9/11: A Boeing 757 Struck the Pentagon

I heard that they were taken to the underground base at Dulce.... Seriously... why isn't anyone answering that one... there were people who saw the plane... or was it a bird...

Originally posted by elevatedone I'm still waiting for you all to answer about all the witnesses on the highway and nearby that WATCHED the AIRPLANE, hit the pentagon ? anyone... anyone...

So far none of the �No plane� believers has managed to explain away that one. I think Damned�s answer was �I don't know, but anything can be painted like an AA jet. That's not even close to impossible, is it?� Whatever that means.

You're pretty smart despite being a Steelers fan, e1. See, you can't argue about numerous civilian witnesses seeing a passenger airliner crash into the Pentagon, so that fact is conveniently swept under the rug. Some people will do their best to create a conspiracy despite evidence (EVIDENCE - not conjecture) to the contrary. Deny ignorance, folks.

What evidence is there that a plane did not hit the pentagon? There is none. But, there is tons of evidence that supports that a plane did hit the pentagon. The entire "9/11 wasn't real" conspiracy bullsh!t theories have no support whatsoever. Why trap yourself in your own dream world? Where terrorism doesn't exist and Bush is more evil than Usama? Give me a break! 9/11 did happen and it is an outrage to say it was staged. Not only to the familes of the dead and their souls, but to our entire country as well. THERE IS NO CONSPIRACY! Get that through your think, paranoid, irrational heads. What's next? Hitler wasn't real? He was a robot made by Senator Bush, right? And the hindenburg... that was just good ol' Hollywood special affects to stiffle the zepplin industry! How could they! And WWII never happened... they just made us think it did so that we would increase homeland productivity . But yea, don't make retarded assumptions that defy all logic in order to feel like you're an elitest intellectual. You are actually the mud pit of intellectuals; what they laugh at. You are no smarter than Bush . Go hide in your underground bomb shelters and wait for the end of the world you so desperately desire so your pathetic lives will be over.

I just want answers to my questions about the physics of what happened, and I don't accept that the wings just folded and neatly entered the Pentagon, through a hole barely large enough for the hull to fit through, without leaving any debris. How the hell do I know they saw a 757, and not something that looked like a 757? Distance and speed are bad combinations for eyewitnesses. They were lucky to catch it out of the corner of their eye, if even that. How much detail can you catch on something going near 500MPH, and overhead, for the most part. It's not as if anyone was able to read the tail number, or anything. My guess is, since everyone knew planes hit the towers, they're automatically going to think the same thing happened at the Pentagon. Don't get me wrong. There's no reason why it shouldn't be a 757, but the physics do not make sense. I'm still waiting for one of you in group A to explain where the wings went. Your BS explanations don't hold an ounce of credibility, IMO. Even if the wings folded, there was 20,000 lbs. of engine, and there was almost no debris? That's what I can't get over. Forget your hypothetical questions! I want answers to the questions that can and should be answered. Hard, cold physics cannot be speculated upon, period. There is no possible way that 20,000 lbs. is going to change direction of travel at that speed. The left engine would have flown off and either went through the wall, or bounced off, and threw debris even further to the left. When things hit concrete walls and don't go through, they explode and/or richochet. There should have been debris everywhere, unless the engines went through the wall, in which case there would be holes where they entered. How can I possibly make that any more simple for you? [edit on 9-12-2004 by Damned]

Where's the plane ? Here's the plane... A lot of people forget about the BBC news footage...

What BBC footage? There is no video of the Pentagon crash, except the security cams from a few places, which were confiscated immediately. www.freedomfiles.org...

This is a video clip that gives some pretty good reasons to belive that a plane did not hit the pentagon. I don't know anything about the author or where I got the link, but it's worth a viewing. Decide for yourself. www.freedomunderground.org... it takes a sec to load.

1. Many eye witnesses did NOT see the plane. 2. Some did see an AIRCRAFT however the witnesses seem to say different things. 3. At 500 MPH it would be very hard to see it was a Boeing, how would they know excactly? 4. The wreckage and damage to the Pentagon is NO WHERE NEAR consistent with that of a Boeing 757. What i do get from the investigation i have done is that some sort of aircraft hit the Pentagon, however i doubt it was a Boeing 757. I'm not saying its a missile, because there is no evidence to back it up AT ALL...as far i know. However is there ANY evidence to prove it was a Boeing 757? What happened to the wings? no one can explain this Where is all the aircraft wreckage? So this plane dodge the columns inside the Pentagon...did this wreckage grow a brain and decided to dodge the columns while it was travelling at 500 MPH ? Why hasn't footage of this aircraft been released, its obvious the government is trying to hide something, if it were a Boeing the government would of released a video showing a Boeing.

