FBI Releases More Pictures from the Pentagon Investigation

[Childlike Empress]

Originally Posted by Steve

Well Oystein, I tried. Childlike Empress appears to have some difficulty with your post and seems to find that ignoring it is the best approach.

Did he ask you to bother me with his nonsense?

[Childlike Empress]

Originally Posted by HighRiser

At the scene of an awfully nasty human tragedy, the effort required to separate that amount of broken airplane from a hill of broken bodies, building, and furniture that's all been cooked in a pretty big fire seems tremendously thoughtless and wasteful to me.

Picking through the rubble and separating out the few major components that were still recognisable as airplane afterwards was quite enough to ask of the people sifting through stinking piles for teeth and pieces of passports in dim hope of finding some few things to identify the shredded dead.

Wouldn't you agree?

Stop making stuff up. There's no such "hill" anywhere, not on the lawn, not inside, nowhere. You assume there is without evidence, actually against evidence of its absence.

[Axxman300]

Wow...I forgot how much slapstick comedy surrounds this part of the 9-11 CT bufoonery...

[The Big Dog]

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

You mean the "fast-moving debris penetrated far enough into the building to break through the inner wall" event you proclaimed didn't happen? It's not inside the exit hole at all? Just a bit of random junk, mostly outside? Well spotted, Dave. Why does it take me to point that out to you in 2017? Stop deceiving yourself.

Hey CE, you should look at these guys called the Citizens investigation Team.

They managed to find a ton of witnesses who all said that the plane hit the Pentagon!

They messed up a ton of stuff, but their evidence that the plane hit the Pentagon is unanimous.

[benthamitemetric]

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

What the hell are you babbling about? "The bulk of the scrap" after (1) you can see in the video I posted in #4. People are proud to point to maybee fifteen kilos like seen in #3. Show me "the bulk" and we can talk about if it looks right. Fail and ask yourself why that is.

Neither the video in post no. 4 nor any other video that I've ever seen shows inside the pentagon in the center of the collapse area immediately following the crash. This is because there was a raging fire and the a multi-floor collapse there. By what explicable process would you expect the bulk of the plane debris to be anywhere but in the center of the crash zone?

[Axxman300]

Someone else will have to post the story about that freeway overpass in Atlanta, GA, that collapsed last night after a fire because I don't have the energy...

[ElMondoHummus]

Saw the news, came back to see if a thread popped up on this... not disappointed.

Well, not disappointed in my prediction of a thread. Disappointed in old, refuted stuff getting recirculated, yes.

As an aside: Is CIT still a thing? I mean... when you're the laughingstock of truthers that even other truthers point and laugh at, then you've bottomed out pretty badly. I figured they might have evaporated or something in the intervening years. Seems not.

[Childlike Empress]

Originally Posted by benthamitemetric

Neither the video in post no. 4 nor any other video that I've ever seen shows inside the pentagon in the center of the collapse area immediately following the crash. This is because there was a raging fire and the a multi-floor collapse. By what explicable process would you expect the bulk of the plain debris to be anywhere but in the center of the crash zone?

The video in #4 shows the immediate alleged impact area, before the collapse that happened half an hour or so later. The absence of dozens of tons of plane remains is evidence for the absence of a crashed passenger jet. What's there is a burning container, a bit of fire and a lot of smoke coming from the roof.

[The Big Dog]

Originally Posted by Axxman300

Someone else will have to post the story about that freeway overpass in Atlanta, GA, that collapsed last night after a fire because I don't have the energy...

I bumped an old thread about a similar event in Cali.

[Childlike Empress]

Originally Posted by ElMondoHummus

Saw the news, came back to see if a thread popped up on this... not disappointed.

Well, not disappointed in my prediction of a thread. Disappointed in old, refuted stuff getting recirculated, yes.

As an aside: Is CIT still a thing? I mean... when you're the laughingstock of truthers that even other truthers point and laugh at, then you've bottomed out pretty badly. I figured they might have evaporated or something in the intervening years. Seems not.

CIT retired and left their work for history. So did I. I'm just bored a bit and decided to use this shiny new thread to point out the obvious again for any potential new knuckleheads around.

