Another Pentagon hit video

[Mattk]

Look, it was quite obvious that the Pentagon was hit by an airliner. There were eyewitness reports and you get get much better than that. The link that nthfinity provided is one of the best I've seen to shut up the sceptics. Maybe, Speedkillar, if you paid attention, you might learn something.

[666fast]

http://www.popularmechanics.com/tech...42.html?page=6

All you need to know.

[Mattk]

FACT: Blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer was the first structural engineer to arrive at the Pentagon after the crash and helped coordinate the emergency response. "It was absolutely a plane, and I'll tell you why," says Kilsheimer, CEO of KCE Structural Engineers PC, Washington, D.C. "I saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box." Kilsheimer's eyewitness account is backed up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building. Kilsheimer adds: "I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts. Okay?"

Kinda says it all, really. It happened.

[RC45]

Originally Posted by bmuller Plus, since you never even read the article, how can you even begin to pass your own high and mighty judgement on the results, but of course you don't even know what the results of the test were because you didn't read the article?

+1

[SPEEDKILLAR]

Originally Posted by bmuller Originally Posted by SPEEDKILLAR Originally Posted by nthfinity Originally Posted by SPEEDKILLAR You mean the puny burns, I could do more damage with a candlestick, common man, fire-resistant or not, the heat of kerosine burning would have scorched the area. And yeah, partially desintegrate, but not completly, there are a lot of components that aren't made of aluminium, where are those? That it wouldn't retain its shape on impact isn't science, let's say the nose and the rest of the airplane pierced the walls, then the surrounding walls should have been strong enough to brake of the wings, so that in theory the wings don't enter the building, well, I can't see no pics that show me twisted, shredded aluminium, and don't forget the huge engines? And again, don't forget the fuel contained in the wings. What was knocked down? Nothing really. Not really a good anwer for the camera's he? What's wrong with showing these video's, if I had a relative who died in there, I would rather ask the gouvernment to release them to stop these so called conspiracy theories and to see what happend for myself. I don't think they hid them, they just had to make the "sacrifice for the greater good I guess". I see that you aren't objective, you are too emotional about this, wich is understandable. But I know that you aren't 100% sure about this, and you just take the easy way out of this, because you are afraid you'll see that the USA aren't as free as they thought they are. That's all I have to say about this. Always quick to judge, and always last to perform research. Spoken like a true biggot faciest. You have no clue what freedoms we enjoy here http://www.911-strike.com/missing-confetti.htm nuff said, now lets hear you try to disprove any of that You really expect me to read something that was most likely made by a fascist or maybe a nerdy redneck :arrow: And it seems you only have problems with my opinion, when there are clearly other members sharing the same opinion, common kiddo, give it up already, I'm not in the mood for these games. Redneck you say...? Now I know you're just pulling stuff out of your a**. You really expect people to believe that a "redneck" is capable of designing and conducting such an elaborate experiment? Plus, since you never even read the article, how can you even begin to pass your own high and mighty judgement on the results, but of course you don't even know what the results of the test were because you didn't read the article? Fascists too...? Let's pretend for one second that the U.S. gov't is in fact as you claim "fascist". I can understand how this might influence any typed/printed report, but the fact that they have supplied pictures, which clearly support their given conclusions, is hard to deny. But then again, even though you never read or looked at the article, apparently you already knew that too... Plus, what's your deal with calling everyone some name akin to "common man/kiddo/etc." Since when did you receive any sort of authority to pass judgement on anyone else? And games, what games? You post arguments in support of your opinion and they are of course "factual", but when someone else posts evidence that supports their side of the argument, they're just playing games. Not only that, you don't even have the gusto to review their side of the argument for fear that it might prove you wrong, you just dismiss it as being wrong and biased, did I hear someone say redneck...? That's like trying to win an argument with a 3 year old; you present him with hard evidence and his response is; "No, you're wrong and I'm right." Then when you ask how he knows he is right, he simply says "Because I'm right...". Needless to say, anyone who adopts this type of strategy in an argument obviously knows he's been defeated because if he had more definitive evidence, he would have presented it to disprove the opposing view. Strikingly similar to the 3 year old, if you actually had substantive evidence disproving the opposition's, you would have presented it. Thus, your argument has been defeated. ***Sidenote*** This is not a personal attack by any means, as I have nothing against you. However, next time you decide to present yourself as any sort of authority, use a more convincing argument and maybe we'll believe you, until then... :bye: Cheers

I didn't read everything you typed, just the redneck stuff, that is why I typed, "nerdy redneck"





Anyway, you have your opinion, and I have mine, let's leave it at that.

[RC45]

Originally Posted by SPEEDKILLAR I didn't read everything you typed, just the redneck stuff, that is why I typed, "nerdy redneck"

If didn't bother reading everything - why bother replying?

Originally Posted by SPEEDKILLAR Anyway, you have your opinion, and I have mine, let's leave it at that.

No - what he has is facts and knowledge of the truth - what you have is a fucked up "opinion" based on your own fucked up mind with no real clue or validation.

That's not your opinion - that's your ignorance.

[ViperASR]

I'm glad im not the only person who isnt a fucking moron when it comes to September 11th, glad to see we are the majority. Thanks for backin me up guys 0X people like that just piss me off too much to argue with them like a 3 year old.

