9/11: A Boeing 757 Struck the Pentagon

There is so much debackle as to what happened with the Pentagon. I was very very impressed with this video - as seen in another post on this forum - regarding the NTSB's findings of the official flight data recorder of AA77. Three key issues of this video: 1.) Path stated by 9|11 Commission completely different than that of the Flight Data Recorder. 2.) Barometric Pressure settings adjusted for REAL TIME show that the actual heigh of the plane upon "descent into the Pentagon" is completely false. 3.) The telephone poles said to have been hit by wings of the plane is FALSE in reference to the OFFICIAL flight data recorder. Take a look for yourself at the video located at the link below. video.google.com... No more is this a question of a "streak on the Pentagon's lawn" from the plane, or the "hole being too small". The evidence is there, it is factual from the data recorder, and it cannot be ignored.

I just don't trust the government. Here is a good site to keep up with what is going on for real in the world. www.nworeport.com... That site is like the Drudge Report only it exposes what the NWO is doing. This site is even more updated at times than Drudge. [edit on 17-1-2007 by renster]

Originally posted by Skibum I guess next you will try to tell me you can't cut steel with water. It's more about mass and speed than what the material is made of. [edit on 16/1/07 by Skibum]

No, you have to take into account what its made of. If this aluminum airframe was torn up by simply hitting a few small trees what do you think will happen when a fragile aluminum airframe hits a reinforced concrete wall. i114.photobucket.com...

Originally posted by TruthSeekerMP There is so much debackle as to what happened with the Pentagon. I was very very impressed with this video - as seen in another post on this forum - regarding the NTSB's findings of the official flight data recorder of AA77. Three key issues of this video: 1.) Path stated by 9|11 Commission completely different than that of the Flight Data Recorder. 2.) Barometric Pressure settings adjusted for REAL TIME show that the actual heigh of the plane upon "descent into the Pentagon" is completely false. 3.) The telephone poles said to have been hit by wings of the plane is FALSE in reference to the OFFICIAL flight data recorder. Take a look for yourself at the video located at the link below. video.google.com... No more is this a question of a "streak on the Pentagon's lawn" from the plane, or the "hole being too small". The evidence is there, it is factual from the data recorder, and it cannot be ignored.

I am convinced to the point that we need to put out another investigation, one that should force them to answer questions... if that plane was too high, then what hit the pentagon? But first, let's try to get the answers to the questions on the website of www.pilotsfor911truth.org [edit on 17-1-2007 by BigMoser]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1 No, you have to take into account what its made of. If this aluminum airframe was torn up by simply hitting a few small trees what do you think will happen when a fragile aluminum airframe hits a reinforced concrete wall. i114.photobucket.com...

Apparently most folks in the truth movement think it would leave large parts laying around outside the pentagon. So is it too fragile to penetrate the wall or is it going to leave big chunks sitting on the lawn? I get it, they can go through steel beams like at the WTC yet somehow trees are invincible. IMO it has a lot to do with how impact occured, Head on versus basically what looks like a sideswipe. [edit on 18/1/07 by Skibum]

Originally posted by Skibum Apparently most folks in the truth movement think it would leave large parts laying around outside the pentagon. So is it too fragile to penetrate the wall or is it going to leave big chunks sitting on the lawn? IMO it has a lot to do with how impact occured, Head on versus basically what looks like a sideswipe. [edit on 18/1/07 by Skibum]

So your saying the plane was sturdy enough to penatrate all the rings of the Pentagon but then just disinagrated afterwards. Please show me pics of this so called sideswipe.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1 So your saying the plane was sturdy enough to penatrate all the rings of the Pentagon but then just disinagrated afterwards.

Yes thats exactly what I'm saying. Of course not, This isn't an all or nothing situation. The plane was damaged severely when it hit the exterior wall. Then damaged further as it hit the other rows of columns and interior walls.

Originally posted by Skibum

Originally posted by ULTIMA1 So your saying the plane was sturdy enough to penatrate all the rings of the Pentagon but then just disinagrated afterwards.

Yes thats exactly what I'm saying.

Of course not, This isn't an all or nothing situation. The plane was damaged severely when it hit the exterior wall. Then damaged further as it hit the other rows of columns and interior walls.

Problem is a fragile aluminum airframe should have not been able to get through the first reinforced wall, (specially after hitting poles and a generator that would have damaged it before it hit the building) it would have been more then severely damaged no matter how much speed and mass the plane had and left far more debris outside the building and the debris from the wings, engines should be outside and also the tail should be outside.

