Pentagon strike.

[Serb]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Can someone give me a good reason why a government that can't even keep the existance of supposedly secret prisons a secret can make people disappear with no evidence of them still being alive?

Good question. I'm afraid I have no answer for you. Any ideas?

[Geronimo]

What do you think of Vel's explanations Serb?

[Velociryx]

Vel:

Now, what is it: is the hole to big to make it a car bomb, or is it too small for an airplane?

Will you please make up your mind?

So far, I've not been inconsistent in the least. I'm not sure what you're driving at, but that's okay. If you can indicate where you feel I have suffered some confusion with regards to the hole, that would be helpful.

-=Vel=-

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Russians must be really gullible: http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm

I have a bridge in New York I'd like to sell you.

I wonder if people posting conspiracy links also took the time to at least look at the snopes link.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Geronimo
What do you think of Vel's explanations Serb?

I really don't know. Vel's versions exaplain the dissapearence of the fligh, but not the strike on the Pentagon. I believe these two things are connected to each other.
Leaving conspiracy theories aside (such as, it was a planned action of the government), the only explanation I have is that terrorists are behind BOTH hi-jacking of Boeing-757 and strike against the Pentagon. If we assume that three other Boeings have been captured this day, it's possible that this fourth plane has been captured also and was shot-down/fall somewhere in the ocean. At the same time, terrorists managed to get access to US cruise missile and launched it at Pentagon. To cover-up this failure (it is a serious matter of national security, as I understand it) the military came with idea to blame the (already destroyed) hi-jacked Boeing-757 for this attack. I think it explains why flight dissapeard and why there are no Boeing-757 remains at the Pentagon site.

[Capt Dizle]

So why would the pilot of the hijacked plane have headed out over the sea?

[Velociryx]

Any number of reasons....he didn't mean to, but sucked as a pilot. Had a change of heart. Couldn't read the chart. Who knows....could have been any of those, or none. But it's feasable. I can think of a variety of reasons why it COULD HAVE happened just that way.

I'm....having more trouble finding reasons why a plane hit the ground and yet....no impact marks ON the ground. I'll admit...I'm struggling with that.

And I very much think that the attacks (jetliner) were related to whatever hit the pentagon.

-=Vel=-

[Capt Dizle]

Okay, so here is how it goes. Four planes are hijacked and 2 ram the towers. Military jets are scrambled, Plane 3 is shot down in Penn after or during a takeover attempt by the passengers, thus explaining the reports of damage being spread over a wide area. Plane 4 makes it back to the DC area where military fighters attempt to intervene, with a missle or a military jet hitting the Pentagon. Plane 4 manuvers to evade with hopes of being able to get in position to do some harm to a significant target but blunders out to sea and is shot down.

Now, that scenario shows about the right amount of incompetance on the part of the military to be believable.

There's the strawman, knock it down.

[Serb]

I'll add some pics.

How do you like this grass, DD?

[Serb]

Still wondering about the wings, Ecthy?

[Capt Dizle]

The argument about the wings is pretty weak, you can see damage on the lower floor to indicate impact. The wings would have folded and would not have had the mass to penetrate and the photo shows the hole being big enough to acount for the only mass that counts, that being the engines. So, you have no evidence there.

[Serb]

Exclusive for the blind people:

This is the same picture (high resolution):

http://www.defenselink.mil/photos/Sep2001/010914-F-8006R-001.jpg

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Capt Dizle
So why would the pilot of the hijacked plane have headed out over the sea?

Let's try a test. Combine that answer while answering the question of why they would find debris from the plane at the pentagon if it was a cruise missile as Vel and Serb suggest.

[Serb]

Did you find any Boeings on that picture? Engines? Wings? Tail? ANYTHING?
Have you noticed glass in Pentagon's widows?

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Serb
Did you find any Boeings on that picture? Engines? Wings? Tail? ANYTHING?

Small pieces of airplane debris were plainly visible on the Pentagon lawn in other photographs, however, such as the one below:

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/images/debris.jpg

Exterior photographs are misleading because they show only the intact roof structures of the outer rings and don't reveal that the plane penetrated all the way to the ground floor of the third ring. 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.