9/11: A Boeing 757 Struck the Pentagon

Regarding Slanks post

Light still travels at 186,000 mph. [I know it's redundant, but to keep our thinking clear] Low shutter speed should have a moving object smeared in the image.

Speed of Light = 186,000 miles per "second" per second Distance traveled in 60 seconds= 11,160,000 Now if ya wanna get real brainey with this stuff see: en.wikipedia.org... As to the author of this post. 9/11: A Boeing 757 Struck the Pentagon Evidence That A Boeing 757 Really Did Impact the Pentagon on 9/11 by "CatHerder", Member, AboveTopSecret.com/forum September 11th, 2004 Cat Herder? Any reason you posted or compiled the data on a anniverssary date of Sept 11 2004? I smell a smiggen of symbolism in this lodge. Name change suggestion: Sheep or Cow Herder. I can hear the sheeps baaaah baaaaaaahhhhaahhha

Originally posted by project_pisces Cat Herder? Any reason you posted or compiled the data on a anniverssary date of Sept 11 2004? I smell a smiggen of symbolism in this lodge. Name change suggestion: Sheep or Cow Herder. I can hear the sheeps baaaah baaaaaaahhhhaahhha

No, actually it was compiled and created prior to that, it just happened to get "published" on the 11th by the admins here... It's as much a coincidence as it is a clever timing on ATS' part. [edit on 24-9-2004 by CatHerder]

Originally posted by project_pisces Regarding Slanks post

Light still travels at 186,000 mph. [I know it's redundant, but to keep our thinking clear] Low shutter speed should have a moving object smeared in the image.

Speed of Light = 186,000 miles per "second" per second

Actually it is just 186,000 miles per second (period). �Per second per second� is how you describe the acceleration of an object. The speed of light is constant. (or at least relatively so ).

OK, my friend, now please explain the WTC. I am sure the aircrafts are not miltary and that the flash just before the impact was my grand mother snapping a photo! I believe your article is a professional social engineering work or "deception" and that you an employee of Mr. Bush. I don't believe a word of what you say. I think the video is fake and also I think the tail of the aircraft tail you pointed out is too small, yeah perhaps that of jet fighter! but it could be fake. It just does not fit, no matter what science you apply to it. Show me the real juice, the real videos confiscated. This is crap. I am amazed how people believe to this crap. Bye. But I would imagine there is a team of people palying your game! You make me vomit.

For the sake of argument I'm curious for those that are clinging on to this ridiculous theory that it wasn't a plane to please tell me where exactly the plane they said that hit the Pentagon went if it didn't crash into the building? You can analyze the miniscule facts to death, but why don't you tell me how all of the dead passengers ended up in the Pentagon and where the plane went before you say one other thing because I think you're missing the two most obvious problems with your uncomprehensable, dare I say laughable, theory.

Originally posted by defcon5 Huh? I don�t get it.

I am sorry that you do not get it. What I am reading here is a lot of supposition, guess work and made up excuses with no basis in fact. Those types of argument are annoying deflections for which I have no tolerance. If anyone got my point at all, it was not about the light blue/grey since I went to the trouble of using "/" as the accepted indicator of either colour, such that one might use; him/her, to someone when gender is unknown. The issue I have on the colour I thought self-evident especially given the way I charted the colours of the 3 crafts. so I provide same again, and this time highlight what to me is the obvious dissimilarity.: AA 757- ������..AA767�������.Video������Debris ����������.blue/grey��������...................... Dark blue; ��...dark blue�����..dark blue��..light blue/grey white; �����...white�����..��red����......white red;������.�red���....�����white��...��red grayish����...grey������..�..greyish��..�.blue/grey [edit on 9/25/04 by SomewhereinBetween] My humble apologies for the "excessive quoting." [edit on 9/26/04 by SomewhereinBetween]

1200 feet? Maybe not (doesn't look like it, I hate approximating things before I check and measure [sorry about that]) - but 1000-1100 feet? Absolutely.

CatHerder, what is the length of each of the five sides of the pentagon? Is it 921 feet in total or 921 feet per module? If each module is 921 feet then even your 1,200 feet is more than acceptable. if however the total of each side is 921 feet, then you must accept that the camera had to have been no further than the corner of an end module unless it can see around corners, and that the crash site was not in the centre module reducing the 921 feet by the full length of that end module. Consequently, if it is the former, then I give you your 1200 feet, in fact I would concede 2,000 feet, but if it is the latter, then even your 1,000 feet is not correct would be exorbitantly liberal. The whole point of your exercise is then called into question if you are not using facts to support your position. [edit on 9/25/04 by SomewhereinBetween]

Hi all I'm new here and am interested in this topic. Now I do like the main post of this thread and find the material quite compeling. I firmly beleive that a 757 did hit the pentagon. However, what I do have a problem with is how come the 2 767 (that are bigger heaver and hold more fuel) that hit the WTC didnt go through the building but the small lighter 757 went through 3 rings of the pentagon? I don't understand the WTC was a non reenforced building and the jets didn't come out the other side. But the 757 at the pentagon went through 6 2foot thick walls of stone, steel and concreat and probably hit the ground first. Can someone explaine this to me. I'm not discounting that a 757 crashed there I'm posibly proposing that somthing else is at work here as well....... or is there????

