9/11: A Boeing 757 Struck the Pentagon

Originally posted by weedwhacker Registration N644AA. Serial 24602. msn (not sure of their acronym, but guessing manufacturer number) 365. Airplane had two RR RB211-535E4-B engines.....

1. What about the FAA refuseing to release serial numbers for the parts? 2. What are the engine numbers and do they match the engine found at the Pentagon? [edit on 26-6-2008 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by 911truthisalie Flight 77 hit the Pentagon.

Its just too bad you have no actual evidence of AA77 hitting the Pentagon.

I think your cavalier attitude towards evidence is very sad. Perhaps you could show that there is physical evidence that the Moon exists. Given you philosophy, I am very sure you can't.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by weedwhacker Registration N644AA. Serial 24602. msn (not sure of their acronym, but guessing manufacturer number) 365. Airplane had two RR RB211-535E4-B engines.....

1. What about the FAA refuseing to release serial numbers for the parts? 2. What are the engine numbers and do they match the engine found at the Pentagon?[edit on 26-6-2008 by ULTIMA1]

There are two possibilities. The engines "allegedly" recovered at the pentagon were from AA77, or they were not. If the FBI posted photographs online showing the engraved S/Ns or tags on the engines, and PDFs of the construction and maintainance records matching the S/N s on the engines to N644AA, what would you say? Would you accept that AA77 crashed at the Pentagon or would you demand proof of the proof? I mean it would be very simple to fabricate the photos to match the records. How could you be convinced the photos and/or records were authentic? I say you would not be convinced. Despite your calims of being an unbiased researcher interested only in the truth, I belive you have made up your mind that there is a conspiracy here, beyond the concpiracy of several muslim terrorists commandeering a US airliner and crashing into the Pentagon with all crew and passengers. Thats what I think. Carry on with your debates about turbulence, aluminum vs. steel fraction, turbo-jet vs. turbo fan, tail numbers, wing tip vortex, wheel spokes, bla bla bla. It's all getting everyone nowhere...look into financial, political, military, and logistical oddities on, and immediately preceeding 9/11.

reply to post by Kellter Well duh, everyone knows Bush flew the plan in.

reply to post by ULTIMA1 ULTIMA....I have tried, I directed you to a site that had the airframe data. As you well know, engines get changed out, all the time, on airplanes. Those are tracked by the Airline's Maintainence, and then tracked by the FAA, as the FAA is tasked with monitoring Airline procedures. Thing is, an engine change is recorded in the Aircraft Logbook. AND, of course, in a computer database. BUT.....you WILL NOT find a S/N on a piece of an engine!!!! There is a paper trail, for an engine change.....but it does NOT include specific S/N on every part in the engine!!! Just ain't practical!! Same with the wheels. If we, during a walk-around, see something we don't like on the tires, or if the brake-wear pins are flush, then we ask MX to come look. We write it up in the logbook, thereby putting the onus on them to either 'sign off', or change the wheel. There are quite a few tire/wheel assemblies already made up, at MX bases in an airlines's system. They are interchangeable, and have no specific S/N to each airframe. By interchangeable, of course I mean, there are tire/wheel combinations specific to each aircraft type. These tire/wheel combos are pre-built, tires inflated, ready for installation. OH, and the brakes are integral to the wheel hubs.....they take the old one off, disconnecting the hydraulic lines to the brakes, then install the new one, and reconnect the hydraulic lines. Not difficult to understand....they ask us to be sure the Parking Brake is OFF....simple, eh???

Originally posted by 911truthisalie I think your cavalier attitude towards evidence is very sad. Perhaps you could show that there is physical evidence that the Moon exists.

Please do not try to change the subject. I made a statment and you have proven it correct. You cannot post any actual evidence that AA77 hit the Pentagon or anything else about 9/11

Originally posted by darkbluesky Would you accept that AA77 crashed at the Pentagon or would you demand proof of the proof?

I am looking for the truth of what actually happened that day. I accept facts and evidnece that can be verified. (unlike the believers who will not accept anything that does not go along with the official story)

Originally posted by weedwhacker ULTIMA....I have tried, I directed you to a site that had the airframe data.

And i am still waiting for and doing research for some official reports or actual evidnece to support that AA77 hit the Pentagon. [edit on 27-6-2008 by ULTIMA1]

reply to post by ULTIMA1 Well, then, ULTIMNA, we shall patiently await your findings. Sorry this is one line, it seems appropriate, given the topic.

