Comments for Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Big Plane, Small Holes »
Posted By RickyDawkins 9 months ago in Science & TechnologyThough dozens of witnesses saw a Boeing 757 hit the building, conspiracy advocates insist there is evidence that a missile or a different type of plane smashed into the Pentagon.
Why wasn't the hole as wide as a 757's 124-ft.-10-in. wingspan? A crashing jet doesn't punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building, says ASCE team member Mete Sozen, a professor of structural engineering at Purdue University. In this case, one wing hit the ground; the other was sheared off by the force of the impact with the Pentagon's load-bearing columns, explains Sozen, who specializes in the behavior of concrete buildings. What was left of the plane flowed into the structure in a state closer to a liquid than a solid mass. "If you expected the entire wing to cut into the building," Sozen tells PM, "it didn't happen."
Read Full Story at popularmechanics.com »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentShowing 247 of 248 Comments
-
67%
RickyDawkins9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Snopes also did a story on this:
Reply
http://snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.asp-
82%
RickyDawkins9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Eyewitness accounts:
Reply
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1wQ2BJsgx0-
-
-
-
-
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned2 Replies
-
-
-
-
67%
fiftynine9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
As was mentioned in the other story as an example.."when i was in Vietnam it was always the same..the more stressful the situation,the more the story's would differ .That holds true to any stressful situation.
Reply
People had already seen the footage and heard the news of the aircraft hitting the towers....Now i don't know about those people but i was stressed when i say that,maybe even enough to mistake an airliner for a cruise missile,or the other way around.
Ever been to an airshow ,or in a combat zone where there is a flight of a low flying jet..most of the time you don't see them coming and you have no idea what it is when it is overhead,then it takes a few seconds to see it as it passes..those seconds were not available before whatever struck the pentagon.-
-
100%
cowboygrandpa9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What about all the pictures that would confirm the governments story they will not release.
Reply
Ya know people today would still want to go after the criminals that did this. So it would be in the governments favor to reveal the pictures.
But if they don't have the pictures because something else happened ???
Well, they are protecting themselves.
DNA is easy to obtain. A swab and some saliva, blood from a blood test...-
67%
lovemylibs9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There were apparently pictures shown at the Moussaoui trial that helped prove he was a conspirator to murder which I will not post here. They can found on Ricky's link above. DNA can also be found from charred remains that are still strapped to their airline seat.
Reply-
100%
fiftynine9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"DNA can also be found from charred remains that are still strapped to their airline seat."
Reply
What seats..i thought everything was liquefied?
And that is one of the inconsistency's i keep bringing up..
They say titanium parts were liquefied but not seats..how is that possible.It can't be both ways.-
-
50%
SonOfTheMask9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Exactly.
Reply
I've seen the photos of the burned bodies in the Pentagon wreckage. The plane did not completely disintegrate in a flash. When the nose smashed into the wall, most of the area behind it is open air...the seating areas. The lower body of the plan came through the hole and began taking out pylons as shown in the Purdue simulation. The wings, being rather thin and at an angle, tucked in and began to tear apart very rapidly...not disintegrating like "vanished" but disintegrating as in the shape of the wing was no longer integrated (one piece).
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
prophyporcritesComment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned1 Reply
-
-
-
lovemylibsComment removed: Spam
-
-
-
-
-
-
82%
RickyDawkins9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Debunking 9/11 myths
Reply
http://debunk911myths.org/topics/Pentagon
(some graphic images) -
83%
RickyDawkins9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Folks, the hole in the Pentagon is big enough for all of the bulky parts of a 757 to crash through--about 15 feet on the second floor and possibly 80 feet on the first floor. There is a photo of metal wrapped around a column and other photos of aircraft debris within the building."
Reply
http://www.oilempire.us/pentagon-hole.html-
-
-
67%
lovemylibs9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There are photos here:
Reply
http://debunk911myths.org/topics/Pentagon_debris-
80%
fiftynine9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
OK i give..i thought the plane was liquefied.But wait..there are pictures..and none of them seem to be fire damaged,or the area where they are resting doens't seem to show any damage that would be consistent with that type of heat.
Reply -
-
-
-
-
75%
RickyDawkins9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Images:
Reply
http://debunk911myths.org/topics/Pentagon_debris
-
-
-
83%
RickyDawkins9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer was the first structural engineer to arrive at the Pentagon after the crash and helped coordinate the emergency response. "It was absolutely a plane, and I'll tell you why," says Kilsheimer, CEO of KCE Structural Engineers PC, Washington, D.C. "I saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box." Kilsheimer's eyewitness account is backed up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building. Kilsheimer adds: "I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts. Okay?"
Reply
-fta-
-
-
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned7 Replies
-
-
-
54%
fiftynine9 months ago
-
-
100%
alakazam9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"conspiracy nonsense?"
Reply
No...it was a conspiracy...it was planned in detail.
