Author Topic: WTF? Pakistan Jetliner Crashes Into Mountain But Does Not Vaporize.  (Read 14823 times)

tarzan

  • Time Out
  • Getbig II
  • *
  • Posts: 282
Re: WTF? Pakistan Jetliner Crashes Into Mountain But Does Not Vaporize.
« Reply #125 on: August 01, 2010, 08:54:57 PM »
Ill go back and watch your videos 240, I actually did know about the holes and if you watch the pop mechanics guys debate the loose change guys they explain the reasoning for that...

I assume youve watched that and can give reasoning to disbelieve them?

This is the problem with the ct's you have 2 different ct's citing the same evidence as reasoning for their ct but on different sides of the evidence...

tarzan thinks that it should have created more damage, 240 says less LOL

at any rate I would like to see evidence real or physical evidence...not circumstantial evidence that a missle or at the very least not a plane hit the pentagon...

we have physical evidence to say that one did, where is the physical evidence to say a missile did?
Do yourself a favor and watch the video below - around the 68 minute mark - 74 minute mark they interview the cab driver on the bridge that was "struck" by a pole. With a hidden camera he admits that he was driven to the bridge in a van and that the operation is bigger than him and he contradicts himself on camera but off camera is candid and truthful. They have police officers and Pentagon workers who were all witnesses giving interviews that contradict the official account of the flight path per data recorders and flight control. Their observed path of the airliner makes it impossible for the plane to have hit the lamp posts as stated. The theory is that the airliner was shadowed by a smaller plane and that the airliner flew over the Pentagon and the smaller plane actually crashed into the building.

This video busts a hole right through the lie.



http://www.citizeninvestigationteam.com/nsa.html
 

tonymctones

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 26520
Re: WTF? Pakistan Jetliner Crashes Into Mountain But Does Not Vaporize.
« Reply #126 on: August 01, 2010, 08:58:10 PM »
I dont have any videos to present to you, tony.

I dont have any evidence for you.  You can go out and find your own.
LOL bro the one video you suggested to me(loose change) was debunked in 2 secs of google research, I agree that the official story isnt what happend, but all the physical evidence points to a plane hitting the pentagon...I agree that certain things seem weird when you first look at them but a pitcher being able to move the baseball seems weird to until you understand the reasons behind it...

ive asked many times and have never gotten a yes from you ct guys...have you seriously looked at evidence that goes against your ct's and your specific ct points?

Like I said there is physical evidence to support the idea that a plane hit the pentagon and nothing but personal opinion to support otherwise...all im asking for is evidence to support your theories...

have you seen the pop mechanics video that explains the holes 240?

tonymctones

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 26520
Re: WTF? Pakistan Jetliner Crashes Into Mountain But Does Not Vaporize.
« Reply #127 on: August 01, 2010, 08:59:34 PM »
Do yourself a favor and watch the video below - around the 68 minute mark - 74 minute mark they interview the cab driver on the bridge that was "struck" by a pole. With a hidden camera he admits that he was driven to the bridge in a van and that the operation is bigger than him and he contradicts himself on camera but off camera is candid and truthful. They have police officers and Pentagon workers who were all witnesses giving interviews that contradict the official account of the flight path per data recorders and flight control. Their observed path of the airliner makes it impossible for the plane to have hit the lamp posts as stated. The theory is that the airliner was shadowed by a smaller plane and that the airliner flew over the Pentagon and the smaller plane actually crashed into the building.

This video busts a hole right through the lie.



http://www.citizeninvestigationteam.com/nsa.html
Ill watch the video when I get a chance

answer me this then, what happend to the flight? the ppl? the pilots?
 

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: WTF? Pakistan Jetliner Crashes Into Mountain But Does Not Vaporize.
« Reply #128 on: August 01, 2010, 09:01:45 PM »
see tony... i could spend all night debating this... but really... pitting youtube clips against each other?  REALLY?

One of the sides is full of shit.  You don't think they'd have pretty convincing video clips as well?  You give a guy enough $ and time, he can make a youtube video as to why Santa is real.  Or not real.

