QUOTE Quote: from starfleetcommand on 4:12 am on Jan. 11, 2006 Firing a missile into the Pentagon isn't to obvious? Right? I think this myth has been busted. Yup.
NOPE! Show me film evidence to PROVE to the world ONCE and for all that a 767 crashed into the white house. I have given you FILM PROOF that there was no jet. Give me FILM proof that there was not. Show me filmed proof that there was.
QUOTE Quote: from neobud on 6:13 am on Jan. 11, 2006 NOPE! Show me film evidence to PROVE to the world ONCE and for all that a 767 crashed into the white house. I have given you FILM PROOF that there was no jet. Give me FILM proof that there was not. Show me filmed proof that there was. I think there's been enough witnesses to prove it.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/911_pentagon_eyewitnesses.html Pretty" target="_blank">http://www.rense.com/general32/phot.htm Pretty convincing. A conspiracy site that includes a crashed plane. Ok, im confused lmao
No, I want to know how a 16' single hole was found that went through 3 rings of The Pentagon. There are WAY too many things that are not explained as far as I am concerned. I am not asking everyone to believe it. That is their choice.
its funny how the "no parking" sign is still hanging, and burn free, especially with all that heat. Or maybe it was put up afterwards, though it would of been a little obvious!
Well after reading through some of the witness reports above I think it is fairly clear that it was a plane that hit the pentagon, and like the one guy pointed out the reason you do not see a tone of photo's out of the pentagon strike is because of all of the classified material that was scattered everywhere,and the Federal agents that were all over the scene who do not need their faces up all over the web. makes good sense to me.
I don't know where that hole is from but what I saw on the news was a large section of collapsing building. Not a hole.
Fish, in the video at the start of this thread you'll see. When media just arrived at the pentagon, I think it was that Jaime Mcyntire guy from CNN, they were zooming in on the damaged section "before The Wall Collapsed" like you said you seen. They seen a small 16ft by 16ft perfectly round hole in the 1st to 2nd floor windows of the wall. None of the surrounding windows were affected, windows were still intact. If a 757 hit there the wings woulda destroyed a section like 50 ft long, and thus shattered all surrounding windows. Mind you this was "before" the wall collapsed from fire. The picture shown above is the 2nd and 3rd ring walls inside the pentagon. An overhead view of the pentagon has 5 rings. It "missle,fighterjet,whatever" penetrated through 3 walls of steel reinforced concrete. You'll notcie when a commercial airliners landing gear fails and the nose or the plane hits the ground it crumbles like a carboard cone. That cannot penetrate 3 walls of concrete. No way. Fish if you havent done so yet. Just watch the video, its not it'll kill you. Also you say "where is this hole from? The hole i seen was much bigger on the news" The news mostly shows images of when the pentagon was already destroyed, not just hit. (Edited by CanadianDAN at 2:22 pm on Jan. 13, 2006)
Thank you I enjoyed that.I don't usually buy into this stuff,but how do you dispute the fact that steel wont burn at those temps?When I watched the buildings go down back in 01 my first thought was that they were imploded.There are some questions that are not answered with that film ,like where did the plane that was said to have not hit the pentagon go if it didn't hit?We will never know the real truth but we should know that what we are fed by the news isn't it.
Or here is a crazy thought. Maybe we were told the truth,and maybe no matter how obviously true it is some people cannot except it. Ask the family members of the people on board the flight that crashed into the pentagon where their loved ones are, if they didn't die at the pentagon? Hey Dan how about posting some of the fucked up **** going on in your country? Maybe an upside down Mapleleaf is in order. I sure hope you are not believing everything you read on the net.
I don't buy the pentagon story but how do you explain the towers coming down from the jets?Why would the bottom of the towers collapse from the fires on the top floors?I am not saying our government did this but maybe they are just ashamed at the fact they let it happen.Ask anybody who works with steel what they think,you wont like the answer.I work for the second biggest builder in the country and have yet to find a steel man who will agree the fires from the 40th+ floors brought it down from the bottom at all never mind in less than an hour.If it is a fact that steel wont be compromised at the temps of burning jet fuel are true,then how do we explain the towers coming down.Even if the jet fuel did weaken the steel on the 40th floor how dose it make the rest of the tower below it go down.The weight of the plane is the only thing I can come up with,but that is never mentioned.By the way I am a republican so don't play the he's a liberal card. I would love nothing better than to put this behind us but some facts are facts even if we don't like it.Please someone prove to me that steel will be compromised at the temps of jet fuel burning. (Edited by The Dawg at 5:20 pm on Jan. 17, 2006)