Originally posted by elevatedone I'm still waiting for you all to answer about all the witnesses on the highway and nearby that WATCHED the AIRPLANE, hit the pentagon ? anyone... anyone...

www.terrorize.dk... Here's a witness.... Sincerly Cade

Originally posted by aelphaeis_mangarae 1. Many eye witnesses did NOT see the plane. 2. Some did see an AIRCRAFT however the witnesses seem to say different things. 3. At 500 MPH it would be very hard to see it was a Boeing, how would they know excactly? 4. The wreckage and damage to the Pentagon is NO WHERE NEAR consistent with that of a Boeing 757. What i do get from the investigation i have done is that some sort of aircraft hit the Pentagon, however i doubt it was a Boeing 757. I'm not saying its a missile, because there is no evidence to back it up AT ALL...as far i know. However is there ANY evidence to prove it was a Boeing 757? What happened to the wings? no one can explain this Where is all the aircraft wreckage? So this plane dodge the columns inside the Pentagon...did this wreckage grow a brain and decided to dodge the columns while it was travelling at 500 MPH ? Why hasn't footage of this aircraft been released, its obvious the government is trying to hide something, if it were a Boeing the government would of released a video showing a Boeing.

Actually I believe it was traveling with 400 MPH according to the official explanation, and the evidence towards the missile explanation is the white plume in the official 5 frames from the survalience video released by the pentagon. Boeings do not have white smoke comming out of their turbo fan jet engines as far as I'm informed. Those who want to investigate, to get as much information as possible, so they can make an informed decision as possible will watch the movies I listed on page 38: www.abovetopsecret.com... To counter that information they will watch what the official explanation is and compare and THAT my fiends is a SCARY experience indeed! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Concerned Cade

Did the FBI demolish the WTC buildings? 01) www.terrorize.dk... 02) www.terrorize.dk... 03) www.terrorize.dk... 04) www.terrorize.dk... 05) www.terrorize.dk... 06) st12.startlogic.com... 07) www.terrorize.dk... 08) www.911blimp.net... 09) www.prisonplanet.tv... 10) www.prisonplanet.tv... 11) st12.startlogic.com... 12) www.terrorize.dk... 13) www.terrorize.dk... In germany there were many citizens who could see that things were going in the wrong direction, they prayed that it would not happen, they stuck their heads in the sand and thought if I just keep it down here long enough it will all pass. It did. The Americans came and saved the day. Today, would we blame these people for not acting on their knowledge? for not being prepared to correct the misconduct in their government by taking it to the streets? Could they have prevented holocaust? In germany there were many citizens who denied the "hear say" that they were killing Jews. They were angry at these conspiracy theories and were very angry with these "nuts" who could think such a horrible thing of their own country and their dear leader. Today, would we blame these people for not being alert enough? for not being prepared to correct the misconduct in their government by taking it to the streets? Could they have prevented holocaust? This deserves at least a minute of everyones time to reflect, if we don't, we have already become a new Germany... I love you all, and the time has come to stand together and save America, and then the world. Is that what the founders of the great America would have done? Sincerly Cade

...and as we all take the time to think deeply about this, please listen to this artist who is also deeply troubled by the development in this great country... www.sharedvoice.org... I hope that we will all come together as one people, internationally, and make sure the future will be one of peace and freedom, is it not what we all want... Sincerly Cade

just had another thought...if the germans never had this much evidence to support their suspicion, and we do, does that mean....that in future history we will be....condemned even more harsh than the germans are being treated today? ericblumrich.com... I've watched the movies, I've thought for myself, and I've taken a stand, it wasn't as hard as I thought it would be, and if feels good... This movie "911 In Plane Site" www.911inplanesite.com... can be bought here: www.thepowermall.com... "Painful Deceptions" can be bought at the bottom of this page: www.erichufschmid.net... or downloaded for free here: question911.com... "The Great Deception" www.viewerplus.com... "The Road To Tyranny" www.infowars.com... Is it true that a patriot must always be prepared to defend his country against its government? Sincerly Cade

Interview With Karl Schwarz from John Stadtmiller Radio Show

JS: So what was it that hit the Pentagon? Any guesses here? KS: I think it was an A3 Sky Warrior.

