Complete Proof (NEW, never seen): Pentagon

starting fresh b/c i don't want any useless shit that will sway people in the other threads:

Picture 1: look at the pieces on the ground

Picture 2: i think we can all agree the wingspan of a 757 is longer than this truck
(where is the damage of the wings?)

COMPLETELY NEW
3 & 4 go together: previous pictures of the "crash" that including myself have shown are indeed of a different part of the pentagon... after careful looking i realized this yesterday and have finally found an answer...

Picture 3: you can tell this isnt the front the building b/c of the different bricks on the entire ground floor portion. this IS the back of the building.

FEMA's Caption
"Arlington, VA, September 14, 2001 -- FEMA Urban Search & Rescue team members from Maryland Task Force-1 prepare to enter the Pentagon crash site. Photo by Jocelyn Augustino/ FEMA News Photo"

Picture 4: this proves that this is not where the "crash" took place b/c of the location. the backside of the part that did get hit is almost completely gone. Furthermore, you can see the pink writing on BOTH of the pictures.

So why would FEMA's photos explicitly say this is the back entrance to the Pentagon crash? What was in that portion of the building? I think we can ALL agree that no matter what hit the pentagon, it is not possible for it to reach that part!

In the first picture are you talking about those things that look like spools? What are you trying to point out?

Ill agree with you on the second picture, that hole is about the size of one wing of a jumbo jet.

Show me where it says FEMA said this and ill examine it a little closer

How do you know that is the same writing from that areial photo??? How do you know that writing in the first one isnt a photoshop effect?

1. 1st picture: little debris for an entire plane

http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/pho...ils.do?id=4515

the 4th picture i came across, and noticed the similarities... no photoshop

i laughed out loud, give it up. These pictures have been going around for awhile now.

Where did they say picture 3 was the front??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ap0c4lyPtIcF4t3

Where did they say picture 3 was the front??

---

they didn't; i said i have previously posted this and said it was the front (until i realized it didnt match the exterior of the front of the pentagon)

Quote:

---

o why would FEMA's photos explicitly say this is the back entrance to the Pentagon crash? What was in that portion of the building? I think we can ALL agree that no matter what hit the pentagon, it is not possible for it to reach that part!

---

where do they say it was the back?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ap0c4lyPtIcF4t3

where do they say it was the back?

---

it's obviously not the front lol.. let me find the other picture i believe there were 2...

seems that there were 3
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/pho...ils.do?id=4958
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/pho...ils.do?id=4957

heres what happened: the pentagon saw the planes going towards the trade center, so they launched a missle after the plane, but the missle turned around and hit the pentagon. they were so imbarrased from the mistake that they blamed it on another airplane.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xblackdogx

it's obviously not the front lol.. let me find the other picture i believe there were 2...

seems that there were 3
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/pho...ils.do?id=4958
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/pho...ils.do?id=4957

---

Are you not getting what im saying you said....

Quote:

---

FEMA's photos explicitly say this is the back entrance to the Pentagon crash?

---

with which you reply its obviously not the front....WHERE DOES FEMA SAY ITS THE BACK!

are you telling me that you're not reading the caption... it's from the FEMA website, click the links, and read the captions

[Arlington, VA, September 21, 2001 -- Some of the work done on the back side of the Pentagon is shown. Photo by Jocelyn Augustino/ FEMA News Photo]

not explicitly saying the back side of the crash but it's pretty clear it's the back side of the Pentagon.

BTW other than minor details, what is your explanation that it's not blatant lies and that this is not proof the gov't did it

Because you have so little evidence/proof to convince the average proud american. You havent accomplished jackshit until you are able to prove to an average american that it was the gov or partially the gov. Im still not seeing enough to convince the average person, not to mention scaring them off by being radical(not you so much blackdog but GS)

i respect those thoughts, but what would explain the hole in that spot of the building (pic 4)? it's obvious there was an explosion there, you can see the dark spots on the building

Shit i have yet seen any proof of the government story on what happen at the pentagon

I totally get what your saying, that hole doesnt add up to the information given. My guess is as good as yours but it shouldnt be there. Why dont you figure out what section of the pentagon it was and then get a map of which section is what department? Just a suggestion!


Id like to see you come up with more of your own information instead of regurgitating(sp?) someone elses!

good idea
the Army Section: home to the Special forces (<--best guess)

here, check out the line on the lawn of the white house. I'm not saying that is the line of a missile, but it is consistent w/ where the hole in the previous photo (pic 4) that i have shown. [right after the column]

what could go through Ring E, D, and C but not knock it all down... a missile?