Way too many unanswered questions.
Like who all the conspirators were.
I would start the questioning with every person that has lied about it in ANY detail.
That list goes far and wide.
-
-
-
90%
Will13139 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I don't have a problem and I'm not a truther.. but they could end all speculation.. just by releasing the confiscated security camera videos... which were picked up suspiciously fast... was that the FIRST THING on everyone's mind when they thought the nation was under attack....
Reply
and you cannot tell me that the Pentagon is not one of the most surveilled buildings in the world.. I'd bet there was a camera that was almost at point of impact....
what exactly do they have to gain by not showing them... and again.. it would silence all critics or ...............-
88%
RickyDawkins9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
911 Case Study: Pentagon Flight 77
Reply
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVDdjLQkUV8-
93%
Will13139 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
there are possibly dozens of tapes.. .. let's see a raw tape 1 can be made to look like anything..
Reply
again....
why not show them...
and believe me .. I believe 19 arabs hijacked airliners and flew them into buildings..
I want to know .. WHO KNEW ANYTHING AND WHEN DID THEY KNOW IT..
I don't believe that to be an unreasonable expectation.. this is after all AMERICA..-
60%
lovemylibs9 months ago
-
91%
Will13139 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
don't have to show that .. and there is actually a whole lot of pictures in graphic detail.. of after the fact..
Reply
you cannot tell me there is not a clear video of the plane incoming...
or give me any good reason why it cannot be made available.. were the destroyed and if so why... if not show them..-
-
93%
Will13139 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
like they don't already know..
Reply
look at the link that Ricky Dawkins sent to me.. that shows animations in graphic detail
your argument simply does not wash...
why do you not want a full accounting of EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED.. WHO KNEW.. WHEN DID THEY KNOW IT.....
not some half assed attempt.. well we'll show you what we want to release and we won't testify under oath.. or separately...
when you go out of your way cover up things.. it looks like you might have something to cover up.....
why do you NOT WANT THE WHOLE TRUTH.. ??
I don't trust government.. to give that without a little prodding ... -
-
-
92%
cowboygrandpa9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
lml:
Reply
Not !!!!!!
If you truly believe that our government would be so stupid as to have not changed security measures then you are not giving the military leaders their due.
I'll guaranty you that even though it didn't happened as said. They have orders to destroy any plane not responding that is inside of a certain boundary.
So please do not think we are stupid.
National Security was a Bush lie. We are less secure with so many secrets.
Because the government can do as it pleases and claim national security.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
What was the reason Nixon claimed we weren't in Cambodia ????? Oh thats right he was just a liar !!!!!
-
-
100%
smithichie9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"you cannot tell me there is not a clear video of the plane incoming..."
Reply
I have seen thousands of serveillance camaras, I have never seen one that was pointing towards the sky.
Further, one shouldn't be surprised by the lack of willingness for the Pentagon to share it's evidence, they have info from the 30's and 40's that is still classified as top secret even though to the layperson that information would seem quite silly to keep secret.-
-
-
100%
alakazam9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
That would be some pretty low grade cameras...If they weren't recording at 30fps bare minimum they were ancient.
Reply
A super secure facility like that? ...sheesh.
If someone wasn't watching it happen live then they have been terribly lax at the National Defense Headquarters.
Wasn't Dick Cheney in personal command of NORAD when it happened?
Some damn sloppy generalship to be sure...funny that people trusted him to set War policy after such a failure.-
Neutral
Tangent0019 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Security cameras don't record at normal video speed. It would take far too much storage. Look at the security cameras from the Pentagon entrance. They are taking frames every second. That is what normal security cameras do. More than that is generally considered superfluous.
Reply
I'll betcha the cameras at the front entrance were full speed however, because that's the sort of attack the Pentagon expected--a suicide bomber.-
100%
alakazam9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Everything gets recorded to a hard drive set to overwrite...you can get weeks of info before it starts to do so even at 60fps for multiple cameras...just takes a big hard drive. That's at a good resolution.
Reply
Surveillance has come a long, long way.
Granted, most of the gear out there in convenience stores isn't like on CSI ...but there is some serious gear on the market.
With the Budget the DOD has I would expect the system at the Pentagon to be state of the art.-
Neutral
Tangent0019 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"With the Budget the DOD has I would expect the system at the Pentagon to be state of the art."
Reply
I expect it is now.
You're missing the point. This was 2001, when hard drive space was nowhere near as big as it is today. This was a back gate, not the front entrance. And even at the Pentagon they don't have multi-fps cameras watching all of the grounds all of the time.
