I had a conversation with a veteran researcher and they told me something that was really an eye-opener. They said that none of the plane debris seen at the Pentagon was too big to plant.

As I recall, this seems to be true. Was there any debris said to have come from a Boeing 757 that was too big to plant? This would mean debris too big to fit through a doorway inside the Pentagon for instance, or would require heavy equipment to move it out on the lawn.

Not a Pentagon expert, but all the debris I've seen in pictures was carted off by hand(s), not machine.

That wheel assembly would be a pain in the arse to carry by hands..

Several small tractor-like things were used, like the one you see on the left... of course not exclusively for plane debris...

Its fun to say everything was planted but it would also be nice to have any kind of proof that was the case, heh?

How many people you reckon were assigned the task of fabricating fake Boeing 757 evidence? How many people to actually plant them inside and outside the building?

If you go into the details and try to estimate the number of people required to actually fake the whole scene, it becomes quite scary! I actually have done so but since I dont believe thats what happened I'll only post it after some no-planer or flyover guy posts his own estimate first...

trust me, this is where it hurts..

hey racerx,

i invited crustic logic to authenticate that picture, but he has thus far fallen short. i therefore open the same invitation to you: authenticate that picture. find its original source.

yes a user named digest, claiming to be an israeli defense forces sniper posted it here at LFC, hours before he/she forever disappeared from here. but look deeper, that pic has been posted once BEFORE digest posted it here. see if u can find where it was posted first.

and no it wasnt the italian blogger henry (the link larson posted).

***

regarding the thread topic:

i dont think any of the debris found outside of the pentagon (on the lawn) was too big to be planted by hand, it was mostly loose/light pieces of aluminum and plane exterior. so the amount of people and physical force required to plant it would have been relatively small.

the bigger, more substantial pieces however, the ones photographed by a few, including titus, some of these bigger pieces would have required the aid of machinery to be put in place. imo they were put in place before the explosions occurred, possibly tucked out of view of pentagon patrons. but after the explosions occurred, these bigger pieces (what few there were) ended up being part of the rubble, hence they were found in the "wreckage".


back to the picture:

and of these larger pieces, the mystery pic is the most convincing debris i have seen to date. only problem is the pic is a ghost. it appeared out of nowhere, and its poster disappeared. and i still cant fathom why, if such a piece was authentically at the scene, the government would choose NOT to make it public. they have grasped at all other straws that could help them convince people of their "official story", so why in this case would they abstain from releasing this pic?

if this pic is real, but they (the gov) chose NOT to post it, then you have to wonder why. is it because israeli special forces had access to the scene and they took the picture? so far the only person tied to this pic made claims that the "skid driver" took this pic. digest promised russell pickering he would do his best to come up with more info or a better version of the pic. this promise fell empty however, and digest never did reveal anything else about the origin of this photo.

so for all we know, he/she (digest) was the skid driver, or he/she had access to the post 911 pentagon wreckage, and he/she claims to be an israeli commando. so is this why the gov did NOT release the picture? i doubt it, but its a natural/logical line of inquiry if everything is actually as it seems.

so why and how would an israeli commando have access to this pic? were israelis present at the wreckage? did they serve as skid drivers and/or photographers? is this why the gov would resist posting what could be their BEST photographic evidence?

:huh:

somehow i dont think so. so far there are more things pointing to this pic being fake or doctored, than there are to suggest that it is authentic.

***

Nope, not to me...

That shot was clearly taken at A-E drive at the Pentagon, just look at the building.. I dont care if its authentic enough for other people...

The points I've made are still valid, well.. pretty much so.. if you actually think the pic is fake and that the shit we see was added on a pic of a clean Pentagon A-E drive, you still need people to take a 757 landing gear strut, a 757 wheel assembly, and various other 757 components and damage them enough to make the fake picture possible...

what you posted rings like heavy denial to me..

If the skid driver took that picture even if he wasnt supposed to, maybe thats why it isnt used by 'official' sources? Simple as that?

What do you think about my idea of putting out an estimate of the people required to fake the whole scene? I assure you I've been ridiculously conservative with my own.. try it for yourself and see... It'll make the 'northside of citgo' issue seem like a bad joke in comparison.

I always figured they used debris from some previous crash. A lot of those bigger pieces were already planted in the building beforehand.

