9/11 Commissioner Slips, Says Missile Used Against Pentagon
9/11 Commissioner Tim Roemer slips up and names the machine that struck the Pentagon as a missile, instead of an airplane. Oh, well, tangled webs.
Click here to view the embedded video.
Here is an analysis of why an airliner could not have hit the Pentagon that day.
Click here to view the embedded video.
I just had a discussion with a reader on the objections to the theory that a plane was used against the Pentagon. Here is a summary of the objections to that theory.
There are several problems with the explanation that a plane hit the Pentagon. One is that no wreckage of a plane has ever been found. If a plane had hit, there would be bodies of passengers, seats, baggage, tail assembly, wings. They would been all over the place and prominent in pictures of the site.
A second is that the marks on the building are not consistent with a plane. There are no indications that the wings or tail assembly struck the building.
A third is that there are no marks on the ground consistent with a plane flying that low. The jet would have had to come so close to the ground that the grass would show indications of it.
A fourth is that there was no fire at the Pentagon consistent with a plane carrying that amount of jet fuel, as compared say with the explosion at the World Trade Center when planes hit them. You can see that a book still sits on a filing cabinet next to the building and a wooden desk is not even singed. Papers are strewn about indicating that no fire took place.
A fifth is that Hani Hanjour could not have flown a plane that had to make those maneuvers. He did not have the skills to have flown it in such a tight circle as it made on approach or so low to the ground. In fact few well-trained pilots could have flown that flight pattern in a passenger airliner.
A sixth is that the FBI have never released any of the security tapes that would confirm that a plane hit and would be expected to if they wanted to settle the question.
There are increasing numbers of professional organizations, be they architects, space engineers, pilots, firefighters, and others who are convinced about the truth being covered up.
If you are more curious, watch "Loose Change", FINAL cut....available on the web, or on a CD. The folks that made this were so conscientious that the made it several times....each time following questions that people wanted to see documented more empirically. They responded to each challenge, and recreated the film, time after time, in their quest for perfection in reporting.
If you watch it, you will find a compelling film and proven facts....you will forever then see life just a bit differently. My only advice is to PAY ATTENTION! It is not a film to "drowse" to....there are too many details that are amazingly shocking, and the creators put as much in as they could. You need a fresh and alert mind!
After viewing it, if you are not impatient about questions...many, many questions, being answered, you might as well just return to sleep....for it will be some time before you are AWAKE (conscious)!
http://www.loosechange911.com/
Click here to view the embedded video.
Here is an analysis of why an airliner could not have hit the Pentagon that day.
Click here to view the embedded video.
I just had a discussion with a reader on the objections to the theory that a plane was used against the Pentagon. Here is a summary of the objections to that theory.
There are several problems with the explanation that a plane hit the Pentagon. One is that no wreckage of a plane has ever been found. If a plane had hit, there would be bodies of passengers, seats, baggage, tail assembly, wings. They would been all over the place and prominent in pictures of the site.
A second is that the marks on the building are not consistent with a plane. There are no indications that the wings or tail assembly struck the building.
A third is that there are no marks on the ground consistent with a plane flying that low. The jet would have had to come so close to the ground that the grass would show indications of it.
A fourth is that there was no fire at the Pentagon consistent with a plane carrying that amount of jet fuel, as compared say with the explosion at the World Trade Center when planes hit them. You can see that a book still sits on a filing cabinet next to the building and a wooden desk is not even singed. Papers are strewn about indicating that no fire took place.
A fifth is that Hani Hanjour could not have flown a plane that had to make those maneuvers. He did not have the skills to have flown it in such a tight circle as it made on approach or so low to the ground. In fact few well-trained pilots could have flown that flight pattern in a passenger airliner.
A sixth is that the FBI have never released any of the security tapes that would confirm that a plane hit and would be expected to if they wanted to settle the question.
There are increasing numbers of professional organizations, be they architects, space engineers, pilots, firefighters, and others who are convinced about the truth being covered up.
If you are more curious, watch "Loose Change", FINAL cut....available on the web, or on a CD. The folks that made this were so conscientious that the made it several times....each time following questions that people wanted to see documented more empirically. They responded to each challenge, and recreated the film, time after time, in their quest for perfection in reporting.
If you watch it, you will find a compelling film and proven facts....you will forever then see life just a bit differently. My only advice is to PAY ATTENTION! It is not a film to "drowse" to....there are too many details that are amazingly shocking, and the creators put as much in as they could. You need a fresh and alert mind!
After viewing it, if you are not impatient about questions...many, many questions, being answered, you might as well just return to sleep....for it will be some time before you are AWAKE (conscious)!
http://www.loosechange911.com/
