1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Was the Pentagon hit by a plane?

Discussion in 'General' started by irsekz, 26 Aug 2004.

  1. Yadda

    Yadda Minimodder

    Joined:
    25 Jul 2003
    Posts:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    49
    I agree, and that is impossible, as has already been metioned. If anybody believes that for some reason the Pentagon air crash was completely staged then they must also believe that the everything that happened that day was. And that is just ridiculous, if I believed that then I'd worry!

    I don't think it was staged, and I certainly don't think the extremely tragic WTC events were staged either (as, I believe, has been suggested on various "real-truth" type websites).

    But, as they say - rarely are the waters of history completely clear or completely black, they're usually just a bit murky.
     
  2. DeX

    DeX Mube Codder

    Joined:
    22 Jul 2002
    Posts:
    4,152
    Likes Received:
    3
    I don't think that thin white round thing is the fusalage. Otherwise why would it be ontop of all the debris from the collapsed roof? It looks the same as the material used to make part of the roof to me.

    I think they should get Horizon to do an investigation into this one. They always seem to be able to unravel the truth eventually. Perhaps they could make an exact scale model or even a simulation to see exactly how many walls of the pentagon a 90 ton plane could penetrate and exactly how much of the plane would remain. Horizon did do one on the twin towers and although I missed most of it I remember them concluding that the WTC was not up to fire saftey standards and previous inspections had failed to have anything done about it. Apparently the fire insulating foam did not completely cover large parts of the steel structure and with the structure exposed it eventually just melted. After one floor collapsed the other floors didn't stand a chance.
     
  3. Shaolyen

    Shaolyen Minimodder

    Joined:
    30 Dec 2002
    Posts:
    580
    Likes Received:
    6
    For me, the fact that all footage of the event was confiscated by the FBI makes me think that something fishy was going on. It's likely that no-one will ever know, so all this speculation is completely worthless. :wallbash: ;)
     
  4. Piratetaco

    Piratetaco is always right

    Joined:
    15 Apr 2004
    Posts:
    2,746
    Likes Received:
    1
    /off topic OCC= Orange County Choppers? or something else?
    /on topic why is there no damage from the wings?
     
  5. irsekz

    irsekz What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    23 Feb 2004
    Posts:
    39
    Likes Received:
    0
  6. TheoGeo

    TheoGeo What are these goddamn animals?!

    Joined:
    10 Jun 2003
    Posts:
    2,218
    Likes Received:
    14
    the only thing i dont understand about the pentagon strike is how this guy who had almost no training managed to fly so close to the ground at such a speed, this is something higly trained pilots in jet fighters would find extreamly difficult, no matter a man whos hardly flown in his life in a big passenger jet.... also theres something i noticed at the time, even though eye witnesses said it hit the ground before, howcome there is no damage to the lawn? and the only damage was done to the walls

    ok, so thats 2 things but whos counting
     
  7. -:: M@ ::-

    -:: M@ ::- Testify!

    Joined:
    3 Oct 2003
    Posts:
    1,062
    Likes Received:
    0
    Nah its true, went to a country festival before (West park) and the main attraction was this plane jet engine strapped to the back of a big lorry, then a large normal white van which was filled so heavy and they turned the jet engines on and the power from them (at about 20 meters + away from the van) was enough to not only push the van over, but make it fully flip over in the air, was v.cool to watch, and therefore its possible to push over things with the jet, especially if theres 4 jets, that are more advanced/powerful than this truck mounted one :D

    - M@
     
  8. inmate909

    inmate909 What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    29 May 2004
    Posts:
    183
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why this is as silly as believing the US let aliens/superhumans harvest the REAL passengers of flight 77 and took them to a '5th dimension'. (as proposed by the original posts' link)

    Highly trained pilots in jet fighters intend to keep themselves and the plane intact while flying low and fast, naturally this is MUCH harder than just steering to hit a building and having no regard for your own life.

    Eyewitnesses forget.

    It hit the lower part of the Pentagon and the roof fell on top of it. Eye-witness accounts are sketchy at best and a real investigation takes them all to paint as close to accurate picture as possible...if you have a bias, then obviously you just pick the ones that bias on your side. Fires which are very hot (like the fuel used in a 757 - which would burn white hot) burn out fast. In the explosion, the nearby grass that is covered in sand (to absorb remaining fuel) was instantly scorched - this left nothing to allow any remaining structural fires to spread.