THIS piece is NOT debris from a previous crash. Rivet holes have no rivets and there are no indentations where rivets would've been, which means it's fake.

Why have you not posted on my Integrated Consultants thread? Heavy denial?

Rivet holes have no rivets because the rivets are gone, they're part of the debris field somewhere too though, make no mistake about it.. and if you cant see indentations thats your problem, because the picture speaks for itself.. you should take pliers and a piece of aircraft-grade aluminium and try to replicate it if you even believe yourself..

I havent posted on your Integrated Consultants thread because its just a bunch of speculation.. about a computer animation... bottom line: it doesnt matter.

If you had done the exercise I've suggested and made an estimation of the people required to fake the whole scene, would you add the guy(s) that made the animation as part of the conspiracy?

make sure you dissect this post to suit your agenda too when you bother to reply ;)

OK!!!

We'll just take your anonymous word for it. If you say make no mistake about it, I have no reason to believe you wouldn't be the person to know!!! :rolleyes:

It's 2008, this is so ridiculous. Tail sections and fuselages don't fucking vaporize. Airplane seats don't shatter into microscopic pieces.

And a 757 definitely didn't hit the Pentagon on 9/11.

Well, TC, its not like you think a plane has impacted from the north side of the citgo, is it?

Vaporized as well?

get a clue..

ahem, who's the one in denial? since u dont care about authenticity of evidence (ur own unresearched conclusions suffice for u), then i guess the rest of this post and any efforts on my behalf at enlightening you are just me wasting my time. but im up for it, so lets continue.

im not saying faking it would be easy, but that doesnt make it impossible. had this picture been released with all the other pics years ago, then i would have less doubts about its legitimacy as a photograph. think of any other crime u know: would "evidence" that popped up 6 years after the fact, arriving without ANY authentication or official chain of custody, and anonymously posted on the internet, would this be allowed as an exhibit in a trial? the pic's origin is dubious, to put it simply. therefore the authenticity of the pic remains highly questionable.

unlike u, im not satisfied with the source of the pic. ur the one who says he "does NOT care if its authentic enough for other people", but not me. i do care if its authentic, and all i have to go by is its internet trail. so to the best of my ability i tried to find the source of that pic. something which u have yet to do. i ask again, please do ur homework on that source of that pic, and then let's compare notes about where it came from.

you think they let random people have access to the area? dont u think lesser people like a "skid driver" would have been scrutinized before being allowed access to the scene? you think they would let a "worker" sneak in a camera? no i dont think anyone could have "sneakily" or secretly taken the pic.

as to how a secretly taken pic relates to the gov not wanting to release such a pic, ur reasoning/logic confuses me.

im saying if the piece was there when its alleged to have been there, then why wouldnt the gov themselves take a big fat pic of it and plaster it everywhere for the "conspiracy theorists" to see? it makes no sense to keep this pic secret, if it is real. please provide one reason why the gov would NOT post this pic (if inded such parts existed at the site on or around 911), cuz such logic seriously fails me.

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_F...p?showuser=6562

http://forums.randi.org/z/index.php?z-profile=Digest

plus you still havent yet posed any theory for why a girl claiming to be an israeli sniper is the source of this photograph. is that because ur so eager for such a pic that u dont care if its real? when some random anonymous source, with an extensive jref background, pops up with a holy grail, ur quick to bow down and worship it, rather blindly even by ur own admission. all im asking for is scrutiny. that should be ur protocol if ur really seeking the truth, right? if u did u might see that digest arrived out of AND disappeared into NOWHERE, yet was quite familiar with the scene, and with the people of and contexts of 911truth debates. she was also a jrefer making fun of the various goings on that she (as digest) was privy to here at LFC. so please scrutinize digest's pic further. when u find out that digest was lying about her relation to the source of the pic, will u continue to be in denial?

and lets say for the sake of argument, that the pic is real: it was taken at the pentagon, and what u see in the pic, was physically there inside one of the rings, just as it appears in the photograph. even if it is not a fake, the portion of the pentagon that was attacked was under renovation for years (before 9/11). so none of the plane parts in any images are too big to have been planted in a secured room (offlimits to all but a few) that could have been constructed for the very purpose of hiding these parts, during the renovation. in other words, the "renovations" that were just completed before 9/11 were actually a guise to facilitate all the necessary physical actions that would eventually surmount to rigging the place with explosives and hiding/planting plane parts inside the building.

