757 Plane Did Not Hit Pentagon - Hard Visible Proof!

Where's Swampfox and Caustic, my guess is they got tired of saying the same thing over and over without showing any real proof to thier statements! Name some names Swampfox, who will go on record! Show something other than catherders debunked cartoons Caustic! And by the way Caustic have you seen the pics. from the fisrt responders to the Pentagon? The 2 firetrucks putting out fires on either side of the impact zone, with the pristeen lawn and only the tire marks left from the trucks. I don't see any debrie in these photos. Please debunk for me.

Originally posted by darkbluesky

a) Who says it's the nose?

Perhaps it was the side wall or roof of the cockpit

b) Whatever it is...maybe it went through a window?

Usually. And when they do sheer off, travelling at 500 mph they will eventually hit something while still travelling at a good fraction of the original velocity, and if that "something" is hard they WILL disintegrate.


Oh really? Why don't we hear about them?

1. If it was not the nose what caused the circular hole, the side wall and roof of the cockpit are made of fragile aluminum.

2. Photos of what usually happens to wings when they hit an obsticle.
i114.photobucket.com...
i114.photobucket.com...

3. If you do a litlte research you can find people who have come out against the 911 official story.

Originally posted by kix
Id wish I had a week off and could use like 60 hours work to completely destroy the 757 hit the pentagon but I dont, so Ill just point one part and try to debunk it..

Here is an easy one:

Here is the alleged part that most here including the LONG GONE Cat herder said it came from the wreckage (BTW, the feds not even admit this part is from the wreckage offically).

See the rivets? do you see the separation and the pattern?
whach it closelly and count them and see them....

Now courtesy of airliners net we have this close up of an American airlines 757-200 with...a completelly diferent patterns of rivets, separations and BTW a line where 2 rows are present (the ones holding diferent fuselage sectiosn so they are doubled for extra strength)... note that thsi AA 757 is just 2 aircarft away from the assy line at Boeing fronm the flight 77.

www.airliners.net...

NOW TRY TO FIT THIS INTO YOUR DREAM THAT A 757 WAS EVEN THERE...

P.D. while you are at it check the shinny metal and the reflections on the fuselage...

Kix,

Why would you show a close up of the cockpit when you know the piece of wreckage you're focusing on is from the first class section of the fuselage?



I dont have 60 hrs a week to devote to this debate either so I would ask you to find a close-up of this section of a 757 that shows the rivet pattern to support your claim that the wreckage in question is not part of a 757.

I'd also like to call attention to the "apparent" color of the polished aluminum around the top of the lettering. Seems to "appear" bluish grey doesn't it? But we know for sure its actually polished aluminum so maybe, just maybe, the piece of wreckage you have stated is grey, is actually polished aluminum that "appears" to be colored grey due to lighting, reflections, and camera exposure settings. Would you agree that this is possible?

There is something odd about this rivit pattern on these pieces of alleged wreckage on the Pentagon lawn. I was looking at it carefully last night and I don't believe the rivit pattern is correct. I believe that the rivits are too far part for any structural piece of Boeing 757 aircraft. There is nothing this size that is not structural on a Boeing 757. So if the rivit pattern turns out to be bogus then this piece is not from a Boeing 757. I will research it today.

I am a certificated aircraft mechanic and we had to study this kind of thing for the written test, however this was 40 years ago. Any input from anybody would be very much appreciated.

Originally posted by johnlear
And this is all thats left?

Not really.



Now I suppose someone will tell me all those folks with the brown paper bags are actually planting aircraft scraps vs. picking them up.


















IMO this last one tells the real story. There was surely tons of this type of wreckage collected and catalogued. The fact that we haven't seen pictures of it, does not prove it doesn't exist.

I admit...I can't understand why the FBI has not released all information. Unless, perhaps it's because only a few hundred or thousand nuts like us give a crap about it vs. the hundreds of millions who care more about American Idol?

Actually I think your post is quite illustrative and let me asure you I am not trying to twist thing but I speak of posibilities...

What are the posibilities of a large airliner classified as "Heavy" and explode (full with fuel because of a trans con flight) di not even burn, or chared or at least ignite some parts of the lawn in your photos?, the chances that ALL the parts we see on the pictures posted are broken and twisted and not burned? heck point me towards a half burned part of the fuselage.

The only parts burned are those allegedly of the turbine (does not match), the landing gear and parts inside the building NOT OUTSIDE.



Do we have to believe that ALL the airplane including rudder and wings entered the building and we just got little pieces? and a beautiful not burned lawn?

In my pinion these pictures point to a use of a DU war head and a INSIDE the building detonation, most of the energy was kept inside (clearly seen on the only video) and thus the lawn was too much perfect for a explotion of that size...

Now on top of that, the more shortcomings of the tragedy come up, then "new info and debunkers" come up CatHerder is gone after too much hoopla and fanfare he has been put to pieces but speaking of pieces:



Do we have to believe this is all left of the plane on the exterior?

If that is so explain how the plane (a thin hollow aluminium can as described by persons who buy the Gov. propaganda) punched a clean hole to a incredibly strong building? So almost everything went inside? Either the pentagon is strong and we should have tons of charred pieces outside the building, or something more strong than a thin hollow aluminum can crashed there...

and the rivets DO NOT MATCH. period

Originally posted by kix

What are the posibilities of a large airliner classified as "Heavy" and explode (full with fuel because of a trans con flight) di not even burn, or chared or at least ignite some parts of the lawn in your photos?,

the first 50-100 feet from the building seems to be covered with foam...

....the chances that ALL the parts we see on the pictures posted are broken and twisted and not burned? heck point me towards a half burned part of the fuselage.

Any pieces that ended up inside the building would have been burned.

The only parts burned are those allegedly of the turbine (does not match), the landing gear and parts inside the building NOT OUTSIDE.

This makes sense to me. The fire burned inside the bldg., not outside.

Regarding the turbine that doesn't match....Doesn't match what? a Rolls Royce RB-211, such as that hanging on each wing of AA 77?

You might want to read this:

Boeing 757 Engine Investigation

In my pinion these pictures point to a use of a DU war head and a INSIDE the building detonation, most of the energy was kept inside (clearly seen on the only video) and thus the lawn was too much perfect for a explotion of that size...

OK, but I don't agree with you.

Now on top of that, the more shortcomings of the tragedy come up, then "new info and debunkers" come up CatHerder is gone after too much hoopla and fanfare he has been put to pieces but speaking of pieces:

Do we have to believe this is all left of the plane on the exterior?

No, you don't. I've shown a smattering of photos showing small and large pieces of wing and fuselage throught this thread and others. I'm not posting any more.

and the rivets DO NOT MATCH. period

Oh really? Look at these pictures.

Aero Mexico 757



Close up of rivets, the yellow arrow point's to Kix's double rows of rivets in the cockpit section. White lines demark rows of single rivets referenced by white arrows.



Now, if you want to keep saying the rivet patterns from the Pentagon Lawn wreckage don't match 757 rivet patterns , I guess that's your call... but the "photographic evidence" seems to support my position that the patterns do match.



[edit on 3/20/2007 by darkbluesky]

Originally posted by Realtruth

Come on! That nose cone would have disintegrated just like the wing and tail of the plane just like everyone is saying and pointing out.

RT - That debris circled in red is not the carbon composite material nose cone, it's part of the aluminum and titanium cockpit structure. Maybe from one of these areas, I'm not sure which:

Kix and anyone else who might not accept the Aeromexico example, here is N644AA (at DCA appropriately).

www.airliners.net...

Here is a close up of the rivets over the lettering...



And here is the lawn wreckage for comparison:

Its just too bad we have no official reports matching the parts found to a 757 or to flight 77.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Its just too bad we have no official reports matching the parts found to a 757 or to flight 77.

It is too bad, and perplexing.

I'm confident it will be released eventually.

I realize that puts me in the minority around here, and will surely cause someone to tell me how stupid I am for trusting the govt and believing the slop spoon fed to us by the media...but there you have it.

Originally posted by darkbluesky
It is too bad, and perplexing.

I'm confident it will be released eventually.

I realize that puts me in the minority around here, and will surely cause someone to tell me how stupid I am for trusting the govt and believing the slop spoon fed to us by the media...but there you have it.

Well it seems that after 6 years we would have something. I can find FBI and NTSB reports on any other aircraft crime scene but nothing on any of the 911 crime scenes.

Darkbluesky,

Their is nothing wrong with the side you have chosen, because we all need to look at both sides of this, since there was not a lot of information released. I do think the people of the United States deserve to know the whole truth and all the facts wherever they may fall.

We, the tax paying citizens that keep the government funded, don't need anyone sugar coating anything for us or thinking we can't handle the truth. I don't like to be manipulated, our government has done it in the past and I think that they will do it now and in the future to fit their agenda, that is why I have a hard time putting my trust in them.

Think about this, if someone continually lies to you, what is the chances of them telling you the whole truth or even part of the truth in the future?

Regards,

RT

Originally posted by darkbluesky

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Its just too bad we have no official reports matching the parts found to a 757 or to flight 77.

It is too bad, and perplexing.

I'm confident it will be released eventually.

I realize that puts me in the minority around here, and will surely cause someone to tell me how stupid I am for trusting the govt and believing the slop spoon fed to us by the media...but there you have it.

[edit on 20-3-2007 by Realtruth]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1Well it seems that after 6 years we would have something. I can find FBI and NTSB reports on any other aircraft crime scene but nothing on any of the 911 crime scenes.

I dont know if you've seen these, but here is a link to a few NTSB reports:

www.gwu.edu...

There is also the Pentagon Building Performance Report - Personally I dont feel that report is hiding anything or is intentionally misleading, although it may have gotten some deatils wrong.

IMO this is because it was written primarily by, and for, structural engineers examining the building, and was not focused on, or intended to analyze the approach of the airplane.

Originally posted by darkbluesky
I dont know if you've seen these, but here is a link to a few NTSB reports:

There is also the Pentagon Building Performance Report - Personally I dont feel that report is hiding anything or is intentionally misleading, although it may have gotten some deatils wrong.

Yes i have seen these reports, i work at NSA. These reports are from the black boxes and air traffic control tapes, they are not crime scene reports.

911research.wtc7.net...

The Pentagon BPS is the only government investigation of the crash of Flight 77 that admits to existing, but it was defined as and limited to an investigation of the performance of the building. There was no investigation into the crash by the National Transportation and Safety Board (NTSB). The Probable Cause document for Flight 77 on the NTSB's website reads:

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 are under the jurisdiction of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The Safety Board provided requested technical assistance to the FBI, and any material generated by the NTSB is under the control of the FBI. The Safety Board does not plan to issue a report or open a public docket.

911commission.gov...

By law, the FBI becomes the lead investigative agency when airline crashes are the result of a criminal act, and the NTSB provides support when requested. However, the families were advised by FBI officials that the FBI is investigating only the terrorists. Why, then, have we heard nothing from the NTSB?

According to Mary Schiavo, former Inspector General of the Department of Transportation, "In every single aviation disaster, whether there was criminal activity or not, in every single one in the course of aviation history it has been followed -- not only where necessary a national criminal investigation -- but also a National Transportation Safety [Board] investigation into what went wrong in the aviation system so that it never happens again."
NTSB experts would examine flight and data recorders, and ATC radar tracking data, as well as evaluate the transcripts of air controller-pilot conversations and study air traffic control service on September 11th. They would have also collected airframe wreckage at the scenes and interviewed eye witnesses. Finally, the NTSB would have assessed survival factors, based on documentation of impact forces, emergency
planning and crash-fire-rescue efforts, all of which would have contributed to a better understanding of what happened that morning.

[edit on 20-3-2007 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1 I can find FBI and NTSB reports on any other aircraft crime scene but nothing on any of the 911 crime scenes.

Ultima, I'd greatly appreciate it if you could link me to an FBI or NTSB report on Pan Am 103, or maybe Swiss Air 111, or Egypt Air 990.

I think you will find many links to stories about the incidents and stories talking about the official reports, but no links to the official reports.

I would truly like to be proved wrong.

I know boeing has the detailed technical report on its website,

But how about required aviation standards audits / stress test like crash test reports etc?

Im sorry I don't have the time atm but if maybe someone could find these things and post them, maybe we have engineer / engineers students on ATS who can look at them?

[edit on 21-3-2007 by Selmer2]

Originally posted by darkbluesky
Ultima, I'd greatly appreciate it if you could link me to an FBI or NTSB report on Pan Am 103, or maybe Swiss Air 111, or Egypt Air 990.

I think you will find many links to stories about the incidents and stories talking about the official reports, but no links to the official reports.

I found two NTSB reports but no FBI crime scene reports;

Lockerbie
www.ntsb.gov...

Egypt Air
www.ntsb.gov...

I didn't bother with Swiss Air - as I recall, there was no suspicion of a crime. It was an electrical fire.

Of these two, the proven terrorist incident (Lockerbie) has no information except time date etc, exactly like the AA77 NTSB prliminary docket report.

I do remember the photos of the Pan Am 747 wreckage re-assembled, but it was a different situation. The FBI had suspects in other countries and had to present evidence that it was infact an explosive device that caused the crash.

On 9-11, it seemed clear to everyone what happened. Christ - in counties that harbored the masterminds, they were selling T-shirts and DVDs with OBL's picture and the WTC towers on fire, It wasn't a tough sell for the FBI in the court of world public opinion.

I realize this sounds like excuse making, and rationalization, but so be it.

Originally posted by darkbluesky
On 9-11, it seemed clear to everyone what happened. Christ - in counties that harbored the masterminds, they were selling T-shirts and DVDs with OBL's picture and the WTC towers on fire, It wasn't a tough sell for the FBI in the court of world public opinion.

So what your saying is that if you beleive you know what happened you do not have to a full crime scene investagtion ? Like if a cop is at a murder scene and someone says they saw what happned then they do not need to do a crime scene investigation.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
So what your saying is that if you beleive you know what happened you do not have to a full crime scene investagtion ? Like if a cop is at a murder scene and someone says they saw what happned then they do not need to do a crime scene investigation.

No...more like this:

Why would the FBI (or the cops in your analogy) be compelled to make their investigation findings public? To satisfy us nutcases on ATS?

Look around, there is no widespread public demand for this information. Most people have made up their minds that what appeared to happen on 9/11, is what actually happened.