Why fake the SoC path?

[Baylor]

No. The plane was witnessed by Roosevelt Roberts as it came from around the impact area towards the South Parking Lot. It is funny that you mention the noise, since another possible flyover witness (Roseborough) reports hearing a "lion's roar" above his head and seeing the plane fly away over the south parking lot, corroborating Roberts. We do not know whether anyone inside the Pentagon heard the plane, however, since the plane flew over perhaps only two wedges of the Pentagon in 1-2 seconds, with the sound of the explosion, sirens, and paniced screams any noise from the decoy jet could have gone unnoticed. So, despite your assertion otherwise, you cannot know if anyone heard the jet from inside the Pentagon (not unusual given the circumstances), but witnesses outside most certainly did hear and see the plane.

There is absolutely nothing of substance in this response. Roseborough reports hearing a "lion's roar" BEFORE the impact, not after. He specifically mentions this.

I got out into the parking lot, just walking along, and all of a sudden, I hear what I would describe as a 'lion's roar' above my head. It caught my attention, and as I looked up, I heard another roar and I saw this airplane flying low. I thought, Oh, my God, this thing is really low.I thought it was going to crash onto the highway. Just as I thought that, I saw a fireball come from over the Pentagon.

The doppler effect wasn't even in the "red" when the explosion occured, making it impossible to miss.

We do not know whether anyone inside the Pentagon heard the plane, however, since the plane flew over perhaps only two wedges of the Pentagon in 1-2 seconds, with the sound of the explosion, sirens, and paniced screams any noise from the decoy jet could have gone unnoticed.

No. Again, this violates all laws of psychophysics. The inverse-square law, Weber's law. As the distance descreases, the intensity increases. Witnesses would hear 170+ dB airplane, passing over them as it flew over. There's no way around it.

 

[apathoid]

TheLoneBedouin,

You can give a simple yes/no answer, or answer in as much detail as you like. I'm putting you in charge of the Pentagon attack in the 9/11 Conspiracy War Room. What you say goes....its your baby. So, here's my question: Crash or Flyover?

TLB? It's a simple question. I realize its one that requires independent thought instead of a ctrl-c/ctrl-v from the PffT forum, but it's really an honest question. Would you have the plane flyover or just crash the thing?


I'm trying to get you to realize how stupid this whole scenario is....

 

[apathoid]

LoneBedouin,
To repeat the actual topic question from the OP:
why would they fake the "offical path" but actually fly NoC. What possible purpose could this serve?

I'd love to see an answer.

While it is a good thought provoking question, it relies on the premise that there was a flyover. I wanna know why the perps would even consider a flyover in the first place. I can think of no benefits it would afford over just crashing it.

 

[stateofgrace]

TLB? It's a simple question. I realize its one that requires independent thought instead of a ctrl-c/ctrl-v from the PffT forum, but it's really an honest question. Would you have the plane flyover or just crash the thing?


I'm trying to get you to realize how stupid this whole scenario is....

I have actually asked this question of truthers a few times (well the small amount that buy into the fly over) and like yourself fail to see the point of this entire scenario.

The "perps" fly real planes into the WTC's , after the towers had been packed with explosives and then for reasons that are completely beyond me decide it would be a great idea to pretend a plane hit the Pentagon. They decide that it would add to thier "illusion" to fly a plane over a building, in broad day light and pretend it hit it. They decide to stage downed lamp posts, faked plane parts, false flight paths, fake DNA and goodness knows what else was needed to pull off this stunt. They decide to confiscate videos, rely totally on nobody actually filming a plane flying away from the Pentagon and unbelievably they rely totally on eye witnesses being fooled totally.

Why?

Why would anybody think for a moment that this a great plan and why would anybody even consider sanctioning it?

To the truthers out there that actually buys into this. Would you approve such a plan? If you would, can you please explain exactly what you would hope to achieve by it?

Maybe you could start by actually addressing the OP, why fake a flight path?

 

[Reheat]

Maybe you could start by actually addressing the OP, why fake a flight path?

Maybe, just maybe, "THEY" were struck with a moment of stupidity equal to those who believe there was a fake flight path?

 

[Bananaman]

Chilly:

why would they fake the "offical path" but actually fly NoC. What possible purpose could this serve?

You have to remember that people like TheLoneBedwetter are, essentially, thick.

Bananaman.

 

[Senenmut]

i was wondering what you guys thought about these witnesses saying this:

Don Perkal --
Even before stepping outside I could smell the cordite. Then I knew explosives had been set off somewhere.

Gilah Goldsmith --
We saw a huge black cloud of smoke, she said, saying it smelled like cordite, or gun smoke.

is there a reason( ie materials the pentagon was made of ) for that smell to be in the air?