you question the condition of the items as seen in the pic, so im saying that the parts (especially the bigger/heavier ones inside) could have already been within the building WHEN the explosions occurred, and thats why they show damage consitent with an explosive or fire entrenched event. thats under the assumption of course, that the pic is real.

i thought i addressed it, but let me clarify: the harder pieces to plant, the heavy ones which would require a forklift or the aid other machinery (possibly something as small as a pallette-jack), these pieces could be placed under the guise of construction, covered in a box or by canvass, and be walked thru the building and placed wherever deemed necessary. so although heavier and harder to move, they are actually easier to plant (transported in plain view).

the outside parts having specifically been identified as "plane parts", being light and so few in number, could have easily been planted with relative physical ease. the hard part would be a question of opportunity, as in when could they do it? imo probably during the second attack warnings where everyone was herded out of view. while most eyes were peeled to the SKY in search of possible incoming planes, is when the bulk of the "plane pieces" outside were planted.

the photographic evidence of plane parts doesnt really give any idea of exact time of the photos. but in the earliest pics of the area, u dont see these alleged parts. maybe u could refresh my memory, but did bob pugh film any of the parts upon his initial arrival? do any of the plane parts pics on the lawn have some identifiable marker as to their exact time? here is one:


(NOTE the roadblock off in the distance, and desolation in between. note 2 people on the right looking AWAY from the scene)

here is another pic, where its still early at the scene, and yet none of the big fuselage pieces can be seen (except for the one in front of the van):
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Sep2001/200109114a_hr.jpg


some of the parts, like the famous ones with AA colors and letters, these pieces found outside make no sense. if the plane was solid enough in some bulk of mass or other to reach the c-ring, then how did a few random pieces of it fly outside the building? look at the purdue animation, does that show any pieces of fuselage flying out of the building? or does the plane get shredded inside the building?


and ur leap of logic in to the northside claim also confuses me. i know u cant resist taking potshots at it, but i dont see how it relates to making estimates regarding how many people it would take to plant "evidence". if u could please, if for nothing else but my amusement, could u post these "calculations"? oh wait im supposed to post mine first, right?

ok how about u at least tell me how many pieces we are talking about, and what size they are. in advance i will say this: how many people do u see carrying these "pieces"? each one i have seen was carried by one or two people. so one or two people could have placed a total of ten pieces of plane evidence in less than 5 minutes. most of these pieces were small, right? so they could be tossed about rather randomly and quickly.


(note: no rivets in the piece the guy is holding. and what the heck are these guys doing anyway? are they removing, or placing debris? why would they be removing it? if u look at the later pics u will see that "evidence" was not moved, but tagged with yellow tape instead. so shouldnt these guys be tagging and NOT moving the "evidence"?)


later when the one fed and line of arlington police are officially combing the area, these white shirt guys are nowhere to be found. so who were the bald white shirt guys, what time was it, and what were they doing with the "evidence"? if the authorities did their "sweep" later, then what were the whiteshirts up to?
http://911files.info/77/pentagon_911_book/fbi_sweep.jpg

yellow-tagged piece after official sweep:
http://911files.info/77/pentagon_911_book/...age_remnant.jpg


the bigger "fuselage pieces" may have taken the longest to place. lets say that beige colored van parked next to the heliport (above pics) had the plane pieces in it. two or three of the biggest pieces were found less than 50 feet from this van, in fact one of the pieces was less than 20 feet in front of this van.



so is 5 minutes for 2 people to place a total of roughly 10 pieces inaccurate? how about 10 minutes? im sure u will say im way off, but lets indulge ourselves in some of your calculations for comparison.


p.s. - if you'll excuse me, im taking my son to a movie and wont be back for a few hours, so if i dont repsond until later, please dont take it as a sign of me running away. i will be back.

1) I think it's actually YOUR problem.

2) The picture does speak for itself. It's saying, "Look at me. Where are the indentations?"

Show me how it's just speculation. The man's animation has pole 1 traveling against the very thing that supposedly knocked it over. Then he shows it neatly deposited on the ground, but his placement still didn't match the photographic evidence. That's not speculation, but fact. He shows light poles 4 and 5 traveling straight forward, which also contradicts photographic evidence. That is also a fact. But, if you don't believe me, I'll just bump that thread for you so you can show me how I'm wrong.