    Eyewitnesses exaggerate.

    The hole that goes through all the way would be expected. The center of the plane (the part that is ~3.5m in diameter) is the longest and most dense part of the plane. It has the most force behind it for the longest time. The shape of the nose also lends it better to sustain impacts (like an aluminum can is very strong top to bottom until you put a wrinkle in the side).

    Eyewitnesses forget.

    If you look at the photos with the sides of the building, you can see a short (about 6-10 feet, 2-3m?) that has been impacted. The wing nearest the center would hit first, causing the rest of the wing to fold/explode before impact (scorching the nearby grass and not allowing fire to spread).

    Eyewitnesses lie.

    If a military structure was attacked, you can be DAMN sure the government will want any footage of the attack. If the footage was released, its a virtual How-To on taking down other military structures built in similar fashion. With video, anyone can develop ways to beat these defenses. Video of ANY event will lend MUCH more information on the event than 6 still photos.

    Eyewitnesses often use their imagination more than their eyes and ears.
     
  9. Dad

    Dad You talkin to me?

    Joined:
    15 Apr 2003
    Posts:
    5,375
    Likes Received:
    8
    Yes, a jet can as long as the engine isn't moving. I explained it before, in flight the engine(s) is/are moving at speed and the exhaust is moving at a speed relative to the plane to keep it airborne. If the exhaust is traveling 600mph and the plane is cruising at 550mph, the exhaust is moving 50mph relative to the ground. Therefore it doesn't have enough force to topple or even move a car. It would be like you standing in the back of a truck going 60mph down the highway. If you throw a ball 60mph backwards to your movement, relative to you, the ball is moving at 60mph, but it isn't moving at all relative to the road. However, stand on the same truck while it's stopped at a red light and throw it in the same direction 60mph and the ball is traveling 60mph relative to you AND the road.

    Yes.

    Who said that the plane was flying level to the ground? I've been to DC many times and have driven the beltway too, so maybe it was in a dive at the point it struck. It's not inconceivable..
     
  10. felix the cat

    felix the cat Spaceman Spiff

    Joined:
    11 Jan 2002
    Posts:
    4,914
    Likes Received:
    11
    how come there isnt a single photo were the so called scorched grass can be seen, or maybe its that the fire crew was so efficient that it was covered in sand before anybody could take a picture? also if it was to absorb the remaining fuel, which then counters the theory that the fuel burnt causing fires further inside the pentagon, and the heat also consumed most of the aluminium alloy?

    sorry, but if the goverment wants to make DAMN sure that there is no footage of teh attack they could make all these random conspiracy theories go away with one clear photo...not a photochop (which their actually getting good at these days) but one photo....
     
  11. :: Phat ::

    :: Phat :: Oooh shakalaka!

    Joined:
    7 Jun 2002
    Posts:
    4,886
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ok, here;s my take on things.


    The grass. This is possibly the only "weak" point so to speak. However, if the plane did touch the ground, your talking about a very smooth, almost slick surface (no landing gear remember) briefly touching the ground. Yes, there would be grass torn, but nowhere near crater damage unless it hit heavily.

    Exaust. Everyone who believes a jet can flip a car is looking at a stationary engine. To understand a moving jet you need to understand an element of nautical engineering. Displacement. When the jet is moving, it is no longer pushing air, it is simply filling the displacement in the air caused by the jet. Only a slight amount of thrust is required once this balance is reached. Therefore, cars wouldn't have been blown over.

    The wings. Its more than likely that the wings folded and followed the jet, they had to go somewhere, and the jet pulled them in. If you don't believe the physics, look how the double skinned keel of the titanic managed to hold upright 60,000 tonnes of stern full of air for 2-3minutes.

    Aviation fuel/scortch marks. When a diesel car accelerates you get black smoke, when a petrol car accelerates you get white smoke. When you burn Acyltate(sp?) for welding you get very THICK black smoke, when you burn Aviation fuel you get near invisible flame and white smoke. If you blew an Acyltate flameball against concrete you'd get a black patch, if you blew an aviation fuel flameball against concrete there'd be no marking.