You're doing a better job than I could ever do man! Keep it up!! We know the truth that 9/11 was used to bring about a fascist dictatorship and was not some fucken hijackers with boxcutters. The government knows that a select few would find out this information as well.

Ya know I think I may actually kill myself because I feel I have already done my mission which was to present this evidence and testimony to people. Personal reasons as well. No one really dreams about being put in this sort of situation. It's like "how could those fucken bastards do this?!!", and you really find out how ugly life can be ya know. I just find it so damn fucked up. If I kill myself, I will be welcomed home...so I win. It's how we live...not how we die. Remember...its all about the motive!

It is now the people's choice to accept this information or not. I would like to die a quick and painless death then be beaten and put in a detention camp for being a dissident by Amerikan Nazis.

I thank weed for bringing me enlightenment in this life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xblackdogx

here, check out the line on the lawn of the white house. I'm not saying that is the line of a missile, but it is consistent w/ where the hole in the previous photo (pic 4) that i have shown. [right after the column]

what could go through Ring E, D, and C but not knock it all down... a missile?

---

I've been through the missile theory before.......what kind of missile does this type of damage? Don't exist!:stoned:

that's even better in proving that the gov't did it...
how would you explain the hole in the wall in picture #4 original post...
did one of the hijackers get out of the plane and detonate a bomb in that section of the pentagon?

off topic- I was watching the news and they were picking out the best new technologies that are used in the fight against terrorism that will be soon used in America. One was a new Hazmat suit, a drone helecopter, another drone that you can program its flight path and just control the camera, and this weird plastic containment box that medics would put a contaminated person in and it had like 8 gloves on each side so someone could attend to the person inside without getting infected or what not.

Just thought it was interesting how they need to bring the weapons against terror back to the homeland....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xblackdogx

that's even better in proving that the gov't did it...
how would you explain the hole in the wall in picture #4 original post...
did one of the hijackers get out of the plane and detonate a bomb in that section of the pentagon?

---

This may help ya out.:thumbsup:

So how did the nose of the plane survive allllll that structure to pop a perfect hole at the end?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ap0c4lyPtIcF4t3

Psycho what do you suggest then besides a missle, you know the ________ that hit the building couldnt have made that hole....

---

Like I've stated....looks like a 757 hit it. :stoned:

nevermind

ic, so psycho, where's the entire backside of the plane that didn't reach all the way in... or for that matter the entire plane... any pics?

y would the hole be directly on the ground floor... isn't the nose of the plane higher?

Psycho- please, dear 'ol friend, you're scaring me

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ap0c4lyPtIcF4t3

So how did the nose of the plane survive allllll that structure to pop a perfect hole at the end?

---

By the time it got that far your not talking about the nose of a plane anymore...your talking about debris with inertia.
Here's some interesting reading for those who love physics.:thumbsup:
http://www.mbhs.edu/~ojenkins/Cartoon.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xblackdogx

ic, so psycho, where's the entire backside of the plane that didn't reach all the way in... or for that matter the entire plane... any pics?

y would the hole be directly on the ground floor... isn't the nose of the plane higher?

Psycho- please, dear 'ol friend, you're scaring me

---

Once again....here's some good reading.

http://www.mbhs.edu/~ojenkins/Cartoon.html

fair enough, AMAZING inertia going through Ring D and C after the initial hit... and the pics of the plane?

Here's some more good reading but only this time it deals with reality.
http://911review.com/errors/pentagon/crashdebris.html

in theory, yes it sounds good... but that exact info contends your inertia theory on how the hole got to the other side of the pentagon

i can prove that the second link of info does not apply to the Pentagon [supported w/ rocket hitting wall] b/c look how much debris explodes from the initial contact, MUCH like when the planes hit the WTC... look at the picture sequence below.. there is NO debris... ANYWHERE... not even on the lawn

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xblackdogx

in theory, yes it sounds good... but that exact info contends your inertia theory on how the hole got to the other side of the pentagon

i can prove that the second link of info does not apply to the Pentagon [supported w/ rocket hitting wall] b/c look how much debris explodes from the initial contact, MUCH like when the planes hit the WTC... look at the picture sequence below.. there is NO debris... ANYWHERE... not even on the lawn

---

Wait for the dust to settle before you look for debris.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/hunthoax.html

I don't agree with the counter theory these people portray though.

That doesn't go with your definition of reality [the rocket hitting the concrete]. You're changing your story each post.

That picture shows firemen at the scene already watering down and i barely see any debris all over the lawn.

I will show you a pic of the world trade center, did it take time for it to "settle" befor debris was present, no. for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction = debris flying in the opposite direction just as the rocket has shown w/ your link

THERE IS NO DEBRIS IN THE VIDEO OF THE HIT = whatever hit it, did not hit like the rocket = where is the plane... any pics

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xblackdogx

That doesn't go with your definition of reality [the rocket hitting the concrete]. You're changing your story each post.

