Pentagon 911

[Leader]

What really happened at the Pentagon on 9/11?

I guess Michael Moore must have been having lunch when this info started making the rounds.
Although, I wonder what the relatives of the people killed on the plane that hit the Pentagon have to say about this.

[Icemaster]

Looks like the tinfoil cap brigade is off their thorazine again...

[fintstone]

I was there. Moore is a liar that is only too willing to do so to make a buck...regardless of who it hurts. I can only hope that if the terrorists are ever able to strike again...he is among the group to see firsthand the error of his fiction. Perhaps he should make a "documentary" showing that Bush was somehow responsible for the Russian school children killed today by terrorists. Anything for a buck.

[djmcmath]

Raises some interesting questions.

First, there's the missing plane. The pseudo-conclusion drawn by the presentation seems to say that the 757 was a 757 on the ground, then disappeared somewhere, to be replaced by anything from a learjet to a missile. Can't tell quite what they're getting at because it isn't terribly coherent, but ... Was it a 757 when the flight loaded and started? Where is that plane now?

Second, assuming that it wasn't a 757 that hit the P-gon, what was it, and where did it come from? Just as important ... where did it go?

Third, the assumption is that our government is lying to us. Let's say it was a cruise missile instead of a 757. Or a learjet. Can someone explain to me what the motive behind the lie would be?


In search of coherency,

Dan

[tabs]

I'm sorry this stuff just doesn't have any plausibility.....now UFO's on the other hand....

[ubiquity0]

Load of nonsense. None of that makes any sense at all.

btw finstone- you realize that the college dorm 'docudrama' posted in the link above doesn't have anything to do with MM?

[fintstone]

Yes I do, but just a mention of his name is enough to get me started. Unlike the other conspiracy nutcases....Moore clearly knows he is not telling the truth. Anyone who makes of living telling lies about other people to ruin their reputation and packaging those lies in such a way as to make them appear factual....angers me beyond words. I apologise for wandering off the original topic.

[911pcars]

Flint,
Besides Leader mentioned his name, where was Moore's name mentioned on the site? I didn't see. Maybe missed it. Count to 10, take a deep breathe, then start over.

The "evidence" looks interesting. However, to completely discount it because it sounds unbelievable is to close your mind ...... to the possibility. Why?

Sherwood

[speeder]

I'm as far from a conspiracy theory person as you will find, (I just don't believe in most of them), but it has always bothered me that nothing vaguely resembling a commercial jet was in those Pentagon pictures. Wouldn't the wings or tail have wound up on the ground outside?

Just asking.

[Icemaster]

Do the math:

~500 MPH + immovable object + lots of jet fuel = disintegration.

Those things aren't made of structural steel, they have a tendency to melt, disintegrate, or otherwise return to their basic atomic forms under extreme conditions like this.

Let it die, discussing nonsense like this only gives it a reason to live on. Like Michael effing Moore.

[fintstone]

Originally posted by 911pcars
Flint,
Besides Leader mentioned his name, where was Moore's name mentioned on the site? I didn't see. Maybe missed it. Count to 10, take a deep breathe, then start over.

The "evidence" looks interesting. However, to completely discount it because it sounds unbelievable is to close your mind ...... to the possibility. Why?

Sherwood

Sherwood
Besides Leader, there was only one other post when I posted regarding Moore...making 50% of the posts mentioning Michael Moore at the time. Mine made it 66.6666666%. Now there are 5 more that mention the scumbag. How can one mention a "documentary"and not mention MM? He is the all-time leader in the nonsense faked documentary genre. Even Hamas has spoken out on his behalf.

Wasn't my apology for wandering off the topic enough... or do you want me to say 3 Hail Marys?

[Aurel]

Well it makes perfect sense to me: the neocons organized 9/11 and the attack on the pentagon in order to launch a war in Iraq and grab their oil reserves. And since they were missing a 757 to hit the pentagon, they just used a cruise missile. And Bin Laden has been a CIA operative since day one. Any other question I can help you with today ?

Aurel

[fintstone]

Yep Aurel...and I bet those were KGB agents shooting all those Russian children in the back yesterday too. Makes a good excuse for them to wipe the Chechens off the planet...who knows, they may have oil? I thought that the actions of recent days in Russia would have ended all controversy regarding the terrorist's intent.