I'd like to hear the hole explanation in YOUR OWN WORDS, dude.  Don't refer me to pop mech... you missed the debates where they made shit up, and their editor is a cousin of chertoff, bush's right hand guy.  

So use your own words, or just refer me to google.  Pitting videos against each other all night is gayer than arguing santa vs easter bunny..

tarzan

  • Time Out
  • Getbig II
  • *
  • Posts: 282
Re: WTF? Pakistan Jetliner Crashes Into Mountain But Does Not Vaporize.
« Reply #129 on: August 01, 2010, 09:12:17 PM »
see tony... i could spend all night debating this... but really... pitting youtube clips against each other?  REALLY?

One of the sides is full of shit.  You don't think they'd have pretty convincing video clips as well?  You give a guy enough $ and time, he can make a youtube video as to why Santa is real.  Or not real.

I'd like to hear the hole explanation in YOUR OWN WORDS, dude.  Don't refer me to pop mech... you missed the debates where they made shit up, and their editor is a cousin of chertoff, bush's right hand guy.  

So use your own words, or just refer me to google.  Pitting videos against each other all night is gayer than arguing santa vs easter bunny..
240 - yes however have you seen the video above? These are REAL witnesses and one of them admits on camera to a coverup - a witness that was on the bridge when the airliner supposedly flew over the bridge and knocked the lamp post through his cab. This video is an answer to all those people trying to debunk the 911 CT by saying "But what about the witnesses? Are they all in on it too?"

tonymctones

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 26520
Re: WTF? Pakistan Jetliner Crashes Into Mountain But Does Not Vaporize.
« Reply #130 on: August 01, 2010, 09:16:07 PM »
see tony... i could spend all night debating this... but really... pitting youtube clips against each other?  REALLY?

One of the sides is full of shit.  You don't think they'd have pretty convincing video clips as well?  You give a guy enough $ and time, he can make a youtube video as to why Santa is real.  Or not real.

I'd like to hear the hole explanation in YOUR OWN WORDS, dude.  Don't refer me to pop mech... you missed the debates where they made shit up, and their editor is a cousin of chertoff, bush's right hand guy.  

So use your own words, or just refer me to google.  Pitting videos against each other all night is gayer than arguing santa vs easter bunny..
LOL same could be said for you brosky...why if you can discredit their words...not them their words and points than do so...ive b=presented those points many times and youve never discredited them..so go ahead...

my words...all the physical evidence points to a plane hitting the pentagon...only circumstantial to support yours...

MuscleMcMannus

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6236
Re: WTF? Pakistan Jetliner Crashes Into Mountain But Does Not Vaporize.
« Reply #131 on: August 01, 2010, 10:14:43 PM »
 
I do not think there are that many people in important positions in agencies, facilities and departments that they would be that murderous and diabolical in such numbers that they could decide history at their will.  and when you weigh in the fact that there are likely many many more people of good standing moral and ethical principles in our military.  Or it might be as you suggest, Dr. Evil's minions control the entire world.  

LMAO! So in other words you have no fucking clue just how fucking corrupt and tyrannical the US government is.  This entire paragraph explains your ENTIRE mindsent.  It's hilarious because most of the shit I mentioned previously you've never even heard of.  Mkultra have you heard of that?  Operation Northwoods?  Oh wait it's all tin foil hat conspiracy shit.  You're fucking clueless dude.  You've got the mindset of many Americans who see the world through their rose colored glasses or atleast the US government.  I guess you don't believe there is any conspiracy behind the USS Liberty right?  I mean it was all an accident?   ::)  Someone like Hitler could never rise to power because the US government is your best friend and there are too many good people working day and night to protect and defend the Constitution.  You obviously have no clue who really pulls the strings in the world.  I suggest you research banking and the powerful banking families like the Rockefellers and the Rothschilds.  But that is just conspiracy shit right?  You are so fucking naive dude it's pathetic. 

