5 feet to realize this puppy is only about 2 feet in diameter.



This diagram places all four of your reference points on the same 5-feet elevation plane with the two security cameras on the left and the point 5 feet above the horizon on the right. The top of the Frame1 Column is very near the Camera position, which places the Nose Of Missile directly on the same ‘very low’ 5-feet elevation plane. If our Frame1 picture were of a real 757-200 Jetliner, the Impact Crater (entry hole) would be centered at just about 52 feet off the ground, because of the ‘three times’ distance beneath the object compared to the diameter. Since none of the third story windows were even broken, then this matches the evidence for a ‘low flying’ Tomahawk Missile ( http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-109.html#_SLCM ) fitting these dimensions precisely.

GL,

Terral
AE911Truth.org

Hi Patches:

If you wish to quote any credible witnesses AND support their testimony with evidence, then by all means be my guest. Let’s use one of Russell’s pictures to demonstrate a simple point:



The ‘time’ from the flying object entering this picture to striking the E-Ring outer wall was just under two seconds. Say "one thousand one, one thousand two" to yourself and these witnesses had LESS than that amount of time to 'see' anything. The first sounds following this 500+ mile per hour flying object would have arrived at the Citgo Station just about the moment of impact. This bold red line cannot possibly be the actual flight path of any 125-feet wide 100-ton Jetliner, because all the poles 62 feet on either side of this line would have been snapped off. Asking me what these Citgo witnesses actually saw will never place any crashed 100-ton Jetliner anywhere near the Pentagon. The damage to the outer E-Ring wall . . .



. . . shows a tiny 20-feet diameter entry hole and no sign of any crashed Jetliner at all. If anybody here had just one picture of Flight 77 crashed ANYWHERE, we would all be looking at that LONG before now. Right? Do the math . . . You cannot find one either, because none exist. :0)

GL,

Terral

Terral - you're forgetting the shadow is much closer than the "incoming object".

If there were (say) a pole shadow right below the "object" then your 5' band at that point would be extremely thin. In fact it would be about the breadth of the individual lines drawn on the still.

Another flaw in your analysis (and one you might understand) is that your analysis makes the ground floor of the Pentagon roughly the same height as the height you have calculated for the "object". That is, 2'.

Are you just joshing with us?

Hi Gwb:

Nobody has ever shown you a picture of Flight 77 crashed ANYWHERE, but that disinformation story was easy to swallow. :0)

Anyone can see the concrete creating this shadow is very near the same distance from the security camera as the flying object. That is why many people believe this is a ‘shadow’ from the approaching object.

If dizzy and still in the dark about my explanations, then you have no business offering any kind of rebuttal. There is no ‘plane’ in any of these images BTW. We are first establishing the elevation our flying object above the ground, by lining up our security camera lens, the top of that right hand column and a reference point just slightly above the horizon in the distance. Do you see my “Horizon” notation? Great! Note carefully that we are just above the ground somewhere in the trees, but still below the skyline. If that line were down in the grass, then our security camera would ‘not’ be level and our calculations would suffer proportionately. If that Horizon line was somewhere in the blue sky, then our security camera would be pointing ‘upwards’ and again throw our calculations off. However, since the center of our security camera lens AND the top of the right hand column AND the nose of the flying object AND that distant point near the horizon are ALL on the same 5-feet elevation plane, THEN we can extrapolate the right dimensions of the flying object with a very low percentage of error.

Your statement is very much incorrect, as your head must still be spinning. :0) Anyone can see that three sets of windows appear over the top of my 5-Feet Elevation line matching the top of the right hand column. Note the Pentagon roof appears bent from our perspective, because the camera has a ‘wide angle’ lens. That means all the dimensions farthest away from our straight line through the word “Horizon” are distorted proportionately. The fact is that if the average man were standing in this picture, right in front of the lens, by the column, by the flying object or anywhere in between, then his nose would fall on the 5-feet elevation plane. He would appear larger near us and proportionately smaller in the distance, but his nose would still be just about 5 feet off the ground. This missile is flying in just above the ground (exactly 5 feet) and the distance to the ground is GREATER than the diameter. This object is about one tenth the diameter of a real 757-200 Jetliner.

The fact is that my long presentations give Gwb and everyone else plenty of opportunity to ‘quote >>’ anything for the presentation of their opposing views. And yet, each time I am met with five sentences of drivel and my original statements continue to withstand the test of meaningful debate; even if many of my debating adversaries do not quite understand the substance of my arguments. The simple fact is that any object flying just 5 feet off the ground with more clearance to the ground than the diameter cannot possibly be any 100-ton Jetliner. Look carefully at the Frame1 photo again and imagine this is 9/11 and you have the power to stop time. Suppose you could crawl out of this camera lens and walk pass the column to stand directly in front of the flying object and look things over carefully. If you are about the size of the average man, then your eyes would be just above the nose of this flying object with a diameter no more than just 2 feet. That is what the evidence says for this Pentagon case no matter how you cut the mustard. To think you are going to be looking up at the belly of a massive 125-feet wide and 155-feet long almost 50-feet tall 100-ton Jetliner is very much absurd and ridiculous. :0)

The 911Truth will set you free. Believe it.

GL,

Terral

If it was a missile that blew the hole in the "C" Ring wall - how did it decelerate in the 41 feet of the A/E Drive and not strike the opposing "B" Ring wall?

Hi Tom:

Thank you for writing.

Which statement? The fact is that the Fire Department was met by this fire:



How do we know for certain this picture was taken before the one above? There is no foam on the fire yet, which means our firemen are still on their way. They showed up the first time and sprayed foam over the entire scene:



This all looks really impressive. Right? Do you see the problem? This firetruck is now positioned in the sunlight coming from over the top of the 77-foot Pentagon wall. :0) Even the cable spools are nearly in the sun, which means we are very much closer to 11 o'clock than 9:30 or 10:00 AM. We can calculate the time by comparing the height of the firetruck to the now very short shadow. However, look again at my first picture:



The approximate 77-feet length of the shadow tells you we are very near 10 AM in the morning for September. Why did the firemen leave this fire at 10 AM to return an hour later?

Yes. The firemen are preparing to leave this scene, so the fire will get out of control and cause even the roof to come tumbling down. Now (this is very important to our investigation), I need to note the position of the shadow the pictures above very carefully, then again in this one:



Look carefully into this picture and tell us exactly what you see. Beginning from the left, I see one, two, three, for, five and six firemen with their backs turned to the fire blazing away over the fire truck and inside the impact crater and over these spools up inside the second floor windows. How many firemen do you see with hoses in their hands? Even if you count fireman #3 from the right, where do you really think he is headed? We already know they come back when this fire truck is fully in the sun for another grand ‘show,’ by the evidence already presented.



