9/11 Pentagon Crash

[Jason S. Global Moderator]

I just want to know the the picture we see in the media show a round hole in the pentagon how did that happen, since you saw first hand. I havn't talk to any of the people who saw that.

not to mention it conveniently hit the "under construction for renovation" part where hardly no one was in the first place... rumsfield was in his office, well off to the opposite side of the building and where their would be no critical pentagon information lost.

[corrosive23]

I would RUN out of that place corrosive23. When there was a fight at our lunch i was gone. lol. But that probably got your blood rushing through your body. :(

Im a military veteran with combat experience in panama, haiti, gulf war 1, somalia and bosnia. Nothing I really hadnt seen before.

[Jason S. Global Moderator]

ever seen a plane explode? Jet fuel is highly volatile as its damn near kerosene. Its not hard for an explosion to blow a roundish hole in a building.

the fuel would burst into a giant ball, as shown by the pentagon footage and would immediately burn up and outward... not through 3-4 sections of the pentagon.

[corrosive23]

not to mention it conveniently hit the "under construction for renovation" part where hardly no one was in the first place... rumsfield was in his office, well off to the opposite side of the building and where their would be no critical pentagon information lost.

Considering it was directly on the flight path back from the turn they made after overshooting the capitol building, it is easy to see why they hit were they did.

[Neo003]

ever seen a plane explode? Jet fuel is highly volatile as its damn near kerosene. Its not hard for an explosion to blow a roundish hole in a building.

Plane's fuel are in the wing and if the wings explode it will make a hole list this --O-- or OOO not just O .

[corrosive23]

the fuel would burst into a giant ball, as shown by the pentagon footage and would immediately burn up and outward... not through 3-4 sections of the pentagon.

have you ever seen a car run into a home? It doesnt stop at the wall and bounce off. It goes INTO the building. But yeah I saw it hit but you are right I didnt see what I saw :rolleyes:

[xabi]

what ever, all this is bull ****.

[ScottKin]

If thats the case, why were those 3 or 4 videos never released? ;)

It's called EVIDENCE, you twit.

Wake up and come back to the Real World instead of living in the left-wing/communist/socialist world manufacturerd to blind you to the truth - that you are guillable and will believe *anything* that is sensational, exciting and designed to grab your interest.

--ScottKin

[corrosive23]

what ever, all this is bull ****.

So now the conspiracy guys are making new fake accounts to try and stir more fake crap?

[feverish-]

No, wait...it was a missile made to *look* like a plane! That's what you saw corrosive23...it wasn't *really* a plane at all...quit being blinded by your right-wing propaganda and what you actually saw with your own eyes! There's a book by some French guy that's never been to the US that explains the whole thing! You should read it.

:rolleyes:

[simm_isengard]

None of the links work. Besides...it's an airplane. 90 people and an airplane just don't disappear.

you dont know what kinda power the government has boogsoftball, i know, i have been in its employ before, if we wanna make a boeing and 90 people dissapear then we can do it.

Everybody needs to open some eyes about this whole affair.

the government did it.

and if this bozo gets elected in nov we are all in a world of hurt...

[Guest bartekpl]

I AM TRANCE.FM ****ING MODS!

[SimplyPotatoes]

That is a very well directed flash video. The music and special effects are fantastic. I give it a 10/10. It has done what it was made to do.

[corrosive23]

That is a very well directed flash video. The music and special effects are fantastic. I give it a 10/10. It has done what it was made to do.

accomplished what? made some retard the subject of ridicule for a couple of days on neowin? Well yeah in that case then it did accomplish its goal.

[MetaLRasaM]

No, wait...it was a missile made to *look* like a plane! That's what you saw corrosive23...it wasn't *really* a plane at all...quit being blinded by your right-wing propaganda and what you actually saw with your own eyes! There's a book by some French guy that's never been to the US that explains the whole thing! You should read it.

:rolleyes:

yes..i had the honor to take a look @ it..the book is BANNED in states..i wonder WHYY!!

guys...it wasnt a plane..u should know better..i did my research on this...and for those who say the camera films were EVIDENCE..how come they release the security cam @ pentegon?

[SimplyPotatoes]

accomplished what? made some retard the subject of ridicule for a couple of days on neowin? Well yeah in that case then it did accomplish its goal.

No, the goals of the video are reflections set by the viewer based on opinions set by one's self. As per say the goal your implying, if that is one's opinion then thus goal has been accomplished.

[MetaLRasaM]

It's called EVIDENCE, you twit.

Wake up and come back to the Real World instead of living in the left-wing/communist/socialist world manufacturerd to blind you to the truth - that you are guillable and will believe *anything* that is sensational, exciting and designed to grab your interest.