The Showstoppa

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 26879
  • Call the vet, cause these pythons are sick!
Re: WTF? Pakistan Jetliner Crashes Into Mountain But Does Not Vaporize.
« Reply #132 on: August 02, 2010, 05:08:25 AM »
LMAO! So in other words you have no fucking clue just how fucking corrupt and tyrannical the US government is.  This entire paragraph explains your ENTIRE mindsent.  It's hilarious because most of the shit I mentioned previously you've never even heard of.  Mkultra have you heard of that?  Operation Northwoods?  Oh wait it's all tin foil hat conspiracy shit.  You're fucking clueless dude.  You've got the mindset of many Americans who see the world through their rose colored glasses or atleast the US government.  I guess you don't believe there is any conspiracy behind the USS Liberty right?  I mean it was all an accident?   ::)  Someone like Hitler could never rise to power because the US government is your best friend and there are too many good people working day and night to protect and defend the Constitution.  You obviously have no clue who really pulls the strings in the world.  I suggest you research banking and the powerful banking families like the Rockefellers and the Rothschilds.  But that is just conspiracy shit right?  You are so fucking naive dude it's pathetic. 

I didn't realize nurses had TS-SCI clearances..... :o

OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22847
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
Re: WTF? Pakistan Jetliner Crashes Into Mountain But Does Not Vaporize.
« Reply #133 on: August 02, 2010, 07:36:25 AM »
LMAO! So in other words you have no fucking clue just how fucking corrupt and tyrannical the US government is.  This entire paragraph explains your ENTIRE mindsent.  It's hilarious because most of the shit I mentioned previously you've never even heard of.  Mkultra have you heard of that?  Operation Northwoods?  Oh wait it's all tin foil hat conspiracy shit.  You're fucking clueless dude.  You've got the mindset of many Americans who see the world through their rose colored glasses or atleast the US government.  I guess you don't believe there is any conspiracy behind the USS Liberty right?  I mean it was all an accident?   ::)  Someone like Hitler could never rise to power because the US government is your best friend and there are too many good people working day and night to protect and defend the Constitution.  You obviously have no clue who really pulls the strings in the world.  I suggest you research banking and the powerful banking families like the Rockefellers and the Rothschilds.  But that is just conspiracy shit right?  You are so fucking naive dude it's pathetic. 

More assumptions, ad hoc etc..  you are such a bore. 

But your tin foil hat is interesting.

Again, you haven't done anything to further any of your points except use ridicule to make them.  What a joke.  At least Tarzan is putting together a real argument.   You on the other hand have only shown just how stupid you are.  Go back and re-read all my responses to you, see if you can gleam the jest of what i am saying to you.   :D

OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22847
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
Re: WTF? Pakistan Jetliner Crashes Into Mountain But Does Not Vaporize.
« Reply #134 on: August 02, 2010, 07:41:16 AM »
The proof is the fact that the footprint of the plane (including wings, engines, cockpit) is larger than the initial impact hole. How can that be? Yes the Pentagon is a solid structure but there was still a hole so it was not strong enough to resist penetration. The speed and mass of the airplane would have obliterated a much larger section. In the same way that a 1 mile asteroid would cause a much larger explosion and destruction than it's initial size.

Here is a picture of a 3 pound bird that flew into a plane's wing and actually cutting into the aluminum. It can do that because of the velocity x mass.


The same laws would apply if a lighter yet massive airplane slammed into a solid building like the Pentagon.


Here, research this one show me the hole shaped like a C-130.

Planes going fast enough into concrete pretty much disintegrate.  


http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Sky-News-Archive/Article/20080641205192






OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22847
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
Re: WTF? Pakistan Jetliner Crashes Into Mountain But Does Not Vaporize.
« Reply #135 on: August 02, 2010, 07:43:48 AM »
I didn't realize nurses had TS-SCI clearances..... :o

They all do,  real life is just like a summer block buster.   :D

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: WTF? Pakistan Jetliner Crashes Into Mountain But Does Not Vaporize.
« Reply #136 on: August 02, 2010, 08:04:56 AM »
Planes going fast enough into concrete pretty much disintegrate. 

Yes, agreed.

