AJI Posted May 24, 2006 Share Posted May 24, 2006 http://www.pentagonstrike.co.uk/flash.htm#Main Some people have too much time on their hands. They keep asking where's the wreckage.....but if you've seen how a plane destructs when it hits solid materials then it would be self explanitory. The CCTV footage is no use at all... no resolution and not enough frames. What do you guys think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJ Posted May 24, 2006 Share Posted May 24, 2006 What do you guys think? I think it's a Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJI Posted May 24, 2006 Author Share Posted May 24, 2006 oh shyte ! where's the original post at ? (and does it have the vid link on it?) (hangs head in shame) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted May 24, 2006 Share Posted May 24, 2006 The whole thing was blatantly staged, the world trade centre attacks, the lot... everyone knows that don't they? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raymanuk Posted May 24, 2006 Share Posted May 24, 2006 There was wreckage all over the place and landing gears? I am sure they showed it on the day via the live footage from a news helicopter. Also where was the landing gear from the twin towers then? I like the conspiracy that the twin towers fell down due to a controlled explosion.... I would not rule out anything but I don't believe any old story till proven of course with evidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colsoop Posted May 24, 2006 Share Posted May 24, 2006 Download a video called "loose change 911 2nd edition" That raises a few eyebrows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imi Posted May 24, 2006 Share Posted May 24, 2006 http://www.pentagonstrike.co.uk/flash.htm#Main Some people have too much time on their hands. They keep asking where's the wreckage.....but if you've seen how a plane destructs when it hits solid materials then it would be self explanitory. The CCTV footage is no use at all... no resolution and not enough frames. What do you guys think? seems like youve got all the answers..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted May 24, 2006 Share Posted May 24, 2006 I am sure they showed it on the day via the live footage from a news helicopter. I actually watched the whole thing live on CNN, BBC, Sky, Fox... I was off work ill on my birthday(!), and I didn't see any footage of the Pentagon incident it was all eyes on the WTC's.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_supra Posted May 24, 2006 Share Posted May 24, 2006 That video does put forward some pretty good evidence. Evidence that would be hard to play down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raymanuk Posted May 24, 2006 Share Posted May 24, 2006 I actually watched the whole thing live on CNN, BBC, Sky, Fox... I was off work ill on my birthday(!), and I didn't see any footage of the Pentagon incident it was all eyes on the WTC's.... Fair play fella, they did concentrate on the WTC's but they also showed the pentagon and the plane that crashed in the field too, very brief and quick. I need to dig out some old footage but I will return with more godies regarding the pentagon when I gets home Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wkdtime Posted May 24, 2006 Share Posted May 24, 2006 http://www.pentagonstrike.co.uk/flash.htm#Main Some people have too much time on their hands. They keep asking where's the wreckage.....but if you've seen how a plane destructs when it hits solid materials then it would be self explanitory. The CCTV footage is no use at all... no resolution and not enough frames. What do you guys think? Im training with Ba courtesy of my uni, we have seen many crash videos and disasters, your righ in saying not much of the plane will be left, but in all cases the landing gear will almost be recognisable and quite ditinct. Seems pretty weird to me that theyre seems to be not landing gear wreckage what so ever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soop Dogg Posted May 24, 2006 Share Posted May 24, 2006 Also where was the landing gear from the twin towers then? The landing gear in the WTC attack was recovered. I think one of the nose wheels was recovered from somewhere further north off Church Street. I seem to remember it is now on display in the USS Intrepid museum in Manhattan. Next.......? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_supra Posted May 24, 2006 Share Posted May 24, 2006 Next.......? Our own resident myth Buster! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soop Dogg Posted May 24, 2006 Share Posted May 24, 2006 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted May 24, 2006 Share Posted May 24, 2006 Next.......?Why did the two 6 tonne engines from the Pentagon leave no mark on the building? And why were the remains of those engines never found at the site? Did those huge pieces of of steel and titanium just turn to dust or what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wkdtime Posted May 24, 2006 Share Posted May 24, 2006 Exactly. the rolls engines especially the RB range which i believe were on this aircraft are built out of some seriously strong materials, ranging from titanium to carbon composites, these can with stand great impacts and temps, and yet no sign of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garetheves Posted May 24, 2006 Share Posted May 24, 2006 Hmmm. interesting. I agree that its a bit strange that such a huge plane would punch such neat holes through the buildings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terminator Posted May 24, 2006 Share Posted May 24, 2006 Some people are just so gullible. 