--ScottKin

so you dumbass..tell me how come they release the TV footage from the pentegon security cam?

thats not EVIDENCE?

ur sooooooooooooooo dumb...it makes me feel all bad inside..

YUCK :x

they release wats good for you....wat they wants you to see....open your eyes man...

[ScottKin]

Well, this should totally destroy any ammount of "credibility" mental dengenerates whom created this Flash animation might gain.

I SPOKE PERSONALLY TO AN EYEWITNESS! :yes:

When I heard about the 9/11 attacks on the WTC and then the Pentagon, my first thoughts were of an old high-school friend. I assumed that he was working in NYC at MCI's facilities in the WTC (thankfully, he was not). I emailed him immediately because I didn't have a current phone number and natually assumed that the phone system in the area would be a mess. He emailed me only 10 minutes after I sent my email and asked me to call him.

He was not working in NYC, but was working at MCI's facility across the parkway from the Pentagon. He and several other MCI employees were taking a short break from working in MCI's NOC (Network Operations Center)...AND THEY SAW THE WHOLE INCIDENT!

1) It WAS an American Airlines Plane - it was NOT a missile or military jet. They saw it fly into the Pentagon not at 150kts - the approximate landing speed of most commercial aircraft - but at a much higher speed. How funny that many of the the so-called "eyewitnesses" all have pseudonymns with the exception of government officials who KNEW EXACTLY what happend and were truthful and honest? The best way to lie is to not reveal your name or your source.

2) There *was* wreckage, but so little and in such a condition that it was unrecognizable and indistinguishable from the wreckage of the building. When a commercial aircraft travels at that speed and collides with an object, there's not much left.

3) The photos in the Flash animation of "crashed" aircraft were of aircraft that crashed at between 75kts to 150kts during take-off or landing - not at 400kts like the probable airspeed of AA Flight 77. Case-in-point: Aug. 12, 1985 - Japan Air Flight 123, a Boeing 747, crashes into a mountain on a domestic flight, killing 520 people. You would expect a huge debris field when this size of aircraft slams into a mountain - but the crash was so violent that very little wreckage was found with the rest of it pulverized.

4) The "punch-out" image - apparently showing the final exit hole of the plane - doesn't show any wreckage. Physically, this "punch-out" hole is quite possible to achieve if the wreckage of the plane was significantly farther back and the hole was caused by the compression wave from the impact. In a way similar to how a HEAT (High Explosive Anti Tank) round penetrates an enemy tank's armor by actually exploding OUTSIDE of the tank and firing a high-temperature/shock-wave/shaped-charge explosion into the tank, such an opening in the Pentagon's structure without any overt sign of plane wreckage is possible.

5) I remember an incident that happened in 1981 in Oakland, CA - two tanker trucks collided in the Caldecot Tunnel - the tunnel that connects Oakland with the East Bay via Highway 24 to Lafayette, Concord & Pleasant Hill. The explosion and fire were so intense in the tunnel that the *only* thing left to identify the trucks were the engine blocks of the trucks - the rest had either vaporized or melted & disintegrated. Heat does some amazing things!

This is what happens when youthfull idiots with no understanding of Physics try to twist the facts around for their own political agenda - they base their understanding of Physics on the "special effects" they see in the movies or TV.

This is nothing more than the digital version of "Yellow Journalism" - and the asshats that perpretrated it should be horse-whipped, and "krakow" and anyone else connected with it should be ostracized.

--ScottKin

[Guest bartekpl]

LALALALA, still posting. who wants the trance link> oo wait i dont have it..WOOPS!

[ScottKin]

so you dumbass..tell me how come they release the TV footage from the pentegon security cam?

thats not EVIDENCE?

ur sooooooooooooooo dumb...it makes me feel all bad inside..

YUCK :x

they release wats good for you....wat they wants you to see....open your eyes man...

1) The images from the security camera at one of the security gates were not clear enough to show anything but an explosion. They were not broadcast-quality cameras and did not pick-up enough detail to show anything but an explosion.

2) The images from said security camera were not 30-fps images, but more like 5 or 10-fps - consequently, alot of detail and a view of the actual aircraft would not be possible if the plane was flying at over 500mph.

Like I said - some people will believe anything that is sensational. You seem to be a part of that group.

Are you a regular reader of the alt.conspiracy newsgroup? That just about your speed.

--ScottKin

[Guest bartekpl]

OMG..ban my ass mofos! lol

[MetaLRasaM]

Well, this should totally destroy any ammount of "credibility" mental dengenerates whom created this Flash animation might gain.

