TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- 11th Semptember 2001, Was The Pentagon A Hoax ???

11th Semptember 2001, Was The Pentagon A Hoax ???

sorry if this has been posted before, but a few months back when we were all bored in chat we started doing some random surfing, and fly found this rather interesting site...

http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numer.../erreurs_en.htm

all found from looking at www.arse.com hehe

Man, this is old...and a totally senseless topic to discuss. Fact is: the pentagon was destroyed somehow. Now if u say that it wasn't done by Arab terrorists then of course, it was carried out by the CIA FBI or some other American Intelligence emm...institution . And if u say that the Pentagon was part a conspiracy then surely the WTC attacks were as well. And now uve got a problem! Ud have to explain so many things........I dont know if u really want it (you or the website or whoever believes that crap).
The main question that would have to be answered is : Why?
Except for enormously losing prestige, burying the myth of "invincibility" and the and raising the amount of US flags sold nothins productively has been achieved. It got even worse! The US has again lost credibility as it fought a war without achieving th emain goal! (destroying al quaida and capturing OBL). Oh, and if 11.9. was a conspiracy why did the pennsylvania airplane fail to hit its target? And what about all the other al quaida related events of the past two years? Yemen, Kuwait, Djerba, Bali, Kenia, Pakistan ?

Can you explain how a Boeing 757-200, weighing nearly 100 tons and travelling at a minimum speed of 250 miles an hour* only damaged the outside of the Pentagon?

um...being a pilot myself, a Boeing 757 does not land at a "minimum speed" of 250 miles an hour. That tires would most likely blow out and the aircraft wouldn't have enough landing space on the runway.

Oh well

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Cubano Can you explain how a Boeing 757-200, weighing nearly 100 tons and travelling at a minimum speed of 250 miles an hour* only damaged the outside of the Pentagon? um...being a pilot myself, a Boeing 757 does not land at a "minimum speed" of 250 miles an hour. That tires would most likely blow out and the aircraft wouldn't have enough landing space on the runway. Oh well

well you also have to think about the fact that whoever was piloting that plane - assuming they were a terrorist - may have had some experience and training, but wouldnt have exactly been easing the plane into the building. its like trying to nimbly manoeuvre(sp?) a yacht at high speed- the boeing make it very difficult to hit a low building like the pentagon, and with a boat of a plane like that, sudden directional changes and quick turns will shave a TON of speed off of the forward velocity.

plus the pentagon is the base for US military operations - the WTC wasnt supposed to collapse and it did, being a 'normal' building...the pentagon is most likely of a much tougher structural integrity that your average building. i also do not recall exactly where the airliner hit, but if it struck ground and then the building that removes a fair deal of momentum.

basically this is all stupid. there is no plausible reason for it to be faked...if it was, i guess someone had their reasons no matter how twisted they were. and surely we would never know enough about it to make that call|

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Cubano Can you explain how a Boeing 757-200, weighing nearly 100 tons and travelling at a minimum speed of 250 miles an hour* only damaged the outside of the Pentagon?

Despite the appearances of exterior photographs, the Boeing 757-200 did not "only damage the outside of the Pentagon." It caused damage to all five rings (not just the outermost one) after penetrating a reinforced, 24-inch-thick outer wall. As 60 Minutes II reported in their "Miracle of the Pentagon" episode on 28 November 2001, the section of the Pentagon into which the hijacked airliner was flown had just been reinforced during a renovation project:

"We made several modifications to the building as part of that renovation that we think helped save people's lives," says Lee Evey, who runs a billion-dollar project to renovate the Pentagon. They�ve been working on it since 1993. The first section was five days from being finished when the terrorists hit it with the plane.
The renovation project built strength into the 60-year-old limestone exterior with a web of steel beams and columns.

"You have these steel tubes and, again, they go from the first floor and go all the way to the fifth floor," says Evey. "We have everything bolted together in a strong steel matrix. It supports and encases the windows and provides tremendous additional strength to the wall."

When the plane hit at 350 miles an hour, the limestone layer shattered. But inside, those shards of stone were caught by a shield of cloth that lines the entire section of the building.

It is a special cloth that helps prevent masonry from fragmenting and turning into shrapnel. The cloth is also used to make bullet-resistant vests.

All of this, especially the steel, held up the third, fourth and fifth floors. They stayed up for 35 minutes. You can see them through the smoke, suspended over the hole gouged by the jet. Only after the evacuation did the heat melt the new steel away. Evey says that without the reconstruction, the floors might have collapsed immediately.

Exterior photographs are misleading because they show only the intact roof structures of the outer rings and don't reveal that the plane penetrated all the way to the ground floor of the third ring. As a U.S. Army press release noted back on 26 September 2001, one engine of the aircraft punched a 12-foot hole through the wall of the second ring:

On the inside wall of the second ring of the Pentagon, a nearly circular hole, about 12-feet wide, allows light to pour into the building from an internal service alley. An aircraft engine punched the hole out on its last flight after being broken loose from its moorings on the plane. The result became a huge vent for the subsequent explosion and fire. Signs of fire and black smoke now ring the outside of the jagged-edged hole.

Recall that when the first airliner was flown into a World Trade Center tower on September 11 -- before it was known that the "accident" was really part of a deliberate terrorist attack -- newscasters were speculating that a small plane had accidentally flown into the side of the tower, because the visible exterior damage didn't seem as extensive as what people thought a large airliner would cause. Even though the two airplanes flown into the World Trade Center towers were travelling faster at the time of impact than the Pentagon plane was (400 MPH vs. 350 MPH), hit aluminum-and-glass buildings rather than reinforced concrete walls, and didn't dissipate much of their energy striking the ground first (as the Pentagon plane did), they still barely penetrated all the way through the WTC towers.

My source for all of this is:

http://www.snopes.com/index.html

It's in the rumors of war section and scroll down a bit to find the complete article plus sources. This web page has actually been excellent in dispelling a lot of myths and preconceptions that I've had.

yes but how much experience did these pilots have in flying planes into large buildings... I think the fact that most people die in those missions inhibits experience, so maybe they didn't know how to fly into the Pentagon to cause the maximum damage. Bin Laden even said he didn't think the Twin Towers would collapse, but they did. So even terrorists dont know everything.

i love the united states, i love israel, i love freedom!

are you fucking serious? in your other post you said down with israel.. now you support them?

cmon be fucking serious.

1) i live in the united states
2) i collect unemployment from them
3) ive been to backwards shit countries before
4) i go to college with a bunch of pro-palenstinians who have never been out the coo-coo box with their friends, and drive fancy audi's
5) you live in the united states
6) support the country that supports you
7) do not bite the hand that feeds you

quote:

Originally posted by Eisbaer cmon be fucking serious. 1) i live in the united states 2) i collect unemployment from them 3) ive been to backwards shit countries before 4) i go to college with a bunch of pro-palenstinians who have never been out the coo-coo box with their friends, and drive fancy audi's 5) you live in the united states 6) support the country that supports you 7) do not bite the hand that feeds you

i guess it was okay for the germans to support the holocaust and hitler right? it was also perfectly okay for bin laden to hit the WTC. thats we have freedom, to oppose such actions, even if its against your own country.

i have heard no evidence that osama bin laden hit the world trade center, just plain simply none.

i opened my mind, and it doesnt matter who did it. it was done intentonally, and it certainly reveals a greater problem. besides not having any shred of proof, not even a believable lie, those who have "convicted" mr. laden of crashing airplanes, may have a hard time convicting him in a court of law....

and lets face it, the court of law has convicted innocent people of rape on many occasions.

the united states is where i can eat my hamburger in peace.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.