Pentagon Conspiracy?
- Thread starter fyrestarter
- Start date
- Status
I'm told we didn't land on the moon, either.
They make quite a case by using the testimony of those who have never actually heard a missle or smelled what happens when you hit a stone structure with a high speed tin can.
Fragile structures, like an aluminum airplane, do funny things when they impact things at high speed.
It should be easy enough to locate the survivors of the victims and confirm that several hundred people died as well.
They make quite a case by using the testimony of those who have never actually heard a missle or smelled what happens when you hit a stone structure with a high speed tin can.
Fragile structures, like an aluminum airplane, do funny things when they impact things at high speed.
It should be easy enough to locate the survivors of the victims and confirm that several hundred people died as well.
Fred Hansen
New member
My personal favorite is the guy who is quoted as saying "I smelled the Cordite!"
LMBFAO
LMBFAO
So, where are all the aircraft pieces? Can anybody answer that? Plane crashes leave chunks of plane around. I think that needs to be explained.
Oh...
No, I don't mean at the Pentagon, I mean at the twin towers. Where are all the plane pieces? Supposedly there were TWO planes there. Where are the pieces? A plane doesn't just disappear, you know.
Oh...
No, I don't mean at the Pentagon, I mean at the twin towers. Where are all the plane pieces? Supposedly there were TWO planes there. Where are the pieces? A plane doesn't just disappear, you know.
While I'm at it, wouldn't you expect an "incompetent pilot" to fly a plane smoothly, just like professional pilots? He wouldn't swerve around suddenly, like a fighter craft would. No way. Air traffic controllers have a lot of experience with suicidal maniacs flying airplanes - they wouldn't mistake it for a military craft.
Destructo6
New member
The proof is that flight 77 actually flew to the moon as part of the CIA coverup. On a clear night, with a good telescope, you can see it.
That video is like Johnny Chocran saying, "Nobody could have killed those two people without leaving bloody prints everywhere." Which, of course, begs the question, "So they weren't murdered or did they do that themselves?"
That video is like Johnny Chocran saying, "Nobody could have killed those two people without leaving bloody prints everywhere." Which, of course, begs the question, "So they weren't murdered or did they do that themselves?"
So where is the wreckage of Flight 77?
Aluminum does do funny things when it strikes a hard structure - like break up into small pieces. But the fact is, there is a considerable amount of titanium, tungsten and steel in parts of the wings of a modern airliner.
Viewing photographs of the neat hole in the front of the Pentagon (before they knocked it all down), there was not even scratches where the wings should have impacted the building. Sure there were broken windows and blacking from fire - but little else.
They sure covered up that pristine lawn - uh, I mean the lawn gouged up by those engines - awfully quick. They sure moved those untouched giant wooden cable drums that would have obstructed things rather quickly too.
Of course that rag for public consumption, the "Official" rag about the 9/11 report out now on the news shelves avoids those pictures that make sheer mockery out of the official story
Aluminum does do funny things when it strikes a hard structure - like break up into small pieces. But the fact is, there is a considerable amount of titanium, tungsten and steel in parts of the wings of a modern airliner.
Viewing photographs of the neat hole in the front of the Pentagon (before they knocked it all down), there was not even scratches where the wings should have impacted the building. Sure there were broken windows and blacking from fire - but little else.
They sure covered up that pristine lawn - uh, I mean the lawn gouged up by those engines - awfully quick. They sure moved those untouched giant wooden cable drums that would have obstructed things rather quickly too.
Of course that rag for public consumption, the "Official" rag about the 9/11 report out now on the news shelves avoids those pictures that make sheer mockery out of the official story
Quartus,
Didn't you know?? Hani I-can't-fly-a-Cessna Hanjour - was really Hani Luke Skywalker Hajour! That is how he flew a Boeing 757 like a military fighter!
"Bttt, bttt, I kenot fly e 757! I kennot eving fly a Ceeezna!! I kant eving naveeget a plane!!"
"Trust your instincts Haani. Haaaani, the Farce is with you!"
Didn't you know?? Hani I-can't-fly-a-Cessna Hanjour - was really Hani Luke Skywalker Hajour! That is how he flew a Boeing 757 like a military fighter!
"Bttt, bttt, I kenot fly e 757! I kennot eving fly a Ceeezna!! I kant eving naveeget a plane!!"
"Trust your instincts Haani. Haaaani, the Farce is with you!"
Destructo6
New member
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm
Some seem to assume that the plane was skillfully piloted into the building so that it entered orthogonal to the outer wall.
One of the many humorous portions of that video were that these wire coils were, "intact." It didn't even make an effort to explain where those coils were located before the impact.
Some seem to assume that the plane was skillfully piloted into the building so that it entered orthogonal to the outer wall.