Create another thread about it.

cough.. cough..

I admit I had to add a couple of people on my list since this thread was started... like people who fabricated fake fuselage pieces but forgot rivets, and computer animation specialsts..

You guys seem somewhat agitated...

I dont see you source the pics you guys have posted... why is it so important with the first one:



You can take a few more seconds to think before you post, Im the only one who doesnt need to... because Im not making up shit..

Like I said, create another thread about it.

Agitated?? :huh: How do you figure that?

I rest my case ;)

dont rest ur case quite yet racerx. sorry but i seem to have jumped in while u guys were in the middle of a specific argument. so racerx, please scroll up to my most recent post, cuz it might have gotten overlooked due to my bad timing. i just want to be sure u didnt miss it.

i'll be back in a lil later, but i look forward to reading ur "calculations".

I have to correct myself. Mike Wilson actually shows light pole 5 traveling to the right of the flight path, which is worse because photographic evidence actually shows the pole pointing to the left of the flight path. I realize this is off-topic. Just needed to make that correction.

Like I said earlier, I think a lot of those larger pieces were already in the building. Remember that the Pentagon was being "renovated" around that time.

Oh jeez guys... I agree with Racer here of course but I'm not going to get into this stupid argument where no one can give an inch. 'Cause I can't either.

But regarding the rivets, Mickey Bell's truck was supposed to hve been studded with 'plastic rivets' from the plane. For what it's worth, and just a thought, could it be they proke or popped out due to their plastic nature leaving the metal around flat?

If not, maybe this really is finally the smoking gun. After hundreds of tries, maybe one piece of no-757 evidence will finally hold up and the whole thing finally proven a scam.

And if even this too doesn't hold up to where we can call it proof, whatever. Keep trying.

http://www.necanet.org/whats_new/report.cfm?ID=1003

wouldnt plastic rivets melt? and are planes held together by plastic rivets? and how thick is the sheetmetal on bell's truck? how can a rivet be embedded in such thin metal? wouldnt it go through, or fall out?

lets assume there was indeed plastic rivets embedded into the sheetmetal of his truck. no one is arguing that there was NOT an explosion, so the force of a blast could drive nearby objects (rivets included) into the side of a truck. BUT how do we know where the rivets came from? he was parked near the construction trailer, so how do we know the source of the rivets werent something other than a 757?

and who's story is it anyway? mickey bell was so shaken by the explosion that he "doesnt remember what happened". the story suggests this "discovery of rivets" and tries to use it to reinforce the 757 scenario, but its just a sentence. no picture, no quotes from alleged friends of bell's who made this discovery, no quote from bell himself regarding the discovery, nothing. just a random mention of "plastic rivets" found - who knows how long after the incident.

and technically, if these rivets did belong to flight 77, arent they evidence? shouldnt they have been turned in to the NTSB, FBI, Justice Department, or any other reachable local authority? were they? or is the author of the story being reckless with creative license? or was the person telling the author the story embellishing it for effect? the way its written its quite vague as to who the information is originating from:

did mr.singleton tell mr.bell's story? or just that last part of the paragraph? was mr.bell ever actually interviewed for this story? read the whole story and see what you think. there are never any direct quotes from anyone other than singleton, who by his own admission was NOT anywhere near the event. bell is never directly quoted, so all we get is singleton's recollections about bell. and where is bell? i challenge you to find a mention of bell in the first person, using his own words to describe what he "doesNt remember". there is no record of mickey bell discussing the events of that day anywhere else. if there is please find and post it.


and for good measure let's look at another version of bell as told by singleton:
http://web.archive.org/web/20030602211725/...entagon1001.asp

the above sounds more credible and probably closer to the truth, since it only describes "debris from an explosion" in the back of the truck, which is totally a realistic probability.

but no rivets huh? and the story changed, huh? helicopters, huh? but a witness to flight 77 crashing into the pentagon? i think not.


:huh:

I don't believe planes vaporize. I don't believe they vaporized in DC or Shanksville.

