Pentagon strike.

[Serb]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
As a U.S. Army press release noted back on 26 September 2001, one engine of the aircraft punched a 12-foot hole through the wall of the second ring:

On the inside wall of the second ring of the Pentagon, a nearly circular hole, about 12-feet wide, allows light to pour into the building from an internal service alley. An aircraft engine punched the hole out on its last flight after being broken loose from its moorings on the plane. The result became a huge vent for the subsequent explosion and fire. Signs of fire and black smoke now ring the outside of the jagged-edged hole.

As the front of the Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon, the outer portions of the wings likely snapped during the initial impact, then were pushed inward towards the fuselage and carried into the building's interior; the inner portions of the wings probably penetrated the Pentagon walls with the rest of the plane. Any sizable portions of the wings were destroyed in the explosion or the subsequent fire.

Please, keep repeating this BS about "wings likely snapped during the initial impact, then were pushed inward towards the fuselage and carried into the building's interior". You think any thinking person will believe this crap?
GIVE AS A GOD DAMN PHOTO OF THE "engine of the aircraft punched a 12-foot hole through the wall of the second ring".
DO IT!!!
As long as you can't provide pics, I'll provide mine.
EAT THIS. You were talking about this hole? right?

http://pentagon.batcave.net/hole.html

http://www.noplane.0catch.com/

[Capt Dizle]

Eyewitness:

“Traffic was at a standstill, so I parked on the shoulder, not far from the scene and ran to the site. Next to me was a cab from D.C., its windshield smashed out by pieces of lampposts. There were pieces of the plane all over the highway, pieces of wing, I think.”

[Capt Dizle]

More eyewitness:

Being a former transport type (60's era) I cannot understand how that plane hit where it did giving the direction the aircraft was taking at the time.

As most know, the Pentagon lies at the bottom of two hills from the west with the east side being next to the river at 14th street bridge. One hill is at the Navy Annex and the other is Arlington Cemetery. The plane came up I-395 also known as Shirley Hwy. (most likely used as a reference point.) The plane had been seen making a lazy pattern in the no fly zone over the White House and US Cap. Why the plane did not hit incoming traffic coming down the river from the north to Reagan Nat'l. is beyond me. Strangely, no one at the Reagan Tower noticed the aircraft. Andrews AFB radar should have also picked up the aircraft I would think. Nevertheless, the aircarft went southwest near Springfield and then veered left over Arlington and then put the nose down coming over Ft Myer picking off trees and light poles near the helicopter pad next to building. It was as if he leveled out at the last minute and put it square into the building. The wings came off as if it went through an arch way leaving a hole in the side of the building it seems a little larger than the wide body of the aircraft. The entry point was so clean that the roof (shown in news photo) fell in on the wreckage.

[Capt Dizle]

More eyewitness:

Maj. Leibner drove in and made it as far as the south parking lot, where he got out on foot. "I heard the plane first," he said. "I thought it was a flyover Arlington cemetery."

From his vantage point, Maj. Leibner looked up and saw the plane come in. "I was about 100 yards away," he said. "You could see through the windows of the aircraft. I saw it hit."

The plane came in hard and level and was flown full throttle into the building, dead center mass, Maj. Leibner said. "The plane completely entered the building," he said. "I got a little repercussion, from the sound, the blast. I've heard artillery, and that was louder than the loudest has to offer.

[Colon™]

Originally posted by Capt Dizle
Eyewitness:

“Traffic was at a standstill, so I parked on the shoulder, not far from the scene and ran to the site. Next to me was a cab from D.C., its windshield smashed out by pieces of lampposts. There were pieces of the plane all over the highway, pieces of wing, I think.”

Obviously, this eyewitness was bribed to lie, or at least forced to do so, and got killed several months after this testimony in a "curious" car accident.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Geronimo

Boeing doesnt make planes out of aluminum powder but fully fueled explosions during high speed impacts certainly manufacture aluminum powder from airplanes! The higher the temperature of the fireball the less surface area is required to ignite the aluminum. Also the incineration of aluminum breifly increases the heat of the fireball. shred up an aluminum can, put the pieces in a mortar with a little aluminum powder, ignite the powder and watch it burn the bits of pop can to ash along with the powder (use a welding mask since the fire is bright enough to blind).

