This Is What Happened At The Pentagon On 9/11

[DiveCon]

a pick up truck full of unverified parts collected by men is suits at a crime scene that should of been locked down ...no...not good enough..

uh, NO, TONS of it asshole

 

[DiveCon]

re divecon neg rep :..you mean says not say...retard

yeah says the fucking moronic troofer asshole
pointing out a typo is really fucking pathetic

 

[Joe_Penalty]

Did you ever get an answer? If so, what was it?

What exactly did hit the pentagon?

flight 77, a Boeing 757

When considering the Law of Conservation of Matter.

Why then only one circular hole was made in the wall of the pentagon?

 

[Setarcos]

Because I, your lord God, so willed it

 

[DiveCon]

What exactly did hit the pentagon?

flight 77, a Boeing 757

When considering the Law of Conservation of Matter.

Why then only one circular hole was made in the wall of the pentagon?

are you talking about the lone exit hole?
it is said that was caused by the front landing gear
and a Boeing 757 is mostly light weight aluminum that wouldn't take much punishment at all
i believe that a Boeing 747 lost a huge section of its shell midflight a few years ago without hitting anything

 

[eots]

so where is the front landing gear and what of the engines and other landing gear how come no exit holes for them

 

[sitarro]

Hi Crimson, DiveCon, Toro:

Sorry, I tend not to believe things coming from a guy with Yoda in is avatar.

No problem, Crimson. We can see that you are more into Big Bird, Burt and Ernie. :0)

The problem you guys have is you DONT use the truth you use lies and twisted statements and totally ignore the facts

‘The’ 911Truth about the Pentagon/AA77 case is presented in the Opening Post of this thread. The problem is that you guys attack ‘my person’ rather than the thesis statement, claims, evidence and conclusions contained within ‘my work.’ This is your opportunity to ‘quote >>’ anything at all from the Opening Post to offer your advocating ‘or’ opposing views using whatever DiveCon considers credible evidence. Good luck. :0)

So what happened to the plane?

Planes don't just disappear.

What plane? :0) The painted-up A-3 DoD Flying BOMB struck the west side of the Pentagon between Column Line (CL) 9 and CL-15 (pic = lower left) at 9:36:27 AM in the ‘second attack’ (lower pic) at the Pentagon. However, the joystick operator missed the mark and the painted-up A-3 Jet crashed at the second story concrete slab elevation (pic) with the starboard wing dipped down, so the right-side Pratt and Whitney Engine was catapulted through the West Wedge Wall and into the Pentagon. The port-side engine and A-3 frame fell straight down to appear in many pictures like these:

The A-3 did not simply disappear, but the DoD Flying BOMB exploded to throw debris all over the place.

GL,

Terral

Maybe you could gain a little bit of credibility if your photo of the A-3 wasn't printed backwards.

 

[eots]

maybe you would have more credibility if you could address the relevant issues

 

[DiveCon]

so where is the front landing gear and what of the engines and other landing gear how come no exit holes for them

i have seen photos of it inside the pentagon, i dont remember where, and since i know you are as insane as the rest of the troofers, i wont bother to waste my time looking for it again.

 

[eots]

so where is the front landing gear and what of the engines and other landing gear how come no exit holes for them

i have seen photos of it inside the pentagon, i dont remember where, and since i know you are as insane as the rest of the troofers, i wont bother to waste my time looking for it again.

ya sure you did..and why no exit holes for the engines and other sets of landing gear ?

 

[DiveCon]

so where is the front landing gear and what of the engines and other landing gear how come no exit holes for them

i have seen photos of it inside the pentagon, i dont remember where, and since i know you are as insane as the rest of the troofers, i wont bother to waste my time looking for it again.

ya sure you did..and why no exit holes for the engines and other sets of landing gear ?

wow, how ironic for YOU to talk about "credibility"

since you have NONE

 

[eots]

no you don't..I phoned the dept of credibility and they confirmed it..