Somehow, on 911, the disintegrating plane managed to punch a perfect hole thru 6 concrete walls.  Here you see the SIXTH hole that was punched.  Clean as a whistle - odd, considering it was a fireballing, disintegrating composite nose of a plane, hitting its 6th wall.




OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22847
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
Re: WTF? Pakistan Jetliner Crashes Into Mountain But Does Not Vaporize.
« Reply #137 on: August 02, 2010, 08:43:21 AM »
Yes, agreed.

Somehow, on 911, the disintegrating plane managed to punch a perfect hole thru 6 concrete walls.  Here you see the SIXTH hole that was punched.  Clean as a whistle - odd, considering it was a fireballing, disintegrating composite nose of a plane, hitting its 6th wall.





You know i was just thinking that if it was a cruise missile it wouldn't have done that.  It would have exploded on impact.  If it got that far it would have exploded there. 

And yes, what disintegrates is the frame and skin. 

Mons Venus

  • Guest
Re: WTF? Pakistan Jetliner Crashes Into Mountain But Does Not Vaporize.
« Reply #138 on: August 02, 2010, 09:23:42 AM »
Yes, agreed.

Somehow, on 911, the disintegrating plane managed to punch a perfect hole thru 6 concrete walls.  Here you see the SIXTH hole that was punched.  Clean as a whistle - odd, considering it was a fireballing, disintegrating composite nose of a plane, hitting its 6th wall.






At this point anyone with semi critical thinking skills can understand what happened on 9-11. Unstruck buildings fall on their footprint at the speed of gravity.....80 ton Airliners 'Vaporize' on impact....NORAD decides to take the day off....etc  ::)
 



240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: WTF? Pakistan Jetliner Crashes Into Mountain But Does Not Vaporize.
« Reply #139 on: August 02, 2010, 09:29:46 AM »
You know i was just thinking that if it was a cruise missile it wouldn't have done that.  It would have exploded on impact.  If it got that far it would have exploded there.  

And yes, what disintegrates is the frame and skin.  

You're thinking conventional missile.  There are other options:

Let's look at what kind of missile would enter by such a small hole, penetrate 6 walls and several intervening columns to create a nice round exit hole.



No explosion, just a concrete tip.  Commonly used in war to penetrate 10 stories of bunker or building BEFORE exploding.  Suppose they didn't want a massive explosion at the end - just a nice hole outside for the cameras.

Seriously dude, suppose hypothetically you fly a concrete-tipped dud into the same 6 reinforced walls (and center column which was penetrated too), and you fly a plane into these same walls.  You'd probably expect to see this clean sliced hole with the missile, not the plane.  Looking at the evidence - throwing out politics and motive and everything else - it seems more likely a concrete missile could make that hole, than a composite nose airliner which had already disintegrated ;)

tarzan

  • Time Out
  • Getbig II
  • *
  • Posts: 282
Re: WTF? Pakistan Jetliner Crashes Into Mountain But Does Not Vaporize.
« Reply #140 on: August 02, 2010, 09:47:18 AM »

Here, research this one show me the hole shaped like a C-130.

Planes going fast enough into concrete pretty much disintegrate.  

Each accident will be unique.

Here is another example of flight El Al Flight 1862 that crashed into the Groeneveen and Klein-Kruitberg flats in the Bijlmermeer (colloquially "Bijlmer") neighbourhood (part of Amsterdam Zuidoost) of Amsterdam.
What's interesting about this Israeli flight is that it carried Uranium. In 1997, however, an expert testified in the Israeli Knesset that dangerous products would have been released during combustion of the depleted uranium in the tail of the Boeing 747.




Complete section of building is gone. Notice the damage to the gardens around the building.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Al_Flight_1862


OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22847
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
Re: WTF? Pakistan Jetliner Crashes Into Mountain But Does Not Vaporize.
« Reply #141 on: August 02, 2010, 12:36:02 PM »
Each accident will be unique.


Exactly!


So to say the plane that hit the pentagon should have done "this or that" is baseless to the extend of it should have made a bigger hole as you said in #1 of your 3 questions.

OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22847
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
Re: WTF? Pakistan Jetliner Crashes Into Mountain But Does Not Vaporize.
« Reply #142 on: August 02, 2010, 12:45:10 PM »
You're thinking conventional missile.  There are other options:

Let's look at what kind of missile would enter by such a small hole, penetrate 6 walls and several intervening columns to create a nice round exit hole.



No explosion, just a concrete tip.  Commonly used in war to penetrate 10 stories of bunker or building BEFORE exploding.  Suppose they didn't want a massive explosion at the end - just a nice hole outside for the cameras.

Seriously dude, suppose hypothetically you fly a concrete-tipped dud into the same 6 reinforced walls (and center column which was penetrated too), and you fly a plane into these same walls.  You'd probably expect to see this clean sliced hole with the missile, not the plane.  Looking at the evidence - throwing out politics and motive and everything else - it seems more likely a concrete missile could make that hole, than a composite nose airliner which had already disintegrated ;)

But why would they?  Why would they want to punch a hole through 6 buildings just have every novice in the world say it was a missile?  Why not just exploded where it hits?

tarzan

  • Time Out
  • Getbig II
  • *
  • Posts: 282
Re: WTF? Pakistan Jetliner Crashes Into Mountain But Does Not Vaporize.
« Reply #143 on: August 02, 2010, 01:14:04 PM »

Exactly!


So to say the plane that hit the pentagon should have done "this or that" is baseless to the extend of it should have made a bigger hole as you said in #1 of your 3 questions.

Well the example you posted is unique in the sense that it crashed into the top floor. Who knows maybe it skimmed the top floor? Do you have more info about it? It does not appear like it slammed into the building with it's whole body.

tarzan

  • Time Out
  • Getbig II
  • *
  • Posts: 282
Re: WTF? Pakistan Jetliner Crashes Into Mountain But Does Not Vaporize.
« Reply #144 on: August 02, 2010, 01:16:37 PM »
But why would they?  Why would they want to punch a hole through 6 buildings just have every novice in the world say it was a missile?  Why not just exploded where it hits?
Instead of asking that question which only THEY could answer, why not address the contradiction coming from you that the plane would vaporize when crashing into a concrete structure yet somehow simultaneously penetrate through 6 walls and leave a neat hole at the inner wall that is almost as big as the impact hole.

OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22847
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
Re: WTF? Pakistan Jetliner Crashes Into Mountain But Does Not Vaporize.
« Reply #145 on: August 02, 2010, 01:20:01 PM »
Instead of asking that question which only THEY could answer, why not address the contradiction coming from you that the plane would vaporize when crashing into a concrete structure yet somehow simultaneously penetrate through 6 walls and leave a neat hole at the inner wall that is almost as big as the impact hole.

Were there any solid objects of enough density on the plane to punch through?


OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22847
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
Re: WTF? Pakistan Jetliner Crashes Into Mountain But Does Not Vaporize.
« Reply #146 on: August 02, 2010, 01:23:19 PM »
Well the example you posted is unique in the sense that it crashed into the top floor. Who knows maybe it skimmed the top floor? Do you have more info about it? It does not appear like it slammed into the building with it's whole body.

It wouldn't matter.  The whole point, is your point, every crash has so many factors and variables, so to definitively say it should have made a larger hole and therefore it wasn't a plane, is flawed logic and incorrect.

Mons Venus

  • Guest
Pentagon Survivor April Gallop Suing Rumsfeld, Cheney and Myers
« Reply #147 on: August 02, 2010, 01:32:44 PM »
The truth will surface. Just give it time.  ;)

-------


A career Army officer who survived the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, claims that no evacuation was ordered inside the Pentagon, despite flight controllers calling in warnings of approaching hijacked aircraft nearly 20 minutes before the building was struck.

According to a timeline of the attacks, the Federal Aviation Administration notified NORAD that American Airlines Flight 77 had been hijacked at 9:24 a.m. The Pentagon was not struck until 9:43 a.m.

