Help: Need Photoshop Support For A Drone.

Help: Need Photoshop Support For A Drone.

ron1872
Advanced Member
ron1872
Advanced Member
Joined: Oct 15 2007, 03:51 PM

Nov 2 2007, 08:04 AM #1

After reading and watching a lot of information and video's on the internet about the Pentagon crash, I totally missed Painfull Deceptions by Eric Hufschmid, until yesterday:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uj08P3fp17U

I'm now for 90 percent sure that the attack happened like Eric exposes. It explains a lot of things: the witnesses around the Pentagon, the lightpoles (spanwidth of a Boeing 757 and a Global Hawk), the debris found there which is not of a Boeing 757, the missing frames on the Pentagon video's, the fact Hani Hanjour could not fly at all and so on.

Eric is stating that a missile was launched first from the Global Hawk and after that the plane hit the wall. I'm not convinced about this point, that's the 10 percent.

And now on to my question: are there any Photoshopped pictures here on the LC forum or elsewhere available from a Global Hawk drone painted and camouflaged into AA77 colours? What I need are pictures from many different angles (not above) showing such a kind of plane and (!!) with a neutral background! This into connection with the original Operation Northwoords scenario, which described a simmular plan to repaint a military aircraft.

An aircraft at Elgin AFB would be painted and numbered as an exact duplicate for a civil registered aircraft belonging to a CJA proprietary organization in the Miami area. At a designated time the duplicate would be substituted for the actual civil aircraft and would be loaded with the selected passengers, all boarded under carefully prepared aliases. The actual registered aircraft would be converted to a drone [a remotely controlled unmanned aircraft]. Take off times of the drone aircraft and the actual aircraft will be scheduled to allow a rendezvous south of Florida.

From the rendezvous point the passenger-carrying aircraft will descend to minimum altitude and go directly into an auxiliary field at Elgin AFB where arrangements will have been made to evacuate the passengers and return the aircraft to its original status. The drone aircraft meanwhile will continue to fly the filed flight plan. When over Cuba the drone will be transmitting on the international distress frequency a "May Day" message stating he is under attack by Cuban MiG aircraft. The transmission will be interrupted by destruction of the aircraft, which will be triggered by radio signal. This will allow ICAO [International Civil Aviation Organization radio stations in the Western Hemisphere to tell the U.S. what has happened to the aircraft instead of the U.S. trying to "sell" the incident.


I do not have the knowledge and experience of Photoshopping or other photo editting programme's, so what I need now is some very experienced people who can help me out in making some realistic samples of this probably used drone near Washington!

So please do your best, not only for me, but perhaps to solve the Pentagon mystery.

Greetings from a cold and wet Europe (Netherlands).

(You guys in the US, you're not alone!)
Truth forum Netherlands: http://www.911nederland.nl

Reply
Like
Share

Terral
Advanced Member
Terral
Advanced Member
Joined: Aug 31 2007, 10:03 AM

Nov 2 2007, 03:09 PM #2

Hi Ron:
Ron >>  After reading and watching a lot of information and video's on the internet about the Pentagon crash, I totally missed Painfull Deceptions by Eric Hufschmid, until yesterday. I'm now for 90 percent sure that the attack happened like Eric exposes. It explains a lot of things: the witnesses around the Pentagon, the lightpoles (spanwidth of a Boeing 757 and a Global Hawk), the debris found there which is not of a Boeing 757, the missing frames on the Pentagon video's, the fact Hani Hanjour could not fly at all and so on.
The 1 hr 26 min Eric Hufschmid video is here >> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 0998970210

The video makes several misstatements of fact that include:

1. Boeing 757-200 Jetliner has maximum takeoff weight of 255,000 pounds and not a mere 60 tons, which is the weight of just the high grade aluminum frame.

2. 911Commission crash speed for Flight 77 is 530 MPH and not 400 MPH. http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf (Page 27 on PDF counter).

3. Global Hawk uses a single Allison Rolls-Royce AE3007H turbofan engine ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RQ-4_Global_Hawk ), but the Jet parts found at the Pentagon are from a Pratt and Whitney J-Series engine ( http://www.rense.com/general67/911eng.htm ).

4. The Security Frames ( http://www.911research.wtc7.net/pentago ... ideos.html upper right) show a missile with a diameter of only 20 inches ( http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c266/ ... rame1a.jpg ). The Global Hawk is 15 feet tall and much too big.

Ron >>  Eric is stating that a missile was launched first from the Global Hawk and after that the plane hit the wall. I'm not convinced about this point, that's the 10 percent.
Eric’s conclusions do not match the evidence of an initial 9:31:39 AM attack and a second 9:36:27 AM attack where Pentagon clocks were stopped and “Just Smoke” ( http://video.google.nl/videoplay?docid= ... 6150910098 * ) fires were transformed into a fiery inferno.



The initial 9:32 AM attack ( http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB165/faa5.pdf ) was carried out under the cover of a “Big Plane * ” Decoy, seen by many witnesses. Time passed between Lloyd’s original 9:31:39 AM Light Pole incident and the “Big Boom” ( http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/read ... tNum=78448 ) taking place just 4 minutes and 48 seconds later where many witnesses saw ‘a small plane’ explode against the Wedge One E-Ring wall.