Originally posted by TruthSeekerMP There is so much debackle as to what happened with the Pentagon. I was very very impressed with this video - as seen in another post on this forum - regarding the NTSB's findings of the official flight data recorder of AA77. Three key issues of this video: 1.) Path stated by 9|11 Commission completely different than that of the Flight Data Recorder. 2.) Barometric Pressure settings adjusted for REAL TIME show that the actual heigh of the plane upon "descent into the Pentagon" is completely false. 3.) The telephone poles said to have been hit by wings of the plane is FALSE in reference to the OFFICIAL flight data recorder. Take a look for yourself at the video located at the link below. video.google.com... No more is this a question of a "streak on the Pentagon's lawn" from the plane, or the "hole being too small". The evidence is there, it is factual from the data recorder, and it cannot be ignored.

Thanks for the link to the video! Why aren't more people interested in this? Has the the flight data recorder been "debunked" by anybody? If this information from the flight data recorder is accurate, then it proves that AA77 did not crash into the Pentagon, and/or that the government is proactively involved in some sort of cover-up.

I find it very suspicious that the dots of red damage cannot be connected to the exit hole. With the assumption that things tend to fly basically in one direction, decelerating and deflecting until its the energy is dissapated. The red dots can no longer be connected after the second ring as they are blocked by the yellow dots indicating little damage beyond that point. Yet a hole in ring 3. More bush physics? Looks to me like some kind of fraud! What did they blow up and then cover up, that is what i want to know. To believe this can happen one must belive the single bullet theory in the jfk assassination was true as well.

looks like a bunch of photos from 4 different truth sites.. still nothing explains this.. [edit on 7-2-2007 by THE DECIDER]

Decider: Guess the other clincher is the JT8D engines found there, huh? There's no cockpit. anything darkish is part of the background - all we're seeing is glare. and yours looks a little bit "sharpened" to me. Hey, Karl Schwarz '08 man! To Ultima: Yes, aluminum is much weaker, but even an aluminum plane with great mass should cause extensive damage. The nosecone shape is like a missile – it deflects energy back along its length and is well-designed to pierce air or anything else better than something not so shaped. But… the one big Q for me is – how this wonderful penetrating shape held up even as key parts of the fuselage – the forward sections where the big red letters were painted – were blown off/scraped off either just inside the opening or even outside the building. A persistent puzzler… That said, all outer columns on ground floor WERE removed for a 100 foot span – the three “standing columns” I’m pretty sure are something else. [link- frustratingfraud.blogspot.com...], giving plenty of room for a 50-foot wide engine-chassis-engine penetrating core hitting at a 45degree angle, which only needs 75 feet. And after that it didn’t have to pierce much. No three separate rings – just a single thick wall (12 or 18 inches or whatever) and weak internal walls and support columns – which it doesn’t have to pierce – it can shred and bounce between them like a giant deadly pinball game. The “punch-out hole” is still an odd case, but as has been well-illustrated, most existing plane parts were found near there. Truth Seeker MP said of the NTSB’s new flight path: “No more is this a question of a "streak on the Pentagon's lawn" from the plane, or the "hole being too small". The evidence is there, it is factual from the data recorder, and it cannot be ignored.” You’re right, it has to be looked at – yet MORE energy sucked in – but I’m digesting this stuff right now with as open a mind as I can handle at this exhausted point and consider it an investment. Quickly comparing light poles/original flight path with the animation in the PBB video. Okay, according to that, yes, the flight path is significantly different. It does raise questions with the light poles. Such questions seem silly to me, but I’ll have to mull this over some more before I can comment further. This is now officially interesting to me.

We are 24 hous away from the new info on this subject, and I believe ( using my experience) that the data presented will be well researched and almost acurate beyond doubt...so we will have like 80% of the puzzle solved and the picture is not pretty, there will be solid evidence of a coverup, but the 3 main and horrible questions will remain: If there was no crash..: 1)Where the heck is the AA Plane? 2)What happened to is PAX and crew? 3)If they did this, what happened to the "other highjaked" planes??? Man it gives me chills...

Originally posted by Caustic Logic To Ultima: Yes, aluminum is much weaker, but even an aluminum plane with great mass should cause extensive damage. The nosecone shape is like a missile – it deflects energy back along its length and is well-designed to pierce air or anything else better than something not so shaped. But… the one big Q for me is – how this wonderful penetrating shape held up even as key parts of the fuselage – the forward sections where the big red letters were painted – were blown off/scraped off either just inside the opening or even outside the building. A persistent puzzler…

Actually the nose of the plane is not aluminum but very fragile composite. It would have been destroyed upon hitting the wall and the wings are very thin and fragile and should have been sheared off upon hitting the wall. Also it is 40 feet between center of both engines. 1 engine was found outside the 1 that might have hit the generator.

