Pentagon Plane Bomb Theory
I just read a fairly thorough and impressive analysis of the 9/11 Pentagon attack by someone named Eric Bart, apparently from France. I'm not sure why the French are so interested in the Pentagon attack. In any case, his theory may be the best explanation I've seen so far for what happened at the Pentagon. His theory is that there was a plane loaded with explosives that blew up just before hitting the Pentagon. This theory would seem to explain many things that other theories can't explain very well, particularly the many eye-witness accounts.
The theory may sound kooky at first, but I advise you to check out his site. He has done a really nice job, with several pictures taken right after the attacks that I hadn't seen.
The major problem with this theory is that it presupposes a fairly advanced conspiracy, where the military (apparently) has rigged up an American Airlines jet with explosives and rammed it into the Pentagon. Most people just don't want to wrap their minds around that concept. Nonetheless, this theory would seem to explain the physical evidence fairly well.
However, since I now think that many of the cell phone calls made from the hijacked planes were faked, the plane bomb theory fits in with that general theory. That is, that the 9/11 attacks were government-sponsored and/or -facilitated terror attacks.
Along these lines, we can't rule out that the '93 WTC bombing and the '95 Oklahoma City bombing were not similar more primitive versions of government-sponsored terror attacks. And I don't think Clinton or Bush were behind the attacks, but rather that rogue elements of the government facilitated the attacks for their own ends. In Bush's case with 9/11, they may have finally gotten what they wanted-- an excuse to invade Iraq. I should point out that both the '93 and '95 attacks had some weak but nonetheless clear Iraq connections. These connections to Iraq may have been planted by intelligence agents specifically to incite some sort of Iraq invasion by the US. But in the case of Clinton, these links were never really exploited.
In any case, if the Pentagon attack was made by a plane loaded with bombs, we can't really rule out similar types of scenarios with the other 9/11 planes. Plane bombs may explain the WTC collapses better than just burning jet fuel. In the case of flight 93, there is evidence that the plane blew up in the air. This flight may have been aborted after plotters saw the horrendous damage at the WTC and the Pentagon.
Then, what happened to the real flights and the passengers? And were there hijackings at all?
I will leave these questions for another post.
The theory may sound kooky at first, but I advise you to check out his site. He has done a really nice job, with several pictures taken right after the attacks that I hadn't seen.
The major problem with this theory is that it presupposes a fairly advanced conspiracy, where the military (apparently) has rigged up an American Airlines jet with explosives and rammed it into the Pentagon. Most people just don't want to wrap their minds around that concept. Nonetheless, this theory would seem to explain the physical evidence fairly well.
However, since I now think that many of the cell phone calls made from the hijacked planes were faked, the plane bomb theory fits in with that general theory. That is, that the 9/11 attacks were government-sponsored and/or -facilitated terror attacks.
Along these lines, we can't rule out that the '93 WTC bombing and the '95 Oklahoma City bombing were not similar more primitive versions of government-sponsored terror attacks. And I don't think Clinton or Bush were behind the attacks, but rather that rogue elements of the government facilitated the attacks for their own ends. In Bush's case with 9/11, they may have finally gotten what they wanted-- an excuse to invade Iraq. I should point out that both the '93 and '95 attacks had some weak but nonetheless clear Iraq connections. These connections to Iraq may have been planted by intelligence agents specifically to incite some sort of Iraq invasion by the US. But in the case of Clinton, these links were never really exploited.
In any case, if the Pentagon attack was made by a plane loaded with bombs, we can't really rule out similar types of scenarios with the other 9/11 planes. Plane bombs may explain the WTC collapses better than just burning jet fuel. In the case of flight 93, there is evidence that the plane blew up in the air. This flight may have been aborted after plotters saw the horrendous damage at the WTC and the Pentagon.
Then, what happened to the real flights and the passengers? And were there hijackings at all?
I will leave these questions for another post.
posted by spooked at 10:43 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home