[benthamitemetric]

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

The video in #4 shows the immediate alleged impact area, before the collapse that happened half an hour or so later. The absence of dozens of tons of plane remains is evidence for the absence of a crashed passenger jet. What's there is a burning container,a bit of fire and a lot of smoke coming from the roof.

At what time stamp in the video do you believe there is a clear view into the crash site within the building?

[The Big Dog]

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

CIT retired and left their work for history. So did I. I'm just bored a bit and decided to use this shiny new thread to point out the obvious again for any potential new knuckleheads around.

They ever publish their unedited tapes like they said they were going to?

I'm guessing no, huh.

[Mark F]

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

CIT retired and left their work for history. So did I. I'm just bored a bit and decided to use this shiny new thread to point out the obvious again for any potential new knuckleheads around.

Yet you failed to point out the obvious fact that CIT found a bunch of witnesses who all agreed a plane hit the Pentagon.

Why did you leave that you?

[marplots]

Originally Posted by Mark F

Yet you failed to point out the obvious fact that CIT found a bunch of witnesses who all agreed a plane hit the Pentagon.

Why did you leave that you?

Let's be fair here. CE already posted a video (#4) with a witness describing a plane hitting the pentagon.

[Childlike Empress]

Should there be new knuckleheads around: the old knuckleheads babble about the film I posted in #5, in which it is made absolutely clear that the people interviewed do/did believe that the plane hit the Pentagon. The whole argument is that it has been a deception, and the fact that the old knuckleheads still reuse their old talking points against better knowledge reveals their willingness to deceive - at best. Go watch it.

[The Big Dog]

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

Should there be new knuckleheads around: the old knuckleheads babble about the film I posted in #5, in which it is made absolutely clear that the people interviewed do/did believe that the plane hit the Pentagon. The whole argument is that it has been a deception, and the fact that the old knuckleheads still reuse their old talking points against better knowledge reveals their willingness to deceive - at best. Go watch it.

"The whole argument is that it has been a deception."

Well, the fact that CIT's work was a complete deception ain't exactly an "argument" now is it?

Craig "retired"? After he got that all expense paid trip to Paris, huh?

[HighRiser]

The descriptor, hill, doesn't seem far fetched to me.

https://vault.fbi.gov/9-11-attacks-i...gon-exterior-1

How about an answer or two to my question or two?

[Dave Rogers]

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

You mean the "fast-moving debris penetrated far enough into the building to break through the inner wall" event you proclaimed didn't happen? It's not inside the exit hole at all? Just a bit of random junk, mostly outside? Well spotted, Dave. Why does it take me to point that out to you in 2017? Stop deceiving yourself.

Yawn. Most of the plane penetrated the building, some mixture of debris, fast moving fuel and hot gases from the explosion as it struck the outside wall blew a hole in the inside wall too, and the solid debris was mostly scattered inside the building. Again, a ten year old could visualise all this quite easily; it takes a certain determination not to understand it to have failed to do so over the course of 16 years. But your being left behind by reality and turning yourself into an irrelevant self-parody is hardly my problem, so I probably shouldn't try and stop you.

Dave

[traxy]

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

Should there be new knuckleheads around: the old knuckleheads babble about the film I posted in #5, in which it is made absolutely clear that the people interviewed do/did believe that the plane hit the Pentagon. The whole argument is that it has been a deception, and the fact that the old knuckleheads still reuse their old talking points against better knowledge reveals their willingness to deceive - at best. Go watch it.

I suppose the pertinent follow up questions are:

1. What actually did hit the Pentagon?

2. How were a hundred or more eyewitnesses deceived into seeing an American Airlines passenger jet hit the Pentagon?

3. How did American Airlines debris end up scattered on the lawn of the Pentagon after the crash?

[RandyK47]

I don't know how somebody would describe the 125 killed in the Pentagon. Personally I describe seven of them as close friends. Two of the seven were co-workers in the same agency as mine and one of those I had dated. Another was a close professional colleague who had worked for me off and on as a contractor since 1988. I went to more funerals and memorials in 45 days than I have in my 60+ years. My wife and I were lucky and escaped with no physical injuries but while we don't dwell on it I doubt more than a couple of days goes by when we have some memory of that day and friends and co-workers lost.