 

[DiveCon]

no you don't..I phoned the dept of credibility and they confirmed it..

uh, they confirmed you didnt have any

 

[sitarro]

maybe you would have more credibility if you could address the relevant issues

What is there to address? The fact that the conspiracy theorist base every argument on other aircraft crashes, almost all that happened at much slower speeds? Ones that almost always are into the ground at an angle rather than head on at over 300 miles an hour into a reenforced stone building? A fuselage is a lot more substantial than wings and wings carry most of the fuel, thousands of gallons. Wings are very strong in vertical movements, that's what they are designed to take, they aren't designed to hit stone walls. They are actually quite susceptible to damage, a fuel truck can create a tremendous amount of destruction at slow speeds. Oh and titanium isn't that strong either, my brother lost an engine at 16,000 feet on the climb out from Houston, the titanium blades disintegrated. The outer shell of the engine isn't any more substantial than the fuselage, if it hits a wall at 300 miles an hour, it will disintegrate too. When you guys show me a film of anything other than an American Airlines 757-200 hitting that Pentagon wall, maybe I'll bother to listen. I stand underneath these aircraft, the 757 and the 767 are humongous. Add the speed they were traveling and their weight along with the thousands of gallons of explosive liquid they carried, I have no doubt in the destructive impact that would result.

 

[Godboy]

so where is the front landing gear and what of the engines and other landing gear how come no exit holes for them

i have seen photos of it inside the pentagon, i dont remember where, and since i know you are as insane as the rest of the troofers, i wont bother to waste my time looking for it again.

ya sure you did..and why no exit holes for the engines and other sets of landing gear ?

When the nose of the plane hit the wall of the pentagon, the center fusalage created that big hole you see. As it was pentetrating the wall, once it got up to the point where the wings are connected, the wings were pulled straight back, basically folding parallel with the fusalage, and then they went through the same hole the nose made. It doesnt take all that much to rip off a wing. A wing would not be solid enough to penetrate the wall, because the wings are hollow. The reason they are hollow is because thats where that majority of aircraft fuel is held.

Im no expert, but i do know enough about aviation to relaize this, since i worked on military aircraft in the Navy and i also worked in the fuel skids where we fueled the aircraft after flight. If i were to stand on the end of an F/A-18 wing, jumping up and down, you would see the wing flex under my meager 155 pounds. Trust me, ive done it many times. It gets boring on the flightline, so you gotta do something to fight off the boredom.

Watch any plane crash video out there. The moment a wing touches the ground, it rips off instantly and usually a fireball erupts as all that fuel spills out. The wing and engine would not make a hole in a reinforced concrete wall.

Heres a sample video. Not the best example, but you will see that the moment its wing hits the ground, it shears off and erupts in a fireball. You will also notice that the wings are nowhere to be found when they show the wreckage afterwards.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VY2YJy8vqeQ]YouTube - plane crash caught on tape - 9[/ame]

 

[Terral]

Hi Sit:

Maybe you could gain a little bit of credibility if your photo of the A-3 wasn't printed backwards.

You sound like the typical American that 'is' worthy of utter destruction (#8). No. I do not expect 'you' to believe one word out of my mouth. Please allow me to demonstrate:

I see an 'EMPTY HOLE' containing 'no' crashed 100-ton Jetliner. Let's try again:

My Flight 93 Topic:

I see an 'EMPTY HOLE' containing 'no' crashed 100-ton Jetliner. Perhaps if "I" had more credibility (heh), 'you' would see an 'EMPTY HOLE' too. No sir. "YOU" have been DUPED by George Bush, Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, John Ashcroft . . .

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgfzqulvhlQ]Many People LIE And Get Away With It[/ame]

. . . and all of their Inside-Job Helpers, so do NOT blame 'your' STUPIDITY on me.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTJehfQkuyE]You Do NOT Believe These Experts Either, Because Of YOUR Utter STUPIDITY[/ame]

I 'have' presented 'the' 911Truth and 'YOU' choose to stand with liars and murderers of innocent Americans . . .

GL,

Terral

 

[DiveCon]

Hi Sit:

Maybe you could gain a little bit of credibility if your photo of the A-3 wasn't printed backwards.

You sound like the typical American that 'is' worthy of utter destruction (#8). No. I do not expect 'you' to believe one word out of my mouth. Please allow me to demonstrate:



I see an 'EMPTY HOLE' containing 'no' crashed 100-ton Jetliner. Let's try again:

My Flight 93 Topic:



I see an 'EMPTY HOLE' containing 'no' crashed 100-ton Jetliner. Perhaps if "I" had more credibility (heh), 'you' would see an 'EMPTY HOLE' too. No sir. "YOU" have been DUPED by George Bush, Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, John Ashcroft and all of their Inside-Job Helpers, so do NOT blame 'your' STUPIDITY on me. I 'have' presented 'the' 911Truth and 'YOU' choose to stand with liars and murderers of innocent Americans . . .

