Remembering 9/11

[IM469]

It's so tiny (yeah that's what she said) compared to that of a plane, which it's supposed to be. lol

Here we go. That thing couldn't even pass for a Lear Jet. lol

In poker we would say 'read them and weep!' Your view was obstructed and you were only looking at the tail of the plane over the gate. A missle wouldn't explain the light poles sheered by the wing and the generator damage outside the structure where the engine hit it.

This video shows the flight path of the plane and accounts for all the physical evidence at the scene including the surveillance video:

 

[Promo]

Flying a 757 passed its designed limit speed by over 100 knots so close to the ground would have structurally damaged the plane. Listen to what this veteran pilot of 757's and 767's has to say about how unbelievably impossible it would have been to do, even with the best pilots in the world.

Yet it happened! Given-up on your silly WTC theories and are now focused on the Pentagon.

Best pilots in the world can't eh? Military pilots maneuver at very low altitudes at 500+ MPH in training. Seems they do the impossible every day.

Prove your claim: "Flying a 757 passed its designed limit speed by over 100 knots so close to the ground would have structurally damaged the plane". Provide the information from an expert site like Being or NTSB. What if it did damage the aircraft, didn't matter 30 seconds later did it?

It's the home of what is apparently the most powerful militarized country in the world and no cameras caught anything of substance

More logical explanation is that; being the military, they chose not to share any other videos they may have with the public. Why would they, physical proof of aircraft debris was all over the lawn.

 

[Promo]

In poker we would say 'read them and weep!' Your view was obstructed and you were only looking at the tail of the plane over the gate. A missle wouldn't explain the light poles sheered by the wing and the generator damage outside the structure where the engine hit it.

This video shows the flight path of the plane and accounts for all the physical evidence at the scene including the surveillance video:

Nice find!

SuperCharge, you are big on eyewitness testimony. How do you explain the dozens of witnesses who say the impact from the nearby highway? Shall I post a bunch of videos?

 

[Jubee]

In poker we would say 'read them and weep!' Your view was obstructed and you were only looking at the tail of the plane over the gate. A missle wouldn't explain the light poles sheered by the wing and the generator damage outside the structure where the engine hit it.

This video shows the flight path of the plane and accounts for all the physical evidence at the scene including the surveillance video:

No, the gate wasn't obstructing nothing, it's not a commercial plane. A commercial plane would very easily be higher over that gate, but it's not.
lol @ read and weep, that was cute.

Take a little peek over here.
http://physics911.net/missingwings/


Where are the wings? lol
They sliced into the towers like a hot knife through butter, but in this case, they're gone. lol
Many might argue different structure, okay, that's fine, but surely a building that low, that big, that heavy with concrete and metal would take the blow and parts of the plane would be all over the place.
But apparently it's not that weak, since the nose of the apparent "plane" penetrated small portion of the building.

See how some things just don't add up?

 

[Jubee]

Absolutely wrong. The fire was burning at a high enough temperature for the Aluminum to look red. You were the person who kept insisting on the temperature of the fire.

Right, but at some point, the aluminum reaches it's melting point and it it's "flowing" it doesn't flow red as its exposed to air and cools down.
Whereas molten steel, which has a higher melting point, maintains it's redness, when flowing and exposed to air.

It retains its "redness" throughout the process and when in liquid form it looks like "lava" as described by those inept firefighters. What do they know, right Fuji?

You lie. There have been no reports of molten metal in the rubble for "months on the site".

http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2005/12/why-was-there-molten-metal-under.html

I'm assuming because it's not in the mainstream media, then it's not a good source.
Tons of eyewitness accounts, but of course, not reported by the media, much like a lot of other things are conveniently left out by the media. Or is that not true?
http://911blogger.com/news/2007-03-23/why-was-there-molten-metal-under-ground-zero-months-after-911



3:48 - who are you gonna believe?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQrpLp-X0ws

Apparently you don't know what molten aluminum looks like, even after you've seen several examples from Google.

Nope I do.
I can also tell the different when it's being poured and in liquid form, that's the key.
Sure, anything gets red hot to get to a melting point, or a burning point, it's HEATED, anything you add heat to will turn red, but it's what happens after that differs (in this case, between aluminum and steel).

 

[SuperCharge]

Yet it happened! Given-up on your silly WTC theories and are now focused on the Pentagon.

Rubbish, these events are tied together, or are you denying that. More hyperbole.

Yet Best pilots in the world can't eh? Military pilots maneuver at very low altitudes at 500+ MPH in training. Seems they do the impossible every day.

Military pilots train on military planes. Big difference here.

Yet Prove your claim: "Flying a 757 passed its designed limit speed by over 100 knots so close to the ground would have structurally damaged the plane". Provide the information from an expert site like Being or NTSB. What if it did damage the aircraft, didn't matter 30 seconds later did it?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_77

According to the 9/11 Commission Report, as Flight 77 was 5 miles (8.0 km) west-southwest of the Pentagon, it made a 330-degree turn. At the end of the turn, it was descending through 2,200 feet (670 m), pointed toward the Pentagon and downtown Washington. Hani Hanjour advanced the throttles to maximum power and dived toward the Pentagon. While level above the ground and seconds from the crash, the wings knocked over five street lampposts and the right wing struck a portable generator, creating a smoke trail seconds before smashing into the Pentagon.[38][39] Flight 77, flying at 530 mph (853 km/h, 237 m/s, or 460 knots)

"The speed, the maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that that was a military plane. You don't fly a 757 in that manner. It's unsafe."

Danielle O'Brien, Air traffic controller at Dulles International Airport[34]

Nasa can explain what happens at high speed low altitudes with commercial aircraft better than I ever could.
http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/mach.html

 

[fuji]

In poker we would say 'read them and weep!' Your view was obstructed and you were only looking at the tail of the plane over the gate. A missle wouldn't explain the light poles sheered by the wing and the generator damage outside the structure where the engine hit it.

This video shows the flight path of the plane and accounts for all the physical evidence at the scene including the surveillance video:

Not to mention the many people who saw it.

Notice how the spammers here, despite being wrong so many times, just keep moving on to new bullshit claims, as if they could just forget about being ludicrously wrong about everything else.

 

[Frankfooter]

Aside from the talk about the WTC, I find the statements from government more interesting, including the stalling on the 28 pages, the attempts to protect Saudi Arabia from 9/11 lawsuits and this latest statement from military suggesting that 9/11 lawsuits could be devastating to the military.
http://www.militarytimes.com/articles/defense-chief-9-11-bill-could-be-devastating-to-us-military

 

[SuperCharge]

Aside from the talk about the WTC, I find the statements from government more interesting, including the stalling on the 28 pages, the attempts to protect Saudi Arabia from 9/11 lawsuits and this latest statement from military suggesting that 9/11 lawsuits could be devastating to the military.
http://www.militarytimes.com/articles/defense-chief-9-11-bill-could-be-devastating-to-us-military

In war, truth is the first casualty.

 

[huckfinn]

Flying a 757 passed its designed limit speed by over 100 knots so close to the ground would have structurally damaged the plane. Listen to what this veteran pilot of 757's and 767's has to say about how unbelievably impossible it would have been to do, even with the best pilots in the world.

They would have had to slow to approach speed - 137 knots - to get the airplane to 'land' at the Pentagon, so they couldn't be doing 100 knots over the design speed.

 

[SuperCharge]

They would have had to slow to approach speed - 137 knots - to get the airplane to 'land' at the Pentagon, so they couldn't be doing 100 knots over the design speed.

Huck - did you not see my post #527? The plane that hit the pentagon, flight 77, was going a lot faster than 137 knots, it was travelling at 460 knots with the peddle to the metal. Your post is moot.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amer...ines_Flight_77

According to the 9/11 Commission Report, as Flight 77 was 5 miles (8.0 km) west-southwest of the Pentagon, it made a 330-degree turn. At the end of the turn, it was descending through 2,200 feet (670 m), pointed toward the Pentagon and downtown Washington. Hani Hanjour advanced the throttles to maximum power and dived toward the Pentagon. While level above the ground and seconds from the crash, the wings knocked over five street lampposts and the right wing struck a portable generator, creating a smoke trail seconds before smashing into the Pentagon.[38][39] [B]Flight 77, flying at 530 mph (853 km/h, 237 m/s, or 460 knots)[/B]

 

[huckfinn]

According to the 9/11 Commission Report, as Flight 77 was 5 miles (8.0 km) west-southwest of the Pentagon, it made a 330-degree turn. At the end of the turn, it was descending through 2,200 feet (670 m), pointed toward the Pentagon and downtown Washington. Hani Hanjour advanced the throttles to maximum power and dived toward the Pentagon. While level above the ground and seconds from the crash, the wings knocked over five street lampposts and the right wing struck a portable generator, creating a smoke trail seconds before smashing into the Pentagon.[38][39] Flight 77, flying at 530 mph (853 km/h, 237 m/s, or 460 knots)

So your own post admits a plane hit the Pentagon, which is contrary to your earlier posts.

Flying a 757 passed its designed limit speed by over 100 knots so close to the ground would have structurally damaged the plane. Listen to what this veteran pilot of 757's and 767's has to say about how unbelievably impossible it would have been to do, even with the best pilots in the world.

You have to remember, the plane was at the low altitude for a few seconds, as it "dived" toward the Pentagon, as admitted in the quote above. At that speed, even if it suffered structural damage, it would have hit its intended target anyway.

It also suffered damage hitting posts, and a generator, and still hit the target.

 

[SuperCharge]

So your own post admits a plane hit the Pentagon, which is contrary to your earlier posts.

Jesus do you debunkers ever like putting words into people's mouths. Show me where I said that something other than a plane went into the pentagon.

You have to remember, the plane was at the low altitude for a few seconds, as it "dived" toward the Pentagon, as admitted in the quote above. At that speed, even if it suffered structural damage, it would have hit its intended target anyway.

The plane circled the pentagon, came around, and then hit the building. He dove at an incredible speed, was able to level it out going 460 knots and then miraculously keep the plane steady until he hit the part of the building he wanted? Yaaaaaaaah okay! He could have just dove right into the building, but he didn't, he circled first at an extremely high speed.

Call boeing, ask them if it's possible to be 70 meters off ground going 460 knots? They will laugh at you and call you cute.

 

[huckfinn]

Jesus do you debunkers ever like putting words into people's mouths. Show me where I said that something other than a plane went into the pentagon.


The plane circled the pentagon, came around, and then hit the building. He dove at an incredible speed, was able to level it out going 460 knots and then miraculously keep the plane steady until he hit the part of the building he wanted. He could have just dove right into the building, but he didn't, he circled first at an extremely high speed. NO commercial aircraft can do that, it's impossible. Call boeing, ask them if it's possible to be 70 meters off ground going that speed? They will laugh at you and call you cute.

Well you're saying its near impossible for someone to do what they did. It seems you are suggesting it was something else that hit the Pentagon?

Btw, "According to the 9/11 Commission Report, as Flight 77 was 5 miles (8.0 km) west-southwest of the Pentagon, it made a 330-degree turn". It was at 2200 feet / 670.56 meters and 5 miles away when it made the turn, not leveled out over the ground.

 

[SuperCharge]

Well you're saying its near impossible for someone to do what they did. It seems you are suggesting it was something else that hit the Pentagon?

Btw, "According to the 9/11 Commission Report, as Flight 77 was 5 miles (8.0 km) west-southwest of the Pentagon, it made a 330-degree turn". It was at 2200 feet / 670.56 meters and 5 miles away when it made the turn, not leveled out over the ground.

Listen to yourself right now, look up how impossible and difficult that maneuver would be for the best of pilots, while keeping in mind we're not dealing with the best of the best, we're dealing with someone who couldn't even get a cessna off the ground. Pick the site of your choice. Get back to me later.

 

[huckfinn]

Listen to yourself right now, look up how impossible and difficult that maneuver would be. Pick the site of your choice. Get back to me later.

But you're claiming he made the turn at 70 meters altitude......he was at a 670 meter altitude when he made the turn according to the report.

I'm reading what you are stating, but it is contrary to the report. So are you saying it is impossible to make that manoeuvre at 670 meters off the ground?

I get what you're saying about manoeuvering so close to the ground.....I don't disagree with that. Perhaps it was shit luck, but there is evidence an airplane chopped off the light poles etc.

Eyewitnesses verified airplane parts in the Pentagon, saw it hit the building, heard it. If it didn't crash there, where is the airplane and all the hostages, as an attendant on the airplane called to tell someone the plane was hijacked. There is so much evidence that the airplane hit the Pentagon, I don't have to look far.

 

[IM469]

No, the gate wasn't obstructing nothing, it's not a commercial plane. A commercial plane would very easily be higher over that gate, but it's not.
lol @ read and weep, that was cute.

Take a little peek over here.
http://physics911.net/missingwings/


Where are the wings? lol
They sliced into the towers like a hot knife through butter, but in this case, they're gone. lol

I would suggest that your conspiracy website has conveniently omitted items (eg: the engines attached to the wings found in the wreckage) which is done because it supports their 'raison d'etre'.
As far as seeing the 'big' plane over the gate might I remind you that when you stand in the shade of a tree and look at the sun that little tree is blocking an object over 800,000 miles in diameter. It's all perspective which is clearly illustrated in the Solid Works (a 3-D program used for design) change of view function. The view is obscured exactly as predicted.

Okay ... let's have a little fun and say it was a missile fired at the Pentagon as part of a convoluted conspiracy by a covert government organization 'X'. So 'X' hijacked an airline and according to radar and visual sighting of other pilots flew it towards the Pentagon. Rather than use the hijacked plane, X decided to shoot a missile they had in the area. So 'X' used a magic trick they saw David Copperfield perform and made a fully loaded jet with passengers flying at full throttle disappear in mid flight (never to be seen again). Then 'X' covertly launched their missile at the Pentagon. To sell the jet plane ruse, 'X' had to follow the path of the missile knocking down the light poles and inflict severe damage to half a generator adjacent to the fire. Other 'X' personnel drove down the hill unobserved by press and other witnesses tossing random jet plane wreckage including jet engine parts without being observed or photographed.

Oh, the group 'X' missile makes the most sense - not ! (lol)

 

[Jubee]

Not to mention the many people who saw it.

Notice how the spammers here, despite being wrong so many times, just keep moving on to new bullshit claims, as if they could just forget about being ludicrously wrong about everything else.

Not at all, I'm simply saying that so many crazy improbable things happened in ONE day. How ironic huh?

Seriously, the main "office" so to speak of the most heavily funded military in the world and all you have is a 7 second video (on YOUTUBE omg that Youtube lol).
Surely with a budget as big as theirs, they would have more cameras to record this COMMERCIAL plane coming in towards the building. It's such a big plane, flew beyond its designed limits and so low. lol


So yeah, the Twin Towers falling was very odd. Building 7 being the only building in the area to collapse due to debris and fire, but other buildings in the surrounding area miraculously still stood after all mayhem.
Now there's the topic of the Penta-Con.

Lots of questionable things going around that day. Too coincidental that's all.
I hope you live long enough to hear the truth about it. Wonder how you'll absorb that hit.

 

[Jubee]

Well you're saying its near impossible for someone to do what they did. It seems you are suggesting it was something else that hit the Pentagon?

Btw, "According to the 9/11 Commission Report, as Flight 77 was 5 miles (8.0 km) west-southwest of the Pentagon, it made a 330-degree turn". It was at 2200 feet / 670.56 meters and 5 miles away when it made the turn, not leveled out over the ground.

lol 9/11 Commission Report, these guys were covering up tracks of the government. So much B.S. with their "report".
But because it's "commissioned" by the government it must be true. :sad:

 

[Jubee]

But you're claiming he made the turn at 70 meters altitude......he was at a 670 meter altitude when he made the turn according to the report.

I'm reading what you are stating, but it is contrary to the report. So are you saying it is impossible to make that manoeuvre at 670 meters off the ground?

I get what you're saying about manoeuvering so close to the ground.....I don't disagree with that. Perhaps it was shit luck, but there is evidence an airplane chopped off the light poles etc.

Eyewitnesses verified airplane parts in the Pentagon, saw it hit the building, heard it. If it didn't crash there, where is the airplane and all the hostages, as an attendant on the airplane called to tell someone the plane was hijacked. There is so much evidence that the airplane hit the Pentagon, I don't have to look far.

You truly believe that the Pentacon attack was done by a plane?
That right there where the arrow is pointing, almost touching the grass is a COMMERCIAL plane?

I do like one of the comments below under the video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZaPoD_7TmNc

A billion cameras on that building and the only one that works is a busted old 1978 gas station camera? Bull shit.
A plane that big caused a hole that small but going that fast should have gone through it.
Where's the rest of the plane? They took jfk Jr.
Plane from the bottom of the water and reconstructed it so why not this one?
Why would the plane basically skid across the ground and not at an angle or something?
I'm not into conspiracy theories but something smells funny