[beachnut]

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

Should there be new knuckleheads around: the old knuckleheads babble about the film I posted in #5, in which it is made absolutely clear that the people interviewed do/did believe that the plane hit the Pentagon. The whole argument is that it has been a deception, and the fact that the old knuckleheads still reuse their old talking points against better knowledge reveals their willingness to deceive - at best. Go watch it.

What hit the Pentagon? It was Flight 77, for all the knuckleheads who can't use evidence, and might be gullible.

You can't figure out it was Flight 77, a 757? WWTD, "tweet, SAD"


You don't make sense. Do you believe Flight 77 hit the Pentagon, called reality, or do you deny it? Simple question can clear up the puzzling statements you are making.

Did 19 terrorists do 9/11? Can you explain what happened at the Pentagon? So far you are cryptic, and praised the CIT video as excellent research. Did you mean to praise CIT video, or what? So far it is a lot of or what.

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

That's btw a typical misunderstanding of loud-mouthed but low-research "debunkers" in assessing the Pentagon situation, especially regarding the work of the CIT. If it hadn't be so obvious that no large passenger plane hit the Pentagon, this conclusive research would not have been triggered:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

That video is not "conclusive research", it is delusional claptrap made up by very low IQ paranoid nuts. The video is conclusive evidence of massive ignorance and paranoid delusions.

CIT's work was doo-doo! I am not interested in drug induced paranoid quibbling of CIT! The only thing that concerns me is gullibility and ignorance of the believers of CIT!!! [YF (1974)]

[sts60]

Originally Posted by RandyK47

I don't know how somebody would describe the 125 killed in the Pentagon. Personally I describe seven of them as close friends. Two of the seven were co-workers in the same agency as mine and one of those I had dated. Another was a close professional colleague who had worked for me off and on as a contractor since 1988. I went to more funerals and memorials in 45 days than I have in my 60+ years. My wife and I were lucky and escaped with no physical injuries but while we don't dwell on it I doubt more than a couple of days goes by when we have some memory of that day and friends and co-workers lost.

Randy, I'm sorry about your friends and colleagues.

I hope you don't feel that they are dishonored by crackpots ranting about conspiracy fantasies. The crackpots dishonor only themselves, were they capable of honor in the first place.

[Mark F]

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

Should there be new knuckleheads around: the old knuckleheads babble about the film I posted in #5, in which it is made absolutely clear that the people interviewed do/did believe that the plane hit the Pentagon. The whole argument is that it has been a deception, and the fact that the old knuckleheads still reuse their old talking points against better knowledge reveals their willingness to deceive - at best. Go watch it.

There is no whole argument. Not even a partial argument.

There are assertions without evidence from a tiny minority of individuals who choose to deliberately ignore basic facts in order to push a political agenda.

[pgimeno]

Originally Posted by benthamitemetric

Wouldn't you expect the bulk of that scrap to be exactly in the center of the crash site where the main building collapse then occurred?

I personally wouldn't. I would expect the bulk of the scrap to be scattered around the building's interior, probably more towards the A-E drive's wall, and probably on the hole. And I think that that's why we don't see "a plane" in the debris (as in, something recognizable as a plane).

The columns under the area that later collapsed were completely destroyed by the impact, therefore they didn't stop the plane. Most of the plane went much farther in, and I believe most of its parts ended up in the interior and the A-E drive. If I recall correctly, the FDR was found near the "exit hole", inside the bulding, next to the same wall where the hole was.

Originally Posted by benthamitemetric

What do you expect the bulk of the scrap to look like after (1) the initial impact, (2) the collapse of multiple floors of the pentagon on top of it, and (3) being subjected to hours of severe fires?

And after the impact with the multiple interior columns, which I believe is key.

