What really happened at the pentagon? Flash movie

iraq.

 

you mentioned girls where is the girl here on Assembler ?

do you know one of them ? and keeping it as a secret for us all ? ;-)

 

It may be safe to assume X is a girl.

 

Tell me about it, I have been to enough forums where girls get shit all the time.

"OMFG, uR a G1rl! 4nD 0n t3h 1I\It3rn3t, sI-I0\/\/ u5 uR b00b5! w4nn4 cyb3r?"

 

Sorry but that still makes no sense. If that was the case then the WTC would still have been enough justification for them.

 

:smt043 :smt042 seriously not that it is because i love girls and is looking for a girlfriend because i haven´t had one in a loong time and tired of being single.

 

Don't worry, we didn't think you were an internet stalker or anything!

 

I can understand that. I've found a girl....now all I need to do is get her to like me :smt043 She kicks ass though :smt023

 

sound like a great girl i hope you and her makes eachother happy

 

See guys, the idea here isn't "If it wasn't a plane, then what was it." We're not talking about any political motivation behind whatever happened at the pentagon. We're looking at whatever physical evidence (or lack thereof) of a 747 causing that damage, which judged by what little has been released, is not a plausible explaination.

Of course I realize that it's impossible to see stuff like this without thinking about who may be behind it- terrorists, rouge elements in the government who wanted an excuse to rampage through the middle east, or a forgien government (highly unlikely IMO.)

Lots of questions remain unanswered (If it wasn't a plane then what happened to the flight? Why would they fake this? Etc)
But the fact is until more information is released the physical evidence for the official explaination doesn't add up.

Why hasn't the public been allowed to see the various videos made by the gas station and hotel security cameras of the plane actually hitting the pentagon? Why has no descernable wreakage of a 747 been recovered? If these bits of evidence exsit they would only reinforce the government's official explaintaion, so why are they withheld? These are the questions we need to be asking first, before the "Who did it " questions.

 

There was pieces of aluminum that when pieced together, would fit the body of an AA 747. The tapes, well most CCTV systems use only 1 6hour tape, not a whole database of tapes, they just recorde over it to save money. I betcha some of those, if not most of them had those type of CCTV. The FBI didn't start to get the tapes from them until a day after the plane hit. I personally think and most evidence that is available points to it. As for political motivation, the flash was done by an Anti-Bush group, so there was political motivation ;-). Anyway, just go up to the families of the victims from that crash and tell them that it was not a plane, it was a "missle" and see the reaction you will get .

 

You're really missing the integral points of our arguments, as well as the argument that those flash videos are making - there was NO wreckage that would fit a 757 at all present. In fact, if you would have read the link I posted at http://physics911.org/net/modules/news/article.php?storyid=13, you would see that there are a whole slew of things that really don't add up to a 757 at all. I'm not sure at what point the FBI did decide to confiscate security tapes, but all reports I've ever read indicate it was the day of the event, leading me to think that your statement that they came for tapes the next day is just sortof grasping at straws for an argument. And I'm also not sure where you got the 1 6-hour tape theory, as the hotel I worked this summer had about 3 24-hour tapes, and I can imagine that a place like the Hilton/Sheraton (some major hotel chain, can't remember) in Washington DC would use something a little more sophisticated than that.

I think that is a rather ridiculous assumption. Assuming that something did happen that was different than the official events we all were fed, do you really think the families are going to know about it? Credible witnesses are the ones that don't know enough to try and fake emotions. You tell families of the people who were supposedly on that plane that it wasn't really a 757, that it was a fighter jet or a missile, and you're going to have them angry and crying and everything else, because even if it wasn't really a 757, they wouldn't know.

 

Most gas stations don't have sophisticated CCTV systems.

As for the physics link itself, read the comments and click on ALL the links and try to prove their claims yourself because you did what most americans did, they believed what they were told.

On top of that, the engines on all Boeing 757s(thought it was 747 at first) from 1998 and up, use a more refined jet fuel, the kind that jet fighters use nowadays which burns hotter.

I'll make a more detailed post exposing the anomalies in that whole article with broken links..

 

it was an UFO come on say it :smt042

 

Nah remember when sony had all that hype about the PS2 could launch a nuke... well M$ was thinking of coming up with something along those lines to scare the US gov... so they droped a xbox on them!

 

Funny you should mention that Paulo, in the lead up to the Iraq war I remember reading a LA times article which claimed Saddam Hussain was buying up all the PS2s on the market in order to canibalise the 32 bit risc processors in order to integrate them into some kind of weapons system.

Not making this up. Saw it on MSN.com also. I'll try to find the link.

Madhatter: I would be the first one to accept the official explaination. But there are just some things that don't make sense

- the skill of flying a 747 less than 50 from the ground at 600 miles per hour to hit the Pentagon at that particular angle cannot be learned from 2 weeks of flight school

- the acutal damage doesn't correspond to the physical dimensions of a 74 (as shown in the flash video)

-no damage on the Pentagon lawn, which was covered up with sand soon after. Why? Perhaps there was unexploded jet fuel over the lawn. Or maybe there wasn't, and that's why it was covered up.

- the windows in the ajoining buidling sections that were not blown out. Maybe they're made of some kind of super secret Pentegon 747-impact withstanding glass, maybe not. But it implies that the force of the impact was concentrated (ala a missile or smaller commuter jet) rather than a huge plane.

Right now I personally am not making any conlusions, except to say that it's just another example of why you can't trust the government to tell the truth about anything, ever.

 

Yeah, it's really one of those things where people are so quick to debunk the scary conspiracy and the people who think it might have some credibility, but they don't offer any more reasonable solutions for all the discrepancies in the official explanation.