Keep in mind, the biggest terrorist attack on American soil up to that point was the McVeigh bombing of the Federal building using a rental truck. The Pentagon already had concrete barriers at all approaches to the building, like all Federal building do now. No-one had imagined the use of planes as weapons (at least, no-one was taking it seriously), so I suspect no-one saw the need for high-speed cameras all around the grounds.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
82%
fiftynine9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"As I posted on the other thread and was negged for: Video or pictures of a breach in the Pentagon is not something that we want our enemies to see"
Reply
LOLOL...That is funny...you don't want them to see those pictures and then go to great lengths to produce all sorts of pictures to contradict the "small hole "theory...That makes even less sense than releasing all pics and videos that were confiscated...
I guess what you are saying is that the enemys would somehow gain information or knowledge if the "real"picture were released.....And apparently so would the American public.
-
-
-
-
-
100%
RickyDawkins9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Pentagon & Boeing 757 Wheel Investigation
Reply
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0... -
-
-
73%
Klarissa9 months ago
-
85%
slate9 months ago
-
70%
fiftynine9 months ago
-
67%
slate9 months ago
-
71%
Will13139 months ago
-
-
-
-
100%
Will13139 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
then you're giving second hand testimony...
Reply
inadmissible in court. .. ..
not closed minded..
you've accused the current president of
being a muslim
being not eligible.....
being a socialist...
you simply have no creditability .. zip.. nada.. -
-
-
-
-
-
100%
lvrofwolves9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Sure, I agree if it was your spouse, nobody here is Karissa's spouse tho....still not saying it's not true/true, just saying anyone can say just about anything here, and some people do. I believe there are some who believe her, and some who don't and nobody's personal opinion makes it true or false..including yours and mine.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
100%
slate9 months ago
-
100%
fiftynine9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I can easily provide proof....care to put up some money slate?.Say a grand ?.lolol..
Reply
And you only take the word of the right wingers..no one else,why?
Ok..her ex husband was working at the pentagon...just staring out the window and here comes an aircraft flying at what,five hundred six hundred miles an hour,and watches it fly into the building....Have you ever watched anything come straight at you at that speed...?
Now remember that the speed was sufficient to liquefy the aircraft on impact....except for well placed parts.-
Neutral
slate9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You aren't even bright enough to get the point are yas 59? You ONLY believe the left wingers and no one else, why?
Reply
Hmmmmmm I don't recall anything about looking out a window, let me go back and check.
Nope she said nothing about a window or watching a plane coming straight at him at 600 mph. You just pull that outta your brain? Sakes alive, U is funnier dan Goppy. Trying to call her a liar while fabricating what she posted in some sort of disillusion made up thing is par.
BTW, have you ever watched something coming straight at you at 600mph, and did you dodge it?-
100%
fiftynine9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
REREAD what she wrote dumb azz...Unless the frig'n guy is superman then he must of been looking out a window.
Reply
And please ..you spin more than a friggin top....
And by the way i have have seen things coming at me at 600mph..there called bullets..can ya relate?-
-
Neutral
slate9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
My ex-husband was in the Pentagon, sitting next to the section the plane flew into.
Reply
It was definitely a plane, he was there and saw it, fortunately for him.
Tornado man talking about spinning?
Hmmm let's see,,,, you saw the bullets coming in or did yoou see what they left behind as those brave men around you got hit by them?
It's called debris and big ole holes in walls knucklehead ,,,,
Psssssttttt I've been shot at and I neva saw the bullets,,,,,,, I heard them buzz over but, nope neva saw them flying through the air,,,,,,, it must have been your super secret training to allow you to see them,,,,,,,,, I hope they also trained you in mongoose reflexes so you could dodge the ones coming straight at you.-
100%
fiftynine9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You know slate i think you are nothing more than an angry repug...obviously with some serious mental disorders....."Psssssttttt I've been shot at and I neva saw the bullets,,, First one would have to ask ..why was you being shot at..robbing the local circle K or someone get tired of your s--t ? But one thing is for certain punk it wasn't in the military cause when tracers are coming at you you see them dip wad...and yes I SAW BRAVE MEN FALL AND DIE BECAUSE OF THEM...EAT **** YOU FRIGG'N MORON !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Reply-
50%
slate9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Ohhhhhh I got em riled up he called me a punk,,,, you see it's like this 95,,,, not everyone lives out in the great outdoors of iowa in their little spheres,,,,,
Reply
Yeah I've been shot at and I too have seen brave lads die and I didn't have to get 'drafted' to see it. I wonder hero, did those brave men cry like the ones I saw as they died? Did you about **** your pants like I did when being shot at, or are you just too plain too macho to be afeared?
Since you didn't 'live' what I did growing up there is no need in knowing why I was shot at,,,,,,you'd not 'understand' according to your wisdom.
Now let's hear some other nice names, I'd think an ex soldier could do better than your feeble attempt,,,,,,,,,
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
100%
MRCOFFEECAKE9 months ago
-
100%
smithichie9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The Pentagon doesn't seem to fit for a conspiracy either, in my opinion. The Pentagon as a target for a foreign enemy makes sense, but as an inside job, wouldn't the Capitol Building, complete with both houses in session, have made more sense?