[benthamitemetric]

Originally Posted by pgimeno

I personally wouldn't. I would expect the bulk of the scrap to be scattered around the building's interior, probably more towards the A-E drive's wall, and probably on the hole. And I think that that's why we don't see "a plane" in the debris (as in, something recognizable as a plane).

The columns under the area that later collapsed were completely destroyed by the impact, therefore they didn't stop the plane. Most of the plane went much farther in, and I believe most of its parts ended up in the interior and the A-E drive. If I recall correctly, the FDR was found near the "exit hole", inside the bulding, next to the same wall where the hole was.


And after the impact with the multiple interior columns, which I believe is key.

Fair enough--I was a bit imprecise with in saying within the main crash site in the building. To be clear, I am defining that area as within Rows E through C and the courtyards therebetween. I don't conceptualize that space as being limited to inside Row E, as I think you took my comment to mean.

The main point, in any event, is that Childlike Empress wants to claim there wasn't sufficient crash debris to support the theory that there was a plane crash and yet neither s/he nor anyone else has solid contemporaneous photographic evidence of the volume of debris within the crash site itself immediately following the crash as that site was engulfed in flames and largely covered over by internal collapses within the pentagon.

[Steve]

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

Did he ask you to bother me with his nonsense?

No. And it is not nonsense. Your position is that the absence of something (plane parts) at the time the photo was taken indicates that it never existed. Is it also your position that all the other things absent from that photo, such as the people who worked in the building, also never existed? I am interested in your answer, and your logic.

[ElMondoHummus]

Originally Posted by traxy

I suppose the pertinent follow up questions are:

1. What actually did hit the Pentagon?

Oh man, that's opening a can of worms. There's everything from military jets to - I kid you not - cruise missiles painted in FL77's livery.

Come to think of it, I don't recall anyone using the hologram claim like they do with the New York flights. Or am I not remembering correctly?

Quote:

2. How were a hundred or more eyewitnesses deceived into seeing an American Airlines passenger jet hit the Pentagon?

Second can. Conspiracy peddlers will give anything from "people are afraid of speaking out due to ridicule/getting fired/government coming down on you" to "they misremembered" to "this is what they actually saw", the last implying that they need to actually explain it more clearly rather so that people properly "understand" it.

Quote:

3. How did American Airlines debris end up scattered on the lawn of the Pentagon after the crash?

HA! This is the can with the pop-out surprise worms! There are those who claim it wasn't really there - yeah, seriously! - to those who say it was all planted. Again, I can't tell you how disappointed I am that they didn't use the hologram claims here.

But yeah, I'm not doing these things any justice. You have to read it directly from a conspiracy addict to really get the flavor of the delusion.

[Reheat]

I guess there are lots of folks with nothing better to do that respond to this idiotic junk that has been debunked so thoroughly so long ago that it has gray whiskers and permanent age lines.

Hell, Craig and Alpo did not even believe their own crap toward the end. They intentionally manipulated photographs that revealed that they were intentionally lying in an attempt to keep their deceptions alive.

In another thread there is a discussion about not revealing the names of folks who seek notararity via mass killings because of low self esteem or perhaps due to insanity. Certainly, they should not be glorified. Although, CIT did not commit mass killings, they were guilty of perpetuating intentional deception for notararity perhaps for the same reasons as folks who commit mass murder. Let their story die. I don't think anyone with any common sense could possibly believe it for all of the reasons stated already.

For those reasons I'll just ROFLMAO and not give anyone who perpetuates this garbage the courtesy of a reply.

[Lanzy]

The only thing worse than reading garbage about the Pentagon on 9/11 is meeting people IRL that tell me how wrong I am about what "really" happened. You see that big hole in the side of the building? Yeah, that was my office. I was in another part of the building that morning, most of my friends were not.

[Oystein]

Originally Posted by Steve

Well Oystein, I tried. Childlike Empress appears to have some difficulty with your post and seems to find that ignoring it is the best approach.

Thanks. I have long come to consider getting ignored as the opponent's acknowledgment that I am right and they are finished, and as such wear it as a badge of honor.

