This Is What Happened At The Pentagon On 9/11

[DiveCon]

that plane and its engines and landing gear are a wee bit smaller...and how come it did not punch a hole as the wings folded and followed along...lol...lol

did you see anything even remotely like a plane left over?

 

[eots]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VE7XhiQZD9o&feature=related]YouTube - TOW BUNKER BUSTER MISSILE[/ame]

 

[DiveCon]

YouTube - TOW BUNKER BUSTER MISSILE

ah, so a TOW missile going into a box of sand is some how equal to what happened at the pentagon?


now you will have to explain how all those light poles got knocked over
and why they found all the bodies of the passengers of flight 77 inside the pentagon(well, some were bodies, other with partial)

 

[JBeukema]

Not to mention where the plane disappeared to after people saw it descend and vanish

 

[candycorn]

that plane and its engines and landing gear are a wee bit smaller...and how come it did not punch a hole as the wings folded and followed along...lol...lol

The wall it hit was testing was a nuclear silo if I recall. The results were largely the same with AA77 as comparatively little of the plane was left over. Had the Pentagon been made of the same material, you would have seen even less of the wreckage given the results of this test.

I don't expect a conversion from a YouTube video. It is the toolbox of the lazy researcher but it does show the physical forces at work in a very clear way.

 

[candycorn]

Not to mention where the plane disappeared to after people saw it descend and vanish

Have you seen any quotes from anybody who says they saw a missile?

 

[DiveCon]

Not to mention where the plane disappeared to after people saw it descend and vanish

Have you seen any quotes from anybody who says they saw a missile?

nope, not ONE

 

[DiveCon]

that plane and its engines and landing gear are a wee bit smaller...and how come it did not punch a hole as the wings folded and followed along...lol...lol

The wall it hit was testing was a nuclear silo if I recall. The results were largely the same with AA77 as comparatively little of the plane was left over. Had the Pentagon been made of the same material, you would have seen even less of the wreckage given the results of this test.

I don't expect a conversion from a YouTube video. It is the toolbox of the lazy researcher but it does show the physical forces at work in a very clear way.

yes, it was designed to test a plane hitting a nuke plant wall
it was no where near as reinforced as the Pentagon was
and even in THAT test, there was next to nothing that resembled an aircraft

 

[Mad Scientist]

...now you will have to explain how all those light poles got knocked over

Evil conspiritors were standing by the poles and when the missile flew over they then knocked the poles down with portable, battery powered saws.

...and why they found all the bodies of the passengers of flight 77 inside the pentagon(well, some were bodies, other with partial)

They vacuumed packed the bodies into the missile. Haven't you ever seen those commercials where they pack all those blankets? The missile hits the building, the bodies are ripped out of the bags and they return to original size then are ripped apart by the crash.

Simple.

 

[DiveCon]

...now you will have to explain how all those light poles got knocked over

Evil conspiritors were standing by the poles and when the missile flew over they then knocked the poles down with portable, battery powered saws.

...and why they found all the bodies of the passengers of flight 77 inside the pentagon(well, some were bodies, other with partial)

They vacuumed packed the bodies into the missile. Haven't you ever seen those commercials where they pack all those blankets? The missile hits the building, the bodies are ripped out of the bags and they return to original size then are ripped apart by the crash.

Simple.

ah, its so logical when you explain it like that

 

[JBeukema]

Not to mention where the plane disappeared to after people saw it descend and vanish

Have you seen any quotes from anybody who says they saw a missile?

But Terral said...

 

[JBeukema]

They vacuumed packed the bodies into the missile. Haven't you ever seen those commercials where they pack all those blankets? The missile hits the building, the bodies are ripped out of the bags and they return to original size then are ripped apart by the crash.

Simple.

​

 

[publicprotector]

Good post Terral, just one question to the nay sayers. What are you going to do or say when all that you believe in the 9/11 official story is a lie and that yes indeed people within your own country and those from extrnal countries carried out the attacks, and I don't mean the alleged terrorists.

 

[Terral]

Hi Public:

Good post Terral, just one question to the nay sayers . . .

