Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
Guest KING BLING

Pentagon......truck bomb?????

Recommended Posts

Guest willy.wonka

you know what?!....i spent a great deal of time annalyzing those pics

 

im not too sure of what happened,but it seems reasonable that a truck or an a inside implosion/explsion might have created that...

its hard to tell..

im beggining to have second thoughts though....your thread is working on me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah

i didnt see a plane at all in any of those photos

but then what happened to that plane?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry to bring this topic up again lol but, so what if it was a truck or a plane? what if the plane hit the building at an angle and not straight on. oh well

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by podrido

sorry to bring this topic up again lol but, so what if it was a truck or a plane? what if the plane hit the building at an angle and not straight on. oh well

 

if it was a truck bomb, and not a plane, then we have one airplane unaccounted for. where did it really crash if it didnt crash into the pentagon? or did a plane even crash at all? government coverup? who knows.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always wondered how a terrorist with "steering only, not landing" training could have held the plane steady 20 feet off the ground long enough to approach and hit the side of something as short as the Pentagon. He must have been clipping telephone poles or something in a path leading to the impact site, or been VERY skillful or lucky to have hit on target from a dive steep enough to have avoided clipping tall obstacles nearby.

On the other hand, basic physics dissolves some suspicion IF the plane was in a dive when it hit: a significant vector force would have been in a downward direction, so the ground might have taken as much as half the impact force. That leaves the building with only half the damage you'd expect to see from a plane of that size and velocity. Except, as I said, the pilot would have an extremely small chance of hitting the base of the building in a 45 degree dive at 250 mph. Also, how the hell do you "target" the Pentagon visually? It's recognizable from the air at a low enough altitude, but how does an inexperienced pilot do a flyover, recognize the target, turn around (this takes a lot of room for a big plane at 250 mph), get down to almost zero altitude, and recognize the right building again from the SIDE?

Overall, I'm crabby. It's easy to put together a shallow conspiracy theory site, and harder to do the necessary research. There aren't too many full-speed frontal crash tests of big airliners to compare results with, so how does anyone know what the Pentagon SHOULD look like after the alleged crash? I'd want to know engineering details like the structure of the Pentagon, building materials, wall thickness, etc. I'd also want to know what the theories are as to what really happened and why. If that plane didn't crash there, where did it go? And why would the government blow up its own people (on short notice) to cover for a vanished plane? Get me more evidence and I'll care enough to retrieve this from the crackpot file.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Cracked Ass

why would the government blow up its own people (on short notice) to cover for a vanished plane?

 

 

thats the thing, it hit an area that was being re-done, so there werent people in it. and sure, they said there were a few workers and what not, but if they're going to lie about a plane hitting it, of course they're going to lie about the casualties. cracked, you know how our govt works, body counts are halfed or doubled, depending on what the public would rather hear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Are2

i already commented plenty in the other thread..

 

but i will reiterate..

 

i personally know two different people (who don't know each other)

who saw the plane hit the pentagon..

 

they SAW it, with their very own eyes, as they were driving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Are2

another controversy...

 

who else thinks that the hijacked plane which crashed in the middle of nowhere in PA was actually SHOT DOWN?!

 

i have heard lots of rumors about this, supposedly originating from a leak at the secret service

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nothing against your friends are2, but unless i see things with my own eyes, i gotta trust what seems 'most likely' and with the history of our government, those photos, and the lack of media coverage afterwards, im gonna have to say something smells rotten in denmark. as soon as i see some video of a plane hitting that building, i just cant believe it. by looking at those pictures, government pictures, and knowing the laws of gravity and the basic concept of physics, i just can see absolutely no possible way that a 757 hit that building. no matter how well reinforced the building might have been, there is not a single piece of plane in that rubble. theres no possible way that a plane 150 feet long, could disolve into a hole that appears to be about 50 feet square. its just absolutely illogical. no matter what angle the plane hit the building, there would be markings from the 120 foot wingspan hitting it. there is none of that... blah blah blah...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Are2

of course i can see the validity in the arguments..

 

but really, i'm more curious about that pennsylvania plane that miraculously crashed in the middle of nowhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love to hear the accounts of those eyewitnesses as to trajectory, height, speed, etc. That would clear some things up.