[Oystein]

Originally Posted by Steve

No. And it is not nonsense. Your position is that the absence of something (plane parts) at the time the photo was taken indicates that it never existed. Is it also your position that all the other things absent from that photo, such as the people who worked in the building, also never existed? I am interested in your answer, and your logic.

CE already acknowledged the validity of my post - twice

• First, by not responding - the ages old indication that a truther surrenders.
• Secondly, by calling my post nonsense. Yes, of course what I wrote WAS nonsense: Of ourse the absence of chairs, desks, office workers, file cabinets, phones, computers etc. does not prove there wasn't any of that right there when the fiery 9/11 incident took place.
  It is the exact same nonsense as presenting the exact same photo and suggesting in the exact same way that not seeing plane parts in it proves there wasn't a plane shredding that Pentagon wedge.
  And CE understands perfectly well that his post was exactly this sort of nonsense. The difference being, I presented my post as nonsense, while CE presented his nonsense as something supposed to be believed. Since CE is intelligent enough to know all this, he understands perfectly well that I mocked his nonsense validly - and that is the exact reason he pretended to ignore it.

[RandyK47]

Originally Posted by sts60

Randy, I'm sorry about your friends and colleagues.

I hope you don't feel that they are dishonored by crackpots ranting about conspiracy fantasies. The crackpots dishonor only themselves, were they capable of honor in the first place.

Originally Posted by Lanzy

The only thing worse than reading garbage about the Pentagon on 9/11 is meeting people IRL that tell me how wrong I am about what "really" happened. You see that big hole in the side of the building? Yeah, that was my office. I was in another part of the building that morning, most of my friends were not.

Sounds like Lanzy's experience is pretty much like mine. I was part of the Army's Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation Management and our commanding general's office was just the immediate left and above the impact and eventual collapse area. Two of our staff were killed immediately at impact. We were two weeks away from moving across the hallway from them and I suspect several dozen more of us would have been killed or severely injured if the attack had taken place two weeks later. The area was part of the building that was deemed structurally damaged and was torn down and replaced. That thought has always been a bit sobering.

Generally I don't mind talking about my experiences that day. For the most part people are just curious and interested. On the other end of the spectrum are the few that want to argue and go as far as to call me a liar, a plant, an agent, delusional, stupid, etc., etc. As discussed in other threads it's been interesting to be questioned as a witness then dismissed because you don't know what you're talking about when your account runs contrary to their theory.

[cantonear1968]

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

Amazing. If only there would be a plane somewhere.

http://i.imgur.com/N3FK45d.jpg

You're not serious?

Is image-mining a word?

[Childlike Empress]

Did Donald Trump have a hand in releasing new 9/11 photos?

[Garrison]

For those who can't figure out what happened to the plane try this 'controlled experiment' courtesy of the Mythbusters:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nl8xTqTUGCY

As you can see in the slow-mo at those sorts of speeds metals doesn't crumple or break, it pretty much vaporizes.

[Axxman300]

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

Did Donald Trump have a hand in releasing new 9/11 photos?

Nope.

Turns out that the FBI had tried to post these pictures earlier, but there was a glitch. They just got around to reposting them.

Plus, nobody cares, so why would Trump waste his time when clearly all he has to do is get on Twitter to send the media into their next spaz attack.

[Dave Rogers]

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

Did Donald Trump have a hand in releasing new 9/11 photos?

Betteridge's law probably applies here.

Dave

[beachnut]

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

Did Donald Trump have a hand in releasing new 9/11 photos?

Your on par research skills with CIT, has you falling for these photos being released by clownstick, but the FBI released these photos in 2010, you are 7 years late, and 15 years behind reality.;

You found more false news, and forgot to check the facts... CIT level research, good job CE

[NoahFence]

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

Did Donald Trump have a hand in releasing new 9/11 photos?

Do complete idiots think no plane crashed at the Pentagon on 9/11?

[Mycroft]

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

Yawn, yeah we've all seen the experiments. Thing is, the matter doesn't disappear, and you don't get a nice little "exit hole" at the same time the remains spray the whole area. It just did not happen - you CAN trust what you see here. Deal with it.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

So where are the remains of that Jet? This video seems to contradict your view, not confirm it.