Here we are with the shadow behind the fire truck getting smaller still and firemen running around doing everything but fighting the blaze. Anyone who says this E-Ring outer wall collapsed in under one hour is either misinformed or a Loyal Bushie LIAR. These water streams are adjustable like your ordinary garden hose with a wide-angle spray on the one end and a steady stream on the other. Do you see a group of firemen aiming a steady stream inside any of these windows? :0) No. Why not? They are misting the wall down and doing NOTHING to put out any fire at all. This is a ‘show’ and nothing more. They could have put this fire out LONG before the sunlight hit their fire truck, but someone ordered them to put on this charade. By the time our sundial reads “High Noon” . . .



. . . well, you can see their goal was accomplished. You can see the fire raging over by the two parked vehicles and the entire roof was allowed to come tumbling down, but where is the sign of a single fire truck or one fireman? There is no need to fear . . .



. . . here come the troops again to save the day! Again, how many firemen do you see dragging around hoses or doing one thing to even put out the little fire by the two vehicles? Note the yellow tape pulled across to section off the area by the cable spools on your right. :0) The fire hose was dragged out in our direction and circled back on itself; left to lay there completely unused by anyone. Is Tom starting to get the “Inside Job” picture? The original pictures with the long shadows show not nearly enough damage to remotely resemble any 100-ton crashed Jetliner. Now that the fire has burned out of control for about two hours, the damage is more to Rumsfeld’s liking.

These firemen moved hoses and fire trucks around this same area for over two hours with no intention of putting out any fire.

These men are following orders and represent mere pawns in a much larger “Flight 77 HOAX” scheme to make the Department of Defense appear like a ‘victim’ by Bearded Jihadist Radicals.

If you claim a 100-ton Boeing 757-200 Jetliner crashed anywhere, then I want to see 100 tons of evidence. Did you see any Jetliner in any of these pictures? No and neither did anyone else. Some really evil men murdered innocent Americans on 9/11 and tried to blame that on somebody else. They continue working within our Federal and State governments to bring in their “New World Order” and this side of the debate does not think any of their wicked plans are very funny and neither should you.

I would expect to see something along these lines . . .



. . . and not a little tiny 20-feet diameter entry hole. Those among you in support of the Official Bushie Administration Cover Story LIES are standing with LIARS and MURDERS of our innocent brothers and sisters. It is time to wake up and smell the 911Truth coffee, before the bad guys begin carrying out the next part of their evil plan out west in California with yet another Tomahawk Missile . . .

Terral

For some reason I can't get the quotes to work correctly on this reply

[QUOTE]Terral,Aug 31 2007, 05:40 AM]


[WWW] Witnesses in the Pentagon, mostly military men, describe a shockwave and a blast; only explosives give a shockwave; there is no shockwave from a crash and fire:[/QUOTE]

Remember that CNN Chief Pentagon Correspondent Jamie McIntire reported "No Plane" in his report on 9/11:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C02dE5VKeck


Terral
911Truth.org
AE911Truth.org[/QUOTE]

Am I to believe that the huge fireball caused by the plane filled with a lot of fuel crashing into the building would not have caused "shockwaves"


In the quote from the CNN correspondent you never hear the beginning of what he was answering. He said it might have appeared that way but in my close examination there is no evidence of anything crashing near to the pentagon . and then goes on to mention that there was evidence of the pentagon crash
Wasn't he referring to reports of a crash near the pentagon instead of directly into it. you notice in the Youtube video what he was answering was conveniently left out.

Clearly once again it appears you are misleading by stating
[QUOTE]Jamie McIntire reported "No Plane"[/QUOTE]

Why do you do this if you are interested in the truth?

Here is what 4 minutes of searching found on Jamie Mcintyres quote

Did you know this? In all of your research I would think you would have found out Do you intentionally mislead Terrel? Are you really interested in truth?

Jamie Mcintyre took video of plane debris right on the Pentagon lawn in the first minutes and 100% states a plane hit the building.

This is pure insanity.

The shadow we're talking about is just a matter of yards onto the lawn. The "object", on the other hand, is at least half the width of the entire facade away.

Your analysis, Terral, is akin to my holding up my thumb and finding it neatly obscures a tree that's 50yds away - and then concluding that the tree is 3" tall.

You surely must be trolling?

Why would they use planes at the WTC, but not at the Pentagon? If you believe that planes hit the towers, why not use one to hit the Pentagon? What would the govt have to gain by faking pole damage, paying some taxi driver to lie, scattering the lawn with American Airline pieces? Why not just crash the plane into the pentagon? I believe that AA 77 hit the pentagon. I do not believe everything the govt says about 911, but planes did hit all three buildings.

Hi Tom with Gwb mentioned:

Thank you again for writing.

Jetliner crashes do not create the “shockwave” and “cordite” evidence described by our ‘military’ eyewitnesses ( http://911review.org/Wiki/PentagonAttackWitnessesBlast.shtml ) in direct proximity to the original ‘missile’ attack. You are talking about a ‘huge fireball,’ because Tom has no picture or Flight 77 crashed anywhere.

Really? Where did the Pentagon crash? Jamie McIntire’s original “close up inspection” statements of no evidence for a “plane crashing anywhere near the Pentagon” appear in the final “YouTube” link in the Opening Post of this thread. You are encouraged to begin hauling out pictures of a crashed 100-ton Flight 77 at your earliest convenience.

Please forgive, but Tom’s characterizations about Jamie McIntire’s original “close up inspection” statements have no bearing upon anything in this Pentagon case. 100-ton Jetliners going 500 miles per hour do NOT create 20-feet diameter holes in limestone clad masonry walls!



The 20-Feet Diameter Entry Hole is highlighted in red for your convenience. Approximately 25 feet from the center of that hole is where your 6-ton Rolls Royce engine should have impacted the Pentagon going 500 miles per hour. However, the “Limestone Units Are ‘Pushed Out’ Exposing the Primary Masonry Wall.” That is because the missile detonation took place inside the 20-Feet Diameter Entry Hole about 30-feet inside the Pentagon. Since the Tomahawk Missile ( http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-109.html#_SLCM ) was 20 feet long, then the tail was only 10 feet inside the E-Ring wall when the detonation ( http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/smart/tomahawk.mpeg ) took place. The shockwave and original force of the blast extended out in all directions from that location inside the red circle, which knocked the limestone cladding off the primary wall and back in our direction. Look inside the black circle to realize the bottom of the second story cross wall was knocked out three inches to your right from the original blast. The reason is because the energy of the blast was concentrated in this ‘corner’ like a massive sledge hammer. The fire was allowed to get out of control in order to hide this kind of ‘missile’ evidence and create the Grand Delusion that a real 100-ton Jetliner crashed here. Anyone willing to open their eyes to the 911Truth can see there is no 125-feet wide entry hole ( http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c266/Ter...tcnorthhole.jpg ) in this wall! Rather than answer the arguments from my posts above, you are grasping at straws in a feeble attempt to deny the 911Truth told by ‘all’ of the evidence in this Pentagon case.

