9/11: A Boeing 757 Struck the Pentagon

I posted this in another 9/11 thread: You know what's really creepy that I just remembered a few days ago? My childhood best friend. Her father works for the FBI and has been on tv. (she always bragged about that.) I remember she told me. "my daddy was supposed to be at the pentagon that day, but it got cancelled." As a kid I just thought. "wow that's so lucky!" And now I'm like. "Nikki you dumb s#." xD weird, right? Id talk to the father, but her and I don't talk anymore, our families aren't very friendly anymore. So it'd be really weird and awkward...

Just watched an independent movie concerning the Pentagon attack named National Security Alert. Just google it. Great cause have the same photos I just downloaded from this site concerning the downed light poles. Especially the photo of the downed light pole and the cab driver (who was interviewed in the movie). The light poles are significant cause they match up with the reported path of the 757 from the "black box" and the exact path that the jet would have to take to cause the damage. Yet in this movie we have many eyewitnesses (including 2 cops and aviators) that put the plane on the north side of the street and not in same path as the downed light poles. The part at end of movie where cab driver doesn't know he is on film is scary. I am going to verify these witnesses as they are supposedly on public record after the attack. So somebody here please debunk how we have expert eyewitness testimony that has plane in different route than that reported/ illustrated with downed light poles. Also please explain that photo of the cab where apparently he going 40mph and plane going 450mph, pole goes through his windshield, and not a scratch on the hood? I must have failed physics.

Originally posted by holdouts Just watched an independent movie concerning the Pentagon attack named National Security Alert. Just google it. Great cause have the same photos I just downloaded from this site concerning the downed light poles. Especially the photo of the downed light pole and the cab driver (who was interviewed in the movie). The light poles are significant cause they match up with the reported path of the 757 from the "black box" and the exact path that the jet would have to take to cause the damage. Yet in this movie we have many eyewitnesses (including 2 cops and aviators) that put the plane on the north side of the street and not in same path as the downed light poles. The part at end of movie where cab driver doesn't know he is on film is scary. I am going to verify these witnesses as they are supposedly on public record after the attack. So somebody here please debunk how we have expert eyewitness testimony that has plane in different route than that reported/ illustrated with downed light poles. Also please explain that photo of the cab where apparently he going 40mph and plane going 450mph, pole goes through his windshield, and not a scratch on the hood? I must have failed physics.

www.youtube.com... Anyone who says CIT was debunked is LYING. Their fine work proved a plane came in on the wrong side of a Citgo gas station which excluded it from knocking down four or five light poles. These eyewitnesses had no idea that what they saw actually debunked that a plane crashed into the Pentagon.

reply to post by cultureoftruth Is the CIT still harassing Pentagon employees with their insane rants? Just curious.......

reply to post by holdouts The movie you refer to has duped you. There is nothing of merit in it.....the so-called "Citizen's Investigation Team" used cherry-picked and coaxed "witnesses" and edited all interview footage to suit their agenda, in order to support their own crackpot theory of a "fly-over" (a "fly-over" that would have been witnessed by thousands of people, if it had actually occurred). The two principle characters who made that piece of garbage film were not "investigating" the facts, they were altering reality to promote themselves, and they have been thoroughly discredited, years ago.

Originally posted by vipertech0596 reply to post by cultureoftruth

 

Is the CIT still harassing Pentagon employees with their insane rants? Just curious.......

I have no idea but a flyover was easily proven by their simple work. I also figured out that a plane's wings striking light pole/s would make it crash before it got to the Pentagon. I'm not sure if they even realized that. Here's the black cab driver talking off the record. The first light pole officially fell on his cab. NSA - Lloyd was much more candid when he didn't realise he was being recorded Lloyd - Do you know what history is? It's not the truth, it his story! It has nothing to do with the truth it's his story! This is too big for me man this is a big thing Man you know this is a world thing happeneing, I'm a small man My life style is completely different to this I'm not supposed to be involved in this This is for other people. People who have money and all this kind of stuff NSA - ..........."inaudible to me"? Lloyd - Well I'm not supposed to be involved with this, I don't have nothing NSA - The people who have all the money........ Lloyd - This is their thing This is for them That's right I'm not supposed to be in it I'm in it We came across that highway together It was planned One thing about it you gotta understand something When people do things and get away with it, you eventually it going to come to me And when it comes to me it's going to be so big I can't do nothing about it So it has to be stopped in the beginning when it is small You see to keep it from spreading..............

Originally posted by cultureoftruth

Originally posted by vipertech0596 reply to post by cultureoftruth

 

Is the CIT still harassing Pentagon employees with their insane rants? Just curious.......

