quote:

Originally posted by The Arbiter Well logically anything that involves the pentagon will be classified for military reasons. Seeying how good a plane is at punching a hole in their key military building in an anti-terroist society is probably something they'll be keen to classify.

Well, not anything (or everything.) This should be evident by the fact that Judicial Watch successfully sued the DoD on the grounds that they had no legal basis for refusing the release of the security video footage under the Freedom of Information Act.

Another thing which I find interesting (which you just reminded me of) is how an alleged plane (with an ultra lightweight, aluminum nosecone) somehow managed to punch through a total of nine feet of concrete at a spot in the Pentagon which had at that point been further reinforced.

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X Well, not anything (or everything.) This should be evident by the fact that Judicial Watch successfully sued the DoD on the grounds that they had no legal basis for refusing the release of the security video footage under the Freedom of Information Act. Another thing which I find interesting (which you just reminded me of) is how an alleged plane (with an ultra lightweight, aluminum nosecone) somehow managed to punch through a total of nine feet of concrete at a spot in the Pentagon which had at that point been further reinforced.

ultra lightweight is not synonymous with ultra weak

an eggshell is ultra light and made of calcium, yet when you balance it perfectly on end, it can support a few hundred pounds..... a nose cone is a similar shape to an egg.... very strong shape to be applying force on end...

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN I have 3 hobbies: gaming, DJing & correcting maladjusted fools on the internet.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN Yeah, I’d like to know what horrible, scarring incident in your childhood turned you into such an ignorant, intellectual-hating philistine?

quote:

Originally posted by colonelcrisp ultra lightweight is not synonymous with ultra weak an eggshell is ultra light and made of calcium, yet when you balance it perfectly on end, it can support a few hundred pounds..... a nose cone is a similar shape to an egg.... very strong shape to be applying force on end...

They're so strong that wild Geese are able to puncture them in mid-flight



http://www.strangemilitary.com/content/item/952.html



Edit:

and again, I STILL can't imagine how a nose cone could have punched though nine feet of reinforced concrete - especially after reading Lt. Kevin Schaeffer's alleged account (he works for the DoD, after all) of how he saw a chunk of it laying near the B ring wall (in between the B and C rings of the Pentagon.)

quote:

(excerpted from 'Inside the Pentagon on 9/11: The Call of Duty') Shaeffer stood on a service road that circled the Pentagon between the B and C rings. A chunk of the 757's nose cone and front landing gear lay on the pavement a few feet away, resting against the B Ring wall.

Last edited by Trancer-X on Oct-10-2007 at 22:01

quote:

Originally posted by LittleGoku Bill Maher. This popular figure for the liberal wing confirms this particular forum has some _____________ people.

_____________ = critically thinking and/or rationally sceptic

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X Eyewitness Don Wright said that it looked like a small commuter plane.

and that supports your "it was a missile" theory how?

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN and that supports your "it was a missile" theory how?

Don't you remember (several) previous references here regarding UAV's?

It wasn't that long ago that this was mentioned but just in case you aren't fully aware of their existence:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unmann...bat_Air_Vehicle

interesting. does that link also explain what happened to flight 77 and where the debris with american airlines insignia came from?

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN interesting. does that link also explain what happened to flight 77 and where the debris with american airlines insignia came from?

No, but I'm almost positive that someone has already identified that piece of AA fuselage as being a part of a plane that went down in some South American rainforest at a relatively low speed.

The debris' mild degree of being bent/twisted definitely suggests that it wasn't a part of anything that hit a reinforced concrete wall at such a high speed.

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X No, but I'm almost positive that someone has already identified that piece of AA fuselage as being a part of a plane that went down in some South American rainforest at a relatively low speed.

oh, and how on earth did they manage to link the two up? could you find me the source please, id love to see how they managed that!

quote:

The debris' mild degree of being bent/twisted definitely suggests that it wasn't a part of anything that hit a reinforced concrete wall at such a high speed.

that is completely untrue. you cannot, for a second, predict what debris might come from/survive a plane crash. its hardly an exact science. plenty of debris survived the WTC impacts, wasnt there plane debris scattered around new york?

anywayz, that's merely conjecture about an unknown and not evidence no matter which way you look at it.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN oh, and how on earth did they manage to link the two up? could you find me the source please, id love to see how they managed that! that is completely untrue. you cannot, for a second, predict what debris might come from/survive a plane crash. its hardly an exact science. plenty of debris survived the WTC impacts, wasnt there plane debris scattered around new york? anywayz, that's merely conjecture about an unknown and not evidence no matter which way you look at it.

I read about it a few months ago so I'll have to search for the link to the original source.

All that I'm able to gather at this very moment is that it was Jim Hanson who pointed James Fetzer in that direction. Fetzer stated it publically in this PR excerpt:

quote:

"Don't be taken in by photos showing damage to the second floor or those taken after the upper floors collapsed, which happened 20-30 minutes later," Fetzer said. "In fact, debris begins to show up on the completely clean lawn in short order, which might have been dropped from a C-130 that was circling above the Pentagon or placed there by men in suits who were photographed carrying debris with them." The most striking is a piece from the fuselage of a commercial airliner, which is frequently adduced as evidence. James Hanson, a newspaper reporter who earned his law degree from the University of Michigan College of Law, has traced that debris to an American Airlines 757 that crashed in a rain forest above Cali, Columbia in 1995. "It was the kind of slow-speed crash that would have torn off paneling in this fashion, with no fires, leaving them largely intact." Fetzer has been so impressed with his research he has invited Hanson to submit his study to Scholars for consideration for publication on its web site, 911scholars.org. (source)

lucky they had all that 757 gear just lying around then isnt it!

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN lucky they had all that 757 gear just lying around then isnt it!

I wonder why they never bothered to cross reference the part numbers to make sure that it was all legitimate.

Here's a message that someone posted on the ABC News forum which they deleted (but not before someone happened to take screenshots of Google's cached page)

quote:

Mr Forbes, Please quote a theory from our website at pilotsfor911truth.org. I havent had a chance to read through the replies. But please check our homepage for corrections/comments to this article as we did not write it. However, we did write this press release... http://pilotsfor911truth.org/pressrelease.html The Flight Data Recorder information does not support the govt story. When asked, the FBI and NTSB refuse to comment. Recordings can be found at our site. This should raise a serious eyebrow for any journalist who has respect for his work. AA77 was never positively identified through Radar, parts or eyewitnesses (not sure how an eyewitness can positively ID a flight number) as the plane which struck the pentagon. The parts found on location were never matched with maintenance logs, please read article(1) from Accident Investigator LtCol George Nelson USAF (Ret) (bottom of page). Pilots For 9/11 Truth do not offer theory. We do not place blame at this point in time (unlike the govt who had their man 2 days after 9/11 yet the FBI doesnt seem to have him listed as wanted for the crime perpetrated on 9/11(2) due to the fact they feel there is "No Hard Evidedence linking Bin Laden to 9/11")(3). Any responsible journalist doing their job properly will see this clearly. Surely any investigative reporter would want to offer responsible journalism instead of typical ad homs, and ridicule as an excuse to not do his/her job..Why is mainstream media not doing their job? 1. http://pilotsfor911truth.org/latestnews.html (bottom of page) 2. http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/terbinladen.htm 3. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...bi+9%2F11+osama