Can you swim? Try diving into a pool first with your arms extended outward. (WTC) Then dive in hands pointed into your dive. (Pentagon) In which dive did you/will you go further? You know... aquadynamic.... aerodynamic... Pentagon the wings came off at the buildings exterior, scroll the thread and look for the outer burn marks from the wing/fuel tanks on impact on the outer walls of the Pentagon. Scroll the thread again and look for the WTC impact, the nose makes it through, the planes weight brings it down and explodes (wings/fuel are in the building WTC).

I saw 757's with the aluminum color/silver on top. Perhaps they may have even started "blue", but can we consider weathering and oxidation... and acid rain... Ever see what can happen to a car left unwaxed due to the elements?

nobody wants to answer my question that thinks it's wasn't a plane instead of arguing assinine details?

Originally posted by LL1 Try diving into a pool first with your arms extended outward. (WTC) Then dive in hands pointed into your dive. (Pentagon) In which dive did you/will you go further?

Ok but what I'm diving into isn't remaining constant. On my first dive I'm diving into water on my second into tar. Also I'm dubious that a 757's hull is strong enough to bash through that much material.

Try looking into the physics of force: www.glenbrook.k12.il.us... How do the hands of a karate expert go through wood objects? Their hands, those trained are considered "deadly weapons". karate Japanese unarmed combat: a traditional Japanese form of unarmed combat, now widely popular as a sport, in which fast blows or kicks are used

Once the plane penetrated the outer wall, the remaining interior walls were drywall or plaster and the exterior walls were simple masonry construction and as such relativley fragile. [edit on 26-9-2004 by HowardRoark]

Ok so only the outer wall was reenforced then right? That would make sence then. Is that the case only the outer wall of the pentagon is reenforced? [edit on 26-9-2004 by Agitator]

Originally posted by Agitator Ok so only the outer wall was reenforced then right? That would make sence then. Is that the case only the outer wall of the pentagon is reenforced? [edit on 26-9-2004 by Agitator]

That is my understanding. go back to the beginning of this thread and look at the photo of where the plane punched out through the last wall. You can clearly see that it is a simple masonry wall. The back side of the inner plaster and metal lath wall is also visible.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by WisdomMaster You make me vomit.

Likewise. Perhaps, rather than simply stand off to the side and sling poiintless derogatory comments, you might expend a similar amount of effort (as cathearder) researching and composing a definitive article that supports something other than a 757. I assure you, if you create such a post, and it meets suitable standards of research and prose quality, it will be similarly upgrade to a "main site content" article as this one has: www.abovetopsecret.com... Now, I'm not saying "put up or shut up", but it's continually frustrating to see these types of comments from people who would rather just sit back and sling mud, rather than sit up and dig into some real research.

Well, unfortunately I am very busy and I can't commit to this kind of project. I think there are enough threads on this site to support a conspiracy behind the 911 events. It's clear that Israel and the US administration are involved in this events and that the US military did not act to protect the country vital targets. It's not about the Pentagon; it's about the whole 911 and the history that just keeps repeating. If you do some research and link together the Bush family, Hitler, the oil lobby, the Illuminati, the support for terrorist groups in Afghanistan, drug trafficking, Israel controlling the US economy, etc, you'll probably get to next level and realize that movie the Matrix in not that far from reality. The truth is much worse than hell. We live a world manipulated by media and politics. We are not supposed to know how evil the people who guide us are. Maybe if I have some free time I will write some stuff.

Originally posted by Agitator Hi all I'm new here and am interested in this topic. Now I do like the main post of this thread and find the material quite compeling. I firmly beleive that a 757 did hit the pentagon. However, what I do have a problem with is how come the 2 767 (that are bigger heaver and hold more fuel) that hit the WTC didnt go through the building but the small lighter 757 went through 3 rings of the pentagon? I don't understand the WTC was a non reenforced building and the jets didn't come out the other side. But the 757 at the pentagon went through 6 2foot thick walls of stone, steel and concreat and probably hit the ground first. Can someone explaine this to me. I'm not discounting that a 757 crashed there I'm posibly proposing that somthing else is at work here as well....... or is there????

It's probably the same case as the WTC where a missile was shot at the target just before the impact. For more information please look for the original CNN video covering the second aircraft hitting the WTC, slow it down and notice the flash 0.3 sec before the impact (the missile). This of course would mean that the aircraft was a military one, just like the WTC's ones. That's how you got the hole!

Originally posted by WisdomMaster I think there are enough threads on this site to support a conspiracy behind the 911 events.

There you go, irrefutable logic.

Originally posted by WisdomMaster For more information please look for the original CNN video covering the second aircraft hitting the WTC, slow it down and notice the flash 0.3 sec before the impact (the missile). This of course would mean that the aircraft was a military one, just like the WTC's ones. That's how you got the hole!

The flash was not before the impact, it was the impact!