The insinuations from Tom and Gwb that I am misleading anyone are getting very old. The transcript says,

http://www.gnn.tv/threads/2852/UNO_UPDATE_...ne_hit_Pentagon

Jamie McIntire was caught in a lie from the very beginning, because the ‘sun’ and ‘shadows’ evidence clearly shows (My post above: Sep 11 2007, 03:22 PM) the attack took place around 9:30 and the roof collapsed around noon.



This picture shows the firemen dragging around their houses with the fire blazing away and the very long shadow is longer than the 77-feet Pentagon wall is tall. This picture had to be taken between 9:30 and 10:00 AM.



This picture shows the fire truck still completely in the shade and none of the firemen doing anything to fight the SAME FIRE. Note the concrete slab with the yellow markers touching the suited man’s right elbow and how the shadow has shortened to almost expose that to the sunlight. The distance from our shadow to the building is now less than the 77-feet height, which equalized very near 10:00 AM.



Here the firemen continue to run around as if lost with a group playing with the fire hydrant protected by the yellow concrete-filled posts (bollards). The fire truck is now completely in the sunlight with its shadow being very much shorter than the height of the vehicle. This means almost two hours have passed since the original missile strike and you can see the outer E-Ring wall is still standing with the fire continuing to burn out of control inside the window to the right of the misty sideshow charade from the fire truck. How then can we substantiate Jamie McIntire’s “45 minutes later” claim from the short News Report??????? If you are going to sell Terral a 911LIE, then at least have the wherewithal to make something up to match THE EVIDENCE. When you come to my thread with insinuations that I am misleading ANYONE, then also be prepared to haul out YOUR EVIDENCE. Do you see anywhere your 100-ton Jetliner could fit inside the standing E-Ring wall of all these time lapse pictures taken over a two hour period??? No sir and neither does anyone else. Every word of my posts match THE EVIDENCE in this Pentagon case 100 percent AND without creating a single contradiction. If you happen to come across one, then please highlight my error for the benefit of everyone here and show us what you got. I am more than happy to go back and edit my comments to reflect whatever you can bring to the table representing “The 911Truth” by our careful consideration of ‘all’ the Pentagon evidence.

GL,

Terral

Hi Gwb:

No sir. If you are happy to go beyond the shadowed concrete curbing and pick out a place on the green grass a millimeter beyond that location, then please knock yourself out. The nose of the missile continues to be positioned precisely on the same 5-feet elevation plane as the security camera lens, the top of that right hand column and a reference point just above the horizon in the distance. Our clearance ‘below’ the missile continues to be two or three times THE DIAMETER anyway you decide to skin this cat. A 100-ton Jetliner cannot fly 5 feet off the ground and have ANY CLEARANCE AT ALL, because 7 feet of the fuselage, the wings and massive engines under those wings would all be below the ground! :0) The reality of what you are looking at continues to fly way over your head.

Do us a big favor and simply right click on the picture and download the image to your desktop. Open up your Paint program and the picture. Make any corrections you like and upload the image to your http://photobucket.com/ account for reposting here. If you do not have one yet, they are free. That way everyone else can gather a good visualization of what the heck you are talking about. The mathematics proving the ‘nose’ of this missile is flying just 5 feet off the ground has NOTHING to do with any shadows at all. You still have the straight line connecting ALL four of these reference points like this:



The security camera is looking horizontally straight across the top of the 5-feet tall column, the nose of the flying object (missile) and a point just above the horizon. If you are going to prove that our missile is flying at ANY OTHER ELEVATION, then that would include proving the ‘nose’ of the flying object is either higher or lower than the other three reference points on the same level elevation plane. My advantage in this area of our debate is heightened by my decades of experience in the General Contracting field, as I have been using these building transits ( http://wantasub1.stores.yahoo.net/transitlevels.html ) from my youth. When you set one up ‘level,’ so all the bubbles are set precisely in the center, then EVERYTHING touching the horizontal crosshair is EXACTLY the same elevation above the ground. Your camera becomes a transit, IF you hold the thing perfectly level on a reference point your height above the horizon. Anything you see through the lens along THAT LEVEL line is also the very same height of your camera lens.

We are debating my arithmetic and analysis of the visual data from the famous Frame1 Pentagon photo, so do not begin condescending to me about my understanding of my own analysis. The only reason we are having this discussion is because this side of the debate brought these things to your attention. The architects and engineers at http://www.ae911truth.org did point out three errors in my 911Truth presentations, but none of those corrections have anything to do with this Frame1 analysis. I must assume you know the meaning of the phrase “wide-angle lens.” They are commonly used on security cameras allowing for a larger FOV or field of view. However, accurate proportions for the captured images appear only near the vertical Y-axis in the center of the frames. The dimensions of the objects in the picture become skewed in direct proportion to their distance from the center vertical line of the frame. Let’s look at the Frame1 image again and attempt to increase your powers of observation:



Note carefully that he right-hand column appears to be leaning to the right, while the left hand shorter column appears to be leaning in the opposite direction. That is because the Y-axis centerline is standing between those two locations. The roof of the Pentagon is perfectly straight, but this picture shows a big bend, as if the Pentagon is round. That is because the section of wall farthest to our left is also the greatest distance from the vertical Y-axis for this wide-angle picture. However, the left and right distortions have nothing to do with the straight horizontal line extending from our security camera lens, through the top of the right hand column, through the nose of the flying object and that reference point just above the horizon in the distance. My calculations would become skewed and distorted IF I were trying to measure vertically along this level plane, because those measurements are also distorted in direct proportion from their distances from the horizontal X-axis. However, my analysis is ‘right on’ within a 1 to 2 percent degree of accuracy, because my measurements are taken from very near the center of the frame vertically, or from just above the X-axis to the right of the Y-axis. The same could not be stated IF my dimensions were taken (say) from the upper left-hand corner of the frame (by the Pentagon roofline) where the wide-angle lens has skewed those dimensions.

Not at all. Please provide your own interpretations of the visual evidence from the famous Frame 1 image ( http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evide...fiveframes.html ) and prove to everyone here the flying object is a 100-ton Jetliner flying just 5 feet off the ground. :0)

GL,

Terral

Hi Tom:

Still no pictures of Flight 77 crashed anywhere? :0) Keep looking . . .