On behalf of retired Army officer April Gallop, California attorney William Veale has filed a civil suit against former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Vice President Dick Cheney and former US Air Force General Richard Myers, who was acting chairman of the joint chiefs on 9/11. It alleges they engaged in conspiracy to facilitate the terrorist attacks by not warning those inside the Pentagon, contributing to injuries she and her two-month-old son incurred.

"The ex-G.I. plaintiff alleges she has been denied government support since then, because she raised 'painful questions' about the inexplicable failure of military defenses at the Pentagon that day, and especially the failure of officials to warn and evacuate the occupants of the building when they knew the attack was imminent" said Veale in a media advisory.

Gallop also says she heard two loud explosions, and does not believe that a Boeing 757 hit the building. Her son sustained a serious brain injury, and Gallop herself was knocked unconscious after the roof collapsed onto her office.

The suit also named additional, unknown persons who had foreknowledge of the attacks.

"What they don't want is for this to go into discovery," said Gallop's attorney, Mr. Veale, speaking to RAW STORY. "If we can make it past their initial motion to dismiss these claims, and we get the power of subpoena, then we've got a real shot at getting to the bottom of this. We've got the law on our side."



The lawsuit's full text follows.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ___

APRIL GALLOP, for Herself and as Mother and Next Friend of ELISHA GALLOP, a Minor, No. _____________

Plaintiff, Jury Trial Demanded

vs.

DICK CHENEY, Vice President of the U.S.A., DONALD RUMSFELD, former U.S. Secretary of Defense, General RICHARD MYERS, U.S.A.F. (Ret.), and John Does Nos. 1– X, all in their individual capacities, Defendants.

________________________ __________________


COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS, CONSPIRACY, AND OTHER WRONGS

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

1. This case arises from the infamous Attack on America of Sept 11, 2001, and especially on the Pentagon; and is premised on an allegation of broad complicity in the attack on the part of key U.S. Government officials, beginning with and led from the top by Vice President Dick Cheney, then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and Richard Myers, then acting Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The plaintiffs allege that these and other government officials, whose identities will be ascertained from their proven or evident relevant roles and activities, and who are named herein as 'John Doe' defendants, together with other known and unknown operatives and functionaries, official and otherwise, engaged in an unlawful conspiracy, or a set of related, ongoing conspiracies, in which the concrete objective was to facilitate and enable the hijacking of the airliners, and their use as living bombs to attack buildings containing thousands of innocent victims; and then to cover up the truth about what they had done.

2. The defendants' purpose in aiding and facilitating the attack, and the overall object of the conspirac(ies), was to bring about an unprecedented, horrifying and frightening catastrophe of terrorism inside the United States, which would give rise to a powerful reaction of fear and anger in the public, and in Washington. This would generate a political atmosphere of acceptance in which the new Administration could enact and implement radical changes in the policy and practice of constitutional government in our country. Much of their intention was spelled out prior to their coming into office, in publications of the so-called Project for the New American Century, of which defendants Cheney and Rumsfeld were major sponsors. There they set forth specific objectives regarding the projection of U.S. military power abroad, particularly in Iraq, the Persian Gulf, and other oil-producing areas. They observed, however, that the American people would not likely support the actions the sponsors believed were necessary, without being shocked into a new outlook by something cataclysmic: “a new Pearl Harbor”. By helping the attack succeed, defendants and their cohorts created a basis for the seizure of extraordinary power, and a pretext for launching the so-called Global War on Terror, in the guise of which they were free to pursue plans for military conquest, “full spectrum dominance” and “American primacy” around the world; as they have done.