Reply-
100%
MRCOFFEECAKE9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well making sense" out of military and political acts don't really apply..But this one is Sooooooo far out of the realm of logic that we should all agree it is senseless...
Reply
Now, asking why the tapes were all confiscated is another question, where logic (I'm certain) can still not justify, but it just is.-
-
-
-
100%
MRCOFFEECAKE9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
19 guys bought plane tickets (legally)..
Reply
Until THAT day we believed that all hijacked planes were destined for Cuba.
We are not up against an organized army..For crying out loud, all they
have is a few dozen random crazies. They have no formal organization, nor any
plan other than generalized civic disruption
Omaha??? ahhh, no.
NYC, D.C. and maybe even Houston...yes. -
Neutral
smithichie9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Not necessarily..You do know what is near Omaha ...S.A.C....Complete with how many nukes? A lot tastier target militarily"
Reply
True, SAC may indeed be a tastier target for a military, but not for a rag tag group of 15 or so terrorists. SAC is a huge military base that has prepared for nuclear attacks along with any number of conventional strikes, hardly a realistic threat for a small group with limited resources. Not to mention it's huge size could allow for over a dozen planes to crash into it without any of them touching one of the hundreds of buildings found on the base, let alone a nuke.
-
-
-
-
100%
fiftynine9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"wouldn't the Capitol Building, complete with both houses in session, have made more sense?"...sure it would have ..unless you wanted to send a message to your military leadership...and who would want to do that? Two names come to mind..cheney and rummy.
Reply-
100%
alakazam9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Flight 93 was inbound on the Capitol...
Reply
Makes you think...would have destroyed the debt record and been the Reichstag fire all in a nice 6 hour window.
This wasn't an accident...it was very carefully planned ...and by someone that had remarkable Intel and an awful lot to gain. -
Neutral
smithichie9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"sure it would have ..unless you wanted to send a message to your military leadership...and who would want to do that? Two names come to mind..cheney and rummy".
Reply
That is an unnecessary message when you're Commander in Chief. As Commander in Chief the only message you need to send to the military is an order. -
-
-
Neutral
Bacalao9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I think the opposite. If you were to destroy a country, would you go after something symbolic like the Pentagon, or would you rather go after a large segment of their government. I know when I am in a fight I always go for the head.
Reply
-
-
-
-
80%
Dionys9 months ago
-
-
100%
tchef9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hope your husband is ok.
Reply
To me the largest problem is the the way any investigation has been handled of this event seems to be trying to hide more than it tries to reveal. I don't really think that this was an inside job, but I do believe that there was a lot of things going on that they are not telling us. -
100%
alakazam9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I would concede the argument that something was not afoot that day if it had not happened the very next day that all that money went missing.
Reply
The part of the building that got hit is where the report was being kept before they took it to Congress.
Doesn't matter whether or not it was or wasn't a plane.
That is non germane to who did it and why.
Our ex-allies in Afghanistan did it because they hate our Freedoms?
That a BS answer...so what's the right one?
-
-
94%
berkeley9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
his argument seems to require the plane to have "liquified." can he show us any other boeing jets that performed this trick?
Reply
does mete sozen have a photograph that shows the scar in the ground that the wing caused? i somehow doubt it, for there are dozens of other pics that show the grass completely intact.
http://pentagon911.0catch.com/
and please, this question has nothing to do with bush or cheney, it simply involves real world physics.-
91%
fiftynine9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"his argument seems to require the plane to have "liquified."...Then why didn't the other two aircraft that hit the towers.I mean if the heat generated was enough to melt the supports,causing the buildings to collapse perfectly into themselves,but still not hot enough to "liquify" at least one of the hijackers ID...Different fuel ? But wait..some one said the entire plane wasn't liquified..there were parts...which is it ?
Reply -
-
100%
berkeley9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
i'm on a mac...
Reply
i just tried it again, and yes, a small window opens inside the main link. the first time, i just closed it immediately, from habit, but this time i didn't, and it tried to start some unknown yuck. i was still simply able to close it, but maybe on a pc it's different. my apologies. -
-
-
100%
Tangent0019 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Please! No-one claims the plane was 'liquified'. What the analysts said was that the heavily reinforced, closely placed concrete pylons effectively shredded the majority of the plane so the debris flowed more like a liquid than a solid.
Reply-
75%
berkeley9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
sozen claims there was a 75 foot wide hole on the exterior ring of the pentagon.
Reply
that claim is contradicted by many photos.
there was a hole in the exterior ring that was about 15 feet in diameter.
for his liquify theory to work, the plane would have had to transform itself into something more like a liquid than a solid BEFORE it struck the building.
that claim is absurd.-
100%
Tangent0019 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"sozen claims there was a 75 foot wide hole on the exterior ring of the pentagon."
