Claim: Â The damage to the Pentagon on
<NOBR>September 11
</NOBR> was caused by something other than a hijacked
<NOBR>Boeing 757
</NOBR>'s being crashed into its side.
<NOINDEX> Status:
 False.
</NOINDEX> Example:
 [Collected on the Internet, 2002]
Unfortunately, the appeal of conspiracy theories has resulted in widespread dissemination of Meyssan's "theory" in France and the USA, particularly in web sites that mirror his work. As Le Nouvel Observateurnoted: "This theory suits everyone - there are no Islamic extremists and everyone is happy. It eliminates reality."
Update:
 A video presentation unleashed on the Internet in
<NOBR>August 2004
</NOBR> rehashes the same conspiracy claims. It can be found at a number of locations, including:
OK, gotta play catch-up. Rich, you can find info on the Toledo breakins by Googling (in the News section) "democrats +toledo +break-in." The Sproul story comes up with "las-vegas voter-registration destroyed."
Luv2, I agree with you and with snopes about the Pentagon plane. Two people I knew were on it, and I haven't seen my neighbor sneaking back to his house in the dead of night, but if Flight 77 didn't really hit the Pentagon, I'd think that he'd have wanted to reclaim some of his art collection before the place was sold. Or maybe the CIA just landed the plane on an island somewhere and shot them all . . .
We've got to get a more believable source, though -- a few weeks back, Iceman exposed snopes.com as a bunch of loony liberal liars. Well, actually he copied-and-pasted an article from Insight magazine which criticized David and Barbara for having the temerity to question articles they'd published criticizing the Clintons. Whatever -- if you want to convince Ice that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon, you'll have to cite something other than snopes.com.
Lt. Col. Steve O'Brien started his day at the controls of a Minnesota National Guard C-130 cargo plane. He and his crew were heading back to the Twin Cities after moving military supplies around the Caribbean. About 9:30 a.m., O'Brien throttled the lumbering plane down a runway at Andrews Air Force Base, just southeast of the District of Columbia.
"When we took off, we headed north and west and had a beautiful view of the Mall," he said. "I noticed this airplane up and to the left of us, at 10 o'clock. He was descending to our altitude, four miles away or so. That's awful close, so I was surprised he wasn't calling out to us.
"It was like coming up to an intersection. When air traffic control asked me if we had him in sight, I told him that was an understatement - by then, he had pretty much filled our windscreen. Then he made a pretty aggressive turn so he was moving right in front of us, a mile and a half, two miles away. I said we had him in sight, then the controller asked me what kind of plane it was.
"That caught us up, because normally they have all that information. The controller didn't seem to know anything."
O'Brien reported that the plane was either a 757 or 767 and its silver fuselage meant it was probably an American Airlines jet. "They told us to turn and follow that aircraft - in 20-plus years of flying, I've never been asked to do something like that. With all of the East Coast haze, I had a hard time picking him out.
"The next thing I saw was the fireball. It was huge. I told Washington the airplane has impacted the ground. Shook everyone up pretty good. I told them the approximate location was close to the Potomac. I figured he'd had some in-flight emergency and was trying to get back on the ground to Washington National. Suddenly, I could see the outline of the Pentagon. It was horrible. I told Washington this thing has impacted the west side of the Pentagon."
O'Brien asked the controller whether he should set up a low orbit around the building but was told to get out of the area as quickly as possible. "I took the plane once through the plume of smoke and thought if this was a terrorist attack, it probably wasn't a good idea to be flying through that plume."...
actually, the official story is pretty weird too..
That terrorist would take over a plane and crash it into a building? Isn't that what a lot of liberals here were predicting when we were talking about missile defence?
"The Cheneys didn't respond to Jim DeMint's gay-baiting in South Carolina, or Alan Keyes' direct insult of their own daughter in Illinois. They have not voiced objections tio a single right-wing piece of homophobia in this campaign or the anti-gay RNC flier in Arkansas and West Virginia. But they are outraged that Kerry mentioned the simple fact of their daughter's openly gay identity
That terrorist would take over a plane and crash it into a building?
No, the details of the crash itself.
"The Cheneys didn't respond to Jim DeMint's gay-baiting in South Carolina, or Alan Keyes' direct insult of their own daughter in Illinois. They have not voiced objections tio a single right-wing piece of homophobia in this campaign or the anti-gay RNC flier in Arkansas and West Virginia.
They are completely deaf to their own parties' members who are openly hostile to their daughter's lifestyle.
Really? Then how do you explain the piece of the plane I showed you? The DNA evidence of those that were on the plane? The eyewitnesses? Where did that flight go if not into the pentagon?
There is no way the government could have done anything like what you are trying to claim. How could they possibly coverup such a thing?
