Military planes in 911

Originally posted by Zaphod58
and you have yet to prove that another type of plane uses the same wheel.

I just posted a photo of a 727 main wheel, its the same type wheel.

Photo of 727 main wheel. from 727.assintel.com.br...
727.assintel.com.br...


[edit on 30-3-2007 by ULTIMA1]

I just posted a photo of a 727 main wheel, its the same type wheel.

Yes you did, but no its not the same. If you bothered to analyse it (job description?) rather than just grabbing the image and sticking it up you might have noticed that the 727 wheel sports 9 cut outs which are squat and 'egg shaped' which is quite different from the elongated cut outs on the Pentagon hub. It might well be a goodrich hub, but it is not the same as a 757 goodrich hub. Don't you get it yet?

1 757 Main gear


2 Pentagon hub


3 727 wheel you posted


If you cannot see the difference then give up your 'research' because you haven't got the talent to get anywhere with it as you are missing the obvious.

[edit on 30-3-2007 by waynos]

Originally posted by waynos
It might well be a goodrich hub, but it is not the same as a 757 goodrich hub. Don't you get it yet?

Well we do not know what size wheel and tire at the Pentagon unless you have it.

We do not know what damage was done to the wheel at the Pentagon.

What!?! damage that reshaped the cutouts? Be serious man. Have another look at my post as I have put the pictures in it for you. I know what you are like when given links to follow

[edit on 30-3-2007 by waynos]

If there was enough damage to turn the cutouts from an egg shape to the shape they are in the picture, then we would have seen a lot more damage to the wheel and we wouldn't have been able to identify it as a 757 hub. I can't think of any way you can change the shape of a cutout that radically on ALL of them, and not have the hub dented and bet a lot more than it was in the pic from the Pentagon.

Originally posted by waynos
What!?! damage that reshaped the cutouts? Be serious man. Have another look at my post as I have put the pictures in it for you. I know what you are like when given links to follow

[edit on 30-3-2007 by waynos]

I have looked at every photo on this forum, other forums, and on every other site i could find. I can still not find any evidence that the wheel is from a 757. Thier is a slight difference between the 757 and 737 wheel but the wheel at Pentagon is damaged.

As stated the wheel is not a special wheel and have not seen any evidence that it is a 757 wheel. I am still doing research.


[edit on 30-3-2007 by ULTIMA1]

[edit on 30-3-2007 by ULTIMA1]

Well, like I said dude, maybe you need to give up this entire 9/11 investigation lark as you clearly don't have the powers of observation needed if you can't tell obvious difference like those I illustrated above.

As stated the wheel is not a special wheel and have not seen any evidence that it is a 757 wheel. I am still doing research.

Well I have given you clear visual evidence and you haven't even got the ability to recognize it. Don't waste your life man, let someone else look into it or you are going to go round in circles for the rest of your life.

[edit on 30-3-2007 by waynos]

Has this thread got a point to it anymore ?

I admire the fortitude, but this is going nowhere and for no apparent reason.

Any resonably intelligent person should have concluded by now, looking at all the evidence that has been tabled, that it was not an Olive Drab Military plane that hit the pentagon.

The size of wheels or tyre manufacture is absolutely redundent in light of what has already been argued in this thread.

The relavants points are surely:

Was it an Olive Drab Military Plane ?
Was it a Civillian Plane?
Was it a rocket?
Was evidence planted?

I'am curious to know where you stand on those questions in a Yes or No format.

Any takers?

Originally posted by waynos
Well, like I said dude, maybe you need to give up this entire 9/11 investigation lark as you clearly don't have the powers of observation needed if you can't tell obvious difference like those I illustrated above.

Still waiting for hard evidence, not just a photo comparison to a damaged wheel. How about something from an investigator that states the part numbers match the 757 of flight 77.

Originally posted by Seeker PI
The relavants points are surely:

Was it an Olive Drab Military Plane ?
Was it a Civillian Plane?
Was it a rocket?
Was evidence planted?

I'am curious to know where you stand on those questions in a Yes or No format.

Any takers?

No
Yes
No
No

Still waiting for hard evidence, not just a photo comparison to a damaged wheel. How about something from an investigator that states the part numbers match the 757 of flight 77.

But its never going to happen, is it. Sometimes you just have to take what you can get.

Seeker PI, I agree with you completely. I have already reached the end of my tether, as you might have guessed from my previous post.;

Was it an Olive Drab Military Plane ? - no
Was it a Civillian Plane? - Yes
Was it a rocket? - no
Was evidence planted? - unproven. Possibly, but I tend to think 'not' while retaining an open mind.

Sorry that last one was longer than a word, but that is my view as briefly as I can give it


[edit on 30-3-2007 by waynos]

Originally posted by Seeker PI
The relavants points are surely:

Was it an Olive Drab Military Plane ?
Was it a Civillian Plane?
Was it a rocket?
Was evidence planted?

