Untitled Document
Taking a Closer Look at the Stories Ignored by the Corporate Media
Donate | Fair Use Notice | Who We Are | Contact

NEWS
All News
9-11
Corporatism
Disaster in New Orleans
Economics
Environment
Globalization
Government / The Elite
Human Rights
International Affairs
Iraq War
London Bombing
Media
Police State / Military
Science / Health
Voting Integrity
War on Terrorism
Miscellaneous

COMMENTARY
All Commentaries
9-11
CIA
Corporatism
Economics
Government / The Elite
Imperialism
Iraq War
Media
Police State / Military
Science / Health
Voting Integrity
War on Terrorism

SEARCH/ARCHIVES
Advanced Search
View the Archives

E-mail this Link   Printer Friendly

9-11 -
-

The 9/11 Pentagon Attack: Planes Simply Do Not Vaporize - Why Didn’t They Show Us the Wreckage?

Posted in the database on Monday, April 17th, 2006 @ 21:10:23 MST (2171 views)
by Jesse    TvNewsLIES.org  

Untitled Document

As each day passes, more and more Americans are becoming aware of the startling evidence that clearly contradicts the official explanation of Sept.11th, 2001 offered by the Bush administration. In fact, as more and more evidence comes to light, incongruities in the official explanation become increasingly and undeniably apparent.

Ironically, the growing number of people new to these unexplained discrepancies poses a new problem for those of us who have been researching 9/11 for many months or years. We will have to find a way to explain the many complexities related to the attacks to those who now doubt the official version of events. We are faced with the overwhelming task helping great numbers of people understand the many contradictions in the 9/11 story they were fed by their government.

Obviously, that is not an easy assignment, even when the great majority of truth seekers agree that the official explanation is little more than a pre-written cover story designed to herd the American public into supporting an agenda that would otherwise horrify and outrage them. However, it becomes far more complicated in light of a topic that causes a great deal of confusion within the research community itself. That disparity relates to the strike on the Pentagon.

Many questions still remain about what actually took place at the Pentagon on September 11th 2001. That’s fine, because the goal of the 9/11 truth community is to raise these questions for further investigation. The problem arises when researchers feel that it is their responsibility to explain what happened at the Pentagon. It is NOT. Rather, it is their charge to highlight the doubts that have been legitimately raised regarding what exactly hit that building.

Some researchers claim that a 110,000 ton Boeing 757 hit the building, leaving only a 16 foot hole in the facade (prior to its collapse some 22 minutes after the initial impact.) Others claim that an A-3 Skywarrior fighter jet was the actual aircraft. Some say it was an unmanned Global Hawk armed with depleted uranium missiles, and still others claim that the Pentagon was hit by another type of military missile. We can argue each of these theories forever, and accomplish absolutely nothing.

We really have to put and end the internal dispute that is getting us nowhere and work together to bring information rather than more uncertainty to the public that is now just entering the 9/11 discussion. To that end, I am posing ONE pertinent question about the strike on the Pentagon: Why didn’t they show us the wreckage?

Planes do not simply vaporize. Never in the history of aviation disasters has an aircraft ever totally disintegrated. Even exploding space shuttles did not vanish into thin air. Therefore, it stands to reason that whatever hit the Pentagon had to leave some recoverable debris in its wake. Surely, there had be enough identifiable rubble remaining from a 110,000 ton aircraft to satisfy the skeptics? There is no way to convince me that the few scraps of metal and small engine parts, which according to some researchers are not from a 757, are proof of anything. at all. Neither am I convinced that the handful of uninformative photos that were released were not staged by the people who planned this event. An 110,000 tons aircraft has to leave more convincing evidence than what we have been offered. I defy anyone, anywhere to recreate a plane crash in which110,000 tons of aircraft are reduced to a select few, barely identifiable parts.

Why was this most important event in America’s history not fully documented by camera crews? Why wasn’t this event filmed and analyzed to its fullest extent for historical and forensic purposes? Why weren’t standard crime scene procedures followed, and why were government officials permitted to tamper with and eventually collect and secrete all of the crime scene evidence? Last time I looked, tampering with or destroying crime scene evidence was a felony. Why wasn’t every inch of the scene photographed by official investigators prior to the recovery process?

There is ample evidence of government complicity in the events of September 11th 2001, but nothing is more suspect than their relentless effort to prevent the public from examining the evidence. The cover up may actually speak louder than the actual evidence of complicity. That in itself may be the most important thing to consider in all of this intrigue and mystery.

It is too late now for the Bush administration to make good and show us the evidence. They have had 5 years to create a library of fabricated films and images. By this time, they actually could have produced a hanger full of faux plane wreckage. We needed to see the evidence at the crime scene at the time of the crime. We did not, and the troubling question remains unanswered: why didn’t they show us the wreckage?

Even without the mounting evidence of their involvement, nothing aside from time travel into the past will remove the aura of government complicity in the events of 9/11. Nothing at all can remove the cloud of suspicion that hangs over this administration because of its undaunted and obvious efforts to keep essential evidence at the Pentagon site hidden from the public.

One side note regarding the actions of a novice pilot attempting to hit the Pentagon: If you were throwing a dart at a toilet seat, would you aim at the side of the seat or would you aim down at the top of the seat, you know…the part that many men try to avoid hitting? Any pilot - especially a less skilled one - looking at the Pentagon as the target of a projectile, surely would have planned a simple, top-down, dive-bomb approach. The Pentagon is shaped like a set of of toilet seats, one smaller than the other, each one residing in the void of the next larger. The side of the Pentagon is 77' high yet the topside surface target space is approximately 29 acres. What would anyone reasonably aim for - a 29 acre target or the relatively miniscule one - on the ONLY reinforced section of the building designed to withstand a frontal attack?

I offer this as another common sense question left out of the discussion by the people who continue to stand by one of the most unbelievable fairy tales ever sold to the American public since the JFK magic bullet story. It is another QUESTION, not an answer, in the long line of questions no one in any official capacity has been willing to listen to, never mind answer.

In conclusion, I repeat that we have to stop trying to ANSWER the questions that have been raised. Instead, we have to collectively demand the answers. Even more constructively, we must focus on the essential questions that absolutely needs to be answered. In the case of the Pentagon, where is there any concrete evidence of the remains of a 110,000 ton Boeing 757 among the wreckage at the scene? Why didn’t they collect, examine and reveal the wreckage to the public? Why, why, why didn’t those in charge of finding out what happened at the Pentagon show us the wreckage? We think we know.



Go to Original Article >>>

The views expressed herein are the writers' own and do not necessarily reflect those of Looking Glass News. Click the disclaimer link below for more information.
Email: editor@lookingglassnews.org.

E-mail this Link   Printer Friendly




Untitled Document
Disclaimer
Donate | Fair Use Notice | Who We Are | Contact
Copyright 2005 Looking Glass News.