Evidence That A Boeing 757 Really Did Impact the Pentagon on 9/11

[Daphne]

Posted by Oouthere (here)
Actually I do believe WTC7 was brought down by demolitions. But it was tested on video that the beams will bend and collapse under a load with simple jet fuel so I cannot completely discount WTC1 and WTC2 as having collapsed because of fire. Since WTC7 did not have this, it is a good possibility that something else caused it to collapse. Plus the BBC announced the collapsed before it happened is reason for concern as well.

if you believe that, you have to wonder why the building 7 was ready for controlled demo. If they needed weeks to prepare, why was it done? and if we agree that it was done, doesn't that make the rest of the story highly suspect

[Oouthere]

Posted by indigopete (here)

Posted by Oouthere (here)
Mostly in regards to the Pentagon impact. There is nothing that fits better than a 757 impacting the Pentagon. The engine parts fit, a stewardess that was caring for her father that missed that flight identified pieces of the aircraft and her best friend's arm by a bracelet (also a stewardess)

Is this a joke ? She "identified peices of the aircraft" ? Did she physically go down their and check the tail number or something ? Hey I'm sure I saw *my* best friend's cufflinks in the rubble pile as well. He wasn't on the flight - so where does that leave us ?

If you really think a 757 can do 500 Knots at 12 feet off the deck while jigging its course 2 seconds from impact to line up with the "right" window then there's a few aerodynamics labs that will be interested in hiring you.

Apart from that, the problem of fitting a 100 foot wide plane travelling at 80% the speed of sound through a 40 foot hole might call into question your best friend's eyesight (as least as far as 'bracelets' go).

I never said I believed everything, as a matter of fact all of the radar and black box data should be discarded imo as it is tainted. I believe the aircraft were remotely flown in with the Pentagon aircraft being near landing speed. Numerous people heard the engines throttling-up before impact.

And yes, the stewardess did go to the crash site: ...."When questions arose about Flight 77, I contacted her to raise the issues that concerned me and the speculations of others who denied the plane hit the Pentagon. She was adamant in saying it had, and told me she had been to the crash site and had seen parts of the plane. I asked her about the speculation that the plane would have made a larger hole due to the wingspan. She informed me that the fuel was stored in the wings and that they would have exploded and broken off, as the fuselage slammed through the building walls."

The hole was not nearly so small as people say, do your research and stop listening to analysis...just use your eyes. But irregardless of what people say, aluminum is used in gunpowder and burns.



That's ok I'm content with my job, I've already completed the requirements for my degree in avionics technologies after being in the air force for 10 years.

[Operator]

Posted by Daphne (here)

Posted by Oouthere (here)
Actually I do believe WTC7 was brought down by demolitions. But it was tested on video that the beams will bend and collapse under a load with simple jet fuel so I cannot completely discount WTC1 and WTC2 as having collapsed because of fire. Since WTC7 did not have this, it is a good possibility that something else caused it to collapse. Plus the BBC announced the collapsed before it happened is reason for concern as well.

if you believe that, you have to wonder why the building 7 was ready for controlled demo. If they needed weeks to prepare, why was it done? and if we agree that it was done, doesn't that make the rest of the story highly suspect

It's easy to 'drown' in the complexity of 9/11. That's why I think we don't need to prove anything.
Take just one element that clearly does not match their official explanation and let them clarify the
whole scenario again. Repeat this process until there are no more questions left. That's how you
debug functional errors in software. This is also how we debug a dis-functional government.

[Oouthere]

Posted by Daphne (here)

Posted by Oouthere (here)
Actually I do believe WTC7 was brought down by demolitions. But it was tested on video that the beams will bend and collapse under a load with simple jet fuel so I cannot completely discount WTC1 and WTC2 as having collapsed because of fire. Since WTC7 did not have this, it is a good possibility that something else caused it to collapse. Plus the BBC announced the collapsed before it happened is reason for concern as well.

if you believe that, you have to wonder why the building 7 was ready for controlled demo. If they needed weeks to prepare, why was it done? and if we agree that it was done, doesn't that make the rest of the story highly suspect

Sure does.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=G43zl4fzDQg

[Oouthere]

Posted by KiwiElf (here)

Mostly in regards to the Pentagon impact. There is nothing that fits better than a 757 impacting the Pentagon. The engine parts fit, a stewardess that was caring for her father that missed that flight identified pieces of the aircraft and her best friend's arm by a bracelet (also a stewardess), numerous people stated they saw an airliner hit. It fits the generator impact, it fits the light poles being down, it simply fits. If you forget the far fetched ideas and simply look at the photo's and not listen to why someone tells you it's wrong, then it fits. Also, April Gallop was seen exiting a double wooden door and not the impact hole as she stated. One of the two people that saw her also suffered lung damage due to the jet fuel of which she said was not present.