 

[twinstead]

i was wondering what you guys thought about these witnesses saying this:

Don Perkal --
Even before stepping outside I could smell the cordite. Then I knew explosives had been set off somewhere.

Gilah Goldsmith --
We saw a huge black cloud of smoke, she said, saying it smelled like cordite, or gun smoke.

is there a reason( ie materials the pentagon was made of ) for that smell to be in the air?

Even if it was indeed cordite they smelled, exactly what would that mean? Do you suggest that the explosion was caused by gun powder?

 

[apathoid]

is there a reason( ie materials the pentagon was made of ) for that smell to be in the air?

They probably were (poorly)describing that carbonesque stench of burning Jet-A, which many other witnesses describe here.

 

[Senenmut]

Yes, the bodies of the 58 passengers on flight 77. 184 of the victims were positively identified through DNA. How'd the NWO pull that off?

i dont want to sound morbid but is there any autopsy reports regarding the victims?? i just read an article about them trying to get the land away from the guy that owns the land where 93 went down and the article stated that only 10% of the remains were found. thats one reason the families want the land to be turned into a park. anyway, id be suspicious if only toes and fingers and bits of ears were found!! i believe even the japanese are asking about their dead. i watched those guys talk about 911 in their government house or parliment the other day. it looks as though 24 japanese died and they received the remains of 13. two japanese were on the planes, one was on flight 11 and another was on flight 93. the japanese said the americans told them that they determined that they were japanese with dna.
anyway, do u have any reports to look at to determine what body parts were found. i have seen pics of bodies in the pentagon. i know many naval intel and accountants died in the impact. but what about the body parts of the passengers?? what was found?

 

[TheLoneBedouin]

Chillzero,

That was answered in extreme detail in post #15. Please re-read it and look into the evidence presented for a deliberate 2nd plane cover story.

If you are asking why they would have a flyover at all as opposed to flying a plane into the building, that answer was also given in post #15.

But I'll re-iterate and elaborate it since it's clear that very few others have paid attention to what was already addressed.

I would think the answer should be obvious especially in comparison to the controlled demo hypothesis of the WTC. In both scenarios the real damage was covertly implemented with pre-planted explosives.

The main difference is that obviously they did not plan to completely demolish the Pentagon. Since this is their own headquarters it is reasonable to suggest that they would want complete control of the damage and/or casualties unlike at the WTC.

Pre-planted explosives/shape-charges/incendiaries obviously would give them that control whereas predicting the damage from a plane impact would be a lot more difficult and unreliable.

Staging the damage ensures success as well.

 

[Senenmut]

They probably were (poorly)describing that carbonesque stench of burning Jet-A, which many other witnesses describe here.

i read your link. these guys are military, you would think they know what cordite smells like.
off topic-
i like your avatar. didnt the illuminati use the owl as one of their symbols.!! haha i got a pic of it somewhere on my comp. and as for your virgo comment, i kida like this:
If the horizon remains cloudless, three stars are visible in a straight line from the Capitol to the White House to the skies in the west. Known as Regulus, Arcturus and Spica, the stars form a right-angled triangle framing the constellation of Virgo.
Washington's founders deliberately aligned the city with the stars, consecrating it to Virgo -- also known as the Egyptian goddess Isis -- claims British author David Ovason in his new book, The Secret Architecture of Our Nation's Capital.

ps. i dont think it represents isis. sirius was isis. maybe im wrong...

 

[apathoid]

Pre-planted explosives/shape-charges/incendiaries obviously would give them that control whereas predicting the damage from a plane impact would be a lot more difficult and unreliable.

So they wanted to kill people, but not too many?! So they wanted it to look like a real plane crash scene, but not too real? You're making this up as you go, arentcha?

Oh and I imagine there are witnesses to the planting of the explosives? Surely you must have evidence when you make that sort of claim.

Staging the damage ensures success as well.

Uhhh, wanna elaborate on that? Wouldn't it be easier to crash the plane and create the damage that way? Thataways you wouldn't have all these gentlemen in black suits running around planting debris, like a 1500 lb main gear strut for a 757, among other things...amognst all the onlookers and cameras in broad daylight?

So you're saying if you were planning the attack, you would use a real plane, have it fly over, and stage the crash scene?!?!?

 

[apathoid]

i read your link. these guys are military, you would think they know what cordite smells like.
off topic-
i like your avatar. didnt the illuminati use the owl as one of their symbols.!! haha i got a pic of it somewhere on my comp. and as for your virgo comment, i kida like this:
If the horizon remains cloudless, three stars are visible in a straight line from the Capitol to the White House to the skies in the west. Known as Regulus, Arcturus and Spica, the stars form a right-angled triangle framing the constellation of Virgo.
Washington's founders deliberately aligned the city with the stars, consecrating it to Virgo -- also known as the Egyptian goddess Isis -- claims British author David Ovason in his new book, The Secret Architecture of Our Nation's Capital.

ps. i dont think it represents isis. sirius was isis. maybe im wrong...