Jamie McIntire was lying in the original News Report ( http://thewebfairy.com/911/pentagon/index.html ), when he said the roof collapsed just 45 minutes after the original attack. He is a Loyal Bushie “yes-man” just like the rest, but he did not have access to the Official Cover Story data for the original report. Nobody had brought him into the disinformation loop. :0)

Really? Too bad you neglected to include that evidence in your one sentence post. :0) Please include any “Jamie McIntire” photos and videos you have in your next thoughtful reply. GL.

Terral

Terral,

Your theory is based on half truths and complete speculation. You obviously know nothing about firefighting or the events that happend that day. I am going to go through you claims one by one and debunk them.

First let me give you some background on myself. I have been a firefighter for 10 years with Prince George's County Fire/EMS Department in Maryland(feel free to call the PGFD operations center at 301-883-2000 to verify my status. my ID# 11595. My department sent 5 companies to the Pentagon that day including the Truck company from my former station. I personally know 3 people that were there that day and fought the fire and saw the plane wreckage. Check this article herePentagon

Your claim about the shadows is bogus too. The amount of smoke above the building blocked out the sun producing shade. as the fires were extinguished and time passed of course the sun shined on them. You can clearly see it is nice and shady on the right side of the picture because of the smoke.

You also say you are certain that the firefighters are prepairing to leave because the way they are moving the hose. What they are doing is called "flakeing out" a line. its what you do when you advance a hoseline. that is why the firefighter has the nozzle over his shoulder and walking AWAY from the firetruck. they were not leaving. although you are correct, the firefighters did leave but not for the reason you think. If you had read the after action report from the Arlington county VA Fire Department you would see the timeline of events for that day. After action reportall crews were evacuated from the impact zone at 9:55am due to danger of structural collapse. this was 14 minutes after the arrival of the first fire department unit which was a ladder truck (No water) that incidentally just happen to witness the plane hitting the building. at 9:57am the building in the impact area collapsed. Then at 10:15am everyone was evacuated from everywhere because of a report of another aircraft approching. the all clear was not given until 10:38am. So your claim that the firefighters left so the fire would get out of control and let the building come tumbling down is obsurd. evacuating means you drop you equipment and run. It doesnt matter if its a small house on fire or the pentagon. No firefighter would ever calmly pack up all his equipment when an evacuation order is given. Your claim that it took more than an hour for the building to collapse is wrong as well. It was 17 minutes. Honestly, there is a reason we dont use sundials anymore for keeping time.

If you knew anything about firefighting you would know that it takes time to set up an operation this large. . You would also know that the fire truck in your pictures is an airport crash truck. I have actually seen this exact truck in the picture in person. It carries a crew of 3, does not carry hose and 4000 gallons of water. It is capable of pump and roll (that means it can drive and squirt water at the same time, something your everyday fire engine cannot do) and can pump between 1500 and 2000 gallons per minute. So again your claim that firefighters were dragging the hose around like the job is done prepairing to leave is false. Why? because you assumed that hose was from that firetruck. Its not. That firetruck does not have hose on it. It came from another firetruck. And before you say im lying because you can see the hose coming out of a compartment, that compartment houses the discharge connections from the pump so you can hook a hose up to it, but does not contain any hose. You also make it seem that that was the only firetruck at the pentagon. Lets take a look at your photo from a different angle.


Look! 2 more firetrucks! You can clearly see there is still hose on the ground, and a second crash truck. You can also see the fires are not out, and burning in more than 2 areas as you originally claim. matter of fact they were not out for a while. Which brings me to my next point. You make it seem that the fire was out based on a picture of the outer ring. What about the other 4 rings? There was fire on all five floors in the rings directly behind that ring.

You make a reference to fire hoses having the same type of nozzles as a garden hose. You are half right. there are 2 types of nozzles, combination nozzles (like a garden hose) and Stack-tip or smooth bore nozzles(these nozzles flow a solid stream of water and the pattern is not ajustable). Also you say they are just 'Misting down the building. That "mist" is flowing at about 2000 gallons a minute. To put that in perspetive, your typical garden hose can flow about 3-5 gallons a minute. That "Mist" can fill a swimming pool in minutes and if you knew anything about firefighting which you clearly do not you would know the more "mist" you make the more fire you can put out. You may also notice that in some pictures that the firetruck is sometimes flowing water and sometimes is not. That is because it carries only 4000 gallons of water onboard. without a continuous supply that firetruck can only flow water for 2 minutes. And before you ask where all the foam went, I can tell you they probably ran out. That firetruck probably only carries a few hundred gallons of foam.

When Tom asked you if maybe they moved the firetrucks you said they moved the firetrucks around the same area for over 2 hours with no intention of putting any fire out. Do you think they were the only firetrucks on the scene? There was over 5 alarms worth of equipment there. they had firetrucks in the courtyard in the center of the pentagon. they were everywhere. and yes they probably moved around a lot since that building is so big. You obviously have never seen the pentagon with your own eyes or you would know this.

As far as your claim that there was no jetliner wreckage, just do a google search for pictures of the wreckage, its everywhere. Not only that I know 3 people that personally saw aircraft wreckage including seats and other pieces. Dont forget the fire captain on the first arriving ladder truck SAW THE PLANE DIVE into the building. The reason there is not any big pieces or a bigger hole (BTW a 25 foot hole is wrong, it was more like 90 feet, and the first floor wasnt really a floor at all. it was support columns, like a beach house on stilts or a pier.) is because the plane sheared its wings off (that were then blown into little pieces and into the building) and the aircraft was made out of aluminium and hit a wall that was designed to survive a megaton nuclear blast. The aircrafts skin is so fragile that the same firetruck in your picture can put a nozzle on the its roof that will pierce the hull of the aircraft to squirt water into the passinger compartment. all it has to do is drive up and push it in. You are compairing 2 different buildings made out of 2 different materials and looking for the same result. it doesnt happen that way.

Lastly, Every sound you hear is a shockwave. All a shockwave is, A large-amplitude compression wave, as that produced by an explosion or by supersonic motion of a body in a mediums the sound produced. A clap of thunder is a shockwave, a sonic boom is a shockwave....any explosives there?? You do not need explosives to have a shockwave. Things explode without any explosives all the time.

If you are seriously intrested in the truth, maybe you should do some real research.