9/11 was a huge hoax, Binladin is working with mother Teresa caring for the sick and homeless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soop Dogg Posted May 24, 2006 Share Posted May 24, 2006 Why did the two 6 tonne engines from the Pentagon leave no mark on the building? And why were the remains of those engines never found at the site? Did those huge pieces of of steel and titanium just turn to dust or what? Exactly. What I was saying was that we all KNOW that aircraft flew into the WTC because it was all filmed and shown on the TV. And with a little digging, we can find out what parts of a plane did survive the carnage of the impact and subsequent explosion. Parts of the landing gear usually survive. Someone asked what happened to it and I answered the question. In the case of the Pentagon, we are not sure of what happened as there is no reliable footage of the incident. I agree there should have been some debris, but the pentagon isn't the sort of place where they let the public go looking for it. Also, there have been plenty of 'doctored' pictures of the pentagon crash site all over the internet over the last few years. Some show more damage than others. I really don't know what went on there. And I would not be terribly surprised to find out that one of the conspiracy theories was true. I like to keep a open mind on most of this stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garetheves Posted May 24, 2006 Share Posted May 24, 2006 So if a plane didnt crash into the pentagon then what did?? Seems a hell of a coincidence that an accident just so happened to occur on the same day and they decided to cover it up. Also, what happened to the original flight 77 and all its passengers then. It was an actual flight that set off earlier that day and then vanished?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted May 24, 2006 Share Posted May 24, 2006 So if a plane didnt crash into the pentagon then what did?? Seems a hell of a coincidence that an accident just so happened to occur on the same day and they decided to cover it up. Also, what happened to the original flight 77 and all its passengers then. It was an actual flight that set off earlier that day and then vanished?? http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5137581991288263801 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJI Posted May 25, 2006 Author Share Posted May 25, 2006 In most cases things like wheels/landing gear do survive.... is therer any statement from the FBI that this was actually NOT found? I keep remembering back to my uni days where we studied impacts of different object at different speeds. I remember watching a video of the US test program on the F4 Phantom where they put it on a rocket sled and fired it at Mach1 into a 20 metre thick solid concrete wall. Every part of the F4 turned into frgments and particles..... it was like watching something turn to dust as it dissapeared into the concrete wall. Metal compnents under this type of sudden impact stress fracture and splinter into many small pieces. So I'm thinking that it is most probable that the aircraft which crashed at high speed into the Pentagon didn't leave much recognisable debris. I'm also guessing that the landing gear may well have been lodged well and truely into the 2nd or third wall.. well out of view of the cameras of the public. the only thing that appears strange to me is how could any pilot fly a plane at such a small angle at such high speed missing trees, pilons, other buildings, vehicles etc. But then if the run upto the pentagon is clear then it may well be possible. I think this is most probably a conspriacy for the sake of a conspiracy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darren-K Posted May 25, 2006 Share Posted May 25, 2006 I like conspiracies,its good to find holes in them all the 911 conspiracies are easy to explain,the only one hard to explan is the flash just a millisecond before the planes impacted the WTC,. (there was a flash ahead of each nose cone ) going back to the pentagon tho, materials take on different properties at high velocity impacts,and the plane virtualy atomised. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imi Posted May 25, 2006 Share Posted May 25, 2006 I like conspiracies,its good to find holes in them all the 911 conspiracies are easy to explain,the only one hard to explan is the flash just a millisecond before the planes impacted the WTC,. (there was a flash ahead of each nose cone ) going back to the pentagon tho, materials take on different properties at high velocity impacts,and the plane virtualy atomised. amazing how pieces of the shuttle explosion were found on planet earth when it blew up. amazing how other flight crashes, lockerbie, and many many more always result in the black box being found, engine components, etc... perhaps the materials on the pentagon flight were from an alien ship. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darren-K Posted May 25, 2006 Share Posted May 25, 2006 amazing how pieces of the shuttle explosion were found on planet earth when it blew up. amazing how other flight crashes, lockerbie, and many many more always result in the black box being found, engine components, etc... perhaps the materials on the pentagon flight were from an alien ship. amazing how the 2 incidents you mention are completely unrelated to 911,. In the 2 incidents you mention the debris was created by different stresses,they werent caused by high velocity impact. the pan am jet over lockerbie exploded then fell for around 4 and a half minuites.,some parts of the jet were found over a hundred miles away as they were so light to of been carried by the wind etc. the space shuttle was downed firstly by gradual pressure and then heat.,the heat burned thru components and the craft became unstable.. hitting the atmosphere like it did was like hitting a brick wall.. but it occured gradualy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.