I'm ex-Army and I had no idea what cordite even was before I heard this claim for the very first time. About my avatar, I'm an avid birdwatcher who has a soft spot for owls, and not because I worship them at our annual NWO gala......or maybe it is and I suppose it doesn't hurt to poke some fun at out Truther friends in the process.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Chillzero,
If you are asking why they would have a flyover at all as opposed to flying a plane into the building, that answer was also given in post #15.

The OP is not asking why they would do the flyover, rather it is asking why fake the SOC path? If they're doing the flyover why not just use that track?

I'm fairly certain it's obvious what Chillzero asked:

LoneBedouin,
To repeat the actual topic question from the OP:
why would they fake the "offical path" but actually fly NoC. What possible purpose could this serve?

Now does that look like the question you just assumed he asked? Please feel free to point out where it was asked about "why they would have a flyover at all as opposed to flying a plane into the building" if indeed that is how you interpreted it.

But I'll re-iterate and elaborate it since it's clear that very few others have paid attention to what was already addressed.

Addressed? You addressed a completely different argument than what was being asked. :\

In both scenarios the real damage was covertly implemented with pre-planted explosives.

The damage to the Pentagon is again incompatible with what you are suggesting had been used

But again, the argument you made here and in the earlier post you referred to does not in any way adress that posed in the OP.

Pre-planted explosives/shape-charges/incendiaries obviously would give them that control whereas predicting the damage from a plane impact would be a lot more difficult and unreliable.

Staging the damage ensures success as well.

But then what do you do when the damage to the building is absolutely uncharacteristic of what you suggest be the culprit?? Why are we even having this discussion when this has nothing to do with the OP?

 

[apathoid]

Breathe easy Grizzly Bear. It was me who asked why they would even do the flyover. Our truther pal just got a bit overwhelmed by the all the flak we are throwing his way.

Now does that look like the question you just assumed he asked?

Chillzero is a lady

 

[The Big Dog]

Chillzero,

That was answered in extreme detail in post #15. Please re-read it and look into the evidence presented for a deliberate 2nd plane cover story.

The main difference is that obviously they did not plan to completely demolish the Pentagon. Since this is their own headquarters it is reasonable to suggest that they would want complete control of the damage and/or casualties unlike at the WTC.

Pre-planted explosives/shape-charges/incendiaries obviously would give them that control whereas predicting the damage from a plane impact would be a lot more difficult and unreliable.

Staging the damage ensures success as well.

Uh, you sure you are in the right thread, boyo?

As silly as that explanation is, it does not at all remotely explain why they faked the South of Citgo path, but actually flew North of Citgo.

C'mon, why are you wasting our time??

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Breathe easy Grizzly Bear. It was me who asked why they would even do the flyover. Our truther pal just got a bit overwhelmed by the all the flak we are throwing his way.




Chillzero is a lady

I call whoops on both counts?

 

[TheLoneBedouin]

So they wanted to kill people, but not too many?! So they wanted it to look like a real plane crash scene, but not too real? You're making this up as you go, arentcha?

WTF are you talking about? The wanted to have control over the damage.

Oh and I imagine there are witnesses to the planting of the explosives? Surely you must have evidence when you make that sort of claim.

There is certainly evidence of explosives. Why don't you ask April Gallop- she was right next to the impact and saw no jet fuel, no plane parts, no passengers. She doesn't believe a plane hit the building, but she's just a stupid truther, right?

Uhhh, wanna elaborate on that? Wouldn't it be easier to crash the plane and create the damage that way? Thataways you wouldn't have all these gentlemen in black suits running around planting debris, like a 1500 lb main gear strut for a 757, among other things...amognst all the onlookers and cameras in broad daylight?

So you're saying if you were planning the attack, you would use a real plane, have it fly over, and stage the crash scene?!?!?

This is simply an argument from incredulity. If you wanted to create controlled damage to a building, explosives would be a logical choice. Please watch the Second Plane Cover Story, to understand how the E4B (also a white plane with jet engines) and the C130 were blended in with the flyaway plane. Also remember that the area that day was particularly secure because the president was scheduled to arrive. See also this post for more on motive.

 

[Hokulele]

... Also remember that the area that day was particularly secure because the president was scheduled to arrive. ...

They deliberately picked a date when they knew there would be extra security? They decided to make the damn thing harder to pull off?


I guess this doesn't make any less sense than any other part of this fruitcake of a theory ...