One of the many humorous portions of that video were that these wire coils were, "intact." It didn't even make an effort to explain where those coils were located before the impact.
The official story is: the Boeing 757 known as Flight 77 hit the Pentagon at ground level, I.E. it struck the first floor, but because of it's height including the two slung engines, it actually "hit the ground" first. THAT is the impression given by the media and official line right? They even had "witnesses" to give their story the momentum they wanted.
Well, I didn't see these photos in the "Official 9/11 Report" rag now on the shelves .....
http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/pentalawn.html
And right in the path at ground level are some of the most amazing wooden cable drums ever constructed. You won't see these photos in the "Official 9/11 Report" rag now on the shelves now either ......
http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/pentanium.html
NOTE: The SECOND floor at the impact site was intact. The fixup crew had placed wooden supports under and over it to shore up the structure before it was soon all demolished. This is significant, because if you juxtapose a Boeing 757 at ground level, i.e. with it's engines just cutting the grass, the center of the fuselage is right about at the "floor" of the second level. Yet the Pentagon was breeched through it's fortified walls times six, as well as the intervening interior reinforced columns. In previous tests of aircraft striking fortified solid structures - aircraft lose, and it is only their more solid components that do superficial damage to the outer face.
On the issue of debris away from the building, there was some debris, until a swarm of military and others policed up the place and carried it away - the bigger pieces covered with blue tarps. So much for the "mandatory" Transportation Safety Board investigation.
And as an aside; intellect, reason and logic does not worship at the feet of "snopes" dot com. The somewhat HUGE cable drums were within yards of the impact area of the building.
Well, I didn't see these photos in the "Official 9/11 Report" rag now on the shelves .....
http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/pentalawn.html
And right in the path at ground level are some of the most amazing wooden cable drums ever constructed. You won't see these photos in the "Official 9/11 Report" rag now on the shelves now either ......
http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/pentanium.html
NOTE: The SECOND floor at the impact site was intact. The fixup crew had placed wooden supports under and over it to shore up the structure before it was soon all demolished. This is significant, because if you juxtapose a Boeing 757 at ground level, i.e. with it's engines just cutting the grass, the center of the fuselage is right about at the "floor" of the second level. Yet the Pentagon was breeched through it's fortified walls times six, as well as the intervening interior reinforced columns. In previous tests of aircraft striking fortified solid structures - aircraft lose, and it is only their more solid components that do superficial damage to the outer face.
On the issue of debris away from the building, there was some debris, until a swarm of military and others policed up the place and carried it away - the bigger pieces covered with blue tarps. So much for the "mandatory" Transportation Safety Board investigation.
And as an aside; intellect, reason and logic does not worship at the feet of "snopes" dot com. The somewhat HUGE cable drums were within yards of the impact area of the building.
It also doesn't care for trivial little factoids like "Where's the missing plane and passengers," apparently. I presume the plane and its pax & crew are being held incommunicado in the same building we used to fake the '69 Apollo landing.
Like I pointed out elsewhere, the beauty of conspiracy theories is their handling of evidence: Any piece of evidence can be interpreted in such a way as to fit the thesis. Any absence of a piece of supporting evidence is interpreted as evidence in and of itself. It's like arguing with a religious true believer, when the flight of every sparrow is interpreted as an omen.
LAK, the NTSB does not do the entire investigation on site. They cart the debris off and do the analysis of it elsewhere. Like someplace with a roof.
Orthogonal? Do you mean perpendicular?
Now HERE'S something I can agree with! Snopes assumes, a priori, that any conspiracy at any level is simply impossible, and therefore already proven false simply by reason of being a conspiracy theory.
That's as absurd as assuming that EVERY incident is part of a conspiracy.
Here's the first pic in the security camera series that shows any activity.
Note the absence of any obvious dust cloud or debris to the right of the photo. If the plane hit the ground, it did so right AT the Pentagon, not back aways. Due to the poor resolution, there MIGHT be some dust cloud there, but it's small.
Which is not inconsistent with eyewitness reports and IS consistent with all of the photographs of the amazing Penta-Lawn.
BTW, if anyone is expecting to see the plane itself in the frame before impact, do some math. The plane (according to the official story) was moving at an easily believable 500 MPH, or about 733 feet per second. Compare that to the frame rate of a typical security video camera, and you'll find it's very easy to miss a plane in a single frame.
Note the absence of any obvious dust cloud or debris to the right of the photo. If the plane hit the ground, it did so right AT the Pentagon, not back aways. Due to the poor resolution, there MIGHT be some dust cloud there, but it's small.
Which is not inconsistent with eyewitness reports and IS consistent with all of the photographs of the amazing Penta-Lawn.
BTW, if anyone is expecting to see the plane itself in the frame before impact, do some math. The plane (according to the official story) was moving at an easily believable 500 MPH, or about 733 feet per second. Compare that to the frame rate of a typical security video camera, and you'll find it's very easy to miss a plane in a single frame.
Destructo6
New member
Orthogonal, meaning perpendicular to both axes of the plane formed by the wall.
Lak, where were those wooden cable drums before impact? Don't know, do you?
Tamara,
What happened to the plane, passengers and crew if it did not strike the Pentagon is another question. You can not arrive at a conclusion that is highly questionable or plain wrong just because you can not answer questions concerned with an alternative - unless you are a government, or government agency
It may be that a Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon. But I think not, the evidence is either not there, or it is being withheld - like the security camera views. I doubt if many airline pilots would buy the story that Hani I-can't-fly-or-navigate Hanjour flew a 757 around, navigated a course change which brought him directly to the Pentagon, handled it like a fighter jet, rapid turning decent, and then down along the deck at 400+ mph.
These are the things the 9/11 Commission should have detailed and debated, instead of listening to people like Guiliani waffle on about why the command center was moved and other superfluous matters.
It must have been highly frustrating for people who lost family and friends in those three strikes to listen to hours of that bs while the real questions were not even addressed.
And the NTSB conducts crash investigations on site. It includes all the physical evidence of a crash. They also, among other things cart away wreckage, when the aircraft is "reconstructed" and the pieces inventoried. Some pieces are selected for chemical and physical analysis.
So where is the wreckage of Flight 77? Where are the flight recorders? Where are the air traffic control data recordings and reports? Where are the camera footage recordings?
What happened to the plane, passengers and crew if it did not strike the Pentagon is another question. You can not arrive at a conclusion that is highly questionable or plain wrong just because you can not answer questions concerned with an alternative - unless you are a government, or government agency
It may be that a Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon. But I think not, the evidence is either not there, or it is being withheld - like the security camera views. I doubt if many airline pilots would buy the story that Hani I-can't-fly-or-navigate Hanjour flew a 757 around, navigated a course change which brought him directly to the Pentagon, handled it like a fighter jet, rapid turning decent, and then down along the deck at 400+ mph.
These are the things the 9/11 Commission should have detailed and debated, instead of listening to people like Guiliani waffle on about why the command center was moved and other superfluous matters.
It must have been highly frustrating for people who lost family and friends in those three strikes to listen to hours of that bs while the real questions were not even addressed.
And the NTSB conducts crash investigations on site. It includes all the physical evidence of a crash. They also, among other things cart away wreckage, when the aircraft is "reconstructed" and the pieces inventoried. Some pieces are selected for chemical and physical analysis.
So where is the wreckage of Flight 77? Where are the flight recorders? Where are the air traffic control data recordings and reports? Where are the camera footage recordings?
rennaissancemann
New member
Wow... I didn't know Michael Moore had an apprentice
I hear more coherent logic coming out of my 4 year old niece.
Nothing I saw in this video, or read in some of the preceding posts, leads me to accept what is being served up as logic. In this instance, a group of terrorists flying a large aircraft into the Pentagon is less absurd than some shadowy government conspiracy. Sites like the one that began this thread are a lot of fun... as long as you remember that that you're enjoying is fiction.
Regards.
I hear more coherent logic coming out of my 4 year old niece.
Nothing I saw in this video, or read in some of the preceding posts, leads me to accept what is being served up as logic. In this instance, a group of terrorists flying a large aircraft into the Pentagon is less absurd than some shadowy government conspiracy. Sites like the one that began this thread are a lot of fun... as long as you remember that that you're enjoying is fiction.
Regards.
Fred Hansen
New member
Amazing in that they are made completely of steel I guess. Note the radial stiffening ridges on the rims of each spool. Go ahead and show me just one wooden spool using that design.
Note that the one on the left is warped from the heat. Maybe it's made of ironwood.
LMFAOSomebody better shut these eyewitnesses up!
Oh, wait... I forgot...
People who vaguely smelled what they thought was cordite ('cause everybody knows that 21st Century cruise missiles use 19th Century explosives ), or heard what they thought was "a missile, or maybe a fighter... no, it was a bizjet!" are eyewitnesses; those who were there who claim to have seen a jetliner are government stooges. Gotta love the consistency of the Gnomes of Zurich crowd...
Oh, wait... I forgot...
People who vaguely smelled what they thought was cordite ('cause everybody knows that 21st Century cruise missiles use 19th Century explosives
), or heard what they thought was "a missile, or maybe a fighter... no, it was a bizjet!" are eyewitnesses; those who were there who claim to have seen a jetliner are government stooges. Gotta love the consistency of the Gnomes of Zurich crowd... - Status