I'am curious to know where you stand on those questions in a Yes or No format.

Any takers?

Well we have seen no videos or photos of what hit the Pentagon. The witnesses could not verify what type fo planes it was.

The flight recorder shows a different path then the official sotry and the altitude is of.

It could have been a civilian plane modified for military use. Like the second plane witnessed at the flight 93 crash site was discribed.

Originally posted by waynos
But its never going to happen, is it. Sometimes you just have to take what you can get.

Seeker PI, I agree with you completely. I have already reached the end of my tether, as you might have guessed from my previous post.;
[edit on 30-3-2007 by waynos]

Why not, its been 6 yearswe should have the FBI and NTSB crime scene reports. I am hoping to still get to the reports.

So why are you jumping on me when you do agree thier might be some planting of evidence.

Thanks folks that is as i thought you would respond.

Ultima1, With all due respect, I applaud the lengths you have gone to, to prove what ever point you are trying to make. But you didn't read my post either.

Never mind.

Reply to Ultima, not seeker PI


Because you are fixated on the WRONG areas. The identity of the debris is completely provable. Also your claim about witness statements appears to be in ignorance of at least 46 statements (as far as I am aware) that a large commercuial jet struck the pentagon. You put those together with the obvious 757 debris and you have your answer as to the plane.

Also, admitting the possibility of planted evidence is not quite the same as thinking it was. I only admit the possibility as I was not there myself, so how can anybody say with certainty that there was no tampering.

What you have to deal with is the balance of probability if you are ever going to reach a conclusion and for me the balance of probability is that an AA 757 hit the Pentagon exactly as described.

Going into the why's and wherefores however is another matter and that is where fixating on a wheel or an engine component derails the bigger picture. I only stuck with this to try to allow you to move yourself on in your investigation, but yopu appear unable or unready to. If you cannot reach a conclusion on this specific point by now you never will.

A question I asked, but which you never answered, was that if say it really as a different commercial jet, a 727 or a 737 for instance. What would be the relevance of claiming it wasa 757 instead? There is nothing to be gained and everything to lose (if indeed it IS part of a lie) as it only takes one person in the entire city to photograph a plane that is idenifiably different from the plane you claim and you have lost everything and the entire gaff is blown.

Even IF it was a substitute plane that was deliberately crashed by the military, you would make absolutely sure it was of the same type that you claim. To do otherwise would just present the stupidest risk to take in such an operation. That is why I am sure it was a 757 that hit.



[edit on 30-3-2007 by waynos]

[edit on 30-3-2007 by waynos]

Originally posted by waynos
Reply to Ultima, not seeker PI
Because you are fixated on the WRONG areas. The identity of the debris is completely provable. Also your claim about witness statements appears to be in ignorance of at least 46 statements (as far as I am aware) that a large commercuial jet struck the pentagon. You put those together with the obvious 757 debris and you have your answer as to the plane.

Please show me the prove you have that the parts found at the Pentagon are from a 757. What research have you done on the parts ?

Do you have the part numbers of the parts so we can check them ?

Some of the witness statements do say a large commercial jet, but not a 757.

Some of the winesses admitted they did not know what hit the Pentagon and were told later it was a 757.




[edit on 30-3-2007 by ULTIMA1]

The answers to your questions are already in my previous post. At least do me the honour of actually READING it.

Originally posted by waynos
The answers to your questions are already in my previous post. At least do me the honour of actually READING it.

You have not answered any of my questions, like the part numbers.

of course we don't have part numbers. read the post again, but this time try to UNDERSTAND it.

clues are in phrases like 'balance of probablity' and 'stupid risks to take' and such like.

How about you answer my question about what would the point in running the risk of blowing the ENTIRE 9/11 operation wide open by doing something as dumb as using one type of plane and then claiming it was another in this digital camera infested age of ours?

Even IF there is a military backed conspiracy over the Pentagon impact and the rest of 9/11, the very least you would do would be to actually USE a 757 in the first place.

[edit on 30-3-2007 by waynos]

Originally posted by waynos
of course we don't have part numbers. read the post again, but this time try to UNDERSTAND it.


How about you answer my question about what would the point in running the risk of blowing the ENTIRE 9/11 operation wide open by doing something as dumb as using one type of plane and then claiming it was another in this digital camera infested age of ours?

Even IF there is a military backed conspiracy over the Pentagon impact and the rest of 9/11, the very least you would do would be to actually USE a 757 in the first place.

[edit on 30-3-2007 by waynos]

Let me state this for the last time, if you can not understand it you are beyond my help. What 911 operation? (I am trying to find the truth). I have never said anything about a military conspiracy.

I have stated that thier is enough evidence that the government may have left it happen.

[edit on 30-3-2007 by ULTIMA1]