The Flight 93 story sounds more plausible (getting shot down). It was over open country (less witnesses), it was acknowledged that fighters were following that plane around, and it was known to be off course not long after 3 other planes had been hijacked and crashed. Of course, in this case the accepted story is genuinely plausible: passengers didn't sit there and take it, and it went down during the struggle. So I'm not as interested in knowing the truth. The other thing is that I wouldn't be against the government shooting the plane down if they knew for sure it was controlled by terrorists who were specifically on a suicide mission. There's zero chance of saving the passengers, so saving people on the ground necessitates the bitter solution of shooting it down over unpopulated territory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Are2

..and i agree that it is better if we never know, so that those that died on that flight can live on in the eyes of their families as heroes, and not victims..

 

but yeah, i think they shot that thing down..and why not?

i know they sent CIA planes over to d.c. to try and catch up with the pentagon plane before it crashed..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest NATO

on a related note did fighters shoot down the other plane that crashed apparently on its way to camp david?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

shanksville pa crash site

 

i read in the paper that there were several eyewitness reports of a missle, the military confirmed a f16 was following it...a one ton chunk of engine was found miles from the rest of the debris, supporting the theory of a heat seeking missle...and when you think they were prolly targeting the whitehouse....why the fuck wouldnt they shoot it down....the fucked thing is they couldnt even be upfront about it..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok, let's assume that everyone is right... a plane DIDN'T hit the pentagon, the PA plane WAS shot down... so...

 

where are we now?

 

 

 

why couldn't they tell us they shot down the PA plane?

(they told us they would shoot down passenger planes in the future)

 

what do these lies told by our govt. (suprise suprise) gain anyone?

 

what ongoing conspiracy does this cover-up?

 

would we be NOT at war if they only attacked the WTC?

 

???

 

I think these are better questions, I'll assume that anyone is correct if the can build a plausable case that explains what 'really' happened and WHY it happened...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think a truck bomb is highly unlikely...for example trucks blow up more than in...so how is a truck bomb going to penetrate 3 unpenetrable rings...in addition to this how are you going to get a truck bomb onto the pentagon lawn...shit like that is hard...being that its the biggest millitary institution in the country, im sure its peremiter is free of errant ryder truck bombs..look at how long the pentetgon burned..a few days...i think the only logical conclusion is a jet full of fuel...series of 3 foot thick concrete reinforced walls is some shit...also i watched a special that said manuvering a jet is similar to manuvering a personal aircraft so if the pilot had commercial jet experience which is very possible, or if he actually took the time to learn to land when taking his flying training it plausible...far more plausible than a truck bomb.....and you also have witness's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the govnt. wouldnt admit that they shot the plane down, because no matter how justifiable, it would be horrible PR. its much better to let everyone think they were heroes, instead of unfortunit casualties.

 

they would perhaps bomb the pentagon, just to give more fodder to the war machine. i mean, i agree that it doesnt make much sense, but neither does telling us that a plane made that hole. its just very physicly unlikely.

 

yes of course we would still be at war, but making the threat larger, makes us more complacent, and more willing to back anything that they say.

"not only did they attack capitalism, they attacked our governemnt, they tried to kill our top officials, and were in the process of trying to kill the president" as terrible as the WTC attack was, having them also trying to take out our governing officials doubles the freedoms were willing to give up at home.

 

these are all very plausible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i dont see why the goverment would bomb its own headqaurters..that makes no logical sense what so ever. im all for theorys to dillute coverup, but in no way do i think the goverment would destroy 10% of their headqaurters..nahhhh i dont bite...it was plane. it had to be. the pentegon was a fortress not a office building...i think the reason the hole is the way it is is becuase the plane instantly burst into flames and concrete does not melt like steel, remember the blasts in the wtc were only 10 floors and the building was of far less durrability for planes crashing in to it. cement is some sturdy ass shit and the damage done the pentegon is huge...im mean you talking about somthing that smashed through at least a dozen layers of steel reinforced concrete in 3 foot thick layers and ignited a fire that burned for at least a day. sounds like a huge missle full of fuel if you ask me.

 

here's my question??

 

who the fuck shut down the goverment with the anthrax attacks???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry Seeking, I'm still not buying... maybe I didn't explain my goals clearly... I want someone to, reasonably, tie these things together in a way other than persented to us by the news.

 

Connect them either directly, or as spokes in a wheel. THEN tell me what those combined events did to DIRECTLY benefit ANY person, or group of persons...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i hope your not claiming that im some puppet, simply regurgitating rhetoric with no understanding of what im saying.