I have no idea but a flyover was easily proven by their simple work. I also figured out that a plane's wings striking light pole/s would make it crash before it got to the Pentagon. I'm not sure if they even realized that. Here's the black cab driver talking off the record. The first light pole officially fell on his cab. NSA - Lloyd was much more candid when he didn't realise he was being recorded Lloyd - Do you know what history is? It's not the truth, it his story! It has nothing to do with the truth it's his story! This is too big for me man this is a big thing Man you know this is a world thing happeneing, I'm a small man My life style is completely different to this I'm not supposed to be involved in this This is for other people. People who have money and all this kind of stuff NSA - ..........."inaudible to me"? Lloyd - Well I'm not supposed to be involved with this, I don't have nothing NSA - The people who have all the money........ Lloyd - This is their thing This is for them That's right I'm not supposed to be in it I'm in it We came across that highway together It was planned One thing about it you gotta understand something When people do things and get away with it, you eventually it going to come to me And when it comes to me it's going to be so big I can't do nothing about it So it has to be stopped in the beginning when it is small You see to keep it from spreading..............

edit on 28-5-2012 by cultureoftruth because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-5-2012 by cultureoftruth because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-5-2012 by cultureoftruth because: (no reason given)

So you are not the teensiest weensiest put off by the scores of eyewitnesses to a plane impact into the Pentagon and the fact that there is not a single witness to a flyover.

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by cultureoftruth

Originally posted by vipertech0596 reply to post by cultureoftruth

 

Is the CIT still harassing Pentagon employees with their insane rants? Just curious.......

I have no idea but a flyover was easily proven by their simple work. I also figured out that a plane's wings striking light pole/s would make it crash before it got to the Pentagon. I'm not sure if they even realized that. Here's the black cab driver talking off the record. The first light pole officially fell on his cab. NSA - Lloyd was much more candid when he didn't realise he was being recorded Lloyd - Do you know what history is? It's not the truth, it his story! It has nothing to do with the truth it's his story! This is too big for me man this is a big thing Man you know this is a world thing happeneing, I'm a small man My life style is completely different to this I'm not supposed to be involved in this This is for other people. People who have money and all this kind of stuff NSA - ..........."inaudible to me"? Lloyd - Well I'm not supposed to be involved with this, I don't have nothing NSA - The people who have all the money........ Lloyd - This is their thing This is for them That's right I'm not supposed to be in it I'm in it We came across that highway together It was planned One thing about it you gotta understand something When people do things and get away with it, you eventually it going to come to me And when it comes to me it's going to be so big I can't do nothing about it So it has to be stopped in the beginning when it is small You see to keep it from spreading..............

edit on 28-5-2012 by cultureoftruth because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-5-2012 by cultureoftruth because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-5-2012 by cultureoftruth because: (no reason given)

So you are not the teensiest weensiest put off by the scores of eyewitnesses to a plane impact into the Pentagon and the fact that there is not a single witness to a flyover.

I'm not saying that. I watched their doc twice (not too recently) and think they did a good job of showing that 77 could not have struck the poles and that cabbie should give anyone interested in 911 the spooks.

reply to post by cultureoftruth

also figured out that a plane's wings striking light pole/s would make it crash before it got to the Pentagon.

No, it would not. The poles are attached to a frangible base, because they are designed to shear away, even if hit by a car, at highway speeds. A jet moving at around 800 feet per second is a formidable force --- and anyone aware of the physics involved realizes the difference between a high-speed and low-speed impact, and the results. AND, in any event, the light poles were struck either a second or two, or fractions of a second, before impact at the Pentagon. Momentum and inertia alone would guarantee that the airplane, as a whole, would continue forward regardless. It's physics! Also, the Flight Data Recorder (what laypeople call the "black box") properly recorded the actual airplane's path, speed, altitude, heading and everything else....to include the spike in lateral G-force at impact......until the recording stopped a fraction of a second later, when power to the Recorder was lost, sue to the airplane's break-up and destruction. Period. End of story. "Citizen's Investigation Team" are long past their "sell-by" date......stick a fork in them, they're done. Their fifteen minutes of"fame" are over.

reply to post by Alfie1 If 100 eyewitnesses saw a mosquito fly through a concrete wall, should I give up believing physics? Nobody can, and nobody tries, to answer my questions about Pentagon. If you believe an airplane hit the Pentagon like the official story says, you are believing in two parallel realities at the same time. And I'm not here to cure you, but I can still wish you a good day.

reply to post by Cade Then of course you have to explain the aircraft parts inside the Pentagon - serial numbers of which trace back to the aircraft What about the bodies of the passengers....? They were identified through DNA Or the engraved wedding ring worn by one of the passengers - it was found with her remains in the Pentagon ? Sorry your delusions do not match up with reality...........

Flying into it with such precision is the tough part to prove, its just incredible that airline pilots can't do it but those idiots managed a three score hit with no misses besides the crashed plane.

