What's your take on this? (9/11 related)

[RRfireblade]

http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pentagone/erreurs_en.htm

Thoughts?

[Load SM5]

From what I understood the plane smacked the ground in front of the pentagon which took a lot of the impact away from the actual building. The fragments of plane did'nt have the speed and mass to do the damage that a fully intact plane, at full speed, could've done. The jet fuel itself and the fires it caused did a lot of the damage afterwords, just as it did with the towers. No doubt, it could have been a lot worse.

I guess we should assume that Bush set off a bomb at the pentagon when he saw the planes crash into the towers so he go start an oil war with Saddam? Puleeeaaase....

[shartley]

Total BS. NUFF said.

Remember..... we never walked on the moon either.

[PyRo]

It is strange that you don't see plane fragments. But still, its just a bunch of whackos.

[cphilip]

Pretty easy to debunk that because there are lots of pictures of peices of debris that show plane parts out there.

Here is one: http://www.geoffmetcalf.com/pentagon/images/13.jpg

If you take some shots that its not clearly including any of them then its easy to try and build a case againts it. But they recoved lots of debris that was easy to identify as the plane itself.

Here is a site with lots of pictures that even show where the plane clipped light poles prior to impact and damaged cars as it went in: http://www.geoffmetcalf.com/pentagon..._20020316.html

[fire1811]

Total BS. NUFF said.

Remember..... we never walked on the moon either.

Agreed
one thing they didnt mention, or i didnt see wtf happend to the plane if it didnt crash into the pentagon

[Ironmag]

I remember seeing a video clip on the news on September 11 or 12 from someone taping somewhere in Washington DC on a highway and it caught the plane flying really low apparently on it's way to the Pentagon. If anyone else remember seeing that other than just me, i think you'll also believe this is BS.

[cphilip]

Yes I believe there is that video too....

But then again people make stuff up out of context and manage to eliminate the photos that clearly prove these ideas wrong.

There is another site out there that puts forth the idea it was a military plane that was MADE to look like a Boeing!

Here is a complete study done by Purdue of a remock of the actual plane crash: http://news.uns.purdue.edu/UNS/html4....Pentagon.html

[cphilip]

And here is an entire article specificaly debunking that site and its claim. Complete with many eyewitness accounts and even facts like the recovery of the black boxes and human remains and positive ID's of those to specific passengers.

http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/blflight77.htm

[GA Devil]

It does seem off tho that if a plane that size crashes into the side of a building at ground level and leaves such little debri. The pics of the cars dont prove anything to me honestly. That dmagae could very well been from a truck bomb. Shrapnel flying thru air. Im not supporting either of the ideas of what happened but I just feel that if there was a plane that size crash like that there would be more of it around. Look at other plane crashs in the past. Always a whole lot more plane left. I even remember hearing about another plane flying at water level down the river.....and it never happened. I am personally leanign more towards the bomb side of the argument and that the government dont want to admit to somethign like that getting to where it was versus a plane that size and only leaving a min. amount of eveidence left.

[punkncat]

If you take an aluminum aircraft travelling at 600 mph and slam it into a building or the ground , the pieces of it aren't just going to be parked on the lawn.
Remember the Airtran crash into the Okefenokee swamp.There was nothing but a hole left.

Lets explore some more.
Jet A is very much like diesel fuel.It burns with a heavy black sooty smoke.Evidence of this is all over the building.
Also the sand truck and gravel in question.If you have ever poured diesel onto grass , you realize quickly that nothing will ever grow there again.It was nec. to put down new soil in order for the lawn ot be restored from the fuel soaked ground where the plane hit.

This is some more conspiracy theory BS.Tell the democrats/french to head back to the drawing board and try harder.

[cphilip]

Well apparently you didn't look at all the evidence I just linked...

Body remains positively identified as passengers ON that plane. Not to mention parts with serial numbers and parts numbers that can be traced to the exact plane that is missing. So where did it go then? How did those passengers remains get into the building?

Almost all if the Peices of the plane. All of the plane would have been propelled into the building from the velocity it was traveling. The pilot at the time was accelerating it into the building. The only way ANY pieces didn't follow in was it slightly banked and knocked off a few before it hit. Most of them would have continued to travel into the building and resulting fire.

How did the light poles get clipped that far away and why would the occupants of the cars say a low flying plane did it? And what happened to that low flying plane if it did not go on into the building in the same tradgectory that it clipped those light poles?

All of the MANY eyewitnesses that SAW it go into the building. Many many people traveling around DC at the time witnessed it actually happen.

Sorry but there is overwhelming evidence it was that plane that hit that building.

[shartley]

[fire1811]

not to mention that there is not way that you could keep something that big and public with that many people(rescue workers, construction, personel, others) quiet.

and as shartley stated your comparing a plane that did want to be crashed with others that didnt want to be crashed

[cphilip]

not to mention that there is not way that you could keep something that big and public with that many people(rescue workers, construction, personel, others) quiet.

There were indeed too many witnesses. All of which describe the plane low flying and accelerating as to not be avoiding but to be attempting a crash. Many of them actually SAW it go into the building. You cannot get that many people on the streets to agree and coordinate an conspiricy. If you believe this then OJ was not guilty. I guess you can make 12 people believe anything if you get them to completely avoid the obvious facts.

Remember there are still black boxes showing flight path and impact site as well.