Flight 77 did not crash into the Pentagon

[Avatar]

Well, let's just say those are the only two options.

Personally, I'm not sure I have an opinion. I like the conspiracy one, but I'm suspicious of conspiracies.

--A

[Loredoctor]

I like the conspiracy one, but I'm suspicious of conspiracies.

--A

As I've always said, behind every conspiracy theorist is a frustrated novelist.

[Avatar]

--A

[Prebe]

If the conspiracy is true, what I don't get is:
1: Where did flight 77 go then?
2: If it was a missile, wouldn't the government try to expose it in every possible way?
3: Or is the conspiracy something about a US fighter that has fired the missile?

[dlbpharmd]

#3, or some variation.

[wayfriend]

You know, when you read about the real things that the US and other powers have done to pull the wool over our eyes, you really cannot dismiss a conspiracy out of hand. I'm thinking of the "paint the US plane with UN colors" thing, or the deception leading to the Korean war, or what the British did to the island of Diego Garcia (broke in the news today). You just can't say "could never happen" or "they would never".

[Prebe]

Absolutely, I never dismiss a conspiracy theory out of hand. I'm as suspicious of governments as the next guy. but for me to believe in anyone constructing such an elaborate scheme as sending a missile towards Pentagon and making a passenge jet dissapear, I would need a very strong motive. And, frankly, I can't even think of a weak one.

[Avatar]

I certainly never dismiss them out of hand. Instead, I'm simply aware of my predisposition to think the worst of government.

--A

[[Syl]]

Just for the record, I linked the video in Feb.

[sindatur]

I still haven't been able to get any proponents of the Conspiracy to give me a motive.

The Pentagon incident happened an hour after the first tower was struck. So, by the time the Pentagon was struck, we were already very well aware of planes flying into buildings, and people were already saying "Terrorist Attack". The Government already had all the fuel it needed to start their war on terror at that point, the Pentagon getting hit didn't provide anymore ammunition, anger or anything else to further the Government's cause, the public was already in the mindset required for what was to follow. So, why would the Govt feel the need to do anything to the Pentagon to charge up more fear or anger?

I can only think of two possible, ludicrous reasons:

1. They wanted to kill someone specific in the Pentagon, so they used the terrorist attacks on the towers as a cover up. Problem is, we never heard about anyone specific who was killed or heard any conspiracy theories or anything about why they were that big a political enemy of the Administration.

2. Rumsfeld wanted to redecorate the Pentagon and Congress wouldn't approve the budget for him, so, he used the 9/11 attacks as a cover, so they'd have to allow him the money to pay for redecorating..

Neither of these scenarios explains all the eye witness accounts of Fire, Police, etc and neither explains the plane being tracked on radar, nor what the Govt did with the plane and all the people on board if it didn't crash into the Pentagon.

The most I can see to this, is they wanted to haul out the 9/11 Boogeyman again, so they released the tapes to remind everyone of the day in the hopes it would frighten people into improving Congress and the President's poll numbers.

Admittedly, it is strange, that they had no idea about Mousaoui when they originally held back the tapes, and the tapes really had nothing to do with his trial, as far as I can see, but, still. I just need a motivation before I can even consider getting on board with this, as much as I would like to have something big and concrete to hang this govt with.

[[Syl]]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_American_Century#Controversy

[sindatur]

Syl, if that was for me, I don't understand. What's Iraq and PNAC's desires for world conquest got to do with Flight 77 not actually hitting the Pentagon. The Twin Towers fueled enough rage, and excessive Patriotism. They could do whatever they wanted just based upon that. The Pentagon didn't add any fuel to the fire, IMHO, all it did was add more expenses to the available tax dollars. So, why do it, if they already had what they needed?

[Prebe]

Agreed Sin. I can't see the motive either, and as previously stated, I can't see what became of 77.

[[Syl]]

I believe the reasoning is that the Pentagon not only increased the... perception of concentrated effot, seriousness of the attack, it set the stage for it being a military concern. Since the stated goals were for worldwide military bases, it only makes a certain poetic sense.

Or, it could've been an abberation... something that didn't go according to plan. Or it could've been that they couldn't prevent one without preventing them all. *shrug*

Was probably terrorists hijacking a plane, tho.

[sindatur]

Oh, I'm certainly open to the possibility they simply didn't bother preventing something they knew was happening because it served their purposes. Especially considering Diane Feinstein was verbally slapping them around in July and August, saying something big was coming, and they needed to sit up and take notice and do something about it, and they basically told her to shut up and stop being a Chicken Little and spreading panic.

And I could even be open to believe they were responsible for the entire day.

I just have a problem believing that they used the Twin Tower attacks to mess up the Pentagon, in order to get their way. An attack on the Pentagon, I would believe, to the American people pales in comparison to the civilians being attcked in the Financial hub of the States (If not the world). The Twin Towers was a big enough outrage to give them power to do whatever they wanted. Why disrupt a Govt facility (The Pentagon) by attacking it themselves?

Most people I have seen supporting this Conspiracy don't question that the Twin Towers was a terrorist attack. It's Flight 93 ("Let's Roll" crashed in PA) and/or Flight 77 (Pentagon) that they think the Government staged (Or whatever version). Another version I've seen is the "missle" that hit the Pentagon was because they shot down Flight 77. To be honest, if I was the Govt, I would rather admit I had shot down the plane headed for the Pentagon, then to let people believe an hour after it all began I still didn't had my sh!t together enough to protect DC by shooting a threat down. I recall numerous apologies that they didn't have the cajones to shoot any planes down, but, they wouldn't refrain from it in future if a similar situation arose.

[wayfriend]

It bears remembering that no one anticipated that the Two Towers attack would be as devastating as it was. No matter who was behind it, I'm sure that they thought it would leave planes stuck in buildings, rather than buildings reduced to rubble.

[sindatur]

It bears remembering that no one anticipated that the Two Towers attack would be as devastating as it was. No matter who was behind it, I'm sure that they thought it would leave planes stuck in buildings, rather than buildings reduced to rubble.

Certainly. But, again, I don't remember anyone being any more scared or angry over the incident when the buildings actually came down then they were when the planes flew into the buildings and it was first suspected it was terrorism.

[finn]

Pretty much agree with most of the opinions here. However if there was a need to motivate Congress (and it's fair comment to suggest that NY was sufficient for this), an incident that happenened as it did, leaves the 'surface' suspicion that they might have been after the White House or ....Congess.

Fear is a greater motivator than outrage.

[Zarathustra]

Dozens of people saw Flight 77 at various stages of its final flight. Many saw it actually hit. There was OBVIOUS damage to the Pentagon from the wings--damage which movies like Loose Change try to hide by posting pictures with firefighters covering most of the area with their efforts at putting out the fire. There were numerous pieces of the plane at the crash site. A huge generator which was directly in the path of one of the plane's engines was knocked towards the building (not away--which would be the case if it had been moved by an explosion). There are scientific explanations of how aluminum will vaporize under these conditions, creating a "fluid" of extremely hot metal that flowed into the Pentagon until its momentum and energy dissipated and was absorbed by the building, leaving very little of the plane behind.

I think it is easy to forget about Occam's razor when considering conspiracy theories. To believe that something other than Flight 77 hit the Pentagon, you'd have to believe the following:

many dozens of people hallucinated a low flying jet head toward the Pentagon and hit the building

the government quickly stashed airplane parts at the site (while cameras were rolling, and while hundreds of people watched on site)

Flight 77--and all it's passengers--disappeared without a trace at precisely the same time dozens of people hallucinated it hitting the building

a HUGE missile hit the Pentagon at exactly the same time that a low-flying Flight 77 was seen to be heading towards it by those pesky dozens of people watching and yet no one noticed the missile coming

an exploding missile can make a generator (weighing several tons) to move toward the building

our government is evil enough to plan an attack on its own citizens in order to justify an attack on Afghanistan and Iraq (forgetting that we didn't need such justification for Bosnia, Kosovo, Haiti, Grenada, Iraq bombing in 1998, etc.).

Isn't it much simpler to believe: a) the physical evidence and eye-witness testimony and b) that Islamic fundamentalists who have openly declared their wish for our destruction to hijack a plane and fly it into the Pentagon? Is that really harder to believe than the above?

There are certain types of people who WANT to believe this conspiracy theory, whether because they distrust our government, hate Bush, love intriguing stories . . . whatever. But the end result of such speculation is to remove the responsibility from the terrorists, to diminish the threat they pose. And wouldn't that be the ultimate irony--that terrorists can attack us in such a dramatic, open, visible, and destructive manner, and people STILL try to excuse them and deny their culpability? Terrorists have tried their hardest to say, "fuck you, Americans!" and some of us were too conditioned by X Files and National Enquirer to even notice. Wow. I'm not sure if that's morbidly funny because the terrorists failed in such a ridiculous manner, or tragically sad because we're too damn stupid to detect a declaration of war when it lands in the center of our economic and military might.

This sickens me. Am I the only one?

[onewyteduck]

No Malik, you are not the only one. Not by a long shot!