Hi Paul:

Why use a real 100-Ton Jetliner, when you can use a Tomahawk Missile and the naïve public will believe anything anyway? The missile attack did not even damage the green grass on the Pentagon lawn:



Do you see any problems with the lawn? No. And yet, the DoD did this:



Please offer your explanations for why the DoD wasted all of this taxpayer money on this kind of nonsense, when all they dug up was the beautiful pristine Pentagon grass? :0) The “Inside Job” terrorists had to make this look like real Jetliner crash, which included allowing the fire to burn out of control and all of this needless renovation. They fooled you. Right? :0)

We have images of Jetliners impacting the Twin Towers.



We have a massive entry hole where a Jetliner crashed into the North Tower:



We have Jetliner debris from Jetliners hitting the Twin Towers:







Please show us one picture of Flight 77 flying or crashed anywhere near the Pentagon. GL, because none exist. These massive 6-ton engines ( http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c266/Terral03/PW2000.jpg ) have a habit of holding together even in the worst crashes:





Look at the height of this bad boy in relation to the fence. :0) Now show us where either of the Rolls Royce engines really impacted this Pentagon wall:



These engines are mounted some fifty feet apart and should have made twin entry holes connected by the massive wing sections. The Official Bushie/Rove Administration Cover Story simply does not begin to compare to THE EVIDENCE for the Pentagon case.

They created the illusion that the Department of Defense was a VICTIM in these 9/11 attacks, when in reality everything you see here was a ‘self-inflicted’ wound. We now have a Department of Homeland Insecurity. Right? The out-of-control president received his Patriot Act powers. Right? With lies about “Weapons of Mass Destruction,” he used our military to depose a king and invade Iraq. Right? Our troops have been practicing urban warfare on the proud people of Iraq for all these years. Right? Want to see your tax dollars at work?



Hey, these guys look like terrorists!



No, the terrorists are living here!



If Saddam Hussein was wrong for killing brown people, then what makes it right for Senor Bushie? Our military is for USA defense and not for the preemptive strike of anyone Senor Bushie decides is a threat. Our military is supposed to fight against other uniformed soldiers on the field of battle and NOT authorized to go door-to-door and use force against the proud Iraqi people scared out of their cotton picking minds by our illegal presence in their country. All of this 9/11 Inside Job terror against We The People is just one component of the ‘Fear-Mongering’ propaganda from our ‘Warmongering’ out-of-control Bushie Administration. The unrest Senor Bushie has sown in the Middle East has seen our gas prices rise from $1.50 to $3.00 during his Fascist Reign. Our military is providing support for his “Loyal Bushie” Contractor buddies raking in billions and billions in ‘no contest / no bid’ government contracts. That is why Senor Bushie never had any exit strategy and NEVER WILL. :0) He will ‘stay the course’ and continue to “move forward” with his Global “New World Order” Agenda that includes the creation of the North American Union ( http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/at...ca_TF_final.pdf , http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article....RTICLE_ID=50618 ) by the dissolution of our borders.

How many ways do you intend on asking the same question? “Why” is in the minds of the Inside Job terrorists working everyday in our Federal and State governments to bring in the One World Government. These 9/11 Attacks are nothing more than pimples and the backside of a much larger “One World Government” scheme. Only Wedge One of the Pentagon was renovated in preparation of these 9/11 attacks. A real 757-200 Jetliner crash at 500 miles per hour could not be contained by the newly installed Wedge One armor. This is the best plan they could muster in the allotted timeframe to coincide with the other 9/11 Grand Delusion attacks. Since most of America and the world was tricked by their smokescreen delusion, then you should give the bad guys a little more credit, OR We The People less credit for being so naive and stupid.

Great! Show us your evidence . . .

LOL! Please forgive Paul, but you saying so does not mean anything. Your universe includes 125-feet wide and 155-feet long and almost 50-feet tall 100-ton Jetliners going 500 miles per hour to create a tiny 20-feet diameter hole in a limestone clad masonry wall!!! Please make something up that begins to match the evidence in this case and bring us your pictures of Flight 77 crashed ANYWHERE. Good Luck. We are all waiting . . .

Terral

Welcome to the forum and thank you for your account of that days events. :)

I suspect, however, that you just wasted the time it took you to type that post, as Terral is rather...... special. If you get my meaning. B)

ETA: I mean he seems to think that the construction of the external walls of the wtc towers was the same as that of the Pentagon. And he promotes A&Etruth for god's sake!

Your own photo showes where the plane hit. Just below the "20 foot hole" you say is the impact is a 90+ foot hole where the plane actually hit. If that isnt the case, explain why all those support columns are missing. did they forget to build them?

Also even if a tomahawk missile hit the pentagon (which it didnt) it would not produce a cordite smell either. Its warhead does not contain cordite which by the way is not an explosive. Tomahawk missiles are armed with CXM-6, a nasty compound in itself but no cordite......

All you "truth seekers" focus on is the confusion during the first few hours and days after the attack. You jump to conclusions and think because somebody didnt see something at first and then retracts a statement that the person was paid off to lie.

here is a simple example. I recently had a call at my station from a motorist that said they saw a cop car in the median of the road and the cop looked like he was not breathing. They said they honked their horn at him and he did not move. It turned out the cop car was part of the county's speeder deterent program and had a manaquin dressed in a police uniform in the drivers seat.
Now if the motorist had been a "truth seeker" they would claim that the county government killed one of its own police officers and paid us off to say it was just a plastic dummy in the car instead of the real truth that what they thought they saw at first was not what was really there.

Just because Jamie McIntire didnt see anything at first, doesnt mean it wasnt there. He probably was not even allowed close enough to see anything at first anyway.

Which brings me to my next point. Where did you get your measurements for the Pentagon? I used to drive past that building everyday and I can tell you that you are WAY off.

Patches, thanks for the welcome.

it was not a total waste of time as it made me feel a bit better and will hopefully convince anyone that actually believes this "special" person that he has no idea what he is talking about :)

A&E for truth is a big joke anyway. Education is no substitute for common sense. My uncle has a Ph.D in Nuclear Engineering and it took him 4 hours to put a 12 piece McDonalds lego set together that only had 6 steps in the instructions. hows that for engineers??? He also built a robot for Three mile Island to survey the damage during the meltdown. It was supposed to hold up against the radiation.....it fried itself 30 seconds after it was exposed to the radiation.

Terrel,

You know why they DoD put down all that gravel? Have you ever tried to get a vehicle that weighs more than 10,000lbs( like most dump trucks and crains and other construction equipment do) off grass after it rains? you cant because they sink. I wrecked a firetruck that way.

seriously dude, take a shower and go outside. stop looking at pictures on the internet.

Hi Cant:

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. The wise thing to do is begin presenting your case, before drawing these ridiculous conclusions.

This side of the debate does not care if you are the Fire Chief of the George’s County Fire Department. The data from these images tell the story.