    The nature of the pentagon collapse would have made a very efficient furnace, thick wall material and plenty of fuel. Also, as for where the plane was, the walls of the pentagon are very strong, but the internal structure is a run of the mill building. Who says the aircraft had to stay on ground level, if its crashed into the building and been compacted/crushed together by the reinforced walls then surely 400+ tonnes of aircraft within one area will crash through the floors into the basement. What you need to remember about the pentagon is the fact that all is not what it seems there. The US government has a lot of secrets about that building, therefore photographing the inside could give some details. Have you ever seen any old wartime photographs where lots of the pictures have been "scraped" where they scratch out details on the pictures.
     
  12. Dad

    Dad You talkin to me?

    Joined:
    15 Apr 2003
    Posts:
    5,375
    Likes Received:
    8
    THIS is what I've been trying so desperately to explain. Thanks for explaining it MUCH better ;)
     
  13. RedXray

    RedXray What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    21 Jun 2004
    Posts:
    51
    Likes Received:
    0
    This thread Is replete with the most idiotic conspiracy theories I have ever heard.
    I can see the "Blame America First" crowed is alive and well.
    As computer enthusiasts I would think people here would be more sagacious
    but all I hear (read) is one obtuse statement after another.
    I really enjoyed the one... flight 77 entered a different realm and aliens abducted the passengers!

    The flash propaganda film showed Airliner crashes with aircraft debris scattered everywhere.
    Did it show any aircraft debris of planes hitting a five story, five walls thick of steel reinforced concrete?
    What in the hell do you expect to see after a jetliner hits such a structure at 600 MPH?
    Nothing thats what! and thats exactly what was left... Nothing!

    The US government wanted an excuse to start a war?
    We had plenty enough reasons to strike Iraq at anytime for there almost daily
    firings of banned surface to air missiles at US aircraft patrolling the no fly zone as we
    protected the Kurds from further attacks from Saddam's WMDs. We didn't need
    any excuse or permission from the inept UN, France, Germany or anyone else
    for that matter...that doesn't have any interest in protecting Americans.

    For those that do not know... Donald Rumsfeld was sitting in HIS OFFICE AT THE PENTAGON
    when flight 77 struck, then aided in the rescues of his colleagues! How stupid would the US be
    in bombing a building that is OCCUPIED by the SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
    and the best US war planners in the world... Just to start a war!
     
  14. Will

    Will Beware the judderman...

    Joined:
    16 Jun 2001
    Posts:
    3,057
    Likes Received:
    2
    I can appreciate your annoyance at conspiracy theories, but everyone is entitled to their opinions, however outlandish and distorted they can be ;)

    I feel I must correct you though - the firings on US and British aircraft patrolling the no fly zones over north and south Iraq prior to the recent war by Iraqi surface to air missiles were not carried out using banned weapons. The ceasefire at the end of the Gulf War which Saddam signed did not ban him from owning any surface to air weaponry, only surface to surface weapons with a range exceeding 150km.

    Also, whilst you're correct that the US doesn't really need any help from the UN to help defend Americans, international law is still of importance - how can the US expect, say, Iran, to obey the UN with regards to its own weapons programs and the inspection regime of the IAEA, if the US professes not to care about the UN? I'm not talking about the Iraq war by the way, arguably resolution 1441 gave the US a good enough reason to invade Iraq, but ignoring or disregarding the institutions of international law purely because they don't help defend Americans is a very short sighted policy in my opinion - the UN is still potentially very helpful for the US in other ways, even if national defence isn't one of them :)
     
  15. inmate909

    inmate909 What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    29 May 2004
    Posts:
    183
    Likes Received:
    0
    \

    The UN is akin to the worlds high school hall monitor without the US as a member. Without the threat of force or reprecusion, there is no 'incentive' for countries to abide by it's resolutions. But you are correct, US needs the UN as much as UN needs the US.
     
  16. Dodge

    Dodge What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    10 Oct 2003
    Posts:
    1,184
    Likes Received:
    0
    YEA>.......
     
  17. RedXray

    RedXray What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    21 Jun 2004
    Posts:
    51
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hey Will

    I stand corrected on the "banned" surface to air weapons but the actual
    firing of these missiles on coalition aircraft is an act of war in itself.

