FranzJoseph
September 15th, 2004, 12:23 AM
I snagged this excellent review by William Lewis because he devotes his middle section to a fairly detailed look at the Pentagon discrepancies which have been discussed here.
To repeat myself, this is really a great crowbar for using on the regime right now. Catching Bushco (and all his merry men) in a spectacular lie and getting large numbers of citizens in on it will not be a little thing.
If you do nothing else, get this vid, spread it around. This one is getting people shook up, and that's good for our side.
http://www.911inplanesite.com/911_in_plane_site.htm
“911 In Plane Site”
Video and Photographic Evidence of the Largest Cover-Up In Modern Day History
by William Lewis
THE PENTAGON:
Some of the most damning evidence surrounding the attack on the Pentagon centers about substantial and incontrovertible video and photographic evidence which insights viewers to ask crucial and essential questions. After all, the laws of physics cannot be suspended or can they? ...
Contrary to the video footage shown to the American public, photographs taken only moments after the impact show no wreckage on the lawn of the Pentagon. Where is the plane? Where are the tail, the wings, the luggage, the seats, the landing gear, and the engines? Most importantly, what happened to the passengers who were aboard that plane? America remembers the photographs that they were shown of tiny, indiscernible fragments, which were described as pieces of a Boeing 757.
Were these fragments of a Boeing 757? Internal photographs of the Pentagon taken by a FEMA representative do not show engine parts matching the description of a 757’s engine turbofan. Pratt & Whitney and Rolls Royce manufacture the engines used on these jetliners. The turbofans themselves are approximately 7 feet in diameter. The FEMA photos show what appears to be a turbofan that is approximately 3 feet in diameter. This better fits the descriptions of eyewitnesses who claim that they saw what could only be described as a commuter plane capable of holding only 8 to 12 passengers. This single piece of evidence also helps support other reports from witnesses such as Lon Rains who said “I heard a very loud, quick whooshing sound. I was convinced it was a missile. It came in so fast – it sounded nothing like an airplane.” Don Parkal said, “A bomb had gone off. I could smell the cordite. I knew explosives had been set off somewhere.” Tom Seibert said, “We heard what sounded like a missile.”
Another interesting point worth mentioning is that in the aftermath following the Pentagon attack, it was reported by media sources that a giant 100 feet crater had been plowed into the front lawn of the Pentagon as the result of a powerful airliner crash. Photographic evidence overwhelmingly shows that this was absolutely not the case. No crater – no skid marks – no burn marks… (No plane?) Why was the American public and the entire world deliberately misled?
Six months after the attacks, as many Americans began to stand up and ask questions concerning the official story of what happened at the heart of the nation’s military establishment, Pentagon officials responded by releasing five fuzzy frames of what they claimed was a 757 plowing into the side of the Pentagon. We were told that a surveillance camera located across from the heliport pad took these photos. However, these five frames seemed to raise more questions than they attempted to answer. First of all, the date code on the first frame was dated September 12, 2001 at 5:37 P.M. That’s one day and eights hours too late. Secondly, the resolution of the frames was so incredibly low that they did not allow for a thorough analysis of the images that we were being shown. Thirdly, the one frame labeled “plane” did not show anything that could even remotely be interpreted as a Boeing 757. Are we truly expected to believe that there was only one security camera capable of capturing the most heinous attack ever carried out against the nucleus of U.S. national defense? Upon further examination of this area of the Pentagon, one can clearly count at least five additional security cameras, two of which were unmistakably aimed directly where the plane would have impacted.
It is also worth mentioning that there was three privately owned security cameras all trained in the direction necessary to capture video of the plane hitting the Pentagon. One at a gas station across I-135, one on the rooftop of the Hilton International Hotel, and another located at the Virginia Department of Transportation, which would have captured the plane descending over Interstate 135. Literally, within only a few minutes after the attack, Federal officials arrived at all three locations and confiscated the videotapes. The contents have never been released to the public....
Entire review is at the link at top.
To repeat myself, this is really a great crowbar for using on the regime right now. Catching Bushco (and all his merry men) in a spectacular lie and getting large numbers of citizens in on it will not be a little thing.
If you do nothing else, get this vid, spread it around. This one is getting people shook up, and that's good for our side.
http://www.911inplanesite.com/911_in_plane_site.htm
“911 In Plane Site”
Video and Photographic Evidence of the Largest Cover-Up In Modern Day History
by William Lewis
THE PENTAGON:
Some of the most damning evidence surrounding the attack on the Pentagon centers about substantial and incontrovertible video and photographic evidence which insights viewers to ask crucial and essential questions. After all, the laws of physics cannot be suspended or can they? ...
Contrary to the video footage shown to the American public, photographs taken only moments after the impact show no wreckage on the lawn of the Pentagon. Where is the plane? Where are the tail, the wings, the luggage, the seats, the landing gear, and the engines? Most importantly, what happened to the passengers who were aboard that plane? America remembers the photographs that they were shown of tiny, indiscernible fragments, which were described as pieces of a Boeing 757.
Were these fragments of a Boeing 757? Internal photographs of the Pentagon taken by a FEMA representative do not show engine parts matching the description of a 757’s engine turbofan. Pratt & Whitney and Rolls Royce manufacture the engines used on these jetliners. The turbofans themselves are approximately 7 feet in diameter. The FEMA photos show what appears to be a turbofan that is approximately 3 feet in diameter. This better fits the descriptions of eyewitnesses who claim that they saw what could only be described as a commuter plane capable of holding only 8 to 12 passengers. This single piece of evidence also helps support other reports from witnesses such as Lon Rains who said “I heard a very loud, quick whooshing sound. I was convinced it was a missile. It came in so fast – it sounded nothing like an airplane.” Don Parkal said, “A bomb had gone off. I could smell the cordite. I knew explosives had been set off somewhere.” Tom Seibert said, “We heard what sounded like a missile.”
Another interesting point worth mentioning is that in the aftermath following the Pentagon attack, it was reported by media sources that a giant 100 feet crater had been plowed into the front lawn of the Pentagon as the result of a powerful airliner crash. Photographic evidence overwhelmingly shows that this was absolutely not the case. No crater – no skid marks – no burn marks… (No plane?) Why was the American public and the entire world deliberately misled?
Six months after the attacks, as many Americans began to stand up and ask questions concerning the official story of what happened at the heart of the nation’s military establishment, Pentagon officials responded by releasing five fuzzy frames of what they claimed was a 757 plowing into the side of the Pentagon. We were told that a surveillance camera located across from the heliport pad took these photos. However, these five frames seemed to raise more questions than they attempted to answer. First of all, the date code on the first frame was dated September 12, 2001 at 5:37 P.M. That’s one day and eights hours too late. Secondly, the resolution of the frames was so incredibly low that they did not allow for a thorough analysis of the images that we were being shown. Thirdly, the one frame labeled “plane” did not show anything that could even remotely be interpreted as a Boeing 757. Are we truly expected to believe that there was only one security camera capable of capturing the most heinous attack ever carried out against the nucleus of U.S. national defense? Upon further examination of this area of the Pentagon, one can clearly count at least five additional security cameras, two of which were unmistakably aimed directly where the plane would have impacted.
It is also worth mentioning that there was three privately owned security cameras all trained in the direction necessary to capture video of the plane hitting the Pentagon. One at a gas station across I-135, one on the rooftop of the Hilton International Hotel, and another located at the Virginia Department of Transportation, which would have captured the plane descending over Interstate 135. Literally, within only a few minutes after the attack, Federal officials arrived at all three locations and confiscated the videotapes. The contents have never been released to the public....
Entire review is at the link at top.