Michael Kelly >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iD0qpbwHCYI

Don Wright >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=schV0rKCRwA

We have evidence of a smaller Jet crash ( http://home.att.net/~carlson.jon/Pentag ... ckage1.htm ) that in no way matches the debris from any Global Hawk.
Ron >>  And now on to my question: are there any Photoshopped pictures here on the LC forum or elsewhere available from a Global Hawk drone painted and camouflaged into AA11 colours?
First I would like to see any evidence at all for a Global Hawk crashing anywhere. We have evidence of retired military jets and Global Hawks being retrofitted ( http://web.archive.org/web/200702210615 ... 8250.shtml ) with Pratt and Whitney engine parts littering the Pentagon, but no evidence of any 5 to 10-ton Global Hawk. The chances are much higher that the DoD painted up the A-3 Jet to look like an AA Jetliner with this kind of action going on:


Ron >>  What I need are pictures from many different angles (not above) showing such a kind of plane and (!!) with a neutral background! This into connection with the original Operation Northwoords scenario, which described a simmular plan to repaint a military aircraft.
I think you fail to realize a Global Hawk ( http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... Hawk_2.jpg ) is a very large candidate for the 20-inch missile we see in the Pentagon Security Video. The maximum speed for this Unmanned aerial vehicle is only about 400 miles per hour ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_US_endurance_UAVs ) and Dulles radar tracked the attacking flying object at 500 knots ( http://www.thepowerhour.com/911_analysi ... alysis.htm ), or almost 600 miles per hour.
Ron >>  I do not have the knowledge of Photoshopping or other photo editting programme's, so what I need now is some very experienced people how can help me out in making some realistic samples of this probably used drone near Washington!
First try to make an attempt at confirming something like a slow-moving flimsy-winged Global Hawk (never happened) made an attack run on the Pentagon.
Ron >>  So please do your best, not only for me, but perhaps to solve the Pentagon mystery.
From looking at all the evidence up one side and down the other, I can find no evidence anywhere to support the “Global Hawk Hit The Pentagon” Explanation at all. If you have that kind of evidence, then I am all ears. :0)

GL,

Terral
Reply
Like
Share

ron1872
Advanced Member
ron1872
Advanced Member
Joined: Oct 15 2007, 03:51 PM

Nov 2 2007, 06:53 PM #3

Truth forum Netherlands: http://www.911nederland.nl

Reply
Like
Share

mrn838
Advanced Member
mrn838
Advanced Member
Joined: Oct 7 2007, 01:20 AM

Nov 2 2007, 07:17 PM #4

ron1872 @ Nov 2 2007, 01:53 PM wrote: Number one, thanks!

http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q62/ ... _Quinn.jpg
Except for the fact that the Global Hawk is much too small to be seriously considered a candidate, that the engine parts do in fact match the 757, that nobody described which even remotely looked like a Global Hawk, that no frames are missing from the Pentagon tape it just has a very low framerate, and that no missile debris were found at the site but the bodies of passengers and Pentagon employees were found, your theory is quite sound. ;)
Reply
Like
Share

Pentagon reality check
Advanced Member
Joined: Sep 20 2007, 10:32 AM

Nov 2 2007, 07:54 PM #5

Sam Danner says he saw the Global Hawk strike. Google this courageous truth-teller along with Hufschmid's name and see what a joker Eric is. He is a self-debunking disinfo clown, in case there's any confusion on the issue.
Also, Joe Quinn, another joker on about the same Jon Carlson level of integrity, who made that graphic I posted (chainsawmoth = me) says the Pentagon wheel rim "bears a startling likeness to the rim of the wheel of the landing gear of a Global Hawk.”


More info:
FF Global Hawk posts
My screen name and tactics are the sole properties of Caustic Logic Communications, and do not reflect any endorsement on the part of the Loose Change Forum: that is, despite my penchant for reality checks and thread-killing, I am not a sanctioned issue-closer and should be treated with no special awe.
My sites:
The Frustrating Fraud
They Let It Happen
The 12/7-9/11 TreadmillGurillas Without Guns
Reply
Like
Share

ron1872
Advanced Member
ron1872
Advanced Member
Joined: Oct 15 2007, 03:51 PM

Nov 2 2007, 08:42 PM #6

The main reason for my thoughts pointing to the Global Hawk option is the wingspan in relation to the five lightpoles.

- Boeing 757-200: 38,05 m
- Global Hawk 35,4 m
- A3 Skywarrior 22,1 m

Only a Boeing 757 or Global Hawk can hit all of the lightpoles, related to their position if they were hit by an aircraft.

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/ ... esfell.jpg

Shown in this animation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhITnPeo374

I really do not believe in a Boeing theory stating a 757 or smaller commercial airliner hit the building. It's simply too small when we have a look at the Pentagon video's. When it was a 757 we have to see something larger, for me a 20 inch missile is too small, a Global Hawk fits better and can hit all of the lightpoles, even though one of these was pointing into the wrong direction.

http://membres.lycos.fr/applemacintosh2/COMPARE.jpg

When we consider the witnesses many of them mention a large aircraft, some of them said it was a small 12-20 person commercial airliner, but most of them did not say something about a lot of sound made by the aircraft landing at full speed!
Truth forum Netherlands: http://www.911nederland.nl

Reply
Like
Share

Terral
Advanced Member
Terral
Advanced Member
Joined: Aug 31 2007, 10:03 AM

Nov 2 2007, 09:07 PM #7

Hi Mrn:
Mrn >>  Except for the fact that the Global Hawk is much too small to be seriously considered a candidate, that the engine parts do in fact match the 757 . . .
The Global Hawk is what?? Too small? Please . . .

http://www.911research.wtc7.net/pentago ... ideos.html



Take good long look at the Camera #2 of the missile nose section and tell everyone the BIG Global Hawk ( http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... Hawk_2.jpg ) is too small. :0) Mrn is DREAMING again and having Flight 77 fantasies.



