9/11: A Boeing 757 Struck the Pentagon

F77 itself DID NOT hit the Pentagon. There is NO WAY IN HELL.. that the MEN on that plane.. MOSTLY MILITARY.. after knowing what had happened already to the WTC let their plane get hijacked. They would have thrown themselves at the hijackers over and over again till they were all dead. There is NO WAY that F77 hit the Pentagon because there is NO WAY that the people aboard that plane allowed it to be hijacked. PERIOD. SPECIALLY after what had already happened in in NY... no way they were going to die like that. THAT ENTIRE plane load of people against 4 jackasses with boxcutters? PLEASE!? I believe the question can be left at the least at that.. DID F77 ITSELF hit the PENTAGON? No. So what did? Did a plane? Maybe it WAS a plane. Maybe it was a missile. But it wasn't F77. Remember also how F77s flight path is ALSO still not completely known right? So we have a plane that no evidence exists really on how it made its approach until it was right over the Washington airspace, and they watched it come down some 2000 feet and hit the STRONGEST and most re-enforced part of the building that also had the least amount of people in it at the time and CERTAINLY the least important people in it. And no real video evidence of this plane actually hitting the most survailed building in the world. Not to mention no video from the preflight boarding either. Why even debate this crap? Its all wrong on SO MANY LEVELS long before you start to look at the physics of the actual impact which is something MOST of you do NOT have the background to dissect. How is it even possible something got that close to the most important building in the world AFTER it was well known there was an attack taking place on the country? How? Guess! YES! They allowed it to happen. Therefore there was a REASON for why they needed it to happen. Who knows what that was? Anyways.. the rest of it.. we'll never know WHAT hit it until we get an independant international investigation. It just wasn't F77 is all I KNOW. And you can be sure of that too. -VMX

Originally posted by LaBTop That's a nice analogy, but has nothing to do with my remark about the deflection probability. Human soft tissue is in no way a comparison to a welded steel beams, kevlar netting, reinforced concrete and bricks wall.

Uh, actually it does. You see there's a thing called an analogy here: the airplane can be crushed like an empty beer can, and lose its shape, and the broken pieces can still have enough kinetic energy to punch through columns and walls.

It is also not in fact the thin alu airframe I'm interested in, it's the 2 motors, the 3 landing gear struts, the main-body luggage area beams, stretching the whole length of the floor and the overall 1/3 lower part of the plane which has the most sturdy beams in it.

I don't know if I'm getting through to you, but even the floor beams are 1/8 inch thick aluminum, too. It's an airplane! Made out of the lightest weight materials possible!

The motors and the landing gear area is the strongest part of the plane, logically, because that's the part which has to be the best shock resistant during landings, which can be rough at times. At least a few parts of those should have been deflected, not those flimsy skin parts. But they didn't. Everyone is obliged to his/her own conclusion.

You're right that those are the strongest peices, and the ones most likely to survive. But, they're not going to "deflect." I guess I don't understand why you think they would. Run a car into a wall at 200 mph. The engine block will almost certainly travel through wall, but will you be able to identify it as an engine block afterwards? The car body pieces have less energy and might "deflect" but the heavy parts won't. -Boenoid

Originally posted by LaBTop It was you who said all airplanes in the world are accounted for. How come, in Europe they do have such difficulties to pinpoint the CIA flights...

I said all the JETLINERS were accounted for. But seriously, all the little planes are accounted for as well - that's how the CIA renditions were discovered! By tracking tail numbers. And if you change a tail number, guess what - the changed number gets tracked and eventually they find you.

The CIA has a whole fleet of unaccounted planes, which they use for all kinds of operations.

Really. Did a CIA agent tell you this? But I'm sure the CIA has a bunch of accounted for airplanes that are registered to various front companies.

I'm really interested to know if the mainstream US citizen is not interested to know at all anymore, where all these unaccounted TRILLIONS of $$$ went, spent by the Pentagon brass, spent from hard earned tax payments from US citizens and corporations. I'm quite sure that those corporations already know, and really don't want the public to know. You must realize soon, that if you can't keep your military accounted for what they spent from the gross national product, you in fact have no democracy anymore, but are left with something very SINISTER. A military which can buy all the heavy industry, most corporations, all politicians, and most legislature. You already past that point, a long time ago. The sad conclusion must be, that a majority of you do not care anymore.