Reply
That's because there was a 75-foot gap in the outer ring...AFTER the wall collapsed. The visible hole before collapse was about 16 feet in diameter which would be consistent with the fuselage of a 757 (the densest part). The wings and tail assembly were largely shredded by the reinforced concrete pillars.
If the craft that hit the Pentagon was a cruise missile, how did it knock over 5 widely-spaced light poles on the approach to the building. It would have had to zig-zag wildly to hit all five. Also, a cruise missile would not have made the sort of hole visible before the wall fell. It would have simply blown the entire section to smithereens.
Again, if you want to make an attack look like someone crashed a plane into the Pentagon and you've already got a hijacked plane full of people, why not use the plane in the first place?-
100%
berkeley9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
there are many details in the official story, but let's stick to the outer wall of the pentagon.
Reply
you tell me that the wings and tail assembly were shredded by the concrete pillars while the outer wall was still intact, before it partially collapsed.
your imagination is apparently far superior to my own.-
Neutral
Tangent0019 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I've seen several computer simulations modeling the physical properties of the materials involved, the angle of impact and the aircraft speed that bear this out.
Reply
If it was a missile, it wouldn't have penetrated the building as far as the plane did, it would have simply detonated. An explosion would have shown a radiant destruction pattern. Even if it didn't detonate, a cruise missile simply does not have sufficient mass to carry it through the three rings that were penetrated, while a 757 weighs hundreds of tons. If you look at the destruction path within the building, it's all roughly in a straight line.
Again, how did a cruise missile knock down 5 street light poles 10 to 20 yards apart without zig-zagging wildly?
Did the missile carry the airplane debris and bodily remains, or were they 'snuck in' later?-
100%
berkeley9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
since you asked, even though this story is now past its 24 hour life:
Reply
there are many details about the pentagon event that are confusing, that i don't have certainty about, since i have no access to all the evidence.
the only unambiguous evidence that we all have are the very first photographs taken, many of which appeared on the army's website in the first days and weeks after the explosion.
they show the lawn untouched.
they show smoke and small fires.
they show the majority of the outer wall intact, except for some broken windows and small voids in the wall.
they show a hole near the ground that's maybe 15 feet in diameter.
that is my starting point, rather than any other stories about what happened or who was responsible. so just considering that evidence, that i have seen, i cannot imagine any way that a 757 sized aircraft caused that damage. zero. that does not mean that i have to have an explanation for all of the other claims, or details, that others introduce into the conversation.
many other counter arguments start with, "since we know it was a 757 boeing, let's figure out how it caused that damage," which is the position sozen, and many others, take. it's an interesting exercise, but it has little connection to the real world.
i have opinions about most of the other details, both for the pentagon and the wtc, but i cannot tell you exactly how it was done, or who did it. none of my comments in this thread or yesterday's make any mention of that. i have only referred to the photographic evidence immediately after the explosion.
i have seen or read nothing in the past seven years that supports the official story of a boeing jet hitting the pentagon when compared to those photographs.
if you, or sozen, want to accept any other argument, you're obviously free to do so.-
100%
cowboygrandpa9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I agree that many look to find a way that a 757 did the damage. That is the first mistake.
Reply
To me that is like someomne saying that the sun is orange because they do not know colors. So instead of recognizing the yellow orb in the sky as the sun they are searching for something orange in the sky they will never find. In othere words if you start with a predetermined idea of what you are looking for you may never find it it. But if you say I am looking to find the source of light, you will find ways to discover what you are looking for.
Hope that makes sense to ya. I'm kind of tired and may not make much sense right now.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
93%
engineer9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This "structural" engineer must be debunked. Find any picture from any website which plane parts in in any of the 911 Pentagon photos and you will find there are none. by the same token, every plane crash on record where a plane has crashed there are pictures of plane parts. at the scene. Being one of the most guarded buildings as is the White House, Capitol, etc., there is no chance that the military would let a plane come into the Pentagon
Reply-
100%
RickyDawkins9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Find any picture from any website which plane parts in in any of the 911 Pentagon photos and you will find there are none."
Reply
http://www.flight77.info/debris.php
(thanks to nostalgia)-
-
-
100%
alakazam9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You know it did...I saw a few little clumps of twisted metal photographed in absolutely no context.
Reply
This should have been one of the most photographed incidents in history and 17 photos of torn metal some of which weren't even taken at the site is supposed to convince me?
...Convince me of what?
It could have been a training exercise anywhere...are the parts from the attack in an FAA warehouse somewhere?
Why would they be secret if they are? ...what's classified about commercial airliner parts?
-
-
-
-
57%
Dionys9 months ago
-
100%
Will13139 months ago
-
-
100%
Will13139 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
you believe you weren't told the truth and you don't care.... and want to label someone who would actually like an accounting a nut bag..
Reply
is that correct...
why would you settle for less than the truth.. and all of it.. ??
please explain...