"As eyewitnesses described and photographs demonstrate, the hijacked airliner dived so low as it approached the Pentagon that it actually hit the ground first, thereby dissipating much of the energy that might otherwise have caused more extensive damage to the building." - Snopes.com
the plane was supposed to be two feet off the ground, but the ground shows no indication of any damage or scorching.
Why would the ground be damaged by a plane flying at about 250 MPH?
that the building swallowed up so completely such a large plane into such a relatively small hole with so little debris or extraneous damage.
You need to remember that this is the Pentagon and as such was built to withstand a large scale attack. The area of the building had just been reinforced with steel tubing to make it even stronger. Each side of the Pentagon contains over 100,000 tons of Potomac sand mixed into the steel-reinforced concrete under its limestone facade. There are nearly 10,000 concrete piles anchoring each side of the building. Compare that to the plane that is only 100 tons of custom alloys stretched thin enough to fly.
As far as the skill of the pilot is concerned, "maybe he just got lucky that time" doesn't seem to be the right phrase, but one does wonder how much the results would vary if he tried it ten times.
Those high-res photos at defenselink are quite something. There's at least half a dozen there, and in addition to showing that it was most definitely a tubular object that hit the building, they also show that hundreds of people would have to be in on the coverup. The bigger the conspiracy and the more people involved, the more likely it is that somebody will spill the beans.
Wait a minute. crabhole complains of not enough damage being done by a plane that big yet says it's energy was dissipated when it struck the ground before hitting the building?????????????????
How far above the ground does it look? About 30 feet.
Rich, crabhole grew tired of me pointing out/debunking all his idiotic, drug induced, posts almost a year ago. During one day, the "quit talking me" quote was used by everyone as a joke. crabhole then decided to stick with it. That's all he can come up with.
The struggle today for most people isn't to get good care but to get other people to pay for their good health care. The great American pastime these days is to get someone else to pay for their doctor visits, drugs and hospital care.Â
crabs wrote: that the wings didn't appear to do any damage.
Then crabs posted:
"As eyewitnesses described and photographs demonstrate, the hijacked airliner dived so low as it approached the Pentagon that it actually hit the ground first, thereby dissipating much of the energy that might otherwise have caused more extensive damage to the building." - Snopes.com
I guess that answers the question that crabs doesn't think about what he posts.
thereby dissipating much of the energy that might otherwise have caused more extensive damage to the building.
now, if it hit the ground, it sure didn't do anything to the ground when it did, and if it didn't, then it sure didn't do the "more extensive damage" to the building that it claims it would if it didn't hit the ground first.
Of course... still, it's weird the anomolies surrounding the attack.
Only to crackpots that jump onto every conspiracy theory that comes down the pike.
Claim:
 The damage to the Pentagon on
<NOBR>September 11
</NOBR> was caused by something other than a hijacked
<NOBR>Boeing 757
</NOBR>'s being crashed into its side.
<NOINDEX>
Status:
Â
False.
</NOINDEX>
Example:
Â
[Collected on the Internet, 2002]
Unfortunately, the appeal of conspiracy theories has resulted in widespread dissemination of Meyssan's "theory" in France and the USA, particularly in web sites that mirror his work. As Le Nouvel Observateurnoted: "This theory suits everyone - there are no Islamic extremists and everyone is happy. It eliminates reality."
Update:
 A video presentation unleashed on the Internet in
<NOBR>August 2004
</NOBR> rehashes the same conspiracy claims. It can be found at a number of locations, including:
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm
I'm sorry, it's weird.
How is the gay couple down the street getting married going to harm you?
Well, that's arguable, but let's assume it doesn't.
Let them have a "Civil Union". Just don't call it marriage. Make it simply a legal union, and leave it at that.
As long as they don't try and force Churches to acknowledge it, who cares.
[Edited by on Oct 15, 2004 at 09:36pm.]
Then let's not have the government call hetrosexual's unions "marriages" either.
What churches do is entirely up to churches.
OK, gotta play catch-up. Rich, you can find info on the Toledo breakins by Googling (in the News section) "democrats +toledo +break-in." The Sproul story comes up with "las-vegas voter-registration destroyed."
Luv2, I agree with you and with snopes about the Pentagon plane. Two people I knew were on it, and I haven't seen my neighbor sneaking back to his house in the dead of night, but if Flight 77 didn't really hit the Pentagon, I'd think that he'd have wanted to reclaim some of his art collection before the place was sold. Or maybe the CIA just landed the plane on an island somewhere and shot them all . . .
We've got to get a more believable source, though -- a few weeks back, Iceman exposed snopes.com as a bunch of loony liberal liars. Well, actually he copied-and-pasted an article from Insight magazine which criticized David and Barbara for having the temerity to question articles they'd published criticizing the Clintons. Whatever -- if you want to convince Ice that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon, you'll have to cite something other than snopes.com.