This is where Mrn wants everyone to believe a 100-Ton Jetliner crashed going 530 miles per hour. :0) This view shows the massive size of the cable spools that are taller than a man with the second story floor standing not far above them, but Mrn says an almost 50-feet tall Jetliner crashed here. :0) Sorry, but all I can do is LAUGH out loud . . . Even if the hole was big enough (and it is not nearly), then you are still missing 100 tons of Jetliner no matter how you cut the mustard. Your statement above that the engine parts do indeed match a 757 is nothing but A LIE that Mrn cannot support with any kind of evidence. Even if you had 757-200 parts from a real Rolls-Royce RB211-535 Registry Number N644AA Flight 77 Jetliner (which you DO NOT), Mrn has no place in the E-Ring wall where anything like that ever crashed on 9/11 or any other day. The fact is that Flight 77 had hundreds of time-change parts with serial numbers and the government has not produced EVEN ONE to date. ZERO.

http://physics911.net/georgenelson
American Airlines Flight 77

This was reported to be a Boeing 757, registration number N644AA, carrying 64 people, including the flight crew and five hijackers. This aircraft, with a 125-foot wingspan, was reported to have crashed into the Pentagon, leaving an entry hole no more than 65 feet wide.

Following cool-down of the resulting fire, this crash site would have been very easy to collect enough time-change equipment within 15 minutes to positively identify the aircraft registry. There was apparently some aerospace type of equipment found at the site but no attempt was made to produce serial numbers or to identify the specific parts found. Some of the equipment removed from the building was actually hidden from public view . . With all the evidence readily available at the Pentagon crash site, any unbiased rational investigator could only conclude that a Boeing 757 DID NOT fly into the Pentagon as alleged.
The Official Cover Story cronies running around here fail to realize Flight 77 and the Rolls-Royce engines had many indestructible ‘time-change’ parts and NONE have ever been presented by the government in this Pentagon case OR any of the other 911 cases. The idea that the FBI still has jurisdiction over these cases is the height of Congressional Complicity and STUPIDITY. The FAA says the aircraft crashed into the Pentagon wall at 9:32 AM ( http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB165/faa5.pdf ), but the FBI-provided Flight Data Recorder evidence, given to the National Transportation Safety Board ( http://web.archive.org/web/200610070323 ... y_AA77.pdf ) places Flight 77 outside Pentagon airspace at 9:32 AM at the official crash time. In short, all of Jim Ritter’s NTSB testimony is a fabricated LIE presented to build a DoD Cover Story and hide the absolute fact that a ‘rogue element’ working inside the Department of Defense itself murdered Navy/Defense Intelligence Personnel along with the ‘accountants, bookkeepers, audit managers and budget analysts’ ( http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/2 ... agonp4.asp ) responsible for creating the paper trail back to the missing 2.3 Trillion dollars ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xU4GdHLUHwU ). But, Mrn wants you to believe the Official Government Cover Story is the 911Truth. :0) All I see is another guy wearing a black hat around here . . .
Mrn >>  . . . that nobody described which even remotely looked like a Global Hawk, that no frames are missing from the Pentagon tape it just has a very low framerate,
Listen to this guy. :0) He has no evidence for anything, but runs his LIES together faster than Senor Bushie can tell the illegals “Come and steal American identities and jobs!” Two frames are missing from camera #1 and camera #2 ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9jW_8ZCUmg ) where the 9:31:39 AM Decoy Flyover Plane was censored from the images.
Mrn >>  . . . and that no missile debris were found at the site but the bodies of passengers and Pentagon employees were found, your theory is quite sound.
LOL! This is the kind of junk hauled out at the JREF Board where CT Debunkers run around regurgitating Loyal Bushie LIES like good little lapdogs going ‘ruff, ruff,’ The DoD carried out the ‘inside job’ murder of innocent Army/Navy/Defense Personnel and as many accountant-types they could cram into the E, D, and C-Rings on a 45-degree south trajectory between Column Line (CL) 13 and CL 15.



The DoD ‘rogue element’ military bad guys packed everyone marked for sterilization inside that red circle for the 9:31:39 party, before they ran to the other side of the Pentagon in anticipation of two big BOOMS some five minutes apart. Any first responders running to the rescue of any injured personnel were killed in the second 9:36:27 A-3 Jet attack, or the 60 Hour Witness Assassination ( http://web.archive.org/web/200609032347 ... 8515.shtml ) that continued for the next three days. Any Flight 77 passenger victim DNA found at the Pentagon was planted there by the same DoD murdering bad guys that killed the Military and Civilian personnel targeted for assassination on 9/11. If Mrn’s Jetliner crashed into the Pentagon at 530 miles per hour, then how did this victim ( http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/ev ... mains.html ) perish without one broken bone or one broken tooth or without his pants even burning??? Where is all the Flight 77 debris surrounding this victim??? And where is the Jetliner debris surrounding all the victims? The 6-ton engines are missing from vaporization, but we have victim bodies entirely intact. Anyone with half a brain can tell this crap is not adding up one bit . . . Mrn is pretending the government has been on the level all along, when they have obviously been LYING through their teeth just like Mrn.

