I have a friend who administers a school in PA. Some of his teachers and students were outside and saw the plane struggling in flight... and if I remember correctly what he told me those many years ago... they even saw smoke from the crash beond the trees and hills.
That's what I'm trying to do. I keep asking if the plane didn't hit the Pentagon, where did it go? Where are all the passengers? Can you please expand on your theory that the plane landed in (wow) Cleveland? Why haven't any family members of the passengers heard from them after all this time? Were the passengers executed by the government after the plane landed in Cleveland? I tend to believe a lot of conspiracy theories. I am not just a typical skeptic, I probably believe more than I don't. But this one is just silly.
http://www.thewebfairy.com/killtown/flight77/theories.html It's been theorized that Flight 77 (along with some/all of the other hijacked planes on 9/11) was flown via remote control to it's real destination. That is why some believe the Boeing 757's and 767's were used because they both have the same flight controls. Although, there were at least two passengers on Flight 77, retired Navy Admiral Wilson Flagg and retired Navy Capt. John Yamnicky, who had extensive flight experience to have possibly flown this plane and both of these individuals also had extensive military backgrounds in the navy no less. Also, remember that the Captain of Flight 77, Charles Burlingame, was a retired Navy fighter pilot and worked as a liaison in the Pentagon (on anti-terrorism strategies no less) for most of his 17 years as a Naval Reserve officer and who was quoted as being "unabashedly patriotic" and who "embraced military life even after he retired". A prime suspect in a conspiracy such as this one. Several theories as to what could have happened to Flight 77 are: 1. It was flown either by a conspirator on the plane or via remote control to a military base (perhaps a secret base) or other remote location. 2. It was flown via remote control and crashed out at sea. 3. It was flown via remote control and crashed in some remote spot inland like Flight 93 reportedly was. If Flight 77 was crashed somewhere with all the passengers on board, then it's obvious everyone perished in the crash along with the plane. If Flight 77 was flown to a secret location, then the innocent passengers or all of the passengers could have been murdered there. It's also been theorized that the passengers could have been gassed while the plane was still in the air. Some theorize that Flight 77 was taken to a remote location where the conspirator passengers, if any, were taken off the plane and then Flight 77 with the innocent passengers was flown via remote control somewhere else and crashed or that the innocent passengers where boarded on another 9/11 hijacked plane who rendezvoused at the same point (such as Flight 93 which had 194 empty seats on it's flight) and then was flown via remote control and crashed it somewhere else (such as the remote spot Flight 93 crashed).
Oh, OK. So the planes were flown by remote control. LOL. Here's another question. If they could fly the planes via remote control (LOL) why wouldn't they just fly one into the Pentagon? Wouldn't that be easier than landing it safely on an airstrip in Cleveland? I think it's ironic that the official version is discounted because of the difficulty of flying a plane so close to the ground and crashing it into the Pentagon....but the conspiracy theory has the plane being flown by remote control, landing on an airstrip by remote control, taking off again by remote control, then crashing at an unknown location? If these passengers were being flown all over the country (by remote control), wouldn't at least one of them make a cellphone call to a loved one to at least say they were going to be late?
Good point, if a remote control was used then it would have been used to fly the original plane into the Pentagon. No need for cloak and daggers if you are planning to kill everyone anyway. My gripe is that all the secrecy behind the security videos surrounding the Pentagon. Why has it taken so long to release just one? Why haven't all the videos seized been made accessible to the public? If there is nothing to hide, then why are things being hidden? And I also don't buy that WTC-7 collapsed in a free fall, into its own footprint from the heat caused by the fires in it on that day. I'm also still amazed that two 100+ story buildings collapsed as fastly as they did too. Now I am no engineer, but from what I know of physics; the engineers who have questioned the official story have a more convincing argument then the ones who supported the "official" story.
Why would you demo WTC-7? You get all the conspiratorial benefits of rage, external sympathy and support just from the two planes flying into the WTC. You don't have to collapse them and you certainly don't have to demo ANOTHER building. OTOH you exponentially increase the chances your conspiracy is found out by blowing up the WTC-7. That just silly.
yeah I would think that the collapse of two 100-story buildings will leave a bigger mess than what it was
maybe they didn't actually collapse at all - they teleported them to area 51 (i heard somewhere they needed the extra office space out there) and replaced them with some extra rubble.
Just an MIT guy... http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/collapse.html Animation of buckling beams on the second page.
Given the number of justifiable questions that have gone unanswered, and the political/global aftermath of 9/11, I find it difficult to believe that the average American citizen is truly informed about what happened that day.
No it's not, not if it's not going to be publicized, I mean a lot of people don't even know about the building 7 collapse, and not if nobody will believe you. Why would they do it? Well, some say it was because of what was in building 7 tenants included the CIA, Secret Service, IRS, the Mayor's Office of Emergency Management, and the SEC. The insurance policy taken out a short time before the attacks netted a 500 million dollar profit on the building, there are other reasons that I can't remember right now. You do some research, watch those Loose Change videos, read about the conspiracy, read the debunk theories, read the debunk theories of the debunk theories, read the debunk theories of the debunk theories of the debunk theories. Then if you still believe what you believe, fine, but don't act like you know everything and everyone who believes that there are questions left unanswered and damning evidence against the US government is an insane aluminum foil cap wearing nutso. Cohen, that dude used ANIMATIONS to "prove" his point, there are videos out there that use the actual tapes of the collapses to "prove" their point, and other nerds who use their nerd speak to try and convince us that a fire shouldn't have brought down the towers much less building 7. In the end, what the hell do we really KNOW? I've been reading about this on and off for months now and I still don't KNOW what to believe, but I do think that both sides have to be taken seriously.
To things come to mind: profit and to cover up evidence if WTC-7 was used as the control center for a staged event. All big ifs, but not outside the realm of possibilities. I have said this before. I believed the official version of 9-11 for at least two years after it happened. What has changed my mind is college professors, MIT grads and others that are a heck of a lot smarter then me, presenting evidence that contradicts the official story. I'm not talking about paranoid folks like Alex Jones, I am talking about people of academia in top universities in this country. Right now their evidence is more convincing then the official story. They do not have the all the answers of who is responsible for what, they just claim that the official story does not stand on the evidence presented. So that leaves lots of room for who, why and how. I want nothing more then the official story to be true, but I wish the government would be more forthcoming. With the resent revelations about how the Bush administration disregards law and the Constitiution, is a coverup of 9-11 then impossible?
So the US government wanted to blow up the offices of the CIA, the secret service, the IRS, the Mayors OEM office, and the SEC? Uh.....why? OK, so its an insurance scam? C'mon, man. That's just gone beyond silly into the 'stupid' realm. Questions left unanswered, sure. Cover up of incompetance - very likely. Government INVOLVEMENT in 9/11? You are an insane aluminum foil cap wearing nutso (although I must confess I don't know why you'd wear aluminum foil in a cap - but then again I'm not a conspiracy theorist, lol).