Originally posted by weedwhacker Well, then, ULTIMNA, we shall patiently await your findings. Sorry this is one line, it seems appropriate, given the topic.

Well its going to be kind of tough since agencies are refusing to release information, some of the infomration could be released which only makes the agencies look bad. Makes them look like they are hiding or covering up something.

reply to post by ULTIMA1 ULTIMA, I want you to find the truth in this matter. I wish you the best of luck. Did you see the ATS thread about Mike Gravel pushing for more investigations?? I do not know how to bring a link to the thread, sorry. I'm still waiitng for the ATS Handbook to be formatted in a way I can download the pages I need, instead of printing the whole bloody thing!!! Cheers

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by darkbluesky Would you accept that AA77 crashed at the Pentagon or would you demand proof of the proof?

I am looking for the truth of what actually happened that day.

So you're looking for the truth huh? I've asked you several times what all your searching and "re"searching so far has uncovered, and how the results of your "research" have formed your opionions regarding what happened 9/11 at the Pentagon. Surely after all this research, you must be leaning one way or the other. So which way is it? 757 or no 757?

I accept facts and evidnece that can be verified. (unlike the believers who will not accept anything that does not go along with the official story)

Evidence that can be verified by anyone...including you, exists. The pictures of airplane parts that everyone has seen, have been credited to certain individuals. Contact those individuals, ask them what they saw, ask to see thier original prints and negatives (if they used film) ask to see the original data cards if they used digital cameras. If you are as serious a researcher as you claim, this should be simple. Please don't tell me it's up to me. I don't need any more proof. It's you who are seeking the truth.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by weedwhacker ULTIMA....I have tried, I directed you to a site that had the airframe data.

And i am still waiting for and doing research for some official reports or actual evidnece to support that AA77 hit the Pentagon. [edit on 27-6-2008 by ULTIMA1]

You already admitted a plane hit the Pentagon, Ultima1. Remember? Now, just WHAT plane hit the Pentagon if you don't think it was AA77? That question has been on the table for weeks now. Are you scared to answer it, Ultima1?

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by 911truthisalie I think your cavalier attitude towards evidence is very sad. Perhaps you could show that there is physical evidence that the Moon exists.

Please do not try to change the subject.

I illustrated the subject and the absurdity of your statement.

I made a statment and you have proven it correct.

I illustrated the absurdity of your statement.

You cannot post any actual evidence that AA77 hit the Pentagon or anything else about 9/11

You can't post any actual evidence that the Moon exists.

reply to post by 911truthisalie We can see pictures of the moon on NASA's site, we have no pictures or videos of what hit the Pentagon that has been released or leaked to the public. I fail to see where you are going with this argument.

Originally posted by darkbluesky The pictures of airplane parts that everyone has seen, have been credited to certain individuals.

Yes i have seen photos, but photos alone are not good evidence without sources and information to confirm whats in the photos. So far the photos i have seen from the believers DO NOT have sources.

reply to post by CatHerder The main conflict that I see in this explanation is the fact that it is stated that the 757 is basically a 13 ft. cylinder this it could make a 13 ft or slightly larger hole. The problem is that if there was engine debris found at the site then the engines were still attached. If the engines were attached then the plane had to have been no less than 30 ft wide and thus a larger than 13 ft hole.

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS If the engines were attached then the plane had to have been no less than 30 ft wide and thus a larger than 13 ft hole.

Fact for you. There is 40 feet from center to center of the engines. Were there holes in the Pentagon 40 feet apart? [edit on 27-6-2008 by ULTIMA1]

reply to post by CatHerder It seems too many who were not in the vicinity of The Pentagon do not know of the myriad eye witnesses, such as the cab driver, whose car was hit or nearly hit by the falling light pole; and, by a friend of mine--a former airline employee, subsequently employed at Treasury Dept., who had the sad experience of watching the airplane come nearly overhead his car from left to right (over the Navy Annex bldgs. and hotel) at an extremely low altidude (obviously lower than the light pole struck immediately in front of him), then "...just disappear....into The Pentagon before the fireball errupted." Too, radar tapes showed the exact flight path of this airplane for miles prior to impact and passengers aboard (real people !) gave vivid descriptions of flight path. Please kill this rumor about a missile as it continues to hurt all those who were too close to events that day. Larry Kinsey