• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

the pentagon

Free episodes:

ok.. almost perfect. what do you see laying in that pile could punch a hole like that?

Oh damn! Didn't I say? Titanium landing gear parts shot through there like hot lead through the fleshy part of your hip Pixal.

What about the DNA evidence found at the scene? Isn't there DNA evidence placing people on the passenger list there at the Pentagon crash site? Doesn't that cinch it? It does for me.DNA evidence placing the victims at the scene is hard to explain away isn't it? Submit.
 
Ron, the question was about FOI and I don't know the details of that. Perhaps the evidence is embargoed due to upcoming trials? I dunno the answer, and I don't assume that I know it.

Really it comes down for me to wondering why you would assume that the fact that a Citgo video that is claimed to not show what you want it to show is somehow evidence of anything? I don't have trouble believing that maybe it just doesn't show it.
And look at where we have gone now, Ron....
First it was 85 videos of the Pentagon crash--and then you see where that came from and it decidedly is NOT 85 videos of the crash into the Pentagon. Yet you still stand on the side of the fence that says but what about this one video, not seeming to realize that you are still using the logic of the same people who disingenuously claimed 85 videos in the 1st place.

Lance

I never said it was evidence. It is just odd that they wouldn't release the 85 videos that show nothing but will release 5 frames that show a blur hitting the building. Let me be clear, I think flight 77 hit the Pentagon. I have heard northing to convince me otherwise. But, there are issues that could be cleared up if a higher degree of visibility were available.

I chose the one video to illustrate my point. But I could have used the Hotel image or any of the others. My point is simply why hold them back at all? Thats it. Not a loaded question, just a sincere one. If you give 2 shots of the airplane in flight 99% of the missile/other than airplane arguments get substantially weaker. Probably to the point of going away entirely.

---------- Post added at 09:38 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:37 PM ----------

Oh damn! Didn't I say? Titanium landing gear parts shot through there like hot lead through the fleshy part of your hip Pixal.

What about the DNA evidence found at the scene? Isn't there DNA evidence placing people on the passenger list there at the Pentagon crash site? Doesn't that cinch it? It does for me.DNA evidence placing the victims at the scene is hard to explain away isn't it? Submit.

See that is news to me. I didn't know they found DNA/body parts or whatever. And yes, that would seem to cinch it.
 
No matter how screwed up all the circumstantial evidence might be, is it not true that DNA evidence linking people known to be on the passenger lists were found at all the crash sites? Am I mistaken about that? To me this is a sobering thought. While the whys and wherefores may still be up for questioning the presence of victims DNA at the crash sites seems to dispel many alternate conspiracy theories in one blow. Planes crashed with the expected passengers on board.
 
He won't respond Trained--his disingenuous way of participating here in the forums is sickening. I am not going to respond or even acknowledge any further posts by him. To my mind his kind is the worst thing about free speech--we have to allow everyone, no matter how unworthy, to speak. At least we don't' have to speak back.

Lance

I will respond to any question or comment. Thankfully, now I won't have to listen to you anymore.
 
No matter how screwed up all the circumstantial evidence might be, is it not true that DNA evidence linking people known to be on the passenger lists were found at all the crash sites? Am I mistaken about that? To me this is a sobering thought. While the whys and wherefores may still be up for questioning the presence of victims DNA at the crash sites seems to dispel many alternate conspiracy theories in one blow. Planes crashed with the expected passengers on board.

Yes I highlighted that myself in this thread, and yes the bodies and remains, were identified by two doctors by the name of Dr Douglas Owsley and Dr Douglas Ubelaker. DNA testing was carried out at a DNA Identification laboratory located in Rockville, Maryland. All but one according to the officials were identified.This alone would be enough to close this thread down, for me personally.

Lads, seriously how much much evidence does one person need to see before coming to the realization a plane crashed against one side of the Pentagon Wall.

1)There is small and large pieces of metal with the colored marking's of an "American Airlines" passenger jet, to be seen in many of the photographs taken at the Pentagon, September 11 2001. Call me stupid, but surely this evidence, would hold up in court to prove to people an American Airline jet crashed at the Pentagon!!!!!