Originally posted by aelphaeis_mangarae 1. Many eye witnesses did NOT see the plane.

Well if They didn�t see the plane, then they weren�t eye witnesses, now were they?

Originally posted by aelphaeis_mangarae 2. Some did see an AIRCRAFT however the witnesses seem to say different things.

But wait a minute, a second ago, you said that they did not see the plane, which is it?

Originally posted by aelphaeis_mangarae 3. At 500 MPH it would be very hard to see it was a Boeing, how would they know excactly?

Well to begin with, I think 400 mph is a more likely number, but if you insist on 500, you can use it. At 500 mph, the plane would cover about a half mile in 4 seconds. Now four seconds may not seem like a lot of time, but when you are watching a plane being deliberately crashed into a building, I bet it seemed like forever to those witnesses. How much you could see in those four seconds would have depended on how close you were and what your position was in relation to the angle of the flight path.

Originally posted by aelphaeis_mangarae 4. The wreckage and damage to the Pentagon is NO WHERE NEAR consistent with that of a Boeing 757.

And this assessment is based on what exactly? Are you a trained aircraft crash investigator for the NTSB? Have you ever had training in investigating aircraft crash sites? Have you ever seen a Boeing 757 crash site in person?

Originally posted by aelphaeis_mangarae What i do get from the investigation i have done is that some sort of aircraft hit the Pentagon, however i doubt it was a Boeing 757.

Maybe you think it was a sky warrior also.

Originally posted by aelphaeis_mangarae I'm not saying its a missile, because there is no evidence to back it up AT ALL...as far i know. However is there ANY evidence to prove it was a Boeing 757?

Reread the very first post of this thread by Cathearder.

Originally posted by aelphaeis_mangarae What happened to the wings? no one can explain this

How much of the wings do you actually expect to see intact after an impact of 500 mph? Again, by what basis are you making the judgment that there should be visible pieces of the wings? Do you actually expect to see them lying pristine on the ground?

Originally posted by aelphaeis_mangarae Where is all the aircraft wreckage?

Once again, I direct you to the very first post of this thread back on page 1. Cathearder pointed out numerous pieces of wreckage. And once again, I ask you, after a 500 mph impact and subsequent fuel explosion, just how much intact wreckage do you expect to see, and on what are you basing that expectation?

Originally posted by aelphaeis_mangarae So this plane dodge the columns inside the Pentagon...did this wreckage grow a brain and decided to dodge the columns while it was traveling at 500 MPH ?

OK, I went through this a couple of pages ago, but you must not have been paying attention to this thread then, so I will repeat myself here for your benefit. I assume that you are basing this claim on the following graphic. Now to be fair, I can see why someone who looks at this might think that it would have been difficult, if not impossible for the debris to pass though the building without bouncing off the columns like a pinball. This really isn�t your fault because you fail to realize one thing. The size of the columns that are shown in that drawing are NOT TO SCALE In other words, the CAD operator that put together that graphic exaggerated the size of the columns by what would appear to be at least 400 percent. How can I tell this? Simple, by looking at the photos of the building I estimate that the column to column distance is about 20 feet. This would be typical for a building of that style construction, from that era. Looking at the pictures also shows that the columns were about 18 inches wide. Based at the graphic above, the width of the columns would be about 1/4 of the distance between the columns, or 5 feet wide. Why did they do this? Simple, the purpose of the above graphic is to map out the locations of the damaged or destroyed columns. To that purpose the column sizes were exaggerated and color coded to show this. If you consider the above graphic with the realization that the actual columns were much smaller than shown, you can see it is easily possible for a portion of the debris to pass through the space without hitting a column on the way.

Originally posted by aelphaeis_mangarae Why hasn't footage of this aircraft been released, its obvious the government is trying to hide something, if it were a Boeing the government would of released a video showing a Boeing.

Because they know, along with the rest of the rational world that it was a Boeing 757, they don�t need to prove anything to anyone.

Originally posted by uknumpty Interview With Karl Schwarz from John Stadtmiller Radio Show

JS: So what was it that hit the Pentagon? Any guesses here? KS: I think it was an A3 Sky Warrior.