Great! Then you can explain why they fought the same fire for over 2 hours and the roof collapsed anyway.

That is why you are making these bold statements apart from quoting one word from any of my posts. This debate is about to get very interesting. :0)

Please forgive, but without any pictures your characterizations really are meaningless. I look very much forward to hearing your explanations as we proceed in this debate.

Your claims above stated, “Terral, Your theory is based on half truths and complete speculation . . . Your claim about the shadows is bogus too . . . The amount of smoke above the building blocked out the sun producing shade.” Now you begin bringing out pictures never posted by Terral anywhere. Our readers can draw a comparison from the length of these shadows from the famous Frame1 image:



The length of the short column shadow with the traffic light is approximately twice the length as the height, which verifies the ‘time’ is before 9:55 AM where the length will match the height for September 11 in that location (22202 area code). That shadow will be reduced to nothing by 1:04 PM (zenith) and equal its height by about 4:13 PM in the afternoon in the opposite direction. The sun travels 15 degrees per hour and we add 3 minutes per hour for September 11 with a 12:37 hour day length (3x12=36). However, in defense of your theory I do believe the smoke plays a roll in distorting the ‘timeframe’ evidence throughout the day. The thick smoke would obviously move the outside shadow line away from the building disproportionate to the roof line itself. If you look under the “z” in horizon, I believe we can make out the yellow marker in this picture:



Since these markers are already in the sunlight at 9:32 [or 9:37 depending :0) ], then obviously they should still be in the sun when the firemen extinguished the fire for the first time. Of course, I am assuming the yellow markers from the Frame1 image are represented by these in the Pentagon Facade picture.

Listen here hotshot: You can begin by “quoting >>” me the same way I quote your exact statements word for word. I never said any such thing! I said,

Let’s examine the evidence in this picture very carefully for my reasoning: How many fire locations do you see from even our remote vantage point? We see the one in front of the fire truck, the second inside the entry hole over the left-hand cable spool AND the third in the second-story window over the other group of spools. Okay, how many firemen do you see in this picture? Shall we count together from the left? I see one, two, three (carrying tanks), four (messing with his hose) and five (heading off to our right). Do we agree so far? Good. Including the massive hose on the fire truck, how many of these firemen are actually trying to put out any fire that we can see blazing away in these three locations? Wouldn’t you think that at least one of them would be spraying something on at least one of these fires? How many of these firemen look concerned about saving anyone from a crashed Jetliner? This is the very same spot where Flight 77 supposedly crashed you know! Do you see any 125-feet wide entry hole? No. How about one shred of Jetliner debris on the lawn? No again! However, what we do see is the fire blazing and nobody putting out any fire. I am willing to concede that the shadow line might be longer than expected from the smoke of the fire.

You offered no picture of anyone dragging any hoses, but the sunny-side of the Pentagon pic was nice. If you look back at my posted picture, you will see no hose on any shoulder, but the fire blazing away. If this were my house, then I would be hosing down the cotton picking fire. :0)

Please stop embarrassing yourself, because you are likely a very nice guy making this claim above in this post: “My department sent 5 companies to the Pentagon that day including the Truck company from my former station.”

Exactly how many Pentagon locations were struck by this flying object to create this single 20-feet diameter entry hole? Are we to assume the Pentagon was attacked on all fives sides, so one company was sent to each side? Please . . . This location where the Pentagon was struck shows five firemen and not five companies of anything! Of the five firemen and the truck, none are putting one drop of water or foam on anything. Did the photographer catch them at a bad moment? Go back to the picture again and look at the demeanor of the fifth fireman on the far right. Tell me this guy looks motivated about putting out any fire. Go back to the fourth fireman holding his hose about twenty feet from the fire truck and tell me he is rolling out more hose! :0) The fire is directly behind him getting out of control and most of their foam looks to have landed on the green Pentagon grass anyway. Did any of these firemen think to aim the giant fire truck hose through one of those windows where the fire is blazing away? What about the two firemen standing two feet from the fire truck? How long before they get into the action?

Of course! That would allow this fire you are NOT fighting to get out of control. There was not even one window broken on the third floor, but all five floors will collapse around noon. The photographic evidence shows firemen standing around throughout this time fighting no fire at all. I thought this post would be a rebuttal to something I actually presented in the posts above . . .

9:57 Am? That would be twenty minutes after the reported 9:37 time: ( http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/context...flight77crashes ). Some folks believe the actual attack took place at 9:32 from the stopped Pentagon clocks, but I am willing to give anyone five minutes either way. So, your story is that the ‘first fire department unit was a ladder truck’ that was so fast at responding to this call, that they actually “just happen to witness the plane hitting the building at 9:57 AM.” Now THAT is a quick response! :0) This is the first time I ever heard of the fire fighters on the scene seeing the “plane hitting the building.” You guys must have ESP or something . . .

Of course! “Let’s everyone run away from the fire and maybe the roof will cave in!” Nobody was fighting the fire anyway, so running away changed nothing . . .

Really? Absurd begins with an ‘a’ partner and you just confirmed the ‘reason’ why these firefighters are running away from a fire that will eventually get out of control. I never intimated once that the firefighters orchestrated any plan for this outcome, but you were used as pawns to ensure the damage appeared much worse than if the fire was extinguished properly the first time. BTW, our readers can judge both sides to see if either appears to be inconsistent in their testimony. What did Cant just say? “ this was 14 minutes after the arrival of the first fire department unit which was a ladder truck (No water) that incidentally just happen to witness the plane hitting the building. at 9:57am the building in the impact area collapsed.” Are we to assume the first truck did not even have a fire hose? If the fire truck in this picture ( http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c266/Terral03/lawn0.jpg ) had no water, then where did the foam come from?



What do you see to the left of the fire truck that obviously has water? You see a fireman working with the connections to a fire hydrant protected by those bollards directly in front of the 20-feet diameter entry hole! Do we see a shadow behind the fire truck longer or shorter than the height of the truck? The two equalize at exactly 9:55 AM (4:13 in the PM) and this shadow is definitely ‘shorter’ than the height. Again, count the firemen in this picture and tell me how many are fighting this fire? I see one, two (turning the wrench), three (guy in white hat beyond him), four (right next to that guy), five (standing very near the truck on left) and six (standing alone on in the center of the picture). Your truck is spraying a fine mist and making a nice show, but where is the steady stream aimed at the fire inside the building? You have a 20-feet wide gapping gash to aim at, so what is the problem?

Lord-Have-Mercy . . . How many of these firemen ( http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c266/Terral03/lawn0.jpg ) are running anywhere?