GL,

Terral

cant wait till you end up in those FEMA camps


not that they actually EXIST

 

[Godboy]

Why are you showing me a picture of the hole after they removed the wreckage, because thats obviously what im looking at. Perhaps you are trying to say the the same government people that you claim made this conspiracy happen, are the same people that gave us this picture that shows nothing? Why would they do that? If they were going to fake a plane crash on the ground, why wouldnt they put wreckage there before taking this picture? Please explain the logic of your claim, because it makes no sense at all.

If theres no wreckage in the picture, then YOU need to give us a logical reason why its not there. To say that the masterminds overlooked this is not logical or believable. There is a logical explanation for why theres no wreckage there.... perhaps because it was already cleaned up by the time this was picture was taken, perhaps because this hole is NOT the spot of the crash, or perhaps the picture has been doctored by conspiracy nuts, or maybe the picture was taken too far away (i cant make out anything at all in the pic, wreckage, trees, rocks, people, none are there) but its NOT because they were too lazy to put wreckage there, or that they forgot to do so. Your story does not add up at all.

I suggest you quit looking at pictures. They only seem to confuse you people.

 

[Terral]

Hi Godboy:

Why are you showing me a picture of the hole after they removed the wreckage, because thats obviously what im looking at.

Okay. I 'am' surrounded by complete buffoons!!!

My Flight 93 Topic:

Here is another picture of the same EMPTY HOLE taken ON 9/11 from this video clip (click here). This is the same EMPTY HOLE seen in ALL the Shanksville Pictures!

Okay hotshot: So where is your crashed 100-ton Jetliner??? The News Clips include testimony about the same little 20 x 15 EMPTY HOLE:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZekosYOmXc"]Watch The News Clip About The Same EMPTY HOLE[/ame]

Perhaps you are trying to say the the same government people that you claim made this conspiracy happen, are the same people that gave us this picture that shows nothing? Why would they do that?

Can you handle 'the' 911Truth? Idiots like you will BELIEVE ANYTHING! George Bush and Karl Rove told you that a 100-ton Jetliner crashed into that EMPTY FIELD 'and' you believed their LIES having NO PROOF at all. Zip, Zero, Nada, NONE. Click on the April 20, 1994 US Geological Survey Picture showing the SAME GODDAMNED EMPTY HOLE:

April 20, 1994 U.S. Geological Survey Photograph << Open your deluded eyes!

If they were going to fake a plane crash on the ground, why wouldnt they put wreckage there before taking this picture? Please explain the logic of your claim, because it makes no sense at all.

Hey! "YOU" are the Loyal Bushie/Obama DUPE. Not me! I know for A FACT that 'all' the pictures show the same EMPTY HOLE . . .

This picture was 'also' taken on 9/11, but you refuse to acknowledge THE EMPTY HOLE.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-59kouBgO_s&feature=player_embedded"]Watch The Short Video[/ame]

There was NO TIME to remove any wreckage, because there never was any 100-Tons of wreckage (you deluded moron!) . . .

If theres no wreckage in the picture, then YOU need to give us a logical reason why its not there.

No sir. The Goatboy wants to believe a real 100-ton Jetliner crashed into this EMPTY FIELD, because 'you' are a Loyal Bushie/Obama DUPE. Do not blame 'your' STUPIDITY on me. My Opening Post contains 'the' 911Truth, but 'you' choose to believe Official Cover Story LIES. And, guess what hotshot?

The Pentagon has the same EMPTY HOLE . . .

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C02dE5VKeck]Jamie McIntyre Was There On 9/11[/ame]

GL,

Terral

 

[Godboy]

Ok, lets assume you are right. No plane crashed there and they just made a hole and didnt put airplane parts in it. Give me a good reason why they felt the need to convince us all that a plane crashed there? Why bother with all of that? If they were so busy with shooting missles into the pentagon and making it look like a plane, and crashing planes into the world trade center and using explosives to topple the towers, why would they add a fictitious plane crash in an empty field on their plate? Explain this to me, because this makes no sense at all. What purpose did this crash serve?