The A3 Skywarrior: Dimensions Length: 76 ft. 4 in Wingspan: 72 ft. 6 in Height: 22 ft. 9.5 in external image Boeing 757-200 Length: 155 ft. 3 in Wingspan: 124 ft. 10 in Height: 44 ft. 6 in The sky warrior is half the size of the 757 and does not look anything like a commercial airliner. Mod Edit: Image size only. [edit on 19-5-2005 by UM_Gazz]

well... that skywarrior sure looks like a commercial aircraft to me.. no mistaking the two... Passenger Airliner.... Passenger Airliner.... Passenger Airliner.... repeat after me... Passenger Airliner... made by Boeing.... flown by terrorist.... crashed into the Pentagon, tradgedy... move on....

Kelly Knowles from an Arlington apartment two miles away saw two planes moving toward the Pentagon, one veering away as the other crashed. Tom Seibert, in the Pentagon, listened to "what sounded like a missile" followed by a "loud boom." Lon Rains Editor, Space News, was driving up Interstate 395 from Springfield to downtown Washington. I heard a very loud, quick whooshing sound that began behind me and stopped suddenly in front of me and to my left. In fractions of a second I heard the impact and an explosion. The next thing I saw was the fireball. I was convinced it was a missile. It came in so fast it sounded nothing like an airplane. Keith Wheelhouse and his sister, Pam Young were preparing to leave a funeral at Arlington National Cemetery when they watched "the jet" approach and hit the Pentagon. Both saw another plane flying near the jet that crashed. When asked if the other plane could have been an airliner performing a normal landing at Reagan National Airport, Wheelhouse stated that he was not confused by normal airport traffic. Alfred S. Regnery, on the freeway with the Pentagon not yet in view, heard a jetliner "not more than 200 yards above the ground" passed overhead, disappearing "behind black cloud of smoke" was pouring from a "gaping hole." Comment: Another witness hearing the loud sound and seeing the jet liner and assuming that sound source and object sited are one and the same. But note that he saw an airliner and that it was 200 yards above the ground, not 20 feet. Terry Scanlon interviewed a Hampton Roads woman who saw a plane following the jet that hit the Pentagon. Christine Peterson, in her car in front of the heliport (near Riskus) saw the airliner. As it flew over she could read numbers on its wing. "My mind could not comprehend what happened. Where did the plane go? ... But there was no plane visible, only huge billows of smoke and torrents of fire." Comment: It would certainly be jumping to conclusions to say that this witness saw that plane crash. Watching the Boeing she missed entirely the killer jet that came from another direction. James S. Robbins, from his west-facing office window, one and a half miles east of the Pentagon, saw "the 757" as it was "diving in at an unrecoverable angle." "I did not immediately comprehend what I was witnessing. There was a silvery flash, an explosion, and a dark, mushroom shaped cloud rose over the building." Comment: The plane was diving. But it must have recovered from the dive at the last second, because the pentagon was not hit by a plane at a downward angle. The killer jet traveled from the entrance hole to the C-ring exit hole without breaking above the floor of the third floor!!! Robbins saw the Boeing that did not crash and the explosion and smoke made by the killer plane that did. [Note: since this was written in 2002 it has come to light (photo and video supporting) that the plane diving over D.C. was a four-engine plane with wings more swept back and more forward on the fuselage than the 757 -- and this over forbidden air space! Obviously a distraction plane. Christopher Munsey headed South on the Interstate saw "a silver, twin- engine American Airlines jetliner gliding almost noiselessly over the Navy Annex, fast, low and straight toward the Pentagon, just hundreds of yards away." Munsey saw the red and blue markings "as it appeared to hit the side of the Pentagon." Comment: A silver twin-engine plane had to have been Flight 77, seen "over the Annex", i.e., over Arlington Cemetery hill, it had American Airlines markings and it was "noiseless," but notice the indefiniteness: "it appeared to hit the side of the Pentagon" -- there are usually psychologically definite reason why people qualify their speech, in this case, perhaps, psychological reservations about what he really did see. Fred Gaskins was driving near the Pentagon as he saw the plane pass about 150 feet overhead. "It was flying very smoothly and calmly, without any hint that anything was wrong." Comment: Near the Pentagon, but still 150 feet in the air. How could it hit those poles? How could it come in for its below-the-third- floor crash through three rings of the Pentagon? A police officer radioed in "Motor 14, it was an American Airlines plane, uh, headed eastbound over the Pike (Columbia Pike highway), possibly toward the Pentagon." The important thing here is that it was reported "eastbound," whereas the killer jet was headed north - northeast by the compass. Obviously this officer was looking at the frame up air show higher up -- he was looking at the plane that soon afterward slipped onto the tarmac at Reagan National. But no one could be expected to take in what was really happening all at once in the course of an action that took all of four seconds on the vicinity stage we have explored above. Sucherman Joel I heard a sonic boom and then the impact, the explosion. ... There were light poles down. Comment: Airliners do not make sonic booms. Anlauf Deb and Jeff It was just this huge fireball that crashed into the wall (of the