Uh, last time I checked, the Pentagon had roughly $30B in "secret" budgets annually. Everyone believes that there is two or three times more money than that being spent, but it's still not trillions. It can't be. There's not enough tax dollars for trillions to be missing. You can look up where tax $ come from and are going to at: www.taxpolicycenter.org... And what do you mean to imply when you say the military can "buy" corporations? Do you propose that the government can buy my silence if they commit a murderous, treasonous act? Because you're talking about me and my coworkers here, if I'm not mistaken. -Boenoid

www.abovetopsecret.com... This will make a few things clear to you about trillions of military dollars missing. Your own mr. Rumsfeld added it all up. By now, 5 years later, it's even much more. However, there is nothing to be found about it anymore. Deadly silence is what is left. It is advisable to read that whole thread. Perhaps it will help you understand my view of the world. Which you don't have to agree with. But you will have learned something, when you keep questioning socalled "facts". A few pages back, I have stated quite clear what my opinion is, about the question if a Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon. This however does not stop me to keep asking questions, to check the theory on soft spots. This is a wellknown scientific technique, sometimes also used in peer reviews. Keep hitting the theory, untill there are no holes left. Then you can be nearly sure that your theory will hold ground. I still see too many holes in the official explanation of what happened at the Pentagon on 9/11. And please, don't start a semi-patriotic company defending tour. You are intelligent enough to understand what I meant. Corporations can be bought to follow the ideas of the military, which are certainly not the ideas of all the US voters. And it becomes scary when that military can not be hold accountable for it's immense riches, which it clearly stole from the voters. STOLE, because covert spending was surely not the intended use by the voters.

Originally posted by BigMoser

Originally posted by ULTIMA1 1. Well as i recall from what a 757 is made from the landing gear doors are made

So, the picture of what your saying is that the Boeing should have been shredded up real badly enough not to make it perfectly into the pentagon like it did? The hole that ripped through those walls, was it the nose-cone? Or was that part 1/8" thick too? [edit on 11/7/2006 by Mirthful Me]

Well i am saying that is an aluminum airframe is fragile when it comes to hitting things and for it to do all the things the official storry says it did is kind of hard to believe. Here is a pic of a plane that hit some small trees and see what happened to the airframe. x10.putfile.com...

Whether the airframe is fragile or not, you're still talking about near EIGHTY TONS moving at around 500 mph. The only concrete wall in existance that would withstand that is around a nuclear powerplant, and they're like 10 feet thick or more.

DIVERSION TACTIC and judging by this post's length it is working perfectly the story and hoaxed evidence that a boeing did not hit pentagon was a trojan horse designed to mislead people and take away from more legitamite research and evidence

well shit....you've got my vote...

Zaphod, and even that wall is IIRC certified just against smaller jets - fighters or commercial, not against jetliners...

All those video cameras on the pentagon (The worlds most heavily guarded military installation, the same place that holds the key to our nuclear arsonal, and our biological and chemical weapons of mass destruction) and all those civillian video cameras on private property which surround the pentagon and none of them caught a picture like this? And where is the luggage? Surely there was a samsonite suitcase or two among the wreckage. What about the black box? Is that classified or does it even exist? Maybe it was incinerated in the impact? What is the government hiding? Surely we already know everything. Some bad muslims hijacked a plane and committed suicide for allah. The cockpit voice recorder would say just that. We could analyize all the data on the black box for ourselves and back up the government story, therby becomming a supporter of the government story, ending all controversy. All you have to do is release the data. Surely the data will match the story, which requires GREAT FAITH to accept. Or maybe feeding the controversy by holding back evidence is exactly what THEY want. [edit on 16-7-2006 by In nothing we trust]

Originally posted by In nothing we trust Or maybe feeding the controversy by holding back evidence is exactly what THEY want.

What -- those perfectly clear frames that they've thrown in our faces twice weren't enough?

Where did you get that idea the Pentagon is the most guarded installation of the world? Maybe most guarded against spies, with vast majority of its security cameras guarding the INSIDE of the building, but even then I doubt it is the bes. As for the defense against outside threats, active is negligible, passive against truck bombs. Hardly most guarded. Try getting to Pentagon and try getting to a nuke silo. As for the picture quality, what's so strange? At the checkpoint you don't need realtime footage and you don't need to focus hundreds of yards away.

Originally posted by Zaphod58 Whether the airframe is fragile or not, you're still talking about near EIGHTY TONS moving at around 500 mph. The only concrete wall in existance that would withstand that is around a nuclear powerplant, and they're like 10 feet thick or more.

Maybe you can explain how the torn up airframe would make nice perfect entry and exit holes after hitting lampost, generator, and the ground. And where is debris that should be left over from an 80 ton aircraft.