Then let's not have the government call hetrosexual's unions "marriages" either.
Yeah, let's just disregard the history, and especially the sanctity of marriage.
What churches do is entirely up to churches.
You'd think so, wouldn't you?
[Edited by on Oct 16, 2004 at 05:57am.]
For this JOE...
I'm sorry, it's weird.
The way that they present it, yes, but in reality it is a completely different story.
AÂ photo showing pieces of an commercial jet on the Pentagon lawn.
Black Boxes Found at Pentagon
http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/14_APboxes.html
Experts ID 184 Pentagon Fatalities
Of the 189 killed, 125 worked at the Pentagon and 64 were passengers on American Airlines Flight 77.
http://www.911review.org/Wget/www.armymedicine.army.mil/news/releases/afip.htm
Complete 911 Timeline: American Airlines Flight 77
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&day_of_911=aa77
...'Follow that aircraft'
Lt. Col. Steve O'Brien started his day at the controls of a Minnesota National Guard C-130 cargo plane. He and his crew were heading back to the Twin Cities after moving military supplies around the Caribbean. About 9:30 a.m., O'Brien throttled the lumbering plane down a runway at Andrews Air Force Base, just southeast of the District of Columbia.
"When we took off, we headed north and west and had a beautiful view of the Mall," he said. "I noticed this airplane up and to the left of us, at 10 o'clock. He was descending to our altitude, four miles away or so. That's awful close, so I was surprised he wasn't calling out to us.
"It was like coming up to an intersection. When air traffic control asked me if we had him in sight, I told him that was an understatement - by then, he had pretty much filled our windscreen. Then he made a pretty aggressive turn so he was moving right in front of us, a mile and a half, two miles away. I said we had him in sight, then the controller asked me what kind of plane it was.
"That caught us up, because normally they have all that information. The controller didn't seem to know anything."
O'Brien reported that the plane was either a 757 or 767 and its silver fuselage meant it was probably an American Airlines jet. "They told us to turn and follow that aircraft - in 20-plus years of flying, I've never been asked to do something like that. With all of the East Coast haze, I had a hard time picking him out.
"The next thing I saw was the fireball. It was huge. I told Washington the airplane has impacted the ground. Shook everyone up pretty good. I told them the approximate location was close to the Potomac. I figured he'd had some in-flight emergency and was trying to get back on the ground to Washington National. Suddenly, I could see the outline of the Pentagon. It was horrible. I told Washington this thing has impacted the west side of the Pentagon."
O'Brien asked the controller whether he should set up a low orbit around the building but was told to get out of the area as quickly as possible. "I took the plane once through the plume of smoke and thought if this was a terrorist attack, it probably wasn't a good idea to be flying through that plume."...
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/2002/minneapolisstartribune091102.html
[Edited 2 times. Most recently by on Oct 16, 2004 at 07:46am.]
actually, the official story is pretty weird too.
actually, the official story is pretty weird too..
That terrorist would take over a plane and crash it into a building? Isn't that what a lot of liberals here were predicting when we were talking about missile defence?
"The Cheneys didn't respond to Jim DeMint's gay-baiting in South Carolina, or Alan Keyes' direct insult of their own daughter in Illinois. They have not voiced objections tio a single right-wing piece of homophobia in this campaign or the anti-gay RNC flier in Arkansas and West Virginia. But they are outraged that Kerry mentioned the simple fact of their daughter's openly gay identity
"What complete b.s."
No, the details of the crash itself.
They are completely deaf to their own parties' members who are openly hostile to their daughter's lifestyle.
Man! The LWW's are out in force today!!
"shut the fuck up" - Torpedo-8
No, the details of the crash itself.
Really? Then how do you explain the piece of the plane I showed you? The DNA evidence of those that were on the plane? The eyewitnesses? Where did that flight go if not into the pentagon?
There is no way the government could have done anything like what you are trying to claim. How could they possibly coverup such a thing?
[Edited by on Oct 16, 2004 at 06:30pm.]
Heh! crabhole recognizing weird.
He's bored today, Dan. He picked you to jack around.
"shut the fuck up" - Torpedo-8
I'm not trying to claim anything. I'm just saying it's weird.
crabgrass 10/16/04 8:14pm
OK... What EXACTLY is weird about it?
that the wings didn't appear to do any damage.
the plane was supposed to be two feet off the ground, but the ground shows no indication of any damage or scorching.
that the building swallowed up so completely such a large plane into such a relatively small hole with so little debris or extraneous damage.
the amount of skill needed to fly a commercial jet liner two feet off the ground into a build.
it's just weird.
you would think that with all the questions, they would release the footage from the gas station camera.
the plane was supposed to be two feet off the ground,
What makes you say that?
that is supposed to be Flight 77 at the far right. How far off the ground does it look to be to you?
and why are the shadows from the gate in the forground not at the same angle as the one from the building?
