rhino 0 #1 October 29, 2004 http://www.freedomunderground.org/memoryhole/pentagon.php#Preloader Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jimbo 0 #2 October 29, 2004 Are you fucking kidding me? - Jim"Like" - The modern day comma Good bye, my friends. You are missed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jimbo 0 #4 October 29, 2004 Do you honestly believe that a large passenger jet did not strike the pentagon? Do me a favor, explain to those widows, widowers, children with parents, and parents without children where there loved ones are now. You'll be a hero, for real. - Jim"Like" - The modern day comma Good bye, my friends. You are missed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tunaplanet 0 #5 October 29, 2004 Great. More of this conspiracy nonsense. Forty-two Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #6 October 29, 2004 Take it or leave it. I found it to be interesting. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flyingferret 0 #7 October 29, 2004 I vote for leave it. I found the Memory Hole a year ago, when I had more time I did about a days worth of research and found it to be pretty similar to the moon landing claims. IE. trying to explain real life with arithmetic instead of calculus. For a simple counterpoint, did you see any piece that looked like a plane after they hit the towers? Nah...-- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydiver30960 0 #8 October 30, 2004 QuoteTake it or leave it. I found it to be interesting. I'll probably leave it too. All the pictures they showed (and the pictures we're used to seeing on tv) are of planes that crashed on landing. Low speed, low angle of attack. In this situation, an aircraft that was HAULING (I think that's an FAA approved term) impacted either a very well built building or (according to the video) the ground immediately proximate to the pentagon. Have you ever seen video of an out-of-control plane crash? Like, when that Russian jet and American F-16 piled it in at airshows? I remember "real tv" or some other program showing a B-52 going in out of control. The aircraft doesn't crash as much as MELT. Complete disintegration. The combination of the speed of the impact and heat of the explosion go a long way to eliminate any aircraft aluminum that may be hanging around afterwords. Elvisio "interesting food for thought though" Rodriguez Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jimbo 0 #9 October 30, 2004 Quote(according to the video) the ground immediately proximate to the pentagon. You sure about that? I saw a special on why the Pentagon survived as well as it did and they made mention of the fact that there was no video of the actual crash. The video they played at the time showed a normal frame, and then the explosion. - Jim"Like" - The modern day comma Good bye, my friends. You are missed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #10 October 30, 2004 The rock music background made it a bit hard[er] to take seriously, as was the lack of any explanation for the missile or fighter jet theories. Scott Petersen's lawyer put on a better defense. But hey, it was a slicker done hit piece than Michael Moore could come up with. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydiver30960 0 #11 October 30, 2004 Quote You sure about that? - Jim Nope. Not sure about anything. I'm not the most politically astute person in the world, so maybe the nation's thinktanks have been grinding away on this one for three years now without my being aware of it, but howcome this is the first I've heard of it? If something else (missle, military jet, commuter jet, hotdog stand, whatever) did spank the Pentagon, then what happened to the 757? Where are all the as-yet-unaccounted-for passengers? Elvisio "not a conspiracy theorist" Rodriguez Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jimbo 0 #12 October 30, 2004 Whoa! I was absolutely not trying to side with the conspiracy theorists, only questioning where you saw the video. QuoteWhere are all the as-yet-unaccounted-for passengers? See my 2nd post in this thread. - Jim"Like" - The modern day comma Good bye, my friends. You are missed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #13 October 30, 2004 When the planes hit the towers there were VERY distinct puncture wounds in the building.. .In the shape of an airplane... If the plane hit the ground before hitting the pentagon you would have still seen the same wing shaped marks in the building... The windows weren't even broken? Where are all the tapes? You can't tell me that the pentagon isn't taped, taped and re-taped again.... I saw a small hole in the pentagon... No wing indentations on the building... If it hit the ground first and the building is as strong as they say it is we would have seen airplane engines outside the building? Or undercarriage? Or something?? Did they ever find the "mystery" black box for that flight? Just curious.. Rhino.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #14 October 30, 2004 QuoteYou sure about that? Jimbo, I think he meant that the video Rhino references says something about the plane hitting the ground...I haven't seen it, so I don't know for sure, but that's how I read his post. As to this particular claim, Rhino, there was a long thread about this a few weeks/months ago. It's not new, this conspiracy theory, but it's pretty completely debunked. The plane hit the Pentagon. NO doubt, NO question. As to your question as to why the wings didn't leave a mark on the Pentagon and yet did in the WTC, I would suggest to you that the different building materials - and structure itself - would create a different sort of pattern. IIRC, the Pentagon had just undergone some signficant renovation, and is built from concrete and rebar, while the WTC is built from glass and rebar. That alone would explain the difference. Add to that plane wings are made to flex - ever sit in a jetliner and watch the wings bounce around? Scared me to hell the first time I noticed it...but it was explained to me that it's designed that way. If they are designed to flex in the air, they will most likely disintegrate when impacting at 500+ mph a concrete building. It's a red herring, Rhino. That's all it is. Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hookitt 1 #15 October 30, 2004 Wow, all you political geeks just NOW found that website? hehehe.. it's been out for a LONG time. Stuff like that is all over the net. Do a search on Pentagon Plane Crash. Then have some fun arguing Have a good weekend Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #16 October 30, 2004 Happy birthday, Hookitt! I knew about it a while ago, just didn't think there was a need to discuss it. Recently, different versions of that vid have been circulating, and so new conversations about it crop up. LOL, but some of those websites are absolutely bizarre, to be sure. Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Frenchy68 0 #17 October 30, 2004 QuoteThen have some fun arguing Happy birthday!Now go back to the bonfire "For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #18 October 30, 2004 This conspiracy has been around for a couple of years now. It does nothing but ask questions and does nothing to seek proof. The FBI does not typically release video for an investigation, just like it hasn't released much from the WTC. There is no need for full disclosure. Also, the video says those at the hotel watched the video - well, what was on the video? They mentioned it "sounded like a missle." How many civilians know what that sounds like? And, go back to the WTC tapes, maybe thats the sound they heard? Conspiracy is one way people handle grief...this was to be expected._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hookitt 1 #19 October 30, 2004 Quote Happy birthday! Thank you QuoteNow go back to the bonfire No Thank you Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Frenchy68 0 #20 October 30, 2004 QuoteNo Thank you Fine, be that way Grab a chair, a cocktail, and join me into enjoying the slugfestOooops, sorry. Too many I'll refrain from now on... "For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Jimbo 0 #21 October 30, 2004 QuoteIIRC, the Pentagon had just undergone some signficant renovation, and is built from concrete and rebar, while the WTC is built from glass and rebar. That alone would explain the difference. Correct. IIRC, it was the section that was hit that was most recent. The special I saw suggested that the renovations to that particular section are the main reason that more damage wasn't done. As far as the windows being intact, they're new bomb-proof windows, also a recent addition and credited with saving a lot of lives. - Jim"Like" - The modern day comma Good bye, my friends. You are missed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites sundevil777 102 #22 October 30, 2004 You can't keep a 767 straight from a 757, and you are surprised that a witness isn't good at planespotting when it goes by at an extreme speed. I won't see anything at all clearly when you look at pictures of a plane flying by so fast. 500mph is about 733 feet per second, or 24 feet of motion during a typical 1/30th of a second camera exposure. What a load of shit! Of course it sounds like a missle when flying low, fast, at high power. But do you think the eyewitnesses have ever heard a missle? A fast flyby of a jet at an airshow, etc. is a lot different than a typical takeoff/landing at a commercial airport.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rhino 0 #23 October 30, 2004 Quotewhile the WTC is built from glass and rebar. That alone would explain the difference. Don't forget VERY VERY THICK STEEL that the outer skin of the WTC was comprised of. The planes had no problem puncturing steel. Rhino Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites BlindBrick 0 #24 October 30, 2004 QuoteDon't forget VERY VERY THICK STEEL that the outer skin of the WTC was comprised of. Yeah, but the WTC towers weren't designed to survive a nuclear attack, the Pentagon was. In fact, my main thought I had on 9/11 after seeing the damage to the Pentagon was "Huh, I guess the designers were wrong." -Blind"If you end up in an alligator's jaws, naked, you probably did something to deserve it." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Michele 1 #25 October 30, 2004 QuoteDon't forget VERY VERY THICK STEEL that the outer skin of the WTC was comprised of. You're correct. They were built with very thick steel. However, the Pentagon withstood the attack for the most part. And I do have to disagree with you - it wasn't a "small hole." Unless some new information comes forth, I am confident in my position. Should new information emerge, I will revisit it, and decide again. Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 1 of 2 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. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
Frenchy68 0 #20 October 30, 2004 QuoteNo Thank you Fine, be that way Grab a chair, a cocktail, and join me into enjoying the slugfestOooops, sorry. Too many I'll refrain from now on... "For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jimbo 0 #21 October 30, 2004 QuoteIIRC, the Pentagon had just undergone some signficant renovation, and is built from concrete and rebar, while the WTC is built from glass and rebar. That alone would explain the difference. Correct. IIRC, it was the section that was hit that was most recent. The special I saw suggested that the renovations to that particular section are the main reason that more damage wasn't done. As far as the windows being intact, they're new bomb-proof windows, also a recent addition and credited with saving a lot of lives. - Jim"Like" - The modern day comma Good bye, my friends. You are missed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #22 October 30, 2004 You can't keep a 767 straight from a 757, and you are surprised that a witness isn't good at planespotting when it goes by at an extreme speed. I won't see anything at all clearly when you look at pictures of a plane flying by so fast. 500mph is about 733 feet per second, or 24 feet of motion during a typical 1/30th of a second camera exposure. What a load of shit! Of course it sounds like a missle when flying low, fast, at high power. But do you think the eyewitnesses have ever heard a missle? A fast flyby of a jet at an airshow, etc. is a lot different than a typical takeoff/landing at a commercial airport.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #23 October 30, 2004 Quotewhile the WTC is built from glass and rebar. That alone would explain the difference. Don't forget VERY VERY THICK STEEL that the outer skin of the WTC was comprised of. The planes had no problem puncturing steel. Rhino Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BlindBrick 0 #24 October 30, 2004 QuoteDon't forget VERY VERY THICK STEEL that the outer skin of the WTC was comprised of. Yeah, but the WTC towers weren't designed to survive a nuclear attack, the Pentagon was. In fact, my main thought I had on 9/11 after seeing the damage to the Pentagon was "Huh, I guess the designers were wrong." -Blind"If you end up in an alligator's jaws, naked, you probably did something to deserve it." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #25 October 30, 2004 QuoteDon't forget VERY VERY THICK STEEL that the outer skin of the WTC was comprised of. You're correct. They were built with very thick steel. However, the Pentagon withstood the attack for the most part. And I do have to disagree with you - it wasn't a "small hole." Unless some new information comes forth, I am confident in my position. Should new information emerge, I will revisit it, and decide again. Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