I've stated OVER AND OVER I believe hijacked aircraft flew into the TOWERS and the PENTAGON...
so your spaceship reference try's to paint someone (me) as something they are not..-
100%
Dionys9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"you believe you weren't told the truth and you don't care.... and want to label someone who would actually like an accounting a nut bag.."
Reply
There's a vast difference between wanting an accounting and claiming without evidence that no plane crashed into the pentagon and that the planes that you can plainly see in the video crashing into the towers were cruise missiles.
"why would you settle for less than the truth.. and all of it.. ?"
Who says I've "settled" for anything? I just don't want to get on the watch lists.-
100%
Will13139 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
where have you ever seen me post that I believed that anything OTHER THAN A HIJACKED AIRPLANE HIT EITHER THE TOWERS OR THE PENTAGON...
Reply
I'll tell you NEVER..
so the alien space ship reference was nothing more that trying to label me a loony.. which I may be.. but not a TRUTHER..
which by the way what is wrong with actually wanting the TRUTH... -
-
-
-
100%
Ratskii9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Dionys, as I understand it, the alternate theory is that a missile was launched at the pentagon rather than a plane.
Reply
I refuse to call people truthers, dupes, etc. because I think this is a subject on which reasonable people can disagree. It is my opinion that we have multiple alternate theories. None of them have been proved to my satisfaction, including the official theory.-
-
100%
fiftynine9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"my opinion that we have multiple alternate theories. None of them have been proved to my satisfaction, including the official theory."..
Reply
Now there we go...someone that see's the picture..not the entire picture,cause non of us do..That is why we need all the evidence put on the table..because none of the opinions,including mine,are totally correct,and until ALL evidence is out in the open then we have all been lied to to some degree..that is the point.
-
-
-
-
-
80%
Bacalao9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The best way to tell a lie is to mix it with some truth.
Reply
Did two planes crash into the twin towers? Absolutely!!
Was that the ONLY Reason for their falling? possibly.
Why did WTC7 fall? Dunno
Why didn't the other buildings around them not fall like WTC? Again Dunno\
Was the pentagon hit by a plane? They tell us it was.
Will we ever know the whole truth? Never!
-
-
92%
fiftynine9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Look...call me a truther,call me an idiot,call me anything you want...but when in this country did wanting to know the truth from OUR government become a bad thing ?
Reply
There are security cameras miles out from the pentagon,as there is in any secure site..one camera out of the thousands around that building would have a a clear picture..Do you at least agree with that..if you don't why? If you do then you have to see the validity of this argument.-
prophyporcritesComment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned11 Replies
-
-
-
80%
fiftynine9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
""If you expected the entire wing to cut into the building," Sozen tells PM, "it didn't happen."
Reply
It did in the towers,why not there ? And even if it didn't,why no marks indicitive of that on the outside of the building.
"In this case, one wing hit the ground;....."
Then what happened to that wing and the parts you would expect to find?-
-
-
100%
Bacalao9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There would be some. think of the unmarked area as a fulcrum point. the parts of the wing that did crash into the building went into it and then pulled the outer tip of the wing into its hole instead of the tip creating a new one.
Reply
then again i could just be blowing smoke. -
Neutral
Tangent0019 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There were marks. You're just expecting a Looney Tunes-style cartoon cutout, as there was on the sides of the WTC. Again, VERY different set of materials. Airplanes are built to withstand the stresses of flight, not go head-to-head with reinforced concrete. The wings are largely hollow tanks for fuel.
Reply
-
-
-
-
73%
Poulenc9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What interests me is the conspiracy-theory mentality--the almost reflexive need some folks have to find or uncover a plot.
Reply
I'm not taking sides on the merits of truther explanations, but noting the consistent appearance of people who believe, in light of some incident, that they're being duped by official explanations for it--or even by the evidence of many eyes.
Here's some interesting info on the subject:
http://www.world-mysteries.com/newgw/gw_rmd1.htm
In a nutshell, conspiracy-theorists tend to exhibit:
* anomia, a belief that he/she felt alienated or disaffection relative to “the system;”
* a tendency to distrust other people; and
* a feeling of insecurity regarding continued employment.
The last is particularly interesting, no?-
-
-
-
100%
Poulenc9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Actually, Cry, I figured it out right after posting the above.
Reply
A baffoon is a single water ski. As opposed to a blafoon which is an inverted horse tether.
One appears very briefly in Demitrius and the Gladiators, which, as you no doubt recall, starred Victor Mature.
As Ghandi.-
100%
alakazam9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7b1zKyVeKgk
Reply
:)
-
-
-
-
-
89%
fiftynine9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"What interests me is the conspiracy-theory mentality--the almost reflexive need some folks have to find or uncover a plot."
Reply
What is important to me and should be to any citizen is the truth.If that truth shows any type of conspiracy then we should be able to go after those that are involved...
We should worry about the security of our country if there are ANY unresolved questions,that is part of the publics duty,to keep asking those questions until we get answers and proof that make sense...so far we haven't got either.
"anomia, a belief that he/she felt alienated or disaffection relative to “the system;”...Where are the real pictures?
"a tendency to distrust other people; and..." Plenty of reason there..After all the sitting president at that time met with Saudi royalty shortly before and after this incident,then took us to war based on lies and misinformation..that is enough not to trust.
"a feeling of insecurity regarding continued employment."....Duh...lol..look around,although i have no idea how that relates to the pentagon..BTW..i'm retired...lol -
82%
hyperbola9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Too facile. We know that the government lies to us regularly. I would submit that that is what leads many people to question the explanations about 9/11 - where even the members of the 9/11 Commission have told us that they were lied to by the Bush administration.
Reply
AND, we know for a fact that our own government has previously planned terrorist attacks on our own country for political reasons. The interesting thing is that although hundreds of federal employees knew about such planned attacks, they never became public. In light of our own history, it is not too much to expect that our government do a MUCH better job providing information about 9/11.
Operation Northwoods
US PLANNED FAKE TERROR ATTACKS ON CITIZENS
TO CREATE SUPPORT FOR CUBAN WAR
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/northwoo... -
89%
hyperbola9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
As for other countries, we have decades of history of sponsoring terrorism in foreign countries - including western Europe. Here is a particularly credible source of information (The Swiss Federal Institute of Technology) about our terrorist support in western Europe.
Reply
Secret Warfare : Operation Gladio and NATO's Stay-Behind Armies
Introduction by Daniele Ganser
Table of Contents
Synopsis
Chronology
Bibliography
About the Author
Book Launch of "NATO's Secret Armies: Operation Gladio and Terrorism in Western Europe" by Daniele Ganser
Terrorism in Western Europe ( English 162 KB ) by Daniele Ganser
International Conference on 'Intelligence in Waging the Cold War', Oslo, 29-30 April 2005
Ganser, Daniele (2005): Gli eserciti segreti della NATO. Operazione Gladio e terrorismo in Europa occidentale. Novità: Fazi Editore.
Media Desk
Endorsements
Chapter One: A terrorist attack in Italy
This chapter describes the discovery of the secret stay-behind army “Gladio” in Italy. The chapter takes the reader back to the Peteano terrorist attack of 31 May 1972. In that year an anonymous phone call after the attack suggested that the left-wing terrorist organization “Red Brigades” had carried out the atrocity, and for many years Italy believed that the crime had been carried out by the political left. Yet in 1984 Italian judge Felice Casson reopened the Peteano case after having discovered large-scale manipulations. The chapter describes how Casson during his investigations discovered the Italian secret stay-behind army “Gladio” hidden within the military secret service and how it had linked up with right-wing terrorist Vincenzo Vinciguerra who confessed to having carried out the Peteano terrorist attack. ....
Chapter Five: The secret war in the United States
This chapter describes US secret warfare operations in Western Europe from the end of the Second World War in 1945 to the end of the Cold War in 1991. It relates how the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the National Security Council (NSC) were created and how directive NSC 10/2 gave them the task to engage in secret warfare. ....
http://www.php.isn.ethz.ch/collections/coll_gladio... -
-
-
100%
Tangent0019 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Penn and Teller did an episode of Bullsh!t about 9/11 conspiracy theorists. One psychologist said it is actually comforting to some to think the government is behind these sorts of attacks, and they will bend over backwards to make the facts fit the theory. These people simply cannot deal with the existential chaos of there actually being extremist whack-jobs out there willing to fly planes into buildings.
Reply
-
-
88%
fiftynine9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
As was mentioned in the other story as an example.."when i was in Vietnam it was always the same..the more stressful the situation,the more the story's would differ .That holds true to any stressful situation.
Reply
People had already seen the footage and heard the news of the aircraft hitting the towers....Now i don't know about those people but i was stressed when i say that,maybe even enough to mistake an airliner for a cruise missile,or the other way around.
Ever been to an airshow ,or in a combat zone where there is a flight of a low flying jet..most of the time you don't see them coming and you have no idea what it is when it is overhead,then it takes a few seconds to see it as it passes..those seconds were not available before whatever struck the pentagon. -
-
-
-
-
-
70%
fiftynine9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Here is one link..i hope it works.
Reply
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/crash_site.htm
Notice that the walls have not collapsed and there is no apparent damage to the walls where the wings would have hit.-
100%
tchef9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If you look closely at the photo with the silhouette of the plane on it you will notice that the outer coating of the building is knocked off right where the wings would have hit. The Pentagon is a very heavily constructed building. Look at the supports inside They are massive concrete pillars that are steel reinforced.
Reply
-
-
75%
fiftynine9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Here is another video...listen to what he says about the walls.
Reply
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcWT2lQszEE -
78%
fiftynine9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Listen to rummy..and does he look like a person that is upset about losing friends and co-workers ?
Reply
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucGCs0hl9S8 -
-
75%
fiftynine9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Here is rummy again..on 9/10/01
Reply
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlnQTcLHaMM -
78%
fiftynine9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Here is the video about the hole...How does this make any sense at all?
Reply
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmP2Vy8K0i0
Nothing is consistent with the official line. -
prophyporcritesComment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned
-
67%
nostalgia9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Here's a site with a lot of info including videos obtained through a FOIA request from Judicial Watch
Reply
http://www.flight77.info/ -
100%
fiftynine9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
WE were attacked on 9/11,of that i have no doubt.Terrorist from other country's attacked us and killed thousands of my fellow citizens,but did anyone in our government know it was going to happen,or were they in on the planning and the possible cover up?
Reply
I don't know,and i have said that before..i don't know and neither do you..and that is the problem.We don't really know.
All i know for certain is that from what I see it is not consistent with that type of a crash or the damage left behind.I also am sure that there are pictures of the event that would put to rest any argument..pro or con.Why won't they release them if there is nothing to hide?
Don't we owe those that died the truth?Don't we have enough respect for differing opinions in this country to allow for the idea that maybe,just maybe there is more to the story?
When did we become such a flock of sheep that if the government tells us something that we just blindly follow? Sorry folks ,that isn't my style..When my country was attacked i want to know all of the facts and i don't want any of those facts hidden from me..I am an American and this is my country and i deserve nothing less than the complete truth.
For those of you that settle for less..i don't know what to tell you except expect more of the same.
Keep one important FACT in mind.That after this devastating attack on us our president at the time,when asked about launching an investigation,said the last thing we need is more investigations and proceeded to do every thing he could to block them..WHY?-
100%
RickyDawkins9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"All i know for certain is that from what I see it is not consistent with that type of a crash or the damage left behind."
Reply
Are you really "certain" or just venting/exaggerating a bit?
The hole in the wall looks plenty big enough to me, and the debris looks like it came from an airliner. Even so, I am not "certain" about anything in this life.-
Neutral
fiftynine9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
How was it that it took $% minutes for the wall to collapse? And is the hole consistant with the height of the supposed aircraft...Look at the picture closely of the wall before it fell,then rewind and watch the aircraft hitting the towers..not even close.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
100%
truthiness9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
when I first started reviewing the conspiracy information I found much of it credible. There is one point that debunks all of it, flatly.
Reply
In order to do all of the things required, hide plains, kill civilians on the original plane, plant explosives in the towers, fire missles at the pentagon, all of this would have required dozens, if not hundreds, of operatives. There is simply no way that not one single person has vome forward to say anything.
although I still do believe they knew it was coming and did nothing, and I think the FBI agent on the witness stand saying his superiors should be charged with negligence lends credibility to that. -
-
-
Neutral
Ratskii9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
My biggest unanswered questions are: 1) What became of the steel girders from the WTC buildings? 2) Were studies done of them to analyze the stresses and temperatures that caused their failure? 3) Does anyone have a link to any of those studies? 4) What is the analysis of the collapse of building 7 which didn't suffer the same structural damage and exposure to 1000s of liters of jet fuel that the other buildings experienced?
Reply -
Neutral
jdhatl9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I think it was planes, and Al Qaeda, and also an "inside job" but not the Bushes. They are just too incompetent to do it. I don't think Bin Laden thought they would take the towers to the ground, but they were tools in someone else's campaign. Of course, Bush's actions in response were so atrocious it kind of doesn't matter. We will be paying for his stupid, arrogant decisions for decades to come. And I don't think we'll ever know what really happened on that day. Each side is basically a bunch of speculation. hard to say what was really happening inside the towers during the fires right before the collapse. Most of those people are dead.
Reply -
-
100%
dvtexan9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Do any of you CTers have a TV??? The showed exactly what happened all day on 9/11.....do you think that was some sort of Hollywood stunt? Explain what we all watched....Why are you trying to make this attack into something different? Wow...just do not get the crazies in this country.
Reply -
100%
Tangent0019 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The missile scenario simply makes no sense. If you already had a hijacked plane headed for the Pentagon, why would you divert that plane, secretly landing it somewhere large enough to land a 757 without being noticed, fire a missile at the Pentagon, rush in to plant airplane parts and burnt passenger remains, and then dispose of the real plane and passengers? Why not just fly the damn plane into the damn building in the first place?
Reply -
100%
SonOfTheMask9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hard to believe that anyone still gives much credence to the "missile hit the Pentagon...not a plane" conspiracy theory. It has been so thoroughly debunked in so many different ways.
Reply
I guess if we still have JFK conspiracy theorists passionate about all kinds of silliness lo these many decades later...we'll also have 9/11 cranks for the foreseeable future.
Ricky...did you post this thread just to see if I were still alive and kicking? LOL. ;) -
militaryfanclubComment removed: Spam
-
SandmonsterComment removed: Hard Banned
-
Submit a Story
Advertisement
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.