I can't 100% say that the plane flew over, there is a very slight chance that whatever plane it was it could have hit the building. Regardless of that, I have not seen any evidence that proves it was American Airlines Flight 77, any evidence that conclusively proves it was a 757 either. Whether the plane flew over or impacted, the thing I do not question is the flight path.

I have no doubt in my mind the multiple corroborating witnesses are telling the truth about the North side of Citgo path. Flyover/Impact I can't say 100% for certain.

I know Lloyd England's account is impossible. I know that if something like that happens you don't jump out of your vehicle and find someone to remove the pole with you because you know you're not setting it down and driving away.

I know the 911 calls from Arlington are being sequestered.

I know videos that would prove you and the government are telling the truth about the flight path and possibly the impact are being sequestered.

I know I don't trust the corporate media so when it's reporters are also the witnesses and then later we find out their accounts are total embellishments at the bare minimum and most likely operation northwoods style complete fabrications I am thankful that there are people like Craig & Aldo going out there and doing this.

I know it's impossible for all of CIT's witnesses to say the plane approached from the North of Citgo and that NONE of them saw it clipping light poles if you and this criminal administration were telling the truth.

Instead we have to take your word that even though everyone who listens to Lloyd tell his story says "Oh no f*cking way" , that he's still telling the truth.

Instead we had to get stuck with Russell Pickering's invention of which pole and which part hit Lloyd's cab even though no one anywhere that was there ever implied anything that could have lead to Pickering's theory.

Instead we get people calling CIT disinfo and telling others to ignore everything the eyewitnesses say before "impact" because they really can't be too sure about that.

And you sit here and tell me to get a clue? Keep doing that. All your doing is giving everyone else a 'clue' as to what your true agenda and motivation is.

I'm sorry, we've been doing this for so long that I must have forgotten your name. What is it again?

Where can I see what you've done to help expose this criminal Bush/Rockefeller Mafia and their New World Order Universal "Government" Crime Syndicate?

What about the people who are corroboratingly (phew!) saying the plane hit the Pentagon, after seeing it with their own eyes?

Why did you avoid that point in your very very eloquent post?

And while you're at it, from what type of planes you think all the debris are from? Are you going Terral on our collective arses now?

Oh, um.... Yeah I read that too fast once. I didn't think it sounded quite right - maybe a special type pf plastic... Sometimes smart sometimes not.

Rivets would be evidence and may hav been collected. But I don't think they needed every last particle, so maybe not. Here's a piece of riveted metal left right there at the scene, hanging off a bar, ten days afterward:


I would like to see a picture of this truck now. And I'm aware Bell doesn't remember it himself. Yes, Singleton related the story based on what he saw and on the fact that Bell was supposed to be there and wound up traumatized. I don't blame him. It was big and loud and explosive and perhaps nearly killed him. I've seen no first person accounts from Bell.

And this is about parts too big to plant, so have we mentioned the landing gear strut(s) yet?

Of course these big parts could have just been inside before the event. Or planted by a crashing plane. Another Rorshach tests.

i think the "rivets" story is nothing but sensational reporting or sensational story telling by singleton. in my earlier post i went about exploring the various specifics about rivets, but thats cuz i didnt find the 2nd link until later.

in that 2nd link we see that there was NEVER any mention of rivets, just "debris" in the back of mickey bell's truck. that story is not sensationalized and is probably a more accurate recollection of what had actually happened.

so the rivets as evidence are (imo) easily dismissable as not having ever been embedded in bell's truck. but as mentioned before, if u can find a first-hand account from bell about that day, i would be much obliged, and we all might be better informed as to what his account really was. so far however, he is still far from what i would consider a "flight 77 witness".

FYI. She was Killed in Action. :(

Are you SURE she was killed in action? That's terrible.

Wow. I remember getting an odd feeling seeing that photo on a post dated for the like the day before her sig line said she was re-deploying and two days or so before I found it. I did a post at my blog wishing her (tho I was thinking him) a safe return. That post had no more informational use and I deleted it yesterday. Now this.

I don't mean to sound cold, but if this were a fictitious person, as some forum members are, dying in action would be a good way to disappear. Otherwise, it's a human tragedy, another in the long ass chain that just gets longer all the time the world over.

May truth and wisdom plus some slavaged/scavenged power bring justice and an end to this War of Terror. Please.

And thanks for the tip Dylan.

That did sound cold. My sense of timing is appaling and I apologize.