If anyone here really believes Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon, then go right now and start that thread and start hauling out your evidence! Do it! You come onto these threads and support Official Bushie LIES by mumbling NONSENSE you cannot support with any evidence, then you run away and hide without starting your “Flight 77 Crashed Into The Pentagon” Thread. You have no evidence and you are all cowards, if you can tell these LIES without defending that “Flight 77 Crashed Here” NONSENSE on your own thread! All of these Loyal Bushies have a big “L” for Loser painted on your foreheads with a big fat yellow strip down your back. But hey, Ron got a picture of a Flight 77-looking Global Hawk, even if nobody can prove anything like that ever hit the Pentagon either. :0)

GL,

Terral
Reply
Like
Share

ron1872
Advanced Member
ron1872
Advanced Member
Joined: Oct 15 2007, 03:51 PM

Nov 2 2007, 09:30 PM #8

Terral @ Nov 2 2007, 04:07 PM wrote:
Listen to this guy. :0) He has no evidence for anything, but runs his LIES together faster than Senor Bushie can tell the illegals “Come and steal American identities and jobs!” Two frames are missing from camera #1 and camera #2 ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9jW_8ZCUmg ) where the 9:31:39 AM Decoy Flyover Plane was censored from the images.   
Hi Terral

I'm aware of debunkers here too, like on any 9/11 place!

The Decoy Flyover is not what I believe in. It sounds great, but I really haven't seen or heard witnesses who can verify this. The airport on the other site is not in a straight line with the flightpath of a Boeing/Global Hawk/A3 Skywarrior.

I've been watching the two Pentagon video's last week and I'm sure on both of them we are missing at least one and maybe two frames between the incoming object at the upper right corner and the actual impact in the building. Why? The incoming object could be followed by a second object. Can a Global Hawk fire a missile in a straight forward line or just drop a bomb or missile? I do not have that knowledge.

This flatbuilding was hit by an El-Al fright airliner about 15 years ago near Amsterdam:

http://www.zachariel.nl/graphics/israelbijlmerramp.jpg

http://www.statengeneraaldigitaal.nl/th ... _quote.jpg

The complete corner of the building was gone and about 20 appartments were destroyed.
Truth forum Netherlands: http://www.911nederland.nl

Reply
Like
Share

mrn838
Advanced Member
mrn838
Advanced Member
Joined: Oct 7 2007, 01:20 AM

Nov 2 2007, 09:50 PM #9

ron1872 @ Nov 2 2007, 03:42 PM wrote: The main reason for my thoughts pointing to the Global Hawk option is the wingspan in relation to the five lightpoles.

- Boeing 757-200: 38,05 m
- Global Hawk 35,4 m
- A3 Skywarrior 22,1 m

Only a Boeing 757 or Global Hawk can hit all of the lightpoles, related to their position if they were hit by an aircraft.

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/ ... esfell.jpg

Shown in this animation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhITnPeo374

I really do not believe in a Boeing theory stating a 757 or smaller commercial airliner hit the building. It's simply too small when we have a look at the Pentagon video's. When it was a 757 we have to see something larger, for me a 20 inch missile is too small, a Global Hawk fits better and can hit all of the lightpoles, even though one of these was pointing into the wrong direction.

http://membres.lycos.fr/applemacintosh2/COMPARE.jpg

When we consider the witnesses many of them mention a large aircraft, some of them said it was a small 12-20 person commercial airliner, but most of them did not say something about a lot of sound made by the aircraft landing at full speed!
No parts of a Global Hawk were found. According to Globalsecurity.org, in March 2002 there were 3 Global Hawks in existence, the other 3 lost in various testing mishaps. So nobody would notice that these aircraft were missing? I think not.

Again, the profile of the Global Hawk does not match a passenger aircraft. Most of them actually reported a large aircraft, identified as an airliner, striking the Pentagon. The simple fact is that nobody could mistake a Global Hawk for a 757.
Reply
Like
Share

Terral
Advanced Member
Terral
Advanced Member
Joined: Aug 31 2007, 10:03 AM

Nov 2 2007, 09:58 PM #10

Hi Ron:

BTW, welcome to the Loose Change Pentagon Forum. :0)
Ron >>  The main reason for my thoughts pointing to the Global Hawk option is the wingspan in relation to the five lightpoles. - Boeing 757-200: 38,05 m - Global Hawk 35,4 m - A3 Skywarrior 22,1 m
If only solving this Pentagon Case were that simple. Please allow me to point out several problems with your theory:

1. The Global Hawk wings are much too flimsy to survive knocking down five light poles, even the ‘breakaway’ kind we have at the Pentagon.

This thing is huge >> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... 750pix.jpg

Just look at the thing! Composite wings cannot stand striking light poles going 400 miles per hour and especially without leaving all kinds of ‘wing’ debris.