[graywolf624]

No - what he has is facts and knowledge of the truth - what you have is a fucked up "opinion" based on your own fucked up mind with no real clue or validation.

I concur. Not all opinions are created equal.. Some are just stupid!

[obdr]

If you look at the video you see them overlay a correctly sized image of the plane. Notice that the engines make up almost the correct width of the hole. What happened most likely is that the wings folded in behind the plane as it hit the Pentagon and the engines and fuselage were what did the primary damage. If you measure the width from engine to engine....you will find that they pretty much match the width of the damage. You can see in the pics that the pentagon is built pretty thick along those corridors...almost like the Titanic with little walled off sections to contain just such a massive blast. And guess what.......they worked.

What does make me wonder is that there seem to be no marks on the concrete face where the wings would have struck BEFORE they folded backwards and went through with the rest of the plane. That is very odd to me as I would think they would at least leave some mark no matter that they were "weak" aluminum.

What I would really be interested in is all the thousands of people who would have had to have seen this "plane" hit. The Pentagon is surrounded by highway traffic ALL THE TIME!!!! If this really were a staged "hit" then you would have tons of Americans who were on the highway when the "explosion" happened going "hold on a minute, I heard the explosion.....but I never saw a plane beforehand".

Its not like the Pentagon is in some seculuded part of the country where you could claim a plane hit without there ever being a plane. The Pentagon is literaly surrounded by civilian traffic all the time.

So the question is: How many average every day Americans actually witnessed the attack at the Pentagon and saw the plane with thier own eyes? The second question: Were there any people there that day on the highway would were maybe lookign at the Pentagon and saw no plane but did see a sudden explosion?? Thirdly, how many people were in the parking lot and saw the plane as it came in?? There had to have been people milling about in the lot. Its a HUGE place.

I would think, even if there was some ginourmous conspiracy going on, it would be impossible to keep EVERYONE quite. Assuming it was a conspiracy, there would be SOMEBODY there that day saying "hold on a minute, I was RIGHT THERE and there was never a huge plane".

Seems to me thats not the case. Lots of people DID see the plane at extremely low altitude. Lots of people heard the plane.

Additionally, if the plane didnt hit the Pentagon then where did it go?? What happened to all the people on the passenger manifest?? Those people did dissappear and they did have families. They were not fake. Could they all be "secret agents". Could their families be in on it for cash. H_E_L_L_O people!!! Thats just a little out there!!!!.

And finally, there is the "overkill factor". Very clearly, real planes with real people hit the WTC towers. So why the heck bother to strike the Pentagon. Its redundent at that point. Assuming it was a government conspiracy then there would be no need to strike the Pentagon unless they wanted to be sure at least one attack succeeded. But, of course, that logic works just as well for the enemy. But think of it as a conspiracy and the logic falls apart. It MIGHT work if they used a real plane. But according to this conspiracy theory they didnt. Why the heck use an explosion and claim a huge plane hit when none ever did. That could unravel the whole huge "plot" that the conspiracy nuts claim. It just seems to make no sense as an "intelligent" conspiracy. Why have this great plan worked out using real planes and then add to it the utterly rediculous plot to stage a "fake hit" of the Pentagon where there are so many uncontrollable factors like a HUGE cast of random people (civilians on thier way to work and such), not to mention hundreds of Pentagon workers with all levels of security clearances and such, there are virtually all times to deny what you claim?!?!?! Do you really think they could control ALL those people and make them support or believe a plane hit that never did?!?!? Just seems HIGHLY unlikely to me.


So in the end, show me some REAL evidence that makes me question it and I will indeed begin to wonder.

[obdr]

Ok, so I did more reading. Now it seems there WERE plane wing marks on the side of the building. I just coudlnt see them in those pics.

So my one little question mark in the ENTIRE thing that made me sit back and wonder for a sec is now gone.

END OF STORY. IT WAS A PLANE PEOPLE.

[RC45]

Originally Posted by obdr I would think, even if there was some ginourmous conspiracy going on, it would be impossible to keep EVERYONE quite.(sic)

+1000,000

That's all you need right there.. the rest of the physical evidence just backs this statement up

[ViperASR]

Originally Posted by obdr Additionally, if the plane didnt hit the Pentagon then where did it go?? What happened to all the people on the passenger manifest?? Those people did dissappear and they did have families. They were not fake. Could they all be "secret agents". Could their families be in on it for cash. H_E_L_L_O people!!! Thats just a little out there!!!!.

I made this point to an effect earlier and for some reason no one commented back on that, they took everything else and questioned it :roll: I agree with you x1million

[TopGearNL]

LOL! Theres so many of these now on the net they are starting to confuse each other. Many of them aren't even based on actual facts.. Sorry these vids are just lame and try to hide the truth..

[gigdy]

if it wasnt a plane what happened to the plane and all the people on it?. I bet if you went and told someones mom her son or daughter wasnt dead, and it was a conspiracy she would disagree.

[Mattk]

For all intents and purposes, this isn't really a matter of opinion. Too many people saw the plane and there's enough physical evidence for the discrening to conclude that a plane did indeed crash into the Pentagon.