It was hardly a "perfect" hole. The exit hold could have been expanded for better access by rescue crews. What makes you think that hitting a 250 pound lamp pole with an engine would tear up the airframe? The engine yes, but not the airframe. Even the generator which was hit by the engine wouldn't tear up the fuselage.

Originally posted by Zaphod58 It was hardly a "perfect" hole. The exit hold could have been expanded for better access by rescue crews. What makes you think that hitting a 250 pound lamp pole with an engine would tear up the airframe? The engine yes, but not the airframe. Even the generator which was hit by the engine wouldn't tear up the fuselage.

Well the entry hole is pretty good for a fragile airframe. Well according to the pic i posted earlier if a vew samll trees can tear up a airframe, at the 500 mph hitting lampost and the generator would have caused some damage. Hitting the ground would have caused damage. If the lampost were hit by the wings it would have damaged them severely.

img453.imageshack.us... This picture isn't showing up in my original post for some reason. [edit on 16-7-2006 by In nothing we trust]

Originally posted by tuccy Where did you get that idea the Pentagon is the most guarded installation of the world?

Pentagon Force Protection Agency (PFPA) - created out of the Defense Protective Service after 2001. www.pfpa.mil... --- THE HISTORY OF THE DEFENSE PROTECTIVE SERVICE (PENTAGON POLICE) www.dtic.mil... Ok maybe not the most heavily armed or physically secure installation, but definatly a place that had more than 2 video cameras watching every angle around the building. Hell, the last time I went to Walmart I saw about 40 cameras, and they probably had another 100+ cameras hidden from view. And all thier gaurding is a bunch of cheap imported junk from China. [edit on 16-7-2006 by In nothing we trust]

Not every angle around but every angle inside - that's the difference. The cameras were set up to guard top-secret departments, safes and so on. The only two external threats perceived as real prior to 0911 were truckbomb and nuke missile. For a truckbomb a camera with 2fps speed is enough and for nuke anything is useless.

For "In Nothing we trust" Where was the luggage? Lying in shreds under the wreckage of the Pentagon. Yes, personal effects were recovered and returned to the families. ID cards, wedding rings, etc..... Where was the black box? Those (or what was left of those) were recovered as well. A common misconception is that these boxes are indestructable. They are not. They are made out of steel and aluminum, just like the rest of the airplane. They are made rugged in the hopes that in a crash they survive enough to allow investigators to recover data from them. Ask any experienced crash investigator, there are many crashes in which little or NO data is able to be recovered from the black boxes. The Pentaon isnt a fortress, its an office building, admittedly built a bit more rugged than most. But in the end, its an office building. No missile batteries, no AA gun emplacements, no super secret missile defense screens, just a building with strict ID procedures and a dedicated police force, neither of which will stop an airliner moving in excess of 400 knots. For LaBtop.... The Defense budget is around a half trillion dollars a year. Heck the FEDERAL budget is around 2 trillion or so a year. So there isnt "trillions of dollars" missing. There is about 2.5 trillion that isnt accounted for......that stretches back a few DECADES. And most of that is crappy bookkeeping, not theft.

Originally posted by In nothing we trust

Originally posted by tuccy Where did you get that idea the Pentagon is the most guarded installation of the world?

Pentagon Force Protection Agency (PFPA) - created out of the Defense Protective Service after 2001. www.pfpa.mil... --- THE HISTORY OF THE DEFENSE PROTECTIVE SERVICE (PENTAGON POLICE) www.dtic.mil... Ok maybe not the most heavily armed or physically secure installation, but definatly a place that had more than 2 video cameras watching every angle around the building. Hell, the last time I went to Walmart I saw about 40 cameras, and they probably had another 100+ cameras hidden from view. And all thier gaurding is a bunch of cheap imported junk from China.

[edit on 16-7-2006 by In nothing we trust]

And in Walmart you don't need special security clearances to get in. Obviously there's no way any video footage from inside would be usable. And the cameras outside were made for identifying faces, not incoming planes. If the Pentagon was freely open to the public they might need 100's of security cameras. but otherwise it's simply speculation that they have 100s of cameras. And your theory would have to also assume that everyone who worked at the pentagon or was contracted by them to maintain or work on the camera systems is also in on the conspiracy. And then there's everyone who works there or has visited and could attest to the large number of security cameras. When making assumptions there's no limit to how far you can go. Perhaps since they it's the pentagon and they have access to super technology, everyone there has camera implants and so they should release the footage from everyones videos that day. Just imagine the arguments I can make up when left only to my imagination.