I SPOKE PERSONALLY TO AN EYEWITNESS! :yes:

When I heard about the 9/11 attacks on the WTC and then the Pentagon, my first thoughts were of an old high-school friend. I assumed that he was working in NYC at MCI's facilities in the WTC (thankfully, he was not). I emailed him immediately because I didn't have a current phone number and natually assumed that the phone system in the area would be a mess. He emailed me only 10 minutes after I sent my email and asked me to call him.

He was not working in NYC, but was working at MCI's facility across the parkway from the Pentagon. He and several other MCI employees were taking a short break from working in MCI's NOC (Network Operations Center)...AND THEY SAW THE WHOLE INCIDENT!

1) It WAS an American Airlines Plane - it was NOT a missile or military jet. They saw it fly into the Pentagon not at 150kts - the approximate landing speed of most commercial aircraft - but at a much higher speed. How funny that many of the the so-called "eyewitnesses" all have pseudonymns with the exception of government officials who KNEW EXACTLY what happend and were truthful and honest? The best way to lie is to not reveal your name or your source.

2) There *was* wreckage, but so little and in such a condition that it was unrecognizable and indistinguishable from the wreckage of the building. When a commercial aircraft travels at that speed and collides with an object, there's not much left.

3) The photos in the Flash animation of "crashed" aircraft were of aircraft that crashed at between 75kts to 150kts during take-off or landing - not at 400kts like the probable airspeed of AA Flight 77. Case-in-point: Aug. 12, 1985 - Japan Air Flight 123, a Boeing 747, crashes into a mountain on a domestic flight, killing 520 people. You would expect a huge debris field when this size of aircraft slams into a mountain - but the crash was so violent that very little wreckage was found with the rest of it pulverized.

4) The "punch-out" image - apparently showing the final exit hole of the plane - doesn't show any wreckage. Physically, this "punch-out" hole is quite possible to achieve if the wreckage of the plane was significantly farther back and the hole was caused by the compression wave from the impact. In a way similar to how a HEAT (High Explosive Anti Tank) round penetrates an enemy tank's armor by actually exploding OUTSIDE of the tank and firing a high-temperature/shock-wave/shaped-charge explosion into the tank, such an opening in the Pentagon's structure without any overt sign of plane wreckage is possible.

5) I remember an incident that happened in 1981 in Oakland, CA - two tanker trucks collided in the Caldecot Tunnel - the tunnel that connects Oakland with the East Bay via Highway 24 to Lafayette, Concord & Pleasant Hill. The explosion and fire were so intense in the tunnel that the *only* thing left to identify the trucks were the engine blocks of the trucks - the rest had either vaporized or melted & disintegrated. Heat does some amazing things!

This is what happens when youthfull idiots with no understanding of Physics try to twist the facts around for their own political agenda - they base their understanding of Physics on the "special effects" they see in the movies or TV.

This is nothing more than the digital version of "Yellow Journalism" - and the asshats that perpretrated it should be horse-whipped, and "krakow" and anyone else connected with it should be ostracized.

--ScottKin

you gotta be kiddin me rite?

so the WHOLE AIR PLANE MELTED? but not the building and the windows?

some of the windows HAD GLASS in them:S so the heat was hot enough to MELT AND VAPORIZE an airplane..but not the windows...lmao..hahaha

and dude..at a landing speed..you should be able to see AT LEAST A WING or somethin..usually the wings seperate fromthe plane..

and u tell me how come NO news crew filmed the insident?

not a SINGLE van (after the crash) a helicopter? a SINGLE NEWS CHANNEL COVERD THE CRASH! for WTC..we had 3980398093930 diff channels showing the crash live...but for pentegon..NOT EVEN A SINGLE CREW?

plzzzzz

[ScottKin]

That's because everyone was fixated on the WTC crashes, you fscking asshat.

I can see it now:

"Quick - send someone to the Pentagon to film the next airplane crash!"

;) :p :D :laugh: :woot: :laugh: :D :hump:

Yes, windows melted - but remember that the windows that didn't melt were made of BALLISTIC GLASS which is pretty much impervious to damage OR FIRE!

Also, Mr. Physics Professor :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: - The plane was flying at over 500MPH - that's not "Landing Speed" (~120mph).

I saw the crash coverage on at least 3 TV Networks and 2 Cable News Channels, you fscking asshat.

Bend Over - you've been :hump: 'ed by the left-wing/communist/socialist kabal.

--ScottKin

[blueshirt]

Nice animation.

[tktino]

Thats a airplane when it inner explode

http://www.planecrashinfo.com/w010704.htm

Close this rude and dum post!