I would love for anyone to 'quote >> anything at all' from the Opening Post of this thread and 'debunk' any part of my work using whatever you call 'credible evidence.' Who among you has just one picture of AA77 crashed anywhere? Nobody.

Your first problem is that we have pre-collapse photographs of the West Wedge E-Ring Wall saying that "No 100-Ton Jetliner Crashed Here."

There is NO WAY that any 100-Ton Jetliner crashed through this standing E-Ring Wall going any 530 miles per cotton-picking hour (like this)!

The rear C-Ring Wall (to your left) is only 220 feet from the outer E-Ring Wall and no 100-ton Jetliner crashed through A/E Drive and into the D-Ring Wall (to your right). That NEVER HAPPENED, because no 100-Ton Jetliner ever crashed into the Pentagon on 9/11 or any other day. All you have is a single (one) C-Ring Hole . . .

. . . and you can see across the 220 feet length of the building and see NO 100-Ton Jetliner crashed here. Period. Most of you want to believe a real 100-Ton Jetliner crashed here, because someone inside the corrupt-to-the-core Govt said so. Go back to the Opening Post (click here) and try to 'debunk' (heh) something. ANYTHING . . .

GL,

Terral

 

[eots]

that plane and its engines and landing gear are a wee bit smaller...and how come it did not punch a hole as the wings folded and followed along...lol...lol

The wall it hit was testing was a nuclear silo if I recall. The results were largely the same with AA77 as comparatively little of the plane was left over. Had the Pentagon been made of the same material, you would have seen even less of the wreckage given the results of this test.

I don't expect a conversion from a YouTube video. It is the toolbox of the lazy researcher but it does show the physical forces at work in a very clear way.

the results were largely the same..fuck off ...uh link to this test please

 

[candycorn]

that plane and its engines and landing gear are a wee bit smaller...and how come it did not punch a hole as the wings folded and followed along...lol...lol

The wall it hit was testing was a nuclear silo if I recall. The results were largely the same with AA77 as comparatively little of the plane was left over. Had the Pentagon been made of the same material, you would have seen even less of the wreckage given the results of this test.

I don't expect a conversion from a YouTube video. It is the toolbox of the lazy researcher but it does show the physical forces at work in a very clear way.

the results were largely the same..fuck off ...uh link to this test please

Yeah....doofus....that is the point. When a 500mph jet crashes into a building that ISN"T as hard as the one in the test, you have some wreckage that doesn't look like a lot of other plane crashes. It answers Terral's request to find a jet in a picture. You, by your own admission, prove what happened to AA77. It basically disentigrated.

If the wall had been like the Nuke Silo wall....you wouldn't even see the overwhelming physical evidence of Flight 77 you see at the Pentagon. And no dipshit, nobody planted it.

You want a link to the video you just saw? Fairly self explanatory.

 

[Gamolon]

Your first problem is that we have pre-collapse photographs of the West Wedge E-Ring Wall saying that "No 100-Ton Jetliner Crashed Here."

Tell me something Terral. Why does that photo above, where you claim there is no damage or plane parts, focused on a part of the pentagon wall that was WAY to the left of where the actual fuselage of the aircraft hit the pentagon?

Here's a better image that I marked up.

Why do you make a "pre-collpase" photograph claim when the photo doesn't even show the part that collapsed or where the fuselage of the plane hit? Did you cut that right side part of the photo out for some reason? Or is this another "misinterpreted photo" like the 45 degree angle cut I called you on?

 

[Terral]

Hi Candy:

Yeah....doofus....that is the point. When a 500mph jet crashes into a building that ISN"T as hard as the one in the test, you have some wreckage that doesn't look like a lot of other plane crashes. It answers Terral's request to find a jet in a picture. You, by your own admission, prove what happened to AA77. It basically disentigrated.

In other words, Candy has no evidence for AA77 crashing anywhere.