Some people simply want conspiracy and are not after the truth. I'm only after the truth irregardless where it leads.

The "engine parts fit"? - have you been reading/researching nothing? The "engine" that was found on the pentagon lawn comes from either (1) an obsolete military navy fighter jet, or (2) a CRUISE MISSILE. That's just for starters. Where are the wings? Where is the tail? (What are you even doing here???)

I would suggest you start looking a little harder!

You could not be more wrong.

The turbine shot that everyone says is not from a 757 is one of the last turbines on the shaft of a RB-211 engine that fits a 757. I've counted the blades and looked-up the parts breakdowns, have you?

And a RB-211 diffusor found at the Pentagon. Here's the part breakdown.

[Atlas]

There's also the wheel. Could these have been put there before the event...?

[jerry]

Posted by Oouthere (here)
Mostly in regards to the Pentagon impact. There is nothing that fits better than a 757 impacting the Pentagon. The engine parts fit, a stewardess that was caring for her father that missed that flight identified pieces of the aircraft and her best friend's arm by a bracelet (also a stewardess), numerous people stated they saw an airliner hit. It fits the generator impact, it fits the light poles being down, it simply fits. If you forget the far fetched ideas and simply look at the photo's and not listen to why someone tells you it's wrong, then it fits. Also, April Gallop was seen exiting a double wooden door and not the impact hole as she stated. One of the two people that saw her also suffered lung damage due to the jet fuel of which she said was not present.

Some people simply want conspiracy and are not after the truth. I'm only after the truth irregardless where it leads.

ask yourself one question what are they hiding ,and by that I mean where's the photos to prove what hit the Pentagon, SERIUOSLY , the worlds most protected building in the world and not one shred of video evidence has been released that has any merit as to what hit it what so ever. And the follow up of the FBI confiscating all surrounding videos from businesses in the area ,GIVE US A BREAK go watch your CNN

[jerry]

Posted by buares (here)

Posted by kemo (here)
Well, I've seen some pretty grisly photos of charred bodies still strapped to airline seats, supposedly taken from inside after it happened. If that was faked then obviously the conspiracy gets even bigger.

Are these the photos of charred bodies (WARNING - DISTURBING/GRAPHIC) you saw ? Are these the only ones we have ? Because if yes, I don't think this is conclusive evidence... Were the remains identified ? and where are the other bodies ?

Agreed lots of pics out there and were these official . Chared bodies but no AP parts call me a skeptic cause I don't buy it. Charred bodies are of the investigative team the missile took out IMHO

[aviators]

Exit Hole ....Exit Hole .... Exit Hole ....
If this isn't the biggest smoking gun please explain.


The Pentagon exit hole is one of the most anomalous features of the Pentagon attack. It is 310 feet away from the impact area, near perfectly round and absolutely inexplicable in terms of the composite nose of a Boeing 757-200 "punching out". The other sore thumb about it is that it is avoided in ALL of the official reports. "It is not explained in the Building Performance Report, the Shoring Report, the Arlington County After-Action Report or the 9/11 Commission Report.". The only report by an engineer commenting on it was linked right here at Rense.com. This article will attempt to support Michael Meyer's position that a type of shape charge was used.
http://www.rense.com/general70/hole.htm

[jerry]

Posted by Oouthere (here)
Actually I do believe WTC7 was brought down by demolitions. But it was tested on video that the beams will bend and collapse under a load with simple jet fuel so I cannot completely discount WTC1 and WTC2 as having collapsed because of fire. Since WTC7 did not have this, it is a good possibility that something else caused it to collapse. Plus the BBC announced the collapsed before it happened is reason for concern as well.

yes something like space age weapons ect could have caused it to collapse BUT NOT AT FREEFALL IN ITS OWN FOOTPRINT????????????????????????

¤=[Post Update]=¤

Posted by mpennery (here)
i expected better from the readers here. Sorry but there is absolutely, positively no chance in hell that a airliner hit the pentagon. This ridiculous argument has been thoroughly destroyed. I can't believe we are still having this discussion. Actually, let me rephrase that. I can't believe it but i see we have something here at pa that i wasn't sure we'd have and i guess i shouldn't be surprised. You know what i'm talking about but do the rest of you?

Matt

yes therrrrre herrrre

[gnostic9]

Posted by buares (here)

Posted by kemo (here)
Well, I've seen some pretty grisly photos of charred bodies still strapped to airline seats, supposedly taken from inside after it happened. If that was faked then obviously the conspiracy gets even bigger.

Are these the photos of charred bodies (WARNING - DISTURBING/GRAPHIC) you saw ? Are these the only ones we have ? Because if yes, I don't think this is conclusive evidence... Were the remains identified ? and where are the other bodies ?

This is interesting too!http://www.911research.wtc7.net/wtc/...ce/bodies.html

[indigopete]

Posted by Oouthere (here)
I asked her about the speculation that the plane would have made a larger hole due to the wingspan. She informed me that the fuel was stored in the wings and that they would have exploded and broken off, as the fuselage slammed through the building walls......That's ok I'm content with my job, I've already completed the requirements for my degree in avionics technologies after being in the air force for 10 years.

Well all I can say is it's just as well you're doing avionics because physics doesn't seem to be your strong point

A single RB211 engine weighs between 3000 and 4000 Kg. Thats nearly ***4 metric tones*** and there are TWO of them.

At 500 miles per hour (220 m/s) it equates to 72,000 Kilojoules of kinetic energy (72 Megajoules). To give you an idea of how much energy that is, a 6 tonne lorry doing 70 mph represents about 3 Megajoules. So imagine, 24 6-tonne lorries doing 70 miles per hour and ploughing into the same spot in a wall: that's the impact effect of only 1 of those RB-211 engines at the speed it was claimed to be moving.

I'm sorry, but your stewardess friend is either deluded or simply forgot that planes have engines. Two 3-tonne projectiles travelling at 500 mph do not change direction in a millisecond to get "sucked" through a 20 foot hole or otherwise "evaporate" on impact. Those engines were 40 feet apart and didn't even leave a stain on the wall at their supposed "impact point" so I think you'd better go back the drawing board with the "bracelet" theory.

[Baby Steps]

Attachment 27452

Posted by jerry (here)

Posted by Oouthere (here)
Mostly in regards to the Pentagon impact. There is nothing that fits better than a 757 impacting the Pentagon. The engine parts fit, a stewardess that was caring for her father that missed that flight identified pieces of the aircraft and her best friend's arm by a bracelet (also a stewardess), numerous people stated they saw an airliner hit. It fits the generator impact, it fits the light poles being down, it simply fits. If you forget the far fetched ideas and simply look at the photo's and not listen to why someone tells you it's wrong, then it fits. Also, April Gallop was seen exiting a double wooden door and not the impact hole as she stated. One of the two people that saw her also suffered lung damage due to the jet fuel of which she said was not present.

Some people simply want conspiracy and are not after the truth. I'm only after the truth irregardless where it leads.

ask yourself one question what are they hiding ,and by that I mean where's the photos to prove what hit the Pentagon, SERIUOSLY , the worlds most protected building in the world and not one shred of video evidence has been released that has any merit as to what hit it what so ever. And the follow up of the FBI confiscating all surrounding videos from businesses in the area ,GIVE US A BREAK go watch your CNN

The image before the roof fell is very telling.No sign of plane or plane sized hole. But many witnesses that there was a plane. It just looks wrong.9/11 could finally trigger a consciousness shift.

[ceetee9]

Posted by Oouthere (here)
Actually I do believe WTC7 was brought down by demolitions. But it was tested on video that the beams will bend and collapse under a load with simple jet fuel so I cannot completely discount WTC1 and WTC2 as having collapsed because of fire. Since WTC7 did not have this, it is a good possibility that something else caused it to collapse. Plus the BBC announced the collapsed before it happened is reason for concern as well.

With all due respect Oouthere, I'm a bit puzzled how you could believe WTC7 was brought down by demolitions, but then believe buildings 1 & 2 were brought down by jet fueled fires. Doesn't it seem odd that two buildings would come down by fires caused by the unexpected impact of planes, but the third would be brought down by a controlled (i.e., planned) demolition? It takes weeks, if not months, to plan and wire a building so that it can be brought down in its own footprint--and even then it doesn't always go as planned.

It has already been proven that office fires (stoked by jet fuel or not) cannot melt or sufficiently weaken high-rise steel structures to bring them down. And this is borne out by the fact that never in history has a single skyscraper been brought down by fires or plane impacts--of which there have been dozens if not hundreds.

I highly recommend you watch The Anatomy of a Great Deception documentary and visit some the better 9/11 websites like Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, Pilots for 9/11 Truth, Scientists for 9/11 Truth, U.S. Military Officers for 9/11 Truth, Firefighters for 9/11 Truth and there are many more that provide real expert testimony including the impossibility of the towers being brought down by fires; much less in their own footprint a la controlled demolition style.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Here are some more visual comparisons.

This was the original hole before the roof collapsed:





It's rather obvious, to me at least, that no plane went into that hole. This is the same hole that General Stubblebine (US military) was talking about when he said there was no way a plane went in there.




I don't know if there's an "official explanation" for the wings but usually I hear that they folded up and were "sucked into" the hole where the fuselage went without striking the building, which doesn't sound very credible to me. I just can't realistically imagine how that could happen, after watching other (test) aircraft impacts and seeing how they actually look.

[Hervé]

That initial hole

... and the sticking belief that a full speed flying 757 created it without leaving imprints of wings, engines, and vertical stabilizer as asserted by the official narrative is one of the best example of what's called

Cognitive Dissonance!

Cognitive dissonance:
In psychology, cognitive dissonance is the mental stress or discomfort experienced by an individual who holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values at the same time, or is confronted by new information that conflicts with existing beliefs, ideas, or values.[1][2]

Leon Festinger’s theory of cognitive dissonance focuses on how humans strive for internal consistency. When inconsistency (dissonance) is experienced, individuals tend to become psychologically uncomfortable and are motivated to attempt to reduce this dissonance, as well as actively avoiding situations and information which are likely to increase it.[1]

More there: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

Festinguer also co-authored a book titled “When prophecy fails”:

Festinger and his collaborators, Henry Riecken and Stanley Schachter, examined conditions under which disconfirmation of beliefs leads to increased conviction in such beliefs in the 1956 book When Prophecy Fails. The group studied a small apocalyptic cult led by Dorothy Martin (under the pseudonym Marian Keech in the book), a suburban housewife.[49][50] Martin claimed to have received messages from “the Guardians,” a group of superior beings from another planet. The messages puportedly said that a flood would destroy the world on December 21. The three psychologists and several more assistants joined the group. The team observed the group firsthand for months before and after the predicted apocalypse. Many of the group members quit their jobs and disposed of their possessions in preparation for the apocalypse. When doomsday came and went, Martin claimed that the world had been spared because of the “force of Good and light”[51] that the group members had spread throughout the world. Rather than abandoning their discredited beliefs, group members adhered to them even more strongly and began proselytizing with fervor.

Festinger and his co-authors concluded that the following conditions lead to increased conviction in beliefs following disconfirmation:

1. The belief must be held with deep conviction and be relevant to the believer’s actions or behavior.
2. The belief must have produced actions that are difficult to undo.
3. The belief must be sufficiently specific and concerned with the real world such that it can be clearly disconfirmed.
4. The disconfirmatory evidence must be recognized by the believer.
5. The believer must have social support from other believers.[52]

Festinger also later described the increased conviction and proselytizing by cult members after disconfirmation as a specific instantiation of cognitive dissonance (i.e., increased proselyting reduced dissonance by producing the knowledge that others also accepted their beliefs) and its application to understanding complex mass phenomena.[53]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leon_Festinger]

Any resemblance to any contemporary group is absolutely non-fortuitous…

[jerry]

Poor Oouthere he's either gonna wake up or go away , and either will still be quite depressing , but its for the best and it will get better with time

[Operator]

Posted by jerry (here)
Poor Oouthere he's either gonna wake up or go away , and either will still be quite depressing , but its for the best and it will get better with time

Yep, it's a painful process for sure. But we should be careful not to divide ourselves into "us and them".

Here we are at post #56 already, after presenting a lot 'evidence' pro- and contra again. We'd better invest some time in
understanding the differences like I attempted in post #9.

Whatever point of view is chosen people are often stuck to it because of factors and belief systems external to the case.
My mother e.g. simply cannot accept that people would be evil enough to inflict death and destruction on their own nation.
A different approach may be needed for each individual case.

[Ahnung-quay]

Operator -I was talking to a friend today about why people deny the conspiracy aspect of 9/11 when the evidence is clearly before them.

She admitted that it is so disruptive to her Polly Anna-like view point of the world that she just can't/won't go there. She's a very loving individual of average intelligence. I guess it does just hurt some people's hearts too much.

[Hervé]

Oouthere did post a very interesting video from a whistle blower:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=G43zl4fzDQg

Interesting because it ties in with this testimony (<---) as well as the different $$ grab schemes -- as documented by Sue Arrigo -- that resulted from that excuse for war that benefited the only 3 individuals who could have given the order to Susan's handler to tell Saddam, "Comply or else!" and leaving out THE individual who was ordering any of the three of them... since Rockefeller has been ordering the CIA and KGB from their inception (see this post <---)

Susan's testimony is also a reminder of that - now proverbial - saying, that "The lie is different at each level"...