9/11 re-revisited/pentagon

I'm not surprised that people believe that the government was in on 9/11. The thing that bothers me is that some think that pre-planted bombs were necessary to bring down the WTC towers - and have totally ruled out the possibility that the planes, without (pre-planted) bombs in the buildings, were the reason for their collapse.

There have been a number of professionals who have explained, in detail, how the structuresâ?? steel support beams melted from the intense heat, why there were explosions, etc. - but some people just wonâ??t listen and claim that these theories are not possible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Breukelen advocaat

There have been a number of professionals who have explained, in detail, how the structuresâ?? steel support beams melted from the intense heat, why there were explosions, etc. - but some people just wonâ??t listen and claim that these theories are not possible.

---

But you forget, all these professionals are either government employees or paid off by the C.I.A.! The only REAL professionals are personally endorsed by Prisonplanet.com!! :thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eg420ne

Its Interesting, that the engine found at the pentagon does not look like it came from an 757 boeing---Do they still think thats an engine from a 757---I guess my eyes are lying to me again...Still no proof that a plane hit the pentagon.....

---

So what your saying is that if you were to take lets say a 2006 Dodge Charger and run it into a reinforced brick wall at 500 MPH it should look like the new car off the lot?

The plane going at a 45 degree angle slams into the the pentagon nose first then the right wing with MTE hits the building smashing it into a tin can along with the titatum engine then the left side hits the building receiving less of the impact, slice right off(not the whole wing hit the building if it went at a 45 degree angle)and the plane was 2 ft from the ground at 500mph with the massive titatum engines dragging on the ground so it can hit the pentagon at that level it hit...

Lets approach this from another direction.....If a 757 "were" to hit the Pentagon at 500 MPH what is it that we should see that we don't now? How much wreckage would you expect? What size holes in the building would you expect as compared to what happened?
It surely wasn't a conventional missle since it would have exploded on contact and it wasn't a bunker buster because the destruction decreased proportional to distance. Bunker busters have a thick skin with a lesser amount of explosive material. Once the exterior of the bomb weakens due to ripping through material, then it detonates leaving equal destruction in all directions. Compare laying a firecracker on your hand as to holding in a tight grip.
I posted a vidio once of a F-14 hitting a wall for a nuclear facility at 500mph...it turned to dust.
If these planes were solid metal I would be wondering shit myself but in fact they are hollow shells.....layers of reinforced brick walls eventually will win.

Steel is surprisingly vulnerable to heat. Steel gets progressively softer as its heated but there is a sudden increase in plasticity at around 900F "black heat" - just below red heat. Its entirely plausible that the burning fuel raised a section of the steel frame to this temperature and started the collapase.

If you hear hoofbeats - guess horses not zebras!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud

Lets approach this from another direction.....If a 757 "were" to hit the Pentagon at 500 MPH what is it that we should see that we don't now? How much wreckage would you expect? What size holes in the building would you expect as compared to what happened?
It surely wasn't a conventional missle since it would have exploded on contact and it wasn't a bunker buster because the destruction decreased proportional to distance. Bunker busters have a thick skin with a lesser amount of explosive material. Once the exterior of the bomb weakens due to ripping through material, then it detonates leaving equal destruction in all directions. Compare laying a firecracker on your hand as to holding in a tight grip.
I posted a vidio once of a F-14 hitting a wall for a nuclear facility at 500mph...it turned to dust.
If these planes were solid metal I would be wondering shit myself but in fact they are hollow shells.....layers of reinforced brick walls eventually will win.

---

'

I cannot believe how many of you guys are doubting eg on this. How do you not think there wouldnt be any wreckage? Its a 757 boeing with passsengers, where the fucks there luggage, where the fucks the itty bitty pieces of debres that we should have seen at the pentagon like we saw with the trade centers. Sure the trade centers are much much bigger and had more debres, but Im saying the pentagon definatly would have had plane debres laying around, a whole 757 boeing does not vaporize at 500 mph hitting a building.


I cant remember who said somehting about the dodge, I think it was you psycho but anyway. If you took a dodge charger into a brick wall at 500 mph, it certainly wouldnt vaporize or 'disapear'. Without a doubt there would be debres.

and aluminum planes melt. don't believe me? toss a beverage can info the fireplace or campfire. within minutes it's completely gone...just a tiny lump of metal buried under the ashes. i doubt if they had many fireproof suitcases on the plane either...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joel

'
I cant remember who said somehting about the dodge, I think it was you psycho but anyway. If you took a dodge charger into a brick wall at 500 mph, it certainly wouldnt vaporize or 'disapear'. Without a doubt there would be debres.

---

LOL....hope ya never try it dude!! Found the video of a similar situation. Of course the pentagon probably wasn't as durable as this wall but you'll get the drift. Have a good one!:thumbsup:

http://www.break.com/index/concreteplane.html

Im talking about the wings and engine especially from the left side, the wing and engine which would of received less of the impact,,,the plane going at a 45 degree angle slams into the pentagon nose first then the right wing hits the building with its MTE which melting point is 3050 degrees, making itself a tin can then the left wing which if it went at a 45 degree angle(and the plane already inside the building) would not have hit the whole building(it would of just broken off), so there should be very noticeable plane parts around the unfazed pentagon lawn. and if the plane was going in at that angle at 2 ft above the ground, the left side engine should of drag along the ground as well..

The "wing root " is the strongest part of the plane. This is where the wing attaches to the fuselage.
The wing roots would have impacted the wall of the building on either side of this hole.
There is no damage that looks like an airliner hit.. it also would of jumped the height of the generator that was there.

The "plane" was supposedly hugging the ground, knocking over lamp poles, therefore, it could NOT have dove into the Pentagon, so on a level path, the right wing should clearly have hit the second or third floor, not the bottom of the first floor where most of the damage was done, then the left wing should of hit ground if not then at least the engine should of been dragging...

Tail of plane should have hit above the impact hole, but clearly, there was no damage to the area above the hole.
The tail should have hit up to the third, or even fourth floor.
The windows are still intact at this point.
A Boeing 757 is about 20-25 ft wide (fuselage) about 150ft long and over 150ft wing tip to wing tip.
Where is the Plane ? It did not squeeze into that small hole shown. Given a standard 4ft wide window size the opening here is 16 to 18ft. The columns are about 10ft apart (give or take 1-2 inches). So this hole is no more than 20ft wide.
The columns on each side of the hole do NOT seem to be seriously damaged.
This is where the "wing root" would have hit. Probabally the strongest section of the plane.