There are a lot of plane parts...no doubt BUT what about a) the hole appears (see the rebar) to have been blown out (as by an explosion) and not in (as one would expect if hit by a plane) and b) where is the impact damage from the twin engines on both sides of the hole?? Where is Columbo when you need him?

reply to post by thedman Apart from your claims without proof, you are not answering the question. You can go ahead and give up on the laws of physics if you like, but I'm gonna go with the latter myself and as such it will not be very strange if we reach entirely different conclusions. You are convinced they found engine parts with serial numbers and DNA inside the building, well how did all that manage to get in there when the walls stopped the wings and the engines? And if you say that the walls vaporised the wings and engines, then how did the fuselage mange to penetrate it?

reply to post by Cade What laws of physics are they....? "truther" physics in where it is whatever conspiracy delusion you are claiming Or Reality Ok - the "hole" - actually were 2 holes in the E Ring facade One about 17 ft in diameter at level of 2 nd floor corresponding to the fuselage of Flight 77 The second 96 ft across on ground level made by the heaviest section of the wings and engine of the jet Here is picture of the impact hole shorthly before that section collapsed 911review.com... Fuselage entry hole 911review.com... Picture showing damage from wingtips 911review.com... This picture also show details of Pentagon construction - unlike the claims of conspiracy mongers It was not some massive concrete bunker, but made of ordinary brick, the outer facade being covered with a layer of limestone Series of picture showing impact damage and trhe revelant section of the Pentagon 911review.com... Another mistake made by the conspiracy monger is the claim that the plane would have to pentetrate multiple walls inside the Pentagon WRONG On the 2 lowest floors there are no interior walls between the exterior E Ring and exit hole in the C Ring

This argument is based on a misunderstanding of the Pentagon's design. In fact, the light wells between the C- and D-ring and D- and E-ring are only three stories deep. The first and second stories span the distance between the Pentagon's facade and the punctured C-ring wall, which faces a ground-level courtyard. There are no masonry walls in this space, only load-bearing columns. Thus it would be possible for an aircraft part that breached the facade to travel through this area on the ground floor, miss the columns, and puncture the C-ring wall without having encountering anything more than unsubstantial gypsum walls and furniture in-between.

Originally posted by thedman reply to post by Cade

 

What laws of physics are they....? "truther" physics in where it is whatever conspiracy delusion you are claiming Or Reality Ok - the "hole" - actually were 2 holes in the E Ring facade One about 17 ft in diameter at level of 2 nd floor corresponding to the fuselage of Flight 77 The second 96 ft across on ground level made by the heaviest section of the wings and engine of the jet Here is picture of the impact hole shorthly before that section collapsed 911review.com... Fuselage entry hole 911review.com... Picture showing damage from wingtips 911review.com... This picture also show details of Pentagon construction - unlike the claims of conspiracy mongers It was not some massive concrete bunker, but made of ordinary brick, the outer facade being covered with a layer of limestone Series of picture showing impact damage and trhe revelant section of the Pentagon 911review.com... Another mistake made by the conspiracy monger is the claim that the plane would have to pentetrate multiple walls inside the Pentagon WRONG On the 2 lowest floors there are no interior walls between the exterior E Ring and exit hole in the C Ring

This argument is based on a misunderstanding of the Pentagon's design. In fact, the light wells between the C- and D-ring and D- and E-ring are only three stories deep. The first and second stories span the distance between the Pentagon's facade and the punctured C-ring wall, which faces a ground-level courtyard. There are no masonry walls in this space, only load-bearing columns. Thus it would be possible for an aircraft part that breached the facade to travel through this area on the ground floor, miss the columns, and puncture the C-ring wall without having encountering anything more than unsubstantial gypsum walls and furniture in-between.

So apart from your retoric you also cannot answer the question, how did the fuselage accomplish what the wings/engines could not?

reply to post by Cade I'm afraid that to me, the question of why a 150ft long metal structure, impacting head on, can punch a hole in a wall where a light and flexible wing structure impacting laterally cannot is rather nonsensical, those pesky laws of physics once again provide the rather obvious answer, don't they? Hint, its all to do with mass, velocity and the relative size of the impact areas.

Originally posted by waynos reply to post by Cade

 

I'm afraid that to me, the question of why a 150ft long metal structure, impacting head on, can punch a hole in a wall where a light and flexible wing structure impacting laterally cannot is rather nonsensical, those pesky laws of physics once again provide the rather obvious answer, don't they? Hint, its all to do with mass, velocity and the relative size of the impact areas.

so this flight came without it's 6 tons engines did it?

reply to post by Cade No, why would you think that? Engines are not wings. The engines are only attached a a couple of bolts,they are not integral and they add no strength to the structure cat all, it doesn't take too much force to remove them, there have been reported incidents of at least one type shedding an engine in mid air, though thankfully that is is a rare event. Have you ever studied a cutaway of an engine pylon? Did you suppose they would stay attached?

reply to post by Cade

So apart from your retoric you also cannot answer the question, how did the fuselage accomplish what the wings/engines could not?

If you knew anyhting about aircraft construction (which from your posts you don't) - would know about the "KEEL BEAM" which runs entire length of the fuselage It is the largest and strongest piece on an aircraft and provides the strenght to support the cabin and cargo bays as well as supporting the weight of the engines and landing gear structures Longerons And Keel Beams Longerons and keel beams perform the same function in an aircraft fuselage. They both carry the bulk of the load traveling fore and aft. The keel beam and longerons, the strongest sections of the airframe, tie its weight to other aircraft parts, such as powerplants, fuel cells, and the landing gears. Article Source: EzineArticles.com... Think of it as a 150 ft long battering ram, one that is going 500 mph There's that "physics" thing you like to quote - try this 1/2 Mass * Veolcity (squared) Now tell us why the aircraft fuselage did not penetrate the E Ring wall