That picture shows firemen at the scene already watering down and i barely see any debris all over the lawn.

I will show you a pic of the world trade center, did it take time for it to "settle" befor debris was present, no. for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction = debris flying in the opposite direction just as the rocket has shown w/ your link

THERE IS NO DEBRIS IN THE VIDEO OF THE HIT = whatever hit it, did not hit like the rocket = where is the plane... any pics

---

Your kidding right? So as soon as the plane hit there should be debris laying there? Big difference between the twin towers and the pentagon. Twin towers were basic construction while the Pentagon is reinforced concrete. It went through how many of these rings while the twin towers had an open floor design.

One hell of an explosion...kind of like what a plane with big fuel reserves would create.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud

Your kidding right? So as soon as the plane hit there should be debris laying there? Big difference between the twin towers and the pentagon. Twin towers were basic construction while the Pentagon is reinforced concrete. It went through how many of these rings while the twin towers had an open floor design.

One hell of an explosion...kind of like what a plane with big fuel reserves would create.

---

No, what I'm saying is that the fireball should be a huge outward motion of debris, not that it should be laying on the floor. And once again, since the Pentagon is reinforced concrete [much like the rocket example you pointed out] it should be that much more of a reason that debris should be in the video of the Pentagon crash. Are you saying that the similarities in YOUR link [concrete] do not apply for the Pentagon crash?

You see i keep on asking this question....OK if the plane going in at the Pentagon at a 45 degree angle <stay with me>-hitting the pentagon nose first then the right wing with massive titanium engine slams into the pentagon completely destroyed leaving no trace of it, then the left side wing with massive titanium engine hits it completely shedding it off leaving no trace of a wing, engine--Well if the plane is going at a 45 degree angle slams into the pentagon the left side wouldnt have hit the whole building because the wings are slanted backwards so where is the damaged wings n engine..

Another one, if the plane hit the pentagon on the first floor wouldnt the engines drag on the ground and if the engines drag on the ground going 400mph how come it did not break off

And why did the alleged hijackers take an extreme maneuver to strike the portion of the pentagon that was nearly empty, when they couldve hit right in the middle, or even the whitehouse.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xblackdogx

No, what I'm saying is that the fireball should be a huge outward motion of debris, not that it should be laying on the floor. And once again, since the Pentagon is reinforced concrete [much like the rocket example you pointed out] it should be that much more of a reason that debris should be in the video of the Pentagon crash. Are you saying that the similarities in YOUR video [concrete] do not apply for the Pentagon crash?

---

It's like your looking for an airplane to be parked in someones office. The rocket is hitting a concrete barrier equivilant to that used for nuclear power facilities. That is even stronger than what the Pentagon had going. The Pentagon plane basically dissolved as it was passing through the rings.

I may just be really tired and missing the point but with the towers the plane went through a open floor space came out the other side as debris

So wouldnt the same type of plane hitting a reinforced concrete structure not make it through???? especially a harden target like the pentagon although im not sure about the structure, its gotta be one tough building....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud

Here's some more good reading but only this time it deals with reality.
http://911review.com/errors/pentagon/crashdebris.html

---

funny that proves that a hijacked plane dident fly into wtc..... the building is still standing WOW look at that....and another thing look at those pics they dont look simular to the flight 93 crash........and so they say they called on cellphones CELL PHONES DID NOT WORK ON PLANES IN 2001, MORE SO JUST BECAME RECENT TECHNOLOGY OF 2004 thank you

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eg420ne

You see i keep on asking this question....OK if the plane going in at the Pentagon at a 45 degree angle <stay with me>-hitting the pentagon nose first then the right wing with massive titanium engine slams into the pentagon completely destroyed leaving no trace of it, then the left side wing with massive titanium engine hits it completely shedding it off leaving no trace of a wing, engine--Well if the plane is going at a 45 degree angle slams into the pentagon the left side wouldnt have hit the whole building because the wings are slanted backwards so where is the damaged wings n engine..

There were pics of engine wreckage and as far as the wings....aluminum...dust!

Another one, if the plane hit the pentagon on the first floor wouldnt the engines drag on the ground and if the engines drag on the ground going 400mph how come it did not break off

Beats the hell out of me but not enough to substantiate a scandal.

And why did the alleged hijackers take an extreme maneuver to strike the portion of the pentagon that was nearly empty, when they couldve hit right in the middle, or even the whitehouse.....

---

The Whitehouse was suppose to be someone elses gig. As for the first part, who knows what was going through their minds....kind of glad I don't!:stoned: