NationStates Jolt Archive

Here is a link to which I think is startling footagehttp://www.aviationexplorer.com/pentagon_757_conspiracy.htm#Main
What does everyone think?

Damn I tired. I'm too tired. Do a search of the forums for 9/11.

Damn I tired. I'm too tired. Do a search of the forums for 9/11.
Amen.

It's just not worth it.

http://members.roadfly.org/viv/AwJeezNotThisSheetAgain1.jpg

Ok genius, if the hijacked flight didn't hit the Pentagon then where did it go?

Ok genius, if the hijacked flight didn't hit the Pentagon then where did it go?

The Commie-Nazi Islamist-controlled Government Drones took it to the secret Illuminati airbase in Nevada.

Some theorize it was a cruise missle that struck the Pentagon.

Ok genius, if the hijacked flight didn't hit the Pentagon then where did it go?
Good point but what made a suprisingly small hole in the pentagon that I know a Boeing 757 could not make.

Check this out. It's a long documentary but it's very interesting.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8260059923762628848

Check this out. It's a long documentary but it's very interesting.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8260059923762628848

Oh god, not Loose Change again. Why won't that thing just lay down and die like a good documentary?

You realise all the nutjobs will come out of the woodwork now?

http://members.roadfly.org/viv/AwJeezNotThisSheetAgain1.jpg


Beat me to it!

Seen this years ago. There's a video on youtube called Loose Change. It's quite long, and a good part of it is a load of bull. It covers not only the pentagon, but the other events on 9/11, pinning it on the United States government.

Edit: damn, beat me, too.

Check this out. It's a long documentary but it's very interesting.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8260059923762628848

Not this debunked doc again. Not this thread again. AHH!!!

*runs around in circles*

Yea I was just searching around and it sparked my intest.I just got internet so I did not know that this stuff was old news.Sorry.

Theeeeeeeeeeeeeeerrrrrrrroooooooooooyyyyyyyyy Jenkins!!!!!!!!!!!

Yea I was just searching around and it sparked my intest.I just got internet so I did not know that this stuff was old news.Sorry.

It's ok.

And by the way, welcome to the big, wide web. Just about everything here is old news, unless it happened today.

And before you start believing this load of trash:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html

Theeeeeeeeeeeeeeerrrrrrrroooooooooooyyyyyyyyy Jenkins!!!!!!!!!!!

I love Lee Roy Jenkins!:p

Good point but what made a suprisingly small hole in the pentagon that I know a Boeing 757 could not make.
How the hell do you know a 757 couldn't make that hole? Check this out from

http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/2006/05/19/askthepilot186/index1.html

"The nonwreckage of Flight 77

According to the would-be detectives, it wasn't a passenger jet that hit the Pentagon, but either a radio-controlled fighter or a missile. The conspicuous dearth of wreckage proves this. This is the "magic bullet" of Sept. 11. Almost no recognizable pieces of the supposed 80-ton 757 were found at the scene. Why weren't the wings sheared off, many bloggers have demanded to know. Where's the tail? "Airplane crashes leave wreckage," insists one Web site, complete with a slide show of past disasters showing the plainly visible remains of tails, wings and sections of fuselage.

Reality: Airplane crashes do leave wreckage, though not always in the shapes and sizes you might expect. Flight 77's demise was an exceptionally high-speed, head-on, explosive collision with the reinforced masonry façade of an office building -- a type of impact rarely seen in air disasters and pretty much guaranteed to cause total destruction. The wings of an airplane, going 400 miles per hour into bricks and reinforced steel columns, do not, under any circumstances, bend or shear off. They shred into fragments, along with the rest of the plane.

Many small parts of Flight 77 were found in semi-recognizable condition, most of them inside the building and hard to discern amid the rubble. A slice of aluminum skin from the upper fuselage, for instance, along which part of the American Airlines livery is still visible, was photographed on the Pentagon lawn.

Earlier this week, in response to a Freedom of Information Act request from the public interest group Judicial Watch, the government officially released video footage, taken by a Pentagon security camera, showing blurry images of American 77. The quality of the footage is awful, and is destined to provoke, rather than staunch, further controversy.

The telltale turbine

Other Pentagon pictures show mutilated landing gear rims, and what looks to be the shattered turbine or compressor disk from a jet engine. That disk, say the skeptics, is of too small a diameter to be from the engine of a 757, but is the proper diameter to be from a cruise missile or unmanned Global Hawk drone.

Reality: Untrue on both counts. Experts say the disk is too large to have belonged to a cruise missile or Global Hawk. And in a modern turbofan engine, the turbine and compressor sections consist of multiple stages, using disks of varying diameter. Analysis by Aerospaceweb.org suggests the disk in the photo belonged to the intermediate compressor stage of the same model of Rolls-Royce engine that powered American 77.

The hole truth

The impact pattern with the Pentagon façade, we are told, is inconsistent with the size and shape of a 757. The hole is too narrow. And there is no outline of where the wings or tail would have struck, as seen on the World Trade Center towers.

Reality: The hole is not too narrow. The fuselage of a 757 is about 13 feet across, which roughly matches the entry wound into the Pentagon. Many conspiracy sites inflate a 757's fuselage height and diameter, citing values that include its landing gear or tail. In any event, we shouldn't expect an aluminum airframe colliding with heavy masonry to leave a silhouette. The damage will be greatly dispersed -- exactly as the Pentagon footage shows -- and points of impact will not necessarily be obvious.

We saw ghostly, wingtip-to-wingtip outlines of the 767s that struck the World Trade Center because the exterior of those skyscrapers was a thin wall of glass and lightweight steel. The Pentagon was an immensely more formidable structure, and the damage, both to the plane and to the building, reflected this exactly as it should have."

And if all that's not good enough for you, simply Google this phrase:

Diameter of a 757 fuselage

and see what comes up.

NOW CAN WE LEAVE THIS CRAP ALONE AT LAST?!? PLEASE!? I know we can't but futility is a hobby of mine.

Yea I was just searching around and it sparked my intest.I just got internet so I did not know that this stuff was old news.Sorry.
No biggie.

Hate to debunk the myth: but the gorramned airplane flew over my grandparent's apartment.

It's ok.

And by the way, welcome to the big, wide web. Just about everything here is old news, unless it happened today.

And before you start believing this load of trash:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html

Thank you.Thats alot more eye opening and it actually makes sense.

How the hell do you know a 757 couldn't make that hole? Check this out from

http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/2006/05/19/askthepilot186/index1.html

"The nonwreckage of Flight 77

According to the would-be detectives, it wasn't a passenger jet that hit the Pentagon, but either a radio-controlled fighter or a missile. The conspicuous dearth of wreckage proves this. This is the "magic bullet" of Sept. 11. Almost no recognizable pieces of the supposed 80-ton 757 were found at the scene. Why weren't the wings sheared off, many bloggers have demanded to know. Where's the tail? "Airplane crashes leave wreckage," insists one Web site, complete with a slide show of past disasters showing the plainly visible remains of tails, wings and sections of fuselage.

Reality: Airplane crashes do leave wreckage, though not always in the shapes and sizes you might expect. Flight 77's demise was an exceptionally high-speed, head-on, explosive collision with the reinforced masonry façade of an office building -- a type of impact rarely seen in air disasters and pretty much guaranteed to cause total destruction. The wings of an airplane, going 400 miles per hour into bricks and reinforced steel columns, do not, under any circumstances, bend or shear off. They shred into fragments, along with the rest of the plane.

Many small parts of Flight 77 were found in semi-recognizable condition, most of them inside the building and hard to discern amid the rubble. A slice of aluminum skin from the upper fuselage, for instance, along which part of the American Airlines livery is still visible, was photographed on the Pentagon lawn.

Earlier this week, in response to a Freedom of Information Act request from the public interest group Judicial Watch, the government officially released video footage, taken by a Pentagon security camera, showing blurry images of American 77. The quality of the footage is awful, and is destined to provoke, rather than staunch, further controversy.

The telltale turbine

Other Pentagon pictures show mutilated landing gear rims, and what looks to be the shattered turbine or compressor disk from a jet engine. That disk, say the skeptics, is of too small a diameter to be from the engine of a 757, but is the proper diameter to be from a cruise missile or unmanned Global Hawk drone.

Reality: Untrue on both counts. Experts say the disk is too large to have belonged to a cruise missile or Global Hawk. And in a modern turbofan engine, the turbine and compressor sections consist of multiple stages, using disks of varying diameter. Analysis by Aerospaceweb.org suggests the disk in the photo belonged to the intermediate compressor stage of the same model of Rolls-Royce engine that powered American 77.

The hole truth

The impact pattern with the Pentagon façade, we are told, is inconsistent with the size and shape of a 757. The hole is too narrow. And there is no outline of where the wings or tail would have struck, as seen on the World Trade Center towers.

Reality: The hole is not too narrow. The fuselage of a 757 is about 13 feet across, which roughly matches the entry wound into the Pentagon. Many conspiracy sites inflate a 757's fuselage height and diameter, citing values that include its landing gear or tail. In any event, we shouldn't expect an aluminum airframe colliding with heavy masonry to leave a silhouette. The damage will be greatly dispersed -- exactly as the Pentagon footage shows -- and points of impact will not necessarily be obvious.

We saw ghostly, wingtip-to-wingtip outlines of the 767s that struck the World Trade Center because the exterior of those skyscrapers was a thin wall of glass and lightweight steel. The Pentagon was an immensely more formidable structure, and the damage, both to the plane and to the building, reflected this exactly as it should have."

And if all that's not good enough for you, simply Google this phrase:

Diameter of a 757 fuselage

and see what comes up.

NOW CAN WE LEAVE THIS CRAP ALONE AT LAST?!? PLEASE!? I know we can't but futility is a hobby of mine.

Also thank you for helping me get my facts right.I was not thinking clearly or rationally but I suppose my mind wanted to belive this at first.

Also thank you for helping me get my facts right.I was not thinking clearly or rationally but I suppose my mind wanted to belive this at first.
Don't kiss his ass. Tell him to eat balls! :mad:

Don't kiss his ass. Tell him to eat balls! :mad:

I would if it did not make sense but it does.

seen this many times.

seen this many times.

Does this mean you are ready to actually accept the truth that it occured just the way it did or do you still believe in conspiracies?

Does this mean you are ready to actually accept the truth that it occured just the way it did or do you still believe in conspiracies?
no. it means ive seen it many times. Tell me. Are you ridiculing me for denying the official story just cuz ur american?

no. it means ive seen it many times. Tell me. Are you ridiculing me for denying the official story just cuz ur american?

Nope. Just your refusal to accept the bloody truth.

Nope. Just your refusal to accept the bloody truth.
i'm afraid your the one that refuses to accept the truth. watch this. (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8260059923762628848)

i'm afraid your the one that refuses to accept the truth.

I already know what the truth is Swilatia.

i know you are but what am I. :)

i know you are but what am I. :)

Your Psychotic :D

I already know what the truth is Swilatia.
show all the evidence you know that supports your theory.

show all the evidence you know that supports your theory.

Its already been presented.

Its already been presented.
Press attack don't count.

Press attack don't count.

Eh? Press attack? Who attacked the press about this? Not me. The Press has actually reported the truth about the attacks on 9/11.

Eh? Press attack? Who attacked the press about this? Not me. The Press has actually reported the truth about the attacks on 9/11.
No. I mean attacks BY the press, not on the press.

No. I mean attacks BY the press, not on the press.

What am you talking about? "Attacks BY the press"? R U SIRIUS?

What am you talking about? "Attacks BY the press"? R U SIRIUS?
I'm totally cereal.

What am you talking about? "Attacks BY the press"? R U SIRIUS?
yes im serios. You know this popular mechanics article that makes a desprate attempt at trying to convice us that alqaeda did do 11/9 when it was really bush.

yes. You know this popular mechanics article that makes a desprate attempt at trying to convice us that alqaeda did do 11/9 when it was really bush.

Well...Al Qaeda did do it and Bush had nothing to do with it. Sorry but that is the truth of the matter. Even Bin Laden proclaimed it and Kalid shieq Mohammad also said it was Al Qaeda.

So either you are very closed minded to the facts or you are not to be taken seriously.

Ok genius, if the hijacked flight didn't hit the Pentagon then where did it go?

Who said anything about a hijacked flight? The government. THINK.:headbang:

Well...Al Qaeda did do it and Bush had nothing to do with it. Sorry but that is the truth of the matter. Even Bin Laden proclaimed it and Kalid shieq Mohammad also said it was Al Qaeda.

So either you are very closed minded to the facts or you are not to be taken seriously.
he is emotionally invested in believing the conspiracy theories. He believes tham because he hates Bush. He probably believes everything negative about Bush that he ever reads. If you were to send him an anonymous note telling him that the CIA is helping Iran develop nukes behind the scenes in an effort to pry more money from congress for the war on terror, he'd be posting about it here within minutes. You are wasting your time.

Who said anything about a hijacked flight? The government. THINK.:headbang:

So what happened to the people on that flight? They just fly off with the fairies?

Who said anything about a hijacked flight? The government. THINK.:headbang:
I seem to remember something about a whole bunch of people talking to their loved ones on the phone who called from the hijacked planes.

he is emotionally invested in believing the conspiracy theories. He believes tham because he hates Bush. He probably believes everything negative about Bush that he ever reads. If you were to send him an anonymous note telling him that the CIA is helping Iran develop nukes behind the scenes in an effort to pry more money from congress for the war on terror, he'd be posting about it here within minutes. You are wasting your time.

WHAT? The CIA is assisting Iran in developing nukes? AHHH *runs in circles*

yes im serios. You know this popular mechanics article that makes a desprate attempt at trying to convice us that alqaeda did do 11/9 when it was really bush.

Heh. Next you'll be saying the holocaust never happened...

Well...Al Qaeda did do it and Bush had nothing to do with it. Sorry but that is the truth of the matter. Even Bin Laden proclaimed it and Kalid shieq Mohammad also said it was Al Qaeda.

So either you are very closed minded to the facts or you are not to be taken seriously.


Well maybe Al qaeda and Bush are best friends. After all Bush does seem to love the saudis, and that could explain why we haven't caught OBL and why it seems we have given up the search for him.. not saying i beleive that...just a possible scenario

Here is a link to which I think is startling footagehttp://www.aviationexplorer.com/pentagon_757_conspiracy.htm#Main
What does everyone think?

http://img452.imageshack.us/img452/4492/owlwhatnow9hd.jpg

Well maybe Al qaeda and Bush are best friends. After all Bush does seem to love the saudis, and that could explain why we haven't caught OBL and why it seems we have given up the search for him.. not saying i beleive that...just a possible scenario

Me thinks you've been watching too much Star Wars.

Well maybe Al qaeda and Bush are best friends. After all Bush does seem to love the saudis, and that could explain why we haven't caught OBL and why it seems we have given up the search for him.. not saying i beleive that...just a possible scenario

Me thinks you've been watching too much Star Wars.


So... :D

To add fuel to this...fire...heh...here is this about 7 hijackers still being alive...should be fun to see this debunked:
http://whatreallyhappened.com/hijackers.html

To add fuel to this...fire...heh...here is this about 7 hijackers still being alive...should be fun to see this debunked:
http://whatreallyhappened.com/hijackers.html

I think DCD said thnat this can be explained as other people just using their IDs and such.

I think DCD said thnat this can be explained as other people just using their IDs and such.


oH darn..i was hoping there was other things to it...oh well

I seem to remember something about a whole bunch of people talking to their loved ones on the phone who called from the hijacked planes.

Ah. I see that you've never been on an airplane. There are phones aboard. And Cell Phones. And all that crap about "Oh, You believe me, don't you mom?"

I'll throw you into a situation in which no one's gonna believe you, and no way you cut it, you wind up dead. Then see how the *fruitcage* you talk to your mommy.

And about the buildings: the guy doesn't know what he's talking about. He doesn't take into account the sheer force of a jet that weighs 80-100 tons (plane, fuel, baggage, people, crap inside, etc) slamming into a non-hardened target at 590mph. A ditty comes to my mind, and I quote: " 'Cause I'm the JUGGERNAUT, BITCH!" Then the fires. Not just JP5 burns, ya know. crap like rugs do too. So does paper. And wood. And desks. And fabric. And even people. All that heat over a period of time combined with all of the shaking and violent impacts...oh, screw it, I'll make it easier for you to comprehend:

Planes + Speed + Combustibles + good angles = 3 buildings destroyed, 1 building damaged, @ 3000 people dead/missing.

Or even the other one: another plane, similar dimensions/weights, slamming into a hardened target. "Intact windows! Intact Windows!" You know, there ARE windows designed NOT to shatter when something goes boom nearby.

Not to freaking mention the fact that my freaking Grandmother was on her goddamned patio when the damned plane flew overhead. Or my good friend, VADM Greene who worked on the other side of the freaking Pentagon. You're grasping at straws. The eyewitnesses say "LIKE a missile", and "commuter jets" can mean anything from the dinky puddle jumpers to big jumbos. They're all commuter jets. They commute people from one place to another. The idiot pied-piper you're following is a *fruitcaging* liar arguing semantics.

Or maybe people turning up saying "Wait, but that's MY name!"

I offer you this: Open up a NYC phone book. Look up John Smith. Howard Johnston. Mary-Jo Blowme. Lots of people in lots of places have the same bloody name. Some more than others.

The movie has one or two good points... maybe... But, A) The thing was made up almost entirely out of quotes, which can easily gain a whole other meaning when taken out of context, or "facts" that they state and then neglect to verify or prove, and, more to the point, B) If the people who made this thing really want to be taken seriously, why set it to catchy music?

guys i hate Bush just as much as the next guy but that does not mean I'm going to think that he blew up the pentagon and two towers.I'll admit there were alot of strange things that happened on that day but they could of been coincidences.Without hard evidence I'm going to have to side with the truth that Osama Bin Laden's people hijacked the planes and flew them into there targets.

Ah. I see that you've never been on an airplane. There are phones aboard. And Cell Phones. And all that crap about "Oh, You believe me, don't you mom?"

I'll throw you into a situation in which no one's gonna believe you, and no way you cut it, you wind up dead. Then see how the *fruitcage* you talk to your mommy.

And about the buildings: the guy doesn't know what he's talking about. He doesn't take into account the sheer force of a jet that weighs 80-100 tons (plane, fuel, baggage, people, crap inside, etc) slamming into a non-hardened target at 590mph. A ditty comes to my mind, and I quote: " 'Cause I'm the JUGGERNAUT, BITCH!" Then the fires. Not just JP5 burns, ya know. crap like rugs do too. So does paper. And wood. And desks. And fabric. And even people. All that heat over a period of time combined with all of the shaking and violent impacts...oh, screw it, I'll make it easier for you to comprehend:

Planes + Speed + Combustibles + good angles = 3 buildings destroyed, 1 building damaged, @ 3000 people dead/missing.

Or even the other one: another plane, similar dimensions/weights, slamming into a hardened target. "Intact windows! Intact Windows!" You know, there ARE windows designed NOT to shatter when something goes boom nearby.

Not to freaking mention the fact that my freaking Grandmother was on her goddamned patio when the damned plane flew overhead. Or my good friend, VADM Greene who worked on the other side of the freaking Pentagon. You're grasping at straws. The eyewitnesses say "LIKE a missile", and "commuter jets" can mean anything from the dinky puddle jumpers to big jumbos. They're all commuter jets. They commute people from one place to another. The idiot pied-piper you're following is a *fruitcaging* liar arguing semantics.

Or maybe people turning up saying "Wait, but that's MY name!"

I offer you this: Open up a NYC phone book. Look up John Smith. Howard Johnston. Mary-Jo Blowme. Lots of people in lots of places have the same bloody name. Some more than others.
Ummm...

that was a pretty dense response. The reason I brought up people on teh planes making calls to their loved ones is because it's OBVIOUS THERE WERE PEOPLE ON HIJACKED PLANES IF THEY WERE TALKING TO THEIR LOVED ONES. you shoudl read my posts in this thread and actually think about my that post and what it is in response to before you accuse me of being a conspiracy loon. What I think happened on 9/11 is that 19 Islamic terrorists hijacked four jetliners and crashed them into teh WTC, the Pentagon and a field in Penn and that the government had nothing to do with it.

guys i hate Bush just as much as the next guy but that does not mean I'm going to think that he blew up the pentagon and two towers.I'll admit there were alot of strange things that happened on that day but they could of been coincidences.Without hard evidence I'm going to have to side with the truth that Osama Bin Laden's people hijacked the planes and flew them into there targets.

Nice! A quadruple post.

Nice! A quadruple post.

That takes talent. Go Murgerspher!

Nice! A quadruple post.

Quad post FTW!

Ummm...

that was a pretty dense response. The reason I brought up people on teh planes making calls to their loved ones is because it's OBVIOUS THERE WERE PEOPLE ON HIJACKED PLANES IF THEY WERE TALKING TO THEIR LOVED ONES. you shoudl read my posts in this thread and actually think about my that post and what it is in response to before you accuse me of being a conspiracy loon. What I think happened on 9/11 is that 19 Islamic terrorists hijacked four jetliners and crashed them into teh WTC, the Pentagon and a field in Penn and that the government had nothing to do with it.

Uhm, that wasn't directed at you... It was more directed to the freaknasties on here who seem to question all of the evidence. My apologies if you thought I was ranting at you! :D

Nice! A quadruple post.
Oh, leave the noob alone. the DB has been acting wierd and he probably hasn't learned to copy his post in the case of a long reload yet.

Sorry about that quadruple post guys:p .It was lagging and something weird happened.

Nah, that's okay. We don't really mind; we're just picking on you.

The Commie-Nazi Islamist-controlled Government Drones took it to the secret Illuminati airbase in Nevada.

To fly the Kennedy assassins back to Cuba.

Seen this years ago. There's a video on youtube called Loose Change. It's quite long, and a good part of it is a load of bull. It covers not only the pentagon, but the other events on 9/11, pinning it on the United States government.

Edit: damn, beat me, too.


I've just watched loose change, I'm now totally convinced that the 11/9/01 attacks were staged by the US government.

Assuming of course that all the evidence presented in loose change is reliable.
But then the same could be said for the "official" report of events.

Clearly both can't be right, the question is who do you trust more? The US goverment or a load of indie freelancers?

or put it another way, who has more to gain from lying?

whatever really happened we will likely never know the full story.

One thing I don't like is the way sceptics are treated, they are treated as either traitors or loonies. Please people, less of this.

I'm British so I suppose you could say I'm an interested third party but you Americans out there have a duty to ask questions, doesn't matter who you believe at the end but whatever you do don't just accept what you're told without looking deeper.

just my two centimes =)

I've just watched loose change, I'm now totally convinced that the 11/9/01 attacks were staged by the US government.

Assuming of course that all the evidence presented in loose change is reliable.
But then the same could be said for the "official" report of events.

Clearly both can't be right, the question is who do you trust more? The US goverment or a load of indie freelancers?

or put it another way, who has more to gain from lying?

whatever really happened we will likely never know the full story.

One thing I don't like is the way sceptics are treated, they are treated as either traitors or loonies. Please people, less of this.

I'm British so I suppose you could say I'm an interested third party but you Americans out there have a duty to ask questions, doesn't matter who you believe at the end but whatever you do don't just accept what you're told without looking deeper.

just my two centimes =)
Read the whole thread, please. It has been debunked pretty cleanly.

I already know what the truth is Swilatia.

No, you dont.

Read the whole thread, please. It has been debunked pretty cleanly.

really all I see is a load of would be know it alls going
"a plane that big would SO not make a hole that small"

followed by

"Nu-uh"

et cetera ad infinitum

Pentagon conspiracies? The US Government can't conspire to buy hammers and toilet seats for less than $20,000. They can't even deliver the mail properly, and it has one's address written on it!

If you're looking for a theory, find one that is premised on the US Government being an incompetant bunch of jackasses.

The Disraeliland Rule On Conspiracy Theories: The credibility of a theory is inversly proportional with the degree of US Government competance assumed.

really all I see is a load of would be know it alls going
"a plane that big would SO not make a hole that small"

followed by

"Nu-uh"

et cetera ad infinitum
Then you didn't read the whole thread because I posted direct testimony from witnesses at the scene. I also posted questions that cannot be answered like, "What about the dozens, maybe hundreds of people who were standing there watching it? What happened to all the people on the plane? What happened to the plane? I also posted a link to an article that goes into depth and debunks all teh claims made by conspiracy theorists.

No, you dont.

Yes I do.

Then you didn't read the whole thread because I posted direct testimony from witnesses at the scene. I also posted questions that cannot be answered like, "What about the dozens, maybe hundreds of people who were standing there watching it? What happened to all the people on the plane? What happened to the plane? I also posted a link to an article that goes into depth and debunks all teh claims made by conspiracy theorists.

Psychotic, I do not think the evidence is going to change minds. They already made up there minds that the government had something to do with it and the fact that they do not buy the plane hitting the Pentagon facts at all.

Yes I do.

Were you there?

Were you there?

At the Pentagon? no but I do live 90 minutes from where 93 went down.

Where you there?

At the Pentagon? no

Then stop right there and shut up.

Then stop right there and shut up.

No I will not shut up because you have yet to tell me if you were there. I highly doubt you were there and I will trust the words of those who actually where over a conspiracy theory that has been utterly destroyed.

Corneliu, Kazus, you're both acting like children. Either start arguing more intelligently that "Nuh uh!" "Yuh huh!" "Shut up!" "No, you shut up!" or stop arguing. Or do the both of you want time outs?

Some theorize it was a cruise missle that struck the Pentagon.

Who cares?

Good point but what made a suprisingly small hole in the pentagon that I know a Boeing 757 could not make.

Are you stuck on stupid? A plane that's made of alluminum and compositives will not make a flat out perfect circular hole in a building made of much harder materials.


Physics, yo!

:headbang:

Corneliu, Kazus, you're both acting like children. Either start arguing more intelligently that "Nuh uh!" "Yuh huh!" "Shut up!" "No, you shut up!" or stop arguing. Or do the both of you want time outs?

Well when he answers my question then I'll stop.