2. The 9:31:39 AM Plane is reported to be a BIG PLANE.

A. http://www.pentagonresearch.com/018.html
Lloyd the taxi driver >>  He described the plane as, "a big one like at the airport with 2 engines". He did not recall any markings and did not state that it was American Airlines.
B. http://video.google.nl/videoplay?docid= ... 6150910098
Terry Cohen >>  “OMG. It was an airplane! It was an airplane! They kept saying it was a BIG AIRPLANE.”
C. http://web.telia.com/~u43109230/flight7 ... allace.txt
On Station Fireman Alan Wallace >>  I saw a large frame commercial airliner crossing Washington Blvd., heading towards the Pentagon!  The plane had two big engines, appeared to be in level flight, and was only approximately 25 feet off the ground and only about 200 YARDS from our location.
Are you beginning to see our problem? :0) Anyone investigating this case is not going to conclude any of these people saw a single-engine Global Hawk of any kind, shape or form. A Global Hawk is a funky looking aircraft that most folks could not accurately identify passing over their head, but these witnesses all saw a BIG PLANE and knew what the hell they where looking at. We know this Big Plane took down the light poles, because this is the same time Lloyd’s windshield was broken and all the poles went flying around. However, the firemen started running north ‘before’ the Decoy flew over the building and before the missile went ‘boom’ into the E-Ring wall. The A-3 then struck 5 minutes later as already described above.

3. Perhaps you fail to realize just one of these Global Hawks with ‘per-aircraft development costs’ run in the range of 123,200,000 dollars. That is 123.2 million bucks per aircraft. These DoD bad guys are in this for the MONEY and are not stupid enough to waste a perfectly good 123 million dollar aircraft, when a retrofitted retired Jet loaded with TNT can do the job at one hundredth the price. :0)

4. Again, you have Pratt and Whitney J-series military Jet parts ( http://home.att.net/~carlson.jon/coffin.htm ) found at the Pentagon.

http://911review.org/Wiki/PentagonPlaneRotor.shtml


There is one photograph of the debris, from  FEMA 1 that may be useful. A rotor (high pressure stage) coming from an jet engine can be seen in left-hand side photo above . On the top left of the image, what seems to be the housing of this engine. On the right, the leg of somebody working on the site gives approximately the scale, of less than a meter in diameter.

Jean-Pierre Desmoulins  examines this photograph carefully, and notes that: this is a high pressure rotor element of a jet engine; the diameter of the housing is not much bigger than the diameter of this rotor, most of the witnesses heard a sound that they describe as the sound of a military aircraft (highly pitched and strident), not the sound of an airliner.

He concludes: this piece and the streamlining behind don't come from the engine of an airliner, which has low pressure fans of much larger size than the high pressure rotors, so that the streamlines are much larger than the diameters of the high pressure rotors. The engines of this plane had no low pressure fans: they are military engines, for which noise is not a problem.
The reason Jean-Pierre Desmoulins concludes these are military parts is because they are from a cheaper Pratt and Whitney J-Series jet engine common to most military jets, because We The People do not afford Rolls-Royce Engines in our military jets. You have the same exact problem as the Official Cover Story cronies running around here without a hope or a prayer, because there were no Rolls-Royce engine parts found anywhere near the Pentagon and most everyone here has known that from the beginning. If the Pentagon was hit by a lawnmower, then it was powered by a cheaper Briggs and Stratton engine and not the Honda.
Ron >>  Only a Boeing 757 or Global Hawk can hit all of the lightpoles, related to their position if they were hit by an aircraft.

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/ ... esfell.jpg
I swear we have far too many people posting ‘lyte trip’ pictures around here. :0) I am not buying any of that, because the composite Global Hawk wings are too flimsy to knock down one light pole and still fly over the E-Ring wall.
Ron >>  Shown in this animation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhITnPeo374
Heh . . . Cartoons.
Ron >>  I really do not believe in a Boeing theory stating a 757 or smaller commercial airliner hit the building. It's simply too small when we have a look at the Pentagon video's. When it was a 757 we have to see something larger, for me a 20 inch missile is too small, a Global Hawk fits better and can hit all of the lightpoles, even though one of these was pointing into the wrong direction.
The 20-inch missile is the baby bear “just right” size from the Pentagon Security Video ( http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c266/ ... rame1a.jpg ), but you can believe that big 123 million dollar Global Hawk hit the Pentagon if that makes Ron happy. :0)

GL,

Terral
Reply
Like
Share

ron1872
Advanced Member
ron1872
Advanced Member
Joined: Oct 15 2007, 03:51 PM

Nov 2 2007, 10:00 PM #11

mrn838 @ Nov 2 2007, 04:50 PM wrote:
No parts of a Global Hawk were found. According to Globalsecurity.org, in March 2002 there were 3 Global Hawks in existence, the other 3 lost in various testing mishaps. So nobody would notice that these aircraft were missing? I think not.

Again, the profile of the Global Hawk does not match a passenger aircraft. Most of them actually reported a large aircraft, identified as an airliner, striking the Pentagon. The simple fact is that nobody could mistake a Global Hawk for a 757.
Unless it was painted in AA colours according to the Operation Northwood 'script'! The wingspan is about the same. I think not many people have seen a Global Hawk before 9/11 in real, because the first official long flight was in April 2001 that year from California to Australia. I wouldn't even think of a Global Hawk if I was not aware of it's existence at that time.
Truth forum Netherlands: http://www.911nederland.nl

Reply
Like
Share

ron1872
Advanced Member
ron1872
Advanced Member
Joined: Oct 15 2007, 03:51 PM

Nov 2 2007, 10:14 PM #12

Terral @ Nov 2 2007, 04:58 PM wrote:

Are you beginning to see our problem? :0) Anyone investigating this case is not going to conclude any of these people saw a single-engine Global Hawk of any kind, shape or form. A Global Hawk is a funky looking aircraft that most folks could not accurately identify passing over their head, but these witnesses all saw a BIG PLANE and knew what the hell they where looking at. We know this Big Plane took down the light poles, because this is the same time Lloyd’s windshield was broken and all the poles went flying around. However, the firemen started running north ‘before’ the Decoy flew over the building and before the missile went ‘boom’ into the E-Ring wall. The A-3 then struck 5 minutes later as already described above.