2) 4 or 5 light poles at the Pentagon were knocked over from their foundations in the ground. These poles can't be just pushed or removed without help of machinery, they would have to been, hit with tremendous force, to have arisen from the soil, like they did. And considering there is 4 to 5 of them shown knocked all close to the the spot were the Pentagon attack happened, logic tels me ok, that it was plane flight 77 that hit these light poles as it came in to attack the Pentagon!!!

3) Landing gear from a 747 was also found and pulled from the debris at the Pentagon, tires and rims also found coming from 757 plane. Part's off a Roll-Royce 'RB211' engine (747 used this type of engine) was found at the Pentagon crash site. I could go on and on and there was lot more wreckage found belonging to a 747 plane, but if this evidence alone hasn't convinced you yet don't know what will?

4) Where did the plane that never crashed at the Pentagon go? What happened to the 125 passengers rostered for this flight? Do people here not see how silly this thread has become? Disappearing planes - 125 people disappeared off the face of the earth for know logical reason at all. It mad stuff, if you ask me, compounded with even more madness still, with people claiming a missile hit the Pentagon, the absurdity behind it all seriously.

Wake up if there was even slightest evidence for something conspiratory i would post it. I find nothing wrong with official versions of events. and honestly if people are unable to read and taken in what I posted let me know, i will enlarge the text, next time for you. I'm officially out of this thread.Before I go agree Ron. There is another video taken from a place near the Pentagon, but it in not so clear it black and white, all you see is the explosion. But your point is a important one.

Why not release some of the other surveillance tapes, but on the other hand Ron like Lance suggested, is there anything useful showing up in the other tapes anyway to even release? Well there is lot of cameras positioned around, and inside the Pentagon, but the side that got hit, from looking at number of Photographs of the Pentagon, the side hit was void of lot of security cameras. The opposite side over to the East, the car park, had more cameras.
 
well then is seems that a 99 cent box cutter and a few lessons in a cessna is all you need to cripple the Pentagon. so... where does all our defense money go then?
 
well then is seems that a 99 cent box cutter and a few lessons in a cessna is all you need to cripple the Pentagon. so... where does all our defense money go then?

That is a royal pisser right there. I will grant you that. Part of my whole f*#&ing problem with the official conspiracy theory is that it pretty much shows the administration, military, and intelligence communities as ineffectual boobs. You would think there would have been heads rolling and asses getting kicked in strategic and critical places. But did anything like that happen? Not to my knowledge.

And by the way, the alleged pilot of the plane that hit the Pentagon had a Pilot's certificate that supposedly could have gotten him a job as a commercial pilot, although no one saw fit to hire him. Go figure.
 
That is a royal pisser right there. I will grant you that. Part of my whole f*#&ing problem with the official conspiracy theory is that it pretty much shows the administration, military, and intelligence communities as ineffectual boobs. You would think there would have been heads rolling and asses getting kicked in strategic and critical places. But did anything like that happen? Not to my knowledge.

And by the way, the alleged pilot of the plane that hit the Pentagon had a Pilot's certificate that supposedly could have gotten him a job as a commercial pilot, although no one saw fit to hire him. Go figure.

Lets arm every soldier with box cutters and matches. We could end all wars very quickly that way. It would be far cheaper too.
 
I think the American people have every right to expect to see definitive video and /or still pictures of the Pentagon event and its aftermath. We live in a sea of video cameras.

I see 2 broad explanations for us having only an "almost" video of the event. Either few or no cameras were trained on the outside of the Pentagon. Or--quality video is being withheld. Either explanation seems unsettling.

As for what a large passenger jet can be made to do and by whom: Only a pilot rated in large turbine aircraft could really tell us. I have a little flying experience from years ago in Pipers and Cessnas and could probably land one today if I had to. They are very "forgiving". Large turbines are a different animal, whether your goal is to place one on a runway, or into the side of a building. This is why I raised the issue of simulator time on comparable aircraft. These are incredibly complex machines and behave differently than smaller planes. Even if what struck the Pentagon was indeed a 757, I doubt the pilot who did this had only light aircraft training. We know these guys had flight training. If anyone knows in what type of aircraft, please weigh in.