Sorry, dude, but you really have to contact your chemistry teacher and get some additional lessons.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Serb

Please, keep repeating this BS about "wings likely snapped during the initial impact, then were pushed inward towards the fuselage and carried into the building's interior". You think any thinking person will believe this crap?
GIVE AS A GOD DAMN PHOTO OF THE "engine of the aircraft punched a 12-foot hole through the wall of the second ring".
DO IT!!!
As long as you can't provide pics, I'll provide mine.
EAT THIS. You were talking about this hole? right?

http://pentagon.batcave.net/hole.html

http://www.noplane.0catch.com/

i don't think you can conclude anything from the interior ring images. We all agree there was an explosion at the pentagon and looking at the interior ring damage can verify that in fact there seems to have been serious damage but not whether an aircraft was involved.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Serb

Sorry, dude, but you really have to contact your chemistry teacher and get some additional lessons.

Such as what lesson?

that explosions cannot pulverize solid aluminum?

that small but macroscopic (solid) pieces of aluminum cannot burn in a non oxygen enriched atmosphere in the presence of burning powdered aluminum? (see for yourself, but be careful)

Specifically under what circumstances do you agree that aluminum can burn?

Keep in mind that molten (melted) aluminum is explosively reactive with water and of course within minutes of the impact fire crews were spraying water into the impact site.

I'm always open to lessons but your post doesn't even help me see where to begin.

[Capt Dizle]

I can't participate in this fantasy discussion any longer. I have to get out of the abandoned temple with Angela and the Spider Queen's heart and go back to town to get my paladin resurrected.

[Vince278]

Serb.

1. That no debris was found at the Twin Towers doesn't mean aircraft did not hit them. Why is no debris at the Pentagon so surprising?

2. Both black boxes were found at the Pentagon crash site. Perhaps you believe they were removed from the plane then planted at the Pentagon?

3. Have an explanation that doesn't sound as crazy as the conspiracy theories?

I worked there up to the year before 9/11. How familiar are you with the Pentagon?

[MosesPresley]

Only one black box was officially found afaik. Do you have a link for that info?

Another question. Why did the victims families receive $2 million payoffs? That was unprecedented. The Oklahoma City bombing victims didn't get jack.

[Colon™]

And if they didn't got $2 million payoffs, you surely would be complaining the victim's families were scandalously left behind?

[JohnT]

Originally posted by VJ

Hey, if JohnT, a businessman who has read at least two physics books in High School, thinks anyone who disagrees with his conclusions is a layperson who is being manipulated, it must be as he says!

JohnT is a person who lives in this world, who is smart enough to realize that when you have four missing planes and four crash sites, no other explanation is necessary.

Occams razor and all that. Surely you've read about him in your vaunted physics classes and "history of science"?

I am also perfectly cognizant of the very human ability to take the same pieces of evidence and spin two contradictory tales out of them. Even if the evidence is so overwhelming for the first tale as to make the second tale a bunch of loony **** that's barely more scientifically valid as the tales of Von Daniken.

Four planes. Four hijacks. Four crash sites. And a great big whopping need by people to believe, if not in religion, than some other fool crap. That, too, is very human - the need to believe that which one cannot see, even if it contradicts the evidence offered before our very eyes. Even if it's as obvious as a gaping hole in the wall.

Go figure.

[MosesPresley]

Originally posted by Colon
And if they didn't got $2 million payoffs, you surely would be complaining the victim's families were scandalously left behind?

I don't think so. I didn't complain when during every other tragedy the families didn't receive payoffs from the government.

The $2M looks like hush money, but maybe it isn't. It was a huge waste of tax money. Please explain why they merit the cash.

[Colon™]

Because there was this massive outpouring of sympathy and outrage back then and any politicians would have felt compelled to be generous?

Why do the victims in Pakistan get a lot less than the victims of the tsunami, huh? Or why were they at one point intending to aid NOLA to the tune of $200 billion, a response way in excess to that of other hurricane struck areas? Conspiracies too?

This isn't rational but to assume the inconsistency implies hush money is ludicrous.