The theory sounds good Terral, but has at least one weak place: witnesses of the fly-over aircraft, when it passed the Pentagon and heading north. I haven't seen something on that on the original mainstream media on 9/11 itself or via the internet.
Truth forum Netherlands: http://www.911nederland.nl

Reply
Like
Share

mrn838
Advanced Member
mrn838
Advanced Member
Joined: Oct 7 2007, 01:20 AM

Nov 2 2007, 11:02 PM #13

Terral @ Nov 2 2007, 04:07 PM wrote:Hi Mrn:
Mrn >>  Except for the fact that the Global Hawk is much too small to be seriously considered a candidate, that the engine parts do in fact match the 757 . . .
The Global Hawk is what?? Too small? Please . . .

http://www.911research.wtc7.net/pentago ... ideos.html



Take good long look at the Camera #2 of the missile nose section and tell everyone the BIG Global Hawk ( http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... Hawk_2.jpg ) is too small. :0) Mrn is DREAMING again and having Flight 77 fantasies.



This is where Mrn wants everyone to believe a 100-Ton Jetliner crashed going 530 miles per hour. :0) This view shows the massive size of the cable spools that are taller than a man with the second story floor standing not far above them, but Mrn says an almost 50-feet tall Jetliner crashed here. :0) Sorry, but all I can do is LAUGH out loud . . . Even if the hole was big enough (and it is not nearly), then you are still missing 100 tons of Jetliner no matter how you cut the mustard. Your statement above that the engine parts do indeed match a 757 is nothing but A LIE that Mrn cannot support with any kind of evidence. Even if you had 757-200 parts from a real Rolls-Royce RB211-535 Registry Number N644AA Flight 77 Jetliner (which you DO NOT), Mrn has no place in the E-Ring wall where anything like that ever crashed on 9/11 or any other day. The fact is that Flight 77 had hundreds of time-change parts with serial numbers and the government has not produced EVEN ONE to date. ZERO.

http://physics911.net/georgenelson
American Airlines Flight 77

This was reported to be a Boeing 757, registration number N644AA, carrying 64 people, including the flight crew and five hijackers. This aircraft, with a 125-foot wingspan, was reported to have crashed into the Pentagon, leaving an entry hole no more than 65 feet wide.

Following cool-down of the resulting fire, this crash site would have been very easy to collect enough time-change equipment within 15 minutes to positively identify the aircraft registry. There was apparently some aerospace type of equipment found at the site but no attempt was made to produce serial numbers or to identify the specific parts found. Some of the equipment removed from the building was actually hidden from public view . . With all the evidence readily available at the Pentagon crash site, any unbiased rational investigator could only conclude that a Boeing 757 DID NOT fly into the Pentagon as alleged.
The Official Cover Story cronies running around here fail to realize Flight 77 and the Rolls-Royce engines had many indestructible ‘time-change’ parts and NONE have ever been presented by the government in this Pentagon case OR any of the other 911 cases. The idea that the FBI still has jurisdiction over these cases is the height of Congressional Complicity and STUPIDITY. The FAA says the aircraft crashed into the Pentagon wall at 9:32 AM ( http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB165/faa5.pdf ), but the FBI-provided Flight Data Recorder evidence, given to the National Transportation Safety Board ( http://web.archive.org/web/200610070323 ... y_AA77.pdf ) places Flight 77 outside Pentagon airspace at 9:32 AM at the official crash time. In short, all of Jim Ritter’s NTSB testimony is a fabricated LIE presented to build a DoD Cover Story and hide the absolute fact that a ‘rogue element’ working inside the Department of Defense itself murdered Navy/Defense Intelligence Personnel along with the ‘accountants, bookkeepers, audit managers and budget analysts’ ( http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/2 ... agonp4.asp ) responsible for creating the paper trail back to the missing 2.3 Trillion dollars ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xU4GdHLUHwU ). But, Mrn wants you to believe the Official Government Cover Story is the 911Truth. :0) All I see is another guy wearing a black hat around here . . .
Mrn >>  . . . that nobody described which even remotely looked like a Global Hawk, that no frames are missing from the Pentagon tape it just has a very low framerate,
Listen to this guy. :0) He has no evidence for anything, but runs his LIES together faster than Senor Bushie can tell the illegals “Come and steal American identities and jobs!” Two frames are missing from camera #1 and camera #2 ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9jW_8ZCUmg ) where the 9:31:39 AM Decoy Flyover Plane was censored from the images.
Mrn >>  . . . and that no missile debris were found at the site but the bodies of passengers and Pentagon employees were found, your theory is quite sound.
LOL! This is the kind of junk hauled out at the JREF Board where CT Debunkers run around regurgitating Loyal Bushie LIES like good little lapdogs going ‘ruff, ruff,’ The DoD carried out the ‘inside job’ murder of innocent Army/Navy/Defense Personnel and as many accountant-types they could cram into the E, D, and C-Rings on a 45-degree south trajectory between Column Line (CL) 13 and CL 15.