The DNA evidence does indeed seem compelling. The irony here is that all it would take to settle the public's mind on this issue would be a real video, or even a convincing still pic.
 
...few or no cameras were trained on the outside of the Pentagon.

That just seems absolutely absurd doesn't it? I would expect that the headquarters of the United States Defense Department would have numerous cameras, radar systems, and human observers monitoring not only the building itself (inside and out) but the surrounding area and most certainly the airspace surrounding it. I would also think that every major approach is monitored for several miles out. Is that an unreasonable assumption on my part? That the plane was able to strike the building without a single missile fired at it or even an alarm raised seems is just absolutely un-f*&^ing believable to me. Surely there were Generals and Admirals there raising hell and kicking asses through the roof over that. Am I wrong to think this way about it? There just seems to be such a major disconnect there.
 
Really?

You do know that we have multiple very nice videos of the planes hitting the WTC?
Do those videos settle that issue?

Did Obama releasing his birth certificate (something the Birthers called for over and over again to settle the matter) settle the matter?

Nothing will satisfy the conspiracy-minded.

This is a prime reason that I do not want ANY more taxpayer money spent on things like UFO studies or 9/11 investigation. Conspiracists are not interested in answers. They worship questions.

Lance

more money was spent on investigating clintons affair than on the 9/11 events. i spose you were all for that tho.
 
Nothing will satisfy the conspiracy-minded. This is a prime reason that I do not want ANY more taxpayer money spent on things like UFO studies or 9/11 investigation. Conspiracists are not interested in answers. They worship questions.
I understand your skepticism on the 9/11 conspiracies and also on the UFO subject and actually agree with some of your remarks. The problem is the generalization that is implicit in your words. To put everyone and everything into the same conspiracy theory loony bag is unfair and possibly offensive. There are real conspiracies throughout human history and, though that doesn't mean we have to doubt each and every event, the blind trust in the complete straightforwardness and honesty of our political leaders can only lead us to a loss of control over the destinies of our countries and societies. Separating the wheat from the chaff is a hard endeavour but one that has to be done. Also, regarding your statement, I have to remind that, as humans, questions are the thing that feed our natural curiosity and lead us to achieve actual advancements in various areas. As always the point is: are we asking the right questions?
 
Oh fer chrissakes! What sane person thinks the military would shoot down an airliner full of passengers over a heavily populated area because it appeared to be headed for the Pentagon? Even today, after the lessons of 9-11. Some of y'all need to go out and get some fresh air.
 
keep in mind that over a decade ago was considered a conspiracy theory. there have been many conspiracy theories that turned out to be true, ie: the European Union, the Iran-Contra Affair, Operation Northwoods, Watergate, the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, Operation Mockingbird, MK-Ultra, Gulf of Tonkin, the Mafia, NWO, Bohemian Grove, Operation Paperclip and many others i can't remember right now.

---------- Post added at 03:29 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:20 PM ----------

Oh fer chrissakes! What sane person thinks the military would shoot down an airliner full of passengers over a heavily populated area because it appeared to be headed for the Pentagon? Even today, after the lessons of 9-11. Some of y'all need to go out and get some fresh air.

everyday we send our own people to die and kill others including innocent women, children and men. the military industrial complex does not care who dies as long as that money machine keeps rolling along.
 
Oh fer chrissakes! What sane person thinks the military would shoot down an airliner full of passengers over a heavily populated area because it appeared to be headed for the Pentagon? Even today, after the lessons of 9-11. Some of y'all need to go out and get some fresh air.

I have no idea what the actual protocols are for that. They have missiles on the White House correct? Do you think they are willing to use them?
 
So now Pentagon = White House, hijacked airliner = Soviet bomber?

What? No. You're saying they wouldn't shoot at an airliner diving at the Pentagon. My question was simply meant to point out that we know they have stinger(?) missiles at the White House which they are presumably willing to use on an unauthorized aircraft approaching it. It only seems reasonable that something similar or more potent is at the Pentagon.
 
Back
Top