Aurel, did you also hear the rumor that Hitler's army really did not defeat the French in WW2? The French all shot each other so they would have a good excuse to surrender. It was the only way the girlie-men could think of to get the Germans to allow them to join the Third Reich. Makes perfect sense to me.

[ubiquity0]

I wouldn't expect to see much in the way of aircraft remains. The other pics of airplane crash remains were all cases where a plane basically crash landed, ie. skidding/tumbling along the relatively soft ground. THe 757 @ the pentagon slammed into the relatively thick concrete structure at full-throttle, head-on.

[rcecale]

while I was in the Corps, I was assigned to the Emergency Reclamation Team for my squadron. If/whenever one of our jets went down, we were the ones to go out and flag, identify and collect "parts" and assist the investigators who were assigned to determine the cause of the accident.

On one such occasion, we had an F/A-18 it the ground at about a 60 degree angle, doing well over 600 knots. It wasn't pretty.

Parts were strewn in a pie shaped wedge, expanding out from the impact point. Some which were found over a quarter mile away. The largest piece we found was one of the barrels from the 50 caliber Vulcan Machine Gun. It was twisted up, but we were still able to identify what it was.

Granted, a large portion of the aircraft surface and flight controls were made of aluminum frame with graphite epoxy skin, but there are several sections which are all metal and very stout, such as the landing gear components. The plane virtually disintegrated upon impact.

Not having worked on a 757, I can only make a guess, but that guess would be along the same lines as what happened above. Jut my own humble opinion.

Randy

[speeder]

Originally posted by rcecale
Not having worked on a 757, I can only make a guess, but that guess would be along the same lines as what happened above. Jut my own humble opinion.

Randy

Sounds good enough for me. I was just wondering.

[djmcmath]

There was an article on Slashdot about this not that long ago, it seems. Anyone else remember seeing it? Something about a batch of students coming across this, and with nothing better to do, did a study on what happens to airplanes that fly into hardened concrete surfaces? Seems like they determined scientifically that airplane wings would pretty much disintegrate on impact, or something.

I just searched for it. Slashdot doesn't seem to have the article anymore, or maybe I'm losing my mind, or perhaps my search-fu is weak. Or perhaps its yet another small component of a massive conspiracy by BushCheney to make Halliburton fantastically wealthy, bankrupt all of EurAsia, and destroy the environment, all at the expense of Chilean innocents. Now where'd I leave that tin-foil hat?


Dan

[911pcars]

If there wasn't a big meltdown, large hunks of the airplane might survive intact but deformed. I'm thinking of the landing gear or the food cart. You'd think if the black box made it, other pieces would as well.

How come the grassy knoll outside the building still looks in pretty good shape? You'd think the engines would make at least a minimal divot trail leading up to the access hole. And the trees are still there. That would mean the pilot came in at a steep enough angle to miss the trees and light poles but still managed to level the craft enough to trim the grass and score a direct hit at 500+ mph. Pretty good driving job.

Just thinking what's plausible and what's not.

Sherwood

[MFAFF]

Whilst it does seem reasonable to imagine the impact and ensuing fire would completely obliterate all signs of the airframe I'm not exaclty sure how that squares with other incidents which involve high speed/ large amounts of fuel and impacts with objects...

Such as the Tenerife accident in 1975 when two fully fuelled 747s collided on the runway....one at take off speed, the other taxiing...huge fire and still a recognisable pair of aircraft.

Or the DC-10 in Chicago when the engine pylon fell off.

That there seems to be nothing recognisable is very strange....unlike in the Twin Towers where due to the collapse all traces would have been hidden within the overall debris field which may well not have been shifted in as much detail..

[turbo6bar]

MFAFF, reread rcecale's post. You're overlooking the factor of speed. Take an object. Ram it into something really hard at really high speed, and there's trouble. A crash at 120 knots vs 500 knots would have far different results. Techweenie started a thread regaring this topic "don't know what to think," or something along those lines. A link was posted that refuted the conspiracy story. Pictures of aircraft debris were posted.