    I understand your statement of countries obeying UN resolutions... but the
    UN has proved itself a corrupt and inept organization and every rouge regime
    flaunts and thumbs there noses at the UNs weak kneed resolutions. We know
    Tehran is building nuclear weapons instead of peaceful energy programs as
    they have transparently admitted, and have said "No We Will Not Abandon Our
    Nuclear Programs". They are and have moved in the same direction as
    North Korea in seeking a bargaining chip to hold the rest of the world hostage
    and using extortionary tactics to achieve there goals. When a rouge country
    like Iran has succeeded in development of this power... do you think for one
    second they can hold these nuclear weapons in check? NO they will push
    the genocide button against Israel in a flash... in the name of there God!

    And what about the genocide happening right now before the world in the Sudan!
    More than two million Christians and animists in southern Sudan have been systematically
    murdered, raped, brutalized, sold into slavery and banished from their homes by Islamic
    supremacists loyal to the government of Sudan. The UN has given Sudanese
    the government deadline after deadline in braking up these bands of outlaw militants.
    The problem is these victims occupy the vast oil rich lands in Sudan and
    companies with oil concerns like Talisman Energy of Canada and China
    National Petroleum Companies and governments like France provide cash flow
    to an otherwise impoverished government.

    So Again the world turns there heads as Innocent Christians are systematically slaughtered
    by Muslims as the Sudanese Government just stands by and prospers along
    with Canada, China, France and many other European countries.

    And theres the Oil for Cash scandal thats exposing many UN corrupt officials
    and It would not surprise me if the buck stops right with Kofi Anon!

    Would you give Sovereignty of your county over to this band of corrupt and
    murderous thugs called the UN?... I didn't think so!

    Sorry about Hijacking this thread...

    Back to the important alien abductions of flight 77 and the US bombing it's own war headquarters... Jeez!
     
  18. julianmartin

    julianmartin resident cyborg.

    Joined:
    25 Jul 2004
    Posts:
    3,561
    Likes Received:
    126
    I have never heard bull**** quite like that in my life!!!!!!!
     
  19. Will

    Will Beware the judderman...

    Joined:
    16 Jun 2001
    Posts:
    3,057
    Likes Received:
    2
    Nobody here is asking the US to give sovereignity of your country over to the UN though :), that would be totally unacceptable for any nation.

    I agree with much of what you say about the UN being weak and inept, but thats all the more reason for the US to work with it, to help strengthen it (which it can't do by just ignoring it as irrelavent) - without the support of the US it'll be even worse than the flawed way in which it operates at the moment. If the US, a nation who's government proclaims itself as the upholder of freedom, ignores the US because its weak and inept, rather than trying to re-inforce the UN, then the UN will wither and die and we go back to the days of international law being even more meaningless than it is at present, and that wouldn't be good for the US or anyone else.
     
  20. RedXray

    RedXray What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    21 Jun 2004
    Posts:
    51
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have to disagree!

    A United Nations Army is a main goal of Kofi Annan!
    The UN Secretary General is on the move for “world governance”
    and global controls. He means business and he’s getting results.
    He Twisted Bill Clinton's arm and shook him down for $200,000 for
    a UN Rapid Deployment Headquarters to coordinate UN troop movements.


    A United Nations standing army, backed with American troops and
    American dollars, is a serious move against American sovereignty and freedoms.

    The UN, which is dominated by Arab-Islamic and other dictatorships
    that do not and never will have the wests interests at heart... NEVER!

    In Annons attempt to force the US congress to pay more dues and loosen
    our grip on sovereignty... Annon said the United States one of the most
    selfish nations on earth! The matter of fact is we are the most generous
    country in the world ...barr none! This is an insult to all Americans
    as we offer relief around the world to ALL COUNTRIES friend or foe!

    It's also an insult to ask our brave solders to EVER take orders from
    foreign officers or ask them to wear those stupid looking blue berets
    having them fight under the auspices of such a corrupt origination!
    Let the UN drift over to Islamic dominated intersts... I say to hell
    with the UN and I know many many Americans feel exactly as I do on this subject!

    Hummmm maybe that was a UN missile that hit the Pentagon in order to bring us
    into compliance! Hey it's no stupider than any other cockamamie conspiracy
    theory I have read in this thread! LoL
     

Share This Page