Ultima: 2) NO engines were found, just like as many have rightly pointed out no 757 as found. An engine, like a plane, is an integrated and functioning composite of hundreds of parts. What's been found is parts. The FEMA gear was I think found inside and brought out. Maybe I'm wrong. 2) 757 engine=nine-feet across. 40 feet center to center is about 50 feet edge to edge, which is what I meant. So we agree, cool. And by the Pythagorean theorem, a 50 foot corehitting at 45 degrees (a bit off but it makes the math easier) we’d get a span of obliterated outer wall and columns at least 75 feet wide. We've got, I think, just shy of 100. 3) Wings certainly would not enter, except at the sturdy bases. But neither would they "shear off" and just fall on the ground in one piece. They were weak FUEL TANKS and would probably explode into very small pieces, which is why there've been no recognizable wing parts. They may have been reduced to something almost like Xmas tree tinsel. I know it’s been said before, just in case anyone still hasn’t gotten this – the size of the 757 compared to “the hole” is not a relevant “question.” It’s the worst kind of question for 757 deniers: one that’s been answered not to their liking. They love the new, shocking, damning and un-debunked “questions” they hope will never be answered. ‘cause every time yet they have been answered so far… That said, the new info from the Pilots and I’m guessing the PentaCon on the revised flight path that seems designed to again cast doubt on the 757 attack, is certainly new, shocking, and undebunked. It's been linked to how many times now in the last couple months of posting?So far I admit it's compelling. I’m sure you’ll all get it right this time and we'll finally get our shocking and undeniable proof. Is this what's less than a day away?

Originally posted by Caustic Logic Ultima: 2) NO engines were found, just like as many have rightly pointed out no 757 as found. An engine, like a plane, is an integrated and functioning composite of hundreds of parts. What's been found is parts. The FEMA gear was I think found inside and brought out. Maybe I'm wrong. 3) Wings certainly would not enter, except at the sturdy bases. But neither would they "shear off" and just fall on the ground in one piece. They were weak FUEL TANKS and would probably explode into very small pieces, which is why there've been no recognizable wing parts. They may have been reduced to something almost like Xmas tree tinsel.

Photo of what left of an engine found outside Pentagon. i22.photobucket.com... i22.photobucket.com... Photos of what normally happenes to wings when they hit a wall or other obsticle. i114.photobucket.com... i114.photobucket.com...

Mmmaybe... that's an engine? the ring in the middle? looks like a ring around a giant orange napkin. I hadn't seen this before and I'll have to look into it. And that's a JT8D as used on the A3 right? As for the wings - okay clearly they just fall off sometimes. Were these high-speed crashes I wonder? If wings in high-speed collisions also just fall off instead of blowing up then CLEARLY the explosions at the Pentagon and WTC were rigged with on-site explosives. Just prove that planes don't blow up and we're one step closer.

Originally posted by Caustic Logic Mmmaybe... that's an engine? the ring in the middle? looks like a ring around a giant orange napkin. I hadn't seen this before and I'll have to look into it. And that's a JT8D as used on the A3 right?

Not sure what engine it is, i have not been able to match it to anything like an RB211 or JT8D. We have no incident reports with part and engine numbers. As for the wings the plane hitting that wall was not at high speed, he was trying to stop but i just wanted to prove the point that wings are fragile and will usually shear off when hitting something. Also thier are reports of a planes wing shearing off from hitting 1 light pole, the plane at the Pentagon was supossed to hit 5 light poles and at high spped, even if the light poles were break-away they would still damage the wings at high speed. [edit on 9-2-2007 by ULTIMA1]

I looked at the image where you have inserted the plane. The problem I have with the video where the plane was inserted is that, you can clearly see the building in the backround where the plane's tail fin is after insertion. If the buildings are visible, how can there be somethng in front of them? Also,shouldn't there be thousands of people that actually seen a huge plane passing by on the way to the Pentagon? And the destruction should have been far worse. I do, however commend you on a very informative report. It has, however, even made me more convinced that something is wrong here. If it was a plane, there should be no questioning it. The damage should have been MASSIVE due to the explosion, and how can anyone miss a huge plane, so loud and thunderous go unseen by so many?

Has anyone seen the "Loose Change"video? I have only seen parts ot it, but I am going to finish it today. Very informative. This question of who knew what and when, as well as how this was truely done should be the most important subject to the American people in the country's history! Even people who are convinced that the government has nothing to hide, should want and DESERVE to have ALL the evidence handed over to them. The more time goes on, the more untrustworthy the government proves itself to be. Do whatever they want, and if they get caught, just go to rehab !! They blame everything but their total lack of honor, and respect for this country. They see their position as a career, not a public service. We need to stop seeing party lines and take our country back from those we have appointed and have failed us, for their own gain!