The DoD ‘rogue element’ military bad guys packed everyone marked for sterilization inside that red circle for the 9:31:39 party, before they ran to the other side of the Pentagon in anticipation of two big BOOMS some five minutes apart. Any first responders running to the rescue of any injured personnel were killed in the second 9:36:27 A-3 Jet attack, or the 60 Hour Witness Assassination ( http://web.archive.org/web/200609032347 ... 8515.shtml ) that continued for the next three days. Any Flight 77 passenger victim DNA found at the Pentagon was planted there by the same DoD murdering bad guys that killed the Military and Civilian personnel targeted for assassination on 9/11. If Mrn’s Jetliner crashed into the Pentagon at 530 miles per hour, then how did this victim ( http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/ev ... mains.html ) perish without one broken bone or one broken tooth or without his pants even burning??? Where is all the Flight 77 debris surrounding this victim??? And where is the Jetliner debris surrounding all the victims? The 6-ton engines are missing from vaporization, but we have victim bodies entirely intact. Anyone with half a brain can tell this crap is not adding up one bit . . . Mrn is pretending the government has been on the level all along, when they have obviously been LYING through their teeth just like Mrn.

If anyone here really believes Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon, then go right now and start that thread and start hauling out your evidence! Do it! You come onto these threads and support Official Bushie LIES by mumbling NONSENSE you cannot support with any evidence, then you run away and hide without starting your “Flight 77 Crashed Into The Pentagon” Thread. You have no evidence and you are all cowards, if you can tell these LIES without defending that “Flight 77 Crashed Here” NONSENSE on your own thread! All of these Loyal Bushies have a big “L” for Loser painted on your foreheads with a big fat yellow strip down your back. But hey, Ron got a picture of a Flight 77-looking Global Hawk, even if nobody can prove anything like that ever hit the Pentagon either. :0)

GL,

Terral
Terral, If you look at the link you posted with the CCTV frames, you'll see the object you're pointing to as the tail section is still there in all the other frames so, I fail to see how it could be part of any aircraft.

If I'm interpreting you correctly, you now believe it was a Global Hawk which impacted? It seems your theory changes like the wind. To give some scale: http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/sy ... 9x-001.jpg

Do you see any weapons pylons? No. The Global Hawk is a surveillance platform it isn't even armed! Oops sorry Terral were you having George Bush dreams again?

Okay I have had enough of you. HereRolls Royce clearly states that the RB211535 is used in the 757.Here is the diagram CLEARLY showing that those parts found do in fact match the RB211535. Do you still insist it is a lie? The flight data recorder was recovered and you can find the full analysis Here.

No Place? Again you'll find pictures

Here Do you honestly conclude that an aircraft going over 500 mph hitting a reinforced concrete building would leave a cookie cutter outline?

Again, pieces were just shown to you of engine parts found at the site. Your assertion that parts of the engine are "indestructible" is pure nonsense. Will they still be intact after a nuclear detonation? Obviously not. If you're referring to this as evidenced being carted off you're sadly mistaken.

Has the FBI ever publicly released physical evidence to the general public, especially in a matter of national security? No so why do you expect them to do so now, just to satisfy your paranoia?

Oh my Terral, the times do not match. My watch says 6:35, my computer says 6:37, the tv says 6:38, and my phone says 6:36. Does that mean there is a cover up? No. It means every clock in the world is not synchronized. Thank you captain obvious.

In short, you feel qualified as a keyboard warrior to dismiss expert testimony. I hardly think you are and you seem to have a very high opinion of yourself, annoyingly so actually. I'll skip all your usual conspiracy rabble.

I want him to believe the truth, the real truth. If he or you choses not to do so that is your choice but you are, at least in my view, wrong. By the way thanks for this, yet more eyewitness testimony of a plane coming in and spearing into the building.

So either the frames were censored by somebody in the government to cover up the murder of hundreds of Americans, and this happened before anyone outside the cabal was able to view the original, or the cameras are simply not in sync. I have a feeling I know which option you'll choose. Oh my Terral, your decoy plane didn't show up, nobody saw it so it must've been CENSORED AMIRITE???????

I see you ignore the COMPLETE lack of missile debris. Very telling. How exactly did they pack everyone in that area? Was this cabal also responsible for assigning offices in the Pentagon to different agenceis? Care to point out some A-3 debris for me? Oh wait those were never found either. 60 Hour Witness Assassination? Those people were fucking dead and for you to use them as pawns in your idiotic baseless theories galls me to no end. I see you're getting ahead of yourself. Please prove that that DNA was planted. Oops you can't do that either. What the fuck are you talking about Terral. You have no idea whatsoever if he died of internal injuries. Every single bone is his body could be broken and you wouldn't know it from this. His clothes look melted on to him to me so please stop spewing your pseudo-intellectual garbage. You have no idea if this man was on the plane or in the building either so debris is irrelevant but notice the charred rebar and building debris. Is that not enough for you? THEY ARE NOT MISSING FOR FUCKS SAKE. How many times must articles like this be posted before you get the point that the engines, or at least portions of them, were found?