Pentagon). Harrington Joe It seemed like it made impact just before the wedge. It was like a Hollywood movie or something. Hovis Tom I cannot understand how that plane hit where it did giving the direction the aircraft was taking at the time. Kean Terrance And then it sort of disappeared, and there was fire and smoke everywhere .. . . It was very sort of surreal. Sayer John At first I thought an airplane had hit in front of the Pentagon, but when I got closer I saw that it had struck the Pentagon. Liebner, Lincoln The plane went into the building like a toy into a birthday cake. The aircraft went in between the second and third floors. Narayanan Vin The hijacked jet slammed into the Pentagon at a ferocious speed. But the Pentagon's wall held up like a champ. It barely budged as the nose of the plane curled upwards and crumpled before exploding into a massive fireball. Timmerman Donald I hear jets all the time, but this jet engine was way too loud. I looked out to the southwest, and it came right down 395, right over Colombia Pike, and as it went by the Sheraton Hotel, the pilot added power to the engines. I heard it pull up a little bit more, and then I lost it behind a building. And then it came out, and I saw it hit right in front of -- it didn't appear to crash into the building; most of the energy was dissipated in hitting the ground, but I saw the nose break up, I saw the wings fly forward, and then the conflagration engulfed everything in flames. It was horrible. Dobbs Mike he saw an American Airlines 737 twin-engine airliner strike the building. Tom McClain I saw the remains of the engines in the North parking lot of the Pentagon as well as melted aluminum and other debris left from the aircraft. Krohn Charles H. One of the aircraft's engines somehow ricocheted out of the building and arched into the Pentagon's mall parking area between the main building and the new loading dock facility. Probst Frank The plane's right wing went through a generator trailer like butter. The starboard engine hit a low cement wall and blew apart. I dove towards the ground and watched this great big engine from this beautiful airplane just vaporize. It looked like a huge fireball, pieces were flying out everywhere. ... the jet vanishing in a cloud of smoke and dust. Comment: Flying pieces? Where did the pieces go, then? Off to the west, Journalist Sucherman saw another plane climb steeply and make a sharp turn. "I thought, 'Is this thing coming around to make a second attack? If there is another explosion, we're toast.'" Bizarre physics, perceptions of physically impossible events, are a natural consequence of seeing confusing events. (Those are not my comments above. I don't necessarily agree with them. I do find them interesting, however.) Here's more interesting witness accounts, some of which don't seem to describe what supposedly happened. There are tons of them... www.geocities.com... Some points I agree with: It is physically impossible for all of the plane to have entered the crash site, and this is backed by solid mathematical proof. There is no evidence outside the building of wreckage to account for the part of the plane which cannot have entered the crash site. There is no evidence of identifiable wreckage inside the crash site. Cremation of the plane was unprecedented in aviation history and physically impossible. Even if such cremation could have been possible, it is impossible in the context of the modest damage to the wall. The hole in the back of the third ring couldn't have been made by any debris found inside or outside the hole. Eyewitness evidence is inconclusive. So if it didn�t hit the Pentagon, what happened to AA 77 and the passengers? An important question, but it�s irrelevant to the argument of whether it hit the Pentagon. By way of analogy, imagine a murder prosecution where the defence has presented an overwhelmingly strong case - more than just reasonable doubt - solid proof that the accused cannot possibly have committed the crime. But then the prosecution plays it�s trump card. "But if your client did not commit the crime, then who did?" The defence answers that it has no idea. Everyone would agree that a guilty verdict on this basis, would be an outrageous lapse of logic. Yet this is precisely the same lapse of logic as suggesting that a lack of alternative explanation for what happened to the plane and the passengers is in any way relevant to the question of whether it hit the Pentagon. The government knows what happened. Investigators have to work it out bit by bit. The full truth will emerge in time, if a methodical, rational, step by step approach is persevered with. I can see one good reason to cling to the belief that AA 77 hit the pentagon. The unshakable faith that the govt would not - could not lie to us. A faith so strong that the laws of physics and motion suspend themselves in order to maintain it. A faith so strong that even the government admitting that it lies cannot overturn it. So, why hasn't someone yet identified the engine parts that should be completely identifiable? Why hasn't the manufacturer and/or model been confirmed? Is anyone working on this still? Why, or why not? Has the supposed strut been identified? Why not? These are things that investigators should have no problem identifying, beyond the shadow of a doubt, as Boeing 757 parts. If there is something being hidden, it's a very good assumption that it's being hidden by those who are authorized to do the investigating. Or those who have the power to authorize investigations are just not doing so. In either case, no one will ever be able to confirm what actually happened. [edit on 10-12-2004 by Damned]