Candy is trying to say that 60 tons of titanium alloy frame simply 'disintegrated' (heh) into thin air 'and' without even creating a sufficient entry hole like you see right here in the North Tower:

Even if more than 200 seats, massive wing sections, two 6-Ton Rolls-Royce Engines, massive tail section, fuselage and indestructible landing gear simply 'vanished' into thin air (IMPOSSIBLE), then we should still be looking at a 125-feet wide impact hole!!!! Candy is trying to say that the 100-Ton Jetliner . . .

. . . vanished 'before' actually striking the Pentagon, when in truth what really hit the Pentagon has NOTHING to do with any 100-Ton Jetliner. Candy can say that Santa Claus and Rudolph hit the Pentagon going 500 miles per hour 'IF' they simply vanished before actually hitting anything. :0)

GL,

Terral

 

[Terral]

Hi Gamolon with Candy mentioned:

Here's a better image that I marked up.

Why do you make a "pre-collpase" photograph claim when the photo doesn't even show the part that collapsed or where the fuselage of the plane hit?

The 'supposed' Jetliner hit the Pentagon 'before' the E-Ring Roof collapsed at 10:15 AM.

The Column Line (CL) 14 entry hole is circled on the right side of this diagram. You can see the undamaged SUV directly in front of CL-8. A man could stand on top of that SUV and reach up and reach the elevation of the second-story concrete slab that is still very much intact!! The second-story hole is only 18-feet 3-inches across 'and' the two windows on the left are NOT EVEN BROKEN. The third-story windows above the CL-14 entry hole ARE NOT EVEN BROKEN. The port-side wing should have impacted CL-5, but the damage only runs to CL-9. And . . .

Click On Large Pic

. . . Column #10 remained intact 'and' Column #9 was blown 'out' in our direction! Now Gamolon can explain how a real 100-Ton Jetliner crashed into the Pentagon going 530 miles per hour, while flying 'over' the green SUV 'and' . . .

. . . over the top of these standing cable spools! You are looking at the aftermath of a DoD-inflicted Missile Strike that took place at exactly 9:31:39 AM, but Gamolon wants to focus your attention on the collapsed E-Ring Roof that fell at 10:15 AM about 45 minutes later. These Official Cover Story Cronies want to talk and talk about the size of the EMPTY HOLE, because of the complete lack of physical evidence that any 100-Ton Jetliner crashed here.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTJehfQkuyE"]These Military/Aviation Experts All Agree![/ame]

Did you cut that right side part of the photo out for some reason?

Listen here, Gam: Asking me a ton of silly questions is never going to place a crashed 100-Ton Jetliner at the Pentagon on 9/11 or any other day.

This is one of the best pictures of the CL-14 entry hole that is still only 18-feet 3-inches wide on the second floor. This is the very location where 'YOU' cuckoo want to believe a real 100-Ton Jetliner crashed going 530 miles per hour.

Or is this another "misinterpreted photo" like the 45 degree angle cut I called you on?

This dimwit confused has more silly questions than a 3-year old child. Just show us your pictures of AA77 crashed ANYWHERE. Do Candy or Gamolon or any of these Official Cover Story Advocates cuckoo have a thread where 'they' have proven that AA77 crashed anywhere? No. Go figure . . .

GL,

Terral

 

[eots]

The wall it hit was testing was a nuclear silo if I recall. The results were largely the same with AA77 as comparatively little of the plane was left over. Had the Pentagon been made of the same material, you would have seen even less of the wreckage given the results of this test.

I don't expect a conversion from a YouTube video. It is the toolbox of the lazy researcher but it does show the physical forces at work in a very clear way.

the results were largely the same..fuck off ...uh link to this test please

Yeah....doofus....that is the point. When a 500mph jet crashes into a building that ISN"T as hard as the one in the test, you have some wreckage that doesn't look like a lot of other plane crashes. It answers Terral's request to find a jet in a picture. You, by your own admission, prove what happened to AA77. It basically disentigrated.

If the wall had been like the Nuke Silo wall....you wouldn't even see the overwhelming physical evidence of Flight 77 you see at the Pentagon. And no dipshit, nobody planted it.

You want a link to the video you just saw? Fairly self explanatory.

so in other words you have no proof to back up your bullshit claim of a similar test with similar results with a commercial airliner...just as i thought