Terral, the evidence has been shown MANY MANY TIMES and yet you ignore it. Will you believe it if it's posted in a separate thread? Of course not because you're so much "smarter" than us aren't you Terral? You're the one who was mumbling about missile shockwaves and couldn't even prove a Tomahawk was there, or that a Tomahawk can even go at supersonic speeds. You're the one whose got a big "P" for Psychotic on your forehead. Perhaps you had a psychological breakdown on Halloween like so many other nutjobs do. God knows I saw enough of it that night. Also, they can't prove a Global Hawk hit the Pentagon because it didn't.
Reply
Like
Share

ron1872
Advanced Member
ron1872
Advanced Member
Joined: Oct 15 2007, 03:51 PM

Nov 3 2007, 02:40 AM #14

@mrm

Can you show evidence the death bodies from flight AA77 were found on the Pentagon site and those were identified by DNA and dental analysis?
Truth forum Netherlands: http://www.911nederland.nl

Reply
Like
Share

racerX
Advanced Member
racerX
Advanced Member
Joined: Oct 28 2006, 11:31 PM

Nov 3 2007, 09:00 AM #15

ron1872 @ Nov 2 2007, 09:40 PM wrote: @mrm

Can you show evidence the death bodies from flight AA77 were found on the Pentagon site and those were identified by DNA and dental analysis?
What kind of question is this?

Nobody here has access to that kind of information and even if you were presented with some sort of dental analysis you could say you havent seen the actual theets or whatever...(?)

At some point people will need to understand that we're dealing with an attack on the Pentagon here... thats not supposed to happen heh? No matter what you believe you cant expect full disclosure on this... it wasnt supposed to happen one way or another...

What kind of freak show would it be if the Pentagon began dishing out statements like:

"Hey, we said it already, but here is additional proof that the people who died here really died here..."

wtf?

What do you expect? The plane crashed there... accept it or show evidence of the contrary...

Can you show evidence of AA77 bodies elsewhere?

That was just stupid... that really wasnt the question you should've been asking...
Reply
Like
Share

mrn838
Advanced Member
mrn838
Advanced Member
Joined: Oct 7 2007, 01:20 AM

Nov 3 2007, 12:33 PM #16

ron1872 @ Nov 2 2007, 05:00 PM wrote:
mrn838 @ Nov 2 2007, 04:50 PM wrote:
No parts of a Global Hawk were found. According to Globalsecurity.org, in March 2002 there were 3 Global Hawks in existence, the other 3 lost in various testing mishaps. So nobody would notice that these aircraft were missing? I think not.

Again, the profile of the Global Hawk does not match a passenger aircraft. Most of them actually reported a large aircraft, identified as an airliner, striking the Pentagon. The simple fact is that nobody could mistake a Global Hawk for a 757.
Unless it was painted in AA colours according to the Operation Northwood 'script'! The wingspan is about the same. I think not many people have seen a Global Hawk before 9/11 in real, because the first official long flight was in April 2001 that year from California to Australia. I wouldn't even think of a Global Hawk if I was not aware of it's existence at that time.
Profile as in from the side, it just looks totally different. Notice the large engine, V shaped rudders, and very curved dorsal area. From the side, as well as the bottom, it would look like a weird aircraft painted in dumb colors, not a 757.

By the way, were you aware that nobody was supposed to die in Operation Northwoods and that even then it was REJECTED by the Kennedy administration back during the 60's?
Reply
Like
Share

mrn838
Advanced Member
mrn838
Advanced Member
Joined: Oct 7 2007, 01:20 AM

Nov 3 2007, 01:07 PM #17

ron1872 @ Nov 2 2007, 09:40 PM wrote: @mrm

Can you show evidence the death bodies from flight AA77 were found on the Pentagon site and those were identified by DNA and dental analysis?
Sure. There's a nice presentation on it: http://tinyurl.com/juld8


^ That's a diagram of where the DNA evidence was collected, and as for the pictures of human remains, they've been posted already several times so I won't do so again.
Reply
Like
Share

mrn838
Advanced Member
mrn838
Advanced Member
Joined: Oct 7 2007, 01:20 AM

Nov 3 2007, 01:12 PM #18

Oh and a little tidbit for Terral since I notice he still thinks a Tomahawk hit the Pentagon. While the diameter of the missile is 20 inches which you have correctly stated, it actually has a wingspan of 8' 9". Source
Reply
Like
Share

ron1872
Advanced Member
ron1872
Advanced Member
Joined: Oct 15 2007, 03:51 PM

Nov 3 2007, 01:39 PM #19

Another question: a complete AA repainted militairy aircraft, is that an option, considering the Northwoods script?
Truth forum Netherlands: http://www.911nederland.nl

Reply
Like
Share

mrn838
Advanced Member
mrn838
Advanced Member
Joined: Oct 7 2007, 01:20 AM

Nov 3 2007, 01:48 PM #20

ron1872 @ Nov 3 2007, 08:39 AM wrote: Another question: a complete AA repainted militairy aircraft, is that an option, considering the Northwoods script?
...No. Especially since the only 757's that the government operates are two aircraft used for Vice Presidential travel and 4 unmarked white aircraft used by the State Department for VIP transport and evacuation. None of those aircraft air polished aluminum which is the color scheme of American Airlines. So you couldn't really "paint" an aircraft to look like an AA 757 at all.
Reply
Like
Share


Confirmation of reply: