[ExistentialDisorder]

photos of the pentagon wreckage aftermath have never really been in short supply. Tho those particular photos that Binkie linked are rather obscure. Especially that first one. They just happened to take a shot of the "crash site" from that particular angle, blocked by the watch tower, or whatever that thing is. Not to mention the rest of the shots don't show the pentagon and could be shots of wreckage from any number of other crash sites. Regardless, as I said, aftermath shots aren't hard to come by. It's the actual impact shots, and video/images leading up to it that don't seem to exist anywhere. Actually they do exist. The problem is they were all confiscated. The survailance videos of surrounding businesses were all seized by the feds and to date have never been released or returned to their owners. There were five stills "leaked" to the media, supposedly from a camera just to the right of the wall that was hit by the "plane". Five images with extremely bad editing. The two most important points to note about those images is that #1, the explosion was added in (i could tell you that just by looking at them), and #2, it's quite clear that something was erased from the sky above the pentagon in the one image prior to the "explosion."

If there's nothing to hide, then why confiscate all the footage of the crash? And why doctor the few photos that are deliberately leaked to the media? ... and further more, why get an amateur to doctor them? I could have done a much better job myself. Give me a photo of a building - any building - and i'll make it look blown up.

There's no question that the street lamps were taken out by a plane, or at least something with the wingspan of a plane. Yet, why aren't there any signs of the wings or the vertical tail fin hitting the wall? And why were there two holes in the wall, one larger than the 2nd, neither big enough to be from a plane?

Why THAT particular side of the building? Why go through having to spin around and hit that wall - the only wall that had been reinforced just prior to the attack, and had the least number of occupants in the building - when they could have just as easily hit from any other side, most-likely taking out many more people and causing a hell of a lot more damage.

On top of all that, it's not possible that the man accused of piloting flight 77 could actually have been the pilot.

"It is doubtful that the best trained fighter pilots could have executed the maneuver that supposedly crashed a 757 into the Pentagon. It required making a tight 270-degree turn while descending seven thousand feet, then leveling out so as to fly low enough over the highway just west of the Pentagon to knock down lamp posts. After crossing the highway the pilot had to take the plane to within inches of the ground so as to crash into the Pentagon at the first-floor level and at such a shallow angle that an engine penetrated three rings of the building, while managing to avoid touching the lawn. And he had to do all of this while flying over 400 mph. Quite a feat for a flight school flunky who had never sat in the cockpit of a jet!"

Setting asside the pentagon, and even the actual collapse of the two towers (a collapse that defies logic and physics), there's still way too many issues that don't make sense, don't add up and just smell way too fishy.

*- How is it that 6 of the highjackers are still alive and well? 7 names were wrong, 6 of them still alive, one having died a year before the attack.

*- Why haven't the blueprints for the towers ever been released? Why wasn't NIST allowed to view them durring their investigation?

*- Why did FEMA outright lie about the structure of the buildings in their report? They make claims that are completely bogus and contradict actual photos of the building's construction.

*- Why was an imposter used in the first video tape that was released after 9/11, which has someone posing as Bin-Laden claiming responsibility for the attack, instead of Bin-Laden himself? If he's got balls enough to put his real face on all the other videos, why not this one?

*- Why is it that just six weeks prior to the attack, the WTC came under one sole ownership, which was a first in its history? On top of that, why was there a special claus written into the insurance plan specifically outlining airplane attacks that would refund the owner the entire value of the center, and a release from the 99 year lease?

*- Why were so many political figureheads and daddy rabbits warned not to be anywhere near new york the day of the attack?

*- Why weren't jets immediately scrambled when it became clear that 4 planes had deviated from their course? And when finally they were scrambled, nothing of the protocol was followed, and they were launched from bases hundreds of miles from where they needed to be, while jets from bases much closer sat and did nothing. Even jets that were already in the air off the coast of Long Island were told at first not to do anything, then later were sent further out to sea "to look for other planes". Those that were scrambled, from places like Ohio, only flew at a quarter of their top speeds.

And all of that's just not even scraping the barrel...