17 minutes?!!! Heh . . . Let’s examine the evidence again:



You can try to discredit the ‘evidence’ in this case all you want, but I am not here to convince ‘you’ of anything. My case is made for the benefit of the ‘unbiased’ third party reader really seeing the ‘911Truth’ on these topics. The sun casts the longest shadows first thing in the morning and very late in the afternoon with the shortest shadows appearing around noon in September. Since the earth spins at the same rate every day, then the lengths of the shadows for any given ‘vertical’ object can tell is the time with a margin of error. This picture was taken at the moment of impact, as you can see the flying object on final approach. The height of our traffic light is very much shorter than the shadow, which tells you the time is somewhere between 9:00 AM and 10:00 AM. This matches with the 9:37 Official Time of impact exactly and represents a perfect place to begin our timeline.



This picture was taken later in the day and of the same West Wedge E-Ring location from the Frame1 image above. We know that MUCH more than 17 minutes have passed by the shadow cast behind the fire truck. Your excellent observation that the thick smoke alters the ‘sundial’ method of telling the time works only when the longer shadows are artificially moved in our direction. This fire truck is standing in the clear sunlight coming over the top of the 77-foot Pentagon wall AND (most importantly) the West Wedge E-Ring wall is still standing. We know this is the same “Entry Hole” position by the location of the cable spools and the missing limestone units directly over them. However, instead of the shadow behind the truck being twice as long as the height, our shadow is only about 6-feet for a 12-feet tall firetruck. We know the approximate height by comparisons to the man standing along side. This shadow should equal the height at 9:55 AM and be half the fire truck height at 11:30 AM. Of course those are approximate figures, but our readers should be catching my drift. If this shadow were completely under the fire truck, then the watch on the fireman’s wrist would say 1:04 PM. This picture was taken very near 11:00 AM or an hour and a half AFTER the original missile attack. Will Cant try to say the smoke caused the short shadow behind the truck? :0) The angle of the ground is going ‘away’ from the truck, which is actually making the shadow appear ‘longer,’ so this picture could very well be taken nearer to 11:30 AM. Either way, if the E-Ring wall fell down at 9:54 AM (sun is at 45 degrees @ 9:55 AM and the afternoon @ 4:13 PM) just 17 minutes after the missile strike, then this shadow would be at least 12 feet long or the height of the fire truck. The shadows simply do not shorten from 2 times the length (Frame1 pic) to half the length (this pic) in 17 minutes! You can take that to the bank . . .

I am a semi-retired General Contractor with demolition and building experience ( http://www.ae911truth.org/joinus.php ) and never claimed to be any firefighter. However, my powers of observation and investigative skills are being challenged in this debate, which require neither my construction or your firefighting expertise. Our third party readers to this debate can decide if anyone making contributions has things right, OR if we are all full of hot air. :0) My particular gift is in using ciphers, code breaking and puzzle solving. I am the guy who goes to the State Fair or Science Museum and solves all the IQ puzzles. My family and friends agree that my mind is just not normal. :0) But hey, we are all individuals and nobody can help the way God made them. I greatly appreciate your input and have already changed my mind about parts of my fact-finding methodology.

My pictures include fire trucks and plenty of firemen doing everything but putting out this fire. The idea of sending a fire truck to a Pentagon fire without hose boggles the mind. Your fire fighting force has been reduced from “Five companies” from your department to three guys and a truck that “does not carry hose and 4000 gallons of water.”

Do you remember the picture of the guy turning the wrench on the fire hydrant right next to the fire truck ( http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c266/Ter...-DSC_0433-1.jpg ) with the four yellow bollards?



How many gallons of water do you really think the firefighters could have used out of this hydrant just feet away from the 20-feet diameter entry hole??? You could have tossed the busy end into the impact hole and ran like hell . . .

You are beating a dead horse I never sent anywhere. My statement was based upon the facts presenting themselves in this picture ( http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c266/Terral03/lawn0.jpg *) that you did not even include in this rebuttal.

Lord-Have-Mercy. The firemen did not require anything more than their hose and a wrench to get the fire hydrant going. We can see ( * ) they already have a hose, even if nobody is watering down anything.

I am here to defend my “No Plane” Thesis from the Opening Post of this thread. You are here making some attempt to discredit my testimony with this ‘fireman’ talk in defense of the firemen in these pictures. I commend you for your bravery on the job and in this debate, because the evidence is speaking loudly against you IMHO. However, our third party readers sit in the position to judge both sides anyway they see fit. I certainly have no intention of calling you a liar. If you really believe the Pentagon roof fell ‘before’ 10:00 AM, when all of the evidence says otherwise, then that is fine by me. If these readers want to believe that nonsense, that is fine by me too. :0)

Not at all. We already know there were plenty of fire trucks and hundreds of men running around. What we do not see are all of the fire trucks and those men with hoses aiming narrow streams of water and foam on these fires with any intention of putting them out. By your own admission, we are looking at one truck on the scene without any hose at all.

Lord-Have-Mercy . . . Look over to the right to realize the entire roof has now fallen! Your fire that was localized in proximity to the 20-feet diameter entry hole has now spread over a hundred feet to the third and fourth floors! Why are three trucks parked over here with the firemen walking around, instead of aiming hoses into the windows where the fire is blazing away? Look over to red fire truck and the second floor of the detached building. Note the windows, then look over to the right and the shadow under the overhand against the wall. The corner of that overhang is casting a shadow straight down, because this picture was taken every near 12:00 Noon. Cant’s shadow still has some length, because this location is far north of the equator and pointing to the ‘north’ side of the Pentagon. Cant’s shadow would be shorter on June 21st and longer on December 21st, when the sun is on the extreme south end of the spectrum. Where were all of these trucks at 9:40 AM in the minutes following the original missile attack??? The funniest part is that this fire truck parking lot finds nobody actually fighting the growing fire, just like from all of my previous pictures. Does anyone look concerned about helping anyone from the Jetliner crash? That part of the joke is funny too . . .

Really? And that is my fault! Right! :0) These firefighters have been walking around empty-handed all morning and the fire got out of control. Imagine that! The fire was containable AT 9:40 AM, when all we had was a 20-feet diameter entry hole!

Since you refuse to actually “quote >>” me saying anything, then our readers are left to wonder what you are even talking about. My observations were based upon the attitude of this one guy on the far right very early on in the day:



That is why my comments were posted directly under this picture. The fire is blazing away BEHIND him and he appears in no hurry to even go the WRONG WAY. Oh, “We have to pull hose out the WRONG WAY first.” Hell, “We need another 1000 feet to reach this fire!” No sir. I am not buying anything you say, beyond the excellent observation that the thick smoke is moving this shadow back and forth to skew the timeline. However, since ‘you say’ this wall collapsed in just 17 minutes (impossible), then obviously these guys are walking around within minutes of the initial attack. Maybe that guy over on the far right is trying to circle the Pentagon with fire hose, before the other trucks arrive sometime around noon . . .