Like I said, weird.
[Edited by molegrass on Oct 16, 2004 at 09:44pm.]
the plane was supposed to be two feet off the ground, but the ground shows no indication of any damage or scorching.
Why would the ground be damaged by a plane flying at about 250 MPH?
that the building swallowed up so completely such a large plane into such a relatively small hole with so little debris or extraneous damage.
You need to remember that this is the Pentagon and as such was built to withstand a large scale attack. The area of the building had just been reinforced with steel tubing to make it even stronger. Each side of the Pentagon contains over 100,000 tons of Potomac sand mixed into the steel-reinforced concrete under its limestone facade. There are nearly 10,000 concrete piles anchoring each side of the building. Compare that to the plane that is only 100 tons of custom alloys stretched thin enough to fly.
But do not take my word for it. Purdue University did a study that proved what happened. http://news.uns.purdue.edu/UNS/html4ever/020910.Sozen.Pentagon.html and http://www.cs.purdue.edu/cgvlab/projects/popescu/pentagonVis.htm The last link has a link to a computer video model showing what happened.
Here is a large, high resolution picture of the aftermath. http://www.defenselink.mil/photos/Sep2001/010914-F-8006R-002.jpg As you can see, it was no small hole.
There can be no doubt of what happened.
[Edited 3 times. Most recently by on Oct 16, 2004 at 10:13pm.]
.
.
.
[Edited 2 times. Most recently by on Oct 16, 2004 at 10:33pm.]
As far as the skill of the pilot is concerned, "maybe he just got lucky that time" doesn't seem to be the right phrase, but one does wonder how much the results would vary if he tried it ten times.
Those high-res photos at defenselink are quite something. There's at least half a dozen there, and in addition to showing that it was most definitely a tubular object that hit the building, they also show that hundreds of people would have to be in on the coverup. The bigger the conspiracy and the more people involved, the more likely it is that somebody will spill the beans.
[Edited by on Oct 16, 2004 at 11:23pm.]
Wait a minute. crabhole complains of not enough damage being done by a plane that big yet says it's energy was dissipated when it struck the ground before hitting the building?????????????????
How far above the ground does it look? About 30 feet.
BTW: The Pentagon is the biggest building in the world.
When will you two fat-boys learn that I don't look at your posts...???
That's good, because it wasn't a post to you.
Was he talking to me?
LOL
Dumbass.
I'm assuming he was talking to Torp as well?
Stupid fucker.
The conversation had nothing to do with him.
[Edited by on Oct 17, 2004 at 04:30pm.]
Poor paranoid Fold. That's the 4th time he had to show everyone i'm on his ignore list. What a retard.
"Quit talking to me crabgrass" - Torpedo-8
[Edited by molegrass on Oct 17, 2004 at 06:04pm.]
crabgrass 10/17/04 6:03pm
Try a new line. That one is growing mold it's so old.
"shut the fuck up" - Torpedo-8
[Edited by molegrass on Oct 17, 2004 at 06:08pm.]
crabgrass 10/17/04 6:07pm
Try a new line. That one is growing mold it's so old.
try telling Torpedo to stop trying to talk to people he said he doesn't want talking to him.
[Edited by molegrass on Oct 17, 2004 at 06:12pm.]
Rich, crabhole grew tired of me pointing out/debunking all his idiotic, drug induced, posts almost a year ago. During one day, the "quit talking me" quote was used by everyone as a joke. crabhole then decided to stick with it. That's all he can come up with.
"Quit talking to me crabgrass" - Torpedo-8
[Edited by molegrass on Oct 17, 2004 at 06:32pm.]
and Rich, if you believe that shit Torpedo just posted, I got a bridge you might be interested in.
short term memory problems, hmmmmmmm, i wonder why?
"Quit talking to me crabgrass" - Torpedo-8
and since when is a year ago "short term"?
LOL!...DUH!!
"shut the fuck up" - Torpedo-8
"Crabby, Quit talking to Torp when you say you're not talking to him but you really are" - JT
"Wolvie quit talking to Wolvie" - Wolvie
The struggle today for most people isn't to get good care but to get other people to pay for their good health care. The great American pastime these days is to get someone else to pay for their doctor visits, drugs and hospital care.Â
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/debrasaunders/ds20041018.shtml
crabs wrote: that the wings didn't appear to do any damage.
Then crabs posted:
I guess that answers the question that crabs doesn't think about what he posts.
this is about the building...
this is about hitting the ground...
now, if it hit the ground, it sure didn't do anything to the ground when it did, and if it didn't, then it sure didn't do the "more extensive damage" to the building that it claims it would if it didn't hit the ground first.
It's just weird.