3. In pursuit of the goals of the conspiracy, the named and unnamed defendants knowingly and by agreement committed a series of acts and omissions which were aimed at and did generally accomplish the following objectives:

+ To permit the men they later identified as the hijackers and any immediate accomplices to enter and remain in the country, and carry out the activities, movements and communications needed in their preparations for the hijacking, free from interference by police or counter-terrorist authorities; and then allow the groups of these men to book passage, all on the same day, and board the flights;

+ To cause normal operation of the regular off-course airline flight interception practice of the US Air Force, in cooperation with civil flight control authorities, to be altered, suspended or disrupted in such a way as to remove its protections, at least on that day, and thus permit three of the four apparently hijacked planes to reach their targets and crash into them (or appear to do so...);1

+ To cause the normal operation of ground and air defenses which guard the Pentagon from external attack to be altered, suspended or disrupted in such a way as to remove or negate the building's normal protections, and thus permit an airliner, believed to be hijacked by possible suicide bombers, and following a forbidden, descending flight path, to reach the Pentagon undeterred;

+ To cause and arrange for high explosive charges to be detonated inside the Pentagon, and/or a missile of some sort to be fired at the building, at or about the time the wayward airliner supposedly arrived there, to give the false impression that hijackers had crashed the plane into the building, as had apparently happened in New York;

+ To arrange, thereafter, and fabricate, propound and defend, as part of the conspiracy, an elaborate, highly complex and sophisticated cover-up, centering around the Report of the 9/11 Commission, and continuing to this day. To this end, defendants misappropriated the highest authority of government to block, misdirect and otherwise evade any fair, independent investigation of the evidence, and officially if implausibly explain away the evident wholesale failure of America's defenses with misinformation, omissions and distortions, withheld and destroyed evidence, and outright lies.

4. In the attack on the Pentagon, in particular, plaintiff avers that the official story, that a hijacked plane crashed into the Pentagon and exploded (causing the plaintiff’s injuries), is false. In fact, the bombing was accomplished another way, so as to limit the damage, protect the defendants, and only make it appear that a plane had been crashed into the building. This claim is supported by data from the plane’s supposed “black box”, released by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), which indicate the plane passed over the building at very low altitude, just as an explosion and fireball were engineered by other means, a planted bomb or bombs and/or a missile. This is supported by the lack of any photographic evidence of a wrecked airliner at the Pentagon, compounded by the record of reported refusal by the U.S. Department of Justice to release some 85 video tapes from surveillance cameras in locations at or near the Pentagon, which it has declared exempt from Freedom of Information Act disclosure.

5. Whatever way the bombing of the Pentagon was accomplished, however, and whatever else may or may not have been done by defendants to facilitate the hijackings that day, it is clear the defendant top commanders would have had and did have, at a profound minimum, enough foreknowledge, on that day and in the intelligence information they received beforehand, to have sounded a warning in time for plaintiff and others to evacuate the building, and thereby avoid much if not all the death and injury which occurred. In the end, more than half an hour passed after flight controllers first sounded the alert on Flight 77, while all concerned were fully aware of the suicide crashes in New York; plenty of time for the Pentagon to be evacuated. ‘Top gun’ jet fighter-interceptors under defendants’ command, available with time to spare, were not summoned; and the people in the building, including plaintiff and her infant, were not

warned. This was the result of unlawful conspiracy among these highest-level commanders, and others, who acted knowingly and intentionally to have the Pentagon attacked or to allow it to be attacked, without warning, with deliberate indifference to and in reckless and callous disregard for the fundamental constitutional and human rights of plaintiff and her child, and many other people, dead, injured and bereaved.

6. Plaintiff April Gallop brings this action for herself and as next friend of her son Elisha Gallop now aged 7, who was a two-month-old baby in her arms on that day, her first back from maternity leave. She was a career member of the US Army, a ranking specialist with top secret clearance, who had served six years, two-and-a-half of them in Germany, before being assigned to the Pentagon in 2000. Her desk was roughly 40 feet from the point where the plane allegedly hit the outside wall. As she sat down to work there was an explosion, then another; walls collapsed and the ceiling fell in. Hit in the head, she was able to grab the baby and make her way towards the daylight showing through a blasted opening in the outside wall. There was no airplane wreckage and no burning airplane fuel anywhere; only rubble and dust.

7. Plaintiff and her baby both suffered substantial head and brain injuries, which seriously affect them still today. Plaintiff charges that, because of the conspiracy alleged herein, she and her child and others were injured by acts of terrorism participated in by defendants. Further, as more fully described within at Pars 57-59, she and her child were and subsequently have been denied fundamental rights — including by acts of retaliation against her for raising painful questions about what occurred — as the cover-up continues.