Keep on characterizing and building grand illusions if that makes Cant happy. I said, “These water streams are adjustable like your ordinary garden hose with a wide-angle spray on the one end and a steady stream on the other.” Are you really going to sit there and pretend your fire hoses spray only to one setting? :0) This guy ( http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c266/Ter...-DSC_0433-1.jpg * ) is spraying a very wide, misty, ‘low intensity’ stream like anyone here an do with their common garden hose attachment. That is great for watering plants, but not for use on the house about to burn down.

If that gigantic fire truck is maxed out using that impotent misty stream, then the taxpayers got ripped off!

Right. And we can see the fire burning away right inside the window (*). The shadow behind the trucks says the time is about 11:00 AM, which means you have been fighting this fire for almost an hour and a half. But, the roof collapsed in just 17 minutes. :0)

Heh . . . This is really getting hilarious and I must include this picture again:



Look into the second window in from the corner where our limestone units were knocked off by the initial blast ( http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c266/Ter...onlimestone.jpg ). Now look at the very short shadow behind the truck and compare that to the long shadows being created at the time of impact ( http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c266/Ter...3/a1-Frame1.jpg ). The fire inside that window has been burning since about 9:40 and the time is now about 11:00 AM. This firemen is sitting here boasting about the enormous ‘capabilities’ of this firefighting equipment at the same time HOURS are going by and this Pentagon fire is growing out of control. The five companies of firemen from his department alone could have filled this 20-feet diameter entry hole with enough water to fill a hundred Olympic size pools in one hour, but they could not put out this fire inside the window only a few feet from a fire hydrant between 9:30 and 11:00 AM. :0) My distinguished debating opponent should realize that a vast majority of our readers are also not firemen, but they do have some common sense.

Oh, we are supposed to ignore the fire hydrants around the most protected security installation IN THE WORLD! :0) If only we could carry more water . . . Lord . . .

We established that already from your first breath in my direction. Your point only works to prove my case, because this 20-feet diameter entry hole fire (E to C Rings with some B-Ring damage) would eventually spread hundreds of feet away to other areas of the Pentagon.

Please forgive, but condescending to me is not helping your case at all. Are you saying a 100-Ton Jetliner crashed into the Pentagon against my Opening Post thesis, claims and conclusions? Why would you drive fire trucks “everywhere,” when the missile struck the outer E-Ring wall? Driving around does not put out fires you know . . . I expected to see a lot of firemen and a lot of trucks with intense streams of water, foam and the kitchen sink being thrown at this fire, but the images simply do not match that kind of story.

No sir. I know a Tomahawk Missile struck the Pentagon and the pictures have already been presented in this thread. If you really believe a 100-ton Jetliner crashed anywhere near the Pentagon (not), then paste those pictures to your very next reply. This side of the debate is not holding his breath. Do you know why? If you had anything like that, then we would not be listening to all of this ‘firefighter’ nonsense.

Really? Great! Include their pictures too. :0)

Wow! Really? They must teach that stuff at firefighter school . . . How about if Cant begins ‘quoting >>’ from my Opening Post to begin offering rebuttals to something “I did say” and cut out all of this Bullony?? Sound fair? Good . . .

Yeah, and those 6-ton engines going 500 miles per hour are fragile too! Lord . . . Please forgive, but anyone believing half of your story above just fell out of their chairs laughing.

Really? Gosh. Maybe 100-ton Jetliners going 500 miles per hour really do create 20-feet diameter entry holes in limestone clad masonry walls (not). No sir. I will not begin calling you names . . .

In other words, this fireman knows more about shockwaves and cordite than these military men ( http://911review.org/Wiki/PentagonAttackWitnessesBlast.shtml ). Maybe all they heard was Cant clapping his hands! Thank you very much for writing.

GL,

Terral

Hi Patches with Cant mentioned:

If you cannot quote from my Opening Post to offer rebuttals, then simply show up to cast stones at the thread starter. :0)

Your ability to change my mind about anything related to this Pentagon case is directly proportional to your ability to send back supported arguments making your case for something else. Those among you believing a real 100-ton Jetliner crashed anywhere near the Pentagon need only haul out 100-tons of evidence. We are talking about over 60 tons of missing high grade aluminum, two 6-ton Rolls Royce engines, wing sections, fuselage, seats, cargo and gigantic tail section that did not put a mark on the E-Ring wall anywhere. Show us the hole your phantom Jetliner created in the wall. Show us the reassembled parts from Flight 77 part of any Jetliner crash investigation. Here is some evidence from ValuJet Flight 592 a DC-9 crash here in Florida that is less than half the size of your missing 757.

http://www.flight592.com/slideshow/index.html






This DC-9 weighs less than 100,000 pounds and your missing Jetliner has a maximum takeoff weight of 255,000 pounds. You talk like we are supposed to believe your fiction, but where is your EVIDENCE that should be over twice this amount of Jetliner debris???

Lord-Have-Mercy . . . The outer skin of the Twin Towers were very much stronger than the masonry / limestone clad outer E-Ring wall.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_and_co...ructural_design

You sit there and pretend the Twin Towers were built out of something other than the very best structural steel ranging in strength from 36,000 to 100,000 pounds per square inch. The fact is that nothing with a ‘wall thickness’ built by man is going to withstand the impact of a 100-ton Jetliner going 500 miles per hour! Your evidence shows a tiny 20-feet diameter hole:



Many people exaggerate the size of this hole to fit their “PLANE” theory, but you can see in all the images this E-Ring wall is on fire but still standing. There is no place to fit any 100-ton Jetliner from your mythical “Official Cover Story” fantasies. But Patches and his new fire buddy know more than the architects and engineers over at http://www.ae911truth.org . :0) Hey, instead of hiring Richard Gage AIA to build their next skyscraper, the next one should be designed and built by Patches and Cant. You really have a lot of nerve taking cheap shots at a group of respected building professionals willing to put their reputations on the in defense of the 911Truth. We have just as much right to call them exactly the way we see them as anyone here.

GL,

Terral

You don't need a picture of AA77 hitting the pentagon to know that it did. There are many, many witnesses who saw the plane hit the pentagon. I don't know how you can dismiss all of these people who were on the highways that morning and saw the plane hit the building or in the last moments of it's flight. Where are the passengers? Please don't tell me that they are living on a island somewhere drinking margaritas.