Originally posted by HowardRoark

Originally posted by aelphaeis_mangarae 1. Many eye witnesses did NOT see the plane.

Well if They didn�t see the plane, then they weren�t eye witnesses, now were they?

Are you saying that if a person does not see a boeing 757 flying into the pentagon and thereby confirms the official story they are pr. definition not an eyewitness?

Originally posted by aelphaeis_mangarae 2. Some did see an AIRCRAFT however the witnesses seem to say different things.

But wait a minute, a second ago, you said that they did not see the plane, which is it?

I believe he said many did not see an airplane fly into the pentagon. He is not saying first that a certain group of people saw an aircraft and then later that the same group of people did not see an aircraft. I'm sure you see the difference. When I have trouble understanding a post I read it a few times, it might help you too.

Originally posted by aelphaeis_mangarae 4. The wreckage and damage to the Pentagon is NO WHERE NEAR consistent with that of a Boeing 757.

And this assessment is based on what exactly? Are you a trained aircraft crash investigator for the NTSB? Have you ever had training in investigating aircraft crash sites? Have you ever seen a Boeing 757 crash site in person?

Not many of us has seen the pentagon crash or a real life plane crash, but we have all seen them on TV, both the pentagon crash and many others, this is how we compare them. I'm sure we can all agree that when there are no wings, no engine, I think it's an intelligent reaction to ask questions. I also think to not ask questions is a misguided view of what a patriot is. The part that catherder says is from the engine is only a fraction of the size it would have had to be, if it came from a boeing. If you really feel strongly about this subject (as your post would seem to indicate) who not take the time to review the "Painful deceptions" DVD? How could more info hurt?

Originally posted by aelphaeis_mangarae What i do get from the investigation i have done is that some sort of aircraft hit the Pentagon, however i doubt it was a Boeing 757.

Maybe you think it was a sky warrior also.

Well since noone can come up with any wreckage that could belong to a Boeing how is this not a plausible suggestion? (well maybe the landing gear is in question as it could have come from most any plane)

Originally posted by aelphaeis_mangarae I'm not saying its a missile, because there is no evidence to back it up AT ALL...as far i know. However is there ANY evidence to prove it was a Boeing 757?

Reread the very first post of this thread by Cathearder.

I would suggest both of you to review "Painful deceptions" then you will see that there are evidence to support it was a missile, quite a few actually, more than there are supporting a Boeing, and you would also see Catherders arguements while being the result of long studies, does not add up when you look at the counter arguements. For example, he shows an engine, so we think:"well there is finally a piece of evidence". But upon further study it turns out it's simply only a fraction of who big an engine from a boeing would be. Notice how a judge in a courtroom listens to both sides of a story before he puts down a verdict. There is a reason for this, check out the documentaries.

Originally posted by aelphaeis_mangarae What happened to the wings? no one can explain this

How much of the wings do you actually expect to see intact after an impact of 500 mph? Again, by what basis are you making the judgment that there should be visible pieces of the wings? Do you actually expect to see them lying pristine on the ground?

When the suttle exploded in outer space, national TV warned that no one was allowed "to pick up wreckage". They even found pieces of the astronauts. No luggage no identafiables no nothing. If you are defending these people, are you defending america or are you defending someone who has attacked america so that they cut put in place the patriot act? Just a question. It's really pointless to continue. Right now I'm doing the work your supposed to do if you really care so much about who attacked america, your supposed to turn every stone, look at every piece of evidence. That's what anybody does when wanting to find the truth. I'm sure you want to know the truth like all of us do. We are all the victims here, we need to remember this. It was done to US ( and I say that living in Denmark, Europe, but even over here our constitution is being changed for the first time, just like in USA) Sincerly Cade