JURISDICTION & VENUE

8. This Court has jurisdiction of this case, as follows:

a. Under the First, Fourth, Fifth and Ninth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, as applied to federal officials under the rule of Bivens v Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971); and 28 USC 1331;

b. Under the federal Common Law — given that the most direct occurrences and mechanisms of plaintiffs’ injuries, no doubt including crucial agreements and other communications among various defendants, took place in the Pentagon, a federal enclave — giving plaintiff a right of action in this Court for conspiracy to commit and facilitate actions likely to cause wrongful death, great bodily injury, terror and other loss to plaintiff and others to whom defendants owed a special duty of care; where, instead, defendants acted with reckless and callous disregard for and deliberate indifference to the likelihood of great harm to plaintiff and others, and deprivation of their rights;

c. Under the Terrorism Acts, 18 U.S.Code 2333(a), for acts of terrorism brought about by actions wholly outside the scope of defendants’ duties, in perversion of their authority, and beyond the bounds or color of any law; and therefore not exempt or immune under the provisions of Sec. 2337, the application of which to exonerate these defendants would be unconstitutional.

9. Venue for the case is set by the special provisions of the Air Transportation Safety Act of September, 2001, 49 U.S.C. 40101, Subsection 408((IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/cool.gif) (3), bringing all claims arising from events of 9/11 to this honorable Court .

PARTIES

10. Plaintiff APRIL GALLOP is an American citizen, resident of the State of Virginia, a member until this year of the U.S. Army, stationed at the Pentagon on 9/11, claiming for herself and for her minor child, ELISHA GALLOP, who was just two months old on 9/11/01, and was with her when the building was hit. Plaintiff respectfully petitions the Court to appoint her as guardian ad litem for the purposes of this action and related matters.

11. Defendants are DICK CHENEY, the Vice President of the United States; DONALD RUMSFELD, formerly and at relevant times Secretary of Defense of the U.S.; Gen. RICHARD MYERS, then acting chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; all sued in their individual capacities. Additional named, unknown defendants are other persons who were and are co-actors and co-conspirators in sundry phases of the (terrorist) undertaking complained of herein, whose identities, and some of whose precise places or functions in the plot(s) alleged herein are not yet known or fully known, but who certainly include high-ranking members of the Defense Department, the Military, the C.I.A., the F.B.I. and other agencies. Such persons are named and alleged as co-defendants, designated as John Does Nos.1-X and hereby notified of this action, pro tanto, to be identified for the record and impleaded by plaintiffs as the particulars of both culpable and innocent acts and omissions by everyone involved in these events become known.


Mons Venus

  • Guest
Eight U.S. State Department Veterans Challenge the Official Account of 9/11
« Reply #148 on: August 02, 2010, 01:49:12 PM »
Official Account of 9/11: “Flawed”, “Absurd”, “Totally Inadequate”, “a Cover-up”

January 5, 2008 – Eight U.S. State Department veterans have severely criticized the official account of 9/11 and called for a new investigation.  “There is no question in my mind, that there is enough evidence to justify a very comprehensive and hard hitting investigation of the kind we have not seen, with subpoenas, general questioning of people, releasing a lot of documents,” said Daniel Ellsberg, PhD, in a 2006 interview with Jack Blood. Full Article

 




240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: WTF? Pakistan Jetliner Crashes Into Mountain But Does Not Vaporize.
« Reply #149 on: August 02, 2010, 01:54:42 PM »
But why would they?  Why would they want to punch a hole through 6 buildings just have every novice in the world say it was a missile?  Why not just exploded where it hits?

Um, already, every novice in the world, along with many professionals, believe it wasn't a plane.  They needed a hole but they couldn't put a lawn full of bodies on tv, now could they?  

But if you want to talk about motive... how about the DoD announcing the day before 911, that they lost 2.3 trillion bucks.  Or, the nice war for oil, bases, minerals, whatever in afghanistan it would lead to.


LOL @ you going from holes to "why".  maybe they wanted to minimize damage.