 

having the american people fearing for their safety, and backing the 'president' in anything he choses to do, is benefiting HIM, its benefiting BIG BUSINESS, its benefitting OIL companies. all of those people and organizations benefit DIRECTY from the fear and anger we as a nation feel. of course blowing up a truck bomb at the pentagon and saying it was a plane doesnt do it alone, but it all weaves together to create the web of 'terrorism' that is allowing ashcroft to strip away our freedoms while we smile and undo the buttons for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by seeking innocence

i hope your not claiming that im some puppet, simply regurgitating rhetoric with no understanding of what im saying.

 

I hope your not talking to me, because you know I give you more credit than that... but... you're still not picking up on it... it still sounds like 'the mason's are poisoning the wells!' to me...

 

 

having the american people fearing for their safety, and backing the 'president' in anything he choses to do, is benefiting HIM...

 

HIM = Bush? The President is a member of a political party, so, there are people checking up on him. The checks and balances right? So, unless you can show me a direct benefit, other than a marginal increase in the value of his oil stock... I mean, it can only make his job last 4 more years at most...

 

 

its benefiting BIG BUSINESS, its benefitting OIL companies. all of those people and organizations benefit DIRECTY from the fear and anger we as a nation feel.

 

again, we're talking faceless organizations made up of competing intrests, so how does this help? Of course the war will help some indusrties but others will suffer, even big ones...

 

of course blowing up a truck bomb at the pentagon and saying it was a plane doesnt do it alone, but it all weaves together to create the web of 'terrorism' that is allowing ashcroft to strip away our freedoms while we smile and undo the buttons for him.

 

so WHO is weaving this web? Is it Ascroft himself? The CIA? The Republicans? WHO???

 

build me the reporters picture...

who?

what?

when?

where?

why?

how?

(not neccessarily in that order)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Smart

 

 

 

HIM = Bush? The President is a member of a political party, so, there are people checking up on him. The checks and balances right? So, unless you can show me a direct benefit, other than a marginal increase in the value of his oil stock... I mean, it can only make his job last 4 more years at most...

 

bush got where he is, because of his father, his father got where he was, because of HIS father and his investments in nazi industrial companies that made an ASSLOAD of money in WW2 by using jews as slave labor. everything is one foot infront of the other in attempts to get someplace else, and everything is interconected. nothing happens in the governemnt, unless someone stands to gain something from it. no laws are passed, no favors granted, unless someone is hooking someone else up. so 'checks and balances' dont matter, because in the bush administration the people who are doing the checking, are just as dirty as those being checked. an example of this is enron, and the fact that keneth lay hand picked the man who would be 'checking' him. finally, anything that benefits bush, benefits the republican party.

 

 

again, we're talking faceless organizations made up of competing intrests, so how does this help? Of course the war will help some indusrties but others will suffer, even big ones...

 

what industries suffer during wartime? the slurpee industry? the rich keep getting richer, and the poor keep getting poorer. the rich are the ones controling all the politicians, thus, they are the ones controlling the country. votes dont mean shit, because money buys media, and media dictates how we feel about everything. not to mention the fact that the politicians are often the ones making money directly from holding stock in these companies. as i stated in another thread, colin powell made 9 million dollars off the aol time warner merger. that merger broke several federal trade laws, but since the final decision was up to michael powell (colins son) it was unanimously passed. dick chaney owns, i believe roughly 30million worth of stock in hallberton (the name is something like that.) they are one of the companies that had been meeting with the taliban about running a pipe line through afghanistan. do i have to explain how they benefited from all of this? these are just two people. every single important person in governemnt is in bed with major companies. major companies that stand to make an assload of money off a war.

 

 

so WHO is weaving this web? Is it Ascroft himself? The CIA? The Republicans? WHO???

the people in 'power' are the ones weaving this. who is in power? i of course cant say for certain, but it sure as shit isnt me. those in power are the ones wiith the money and the influence to stay in power. those who are spinning the web are the ones who stand to benefit from it: big business, thus the politicians. [/b]

 

build me the reporters picture...

who?

what?

when?

where?

why?

how?

(not neccessarily in that order)

 

i just painted as good of a picture as anyone possibly could. everything ive said makes perfect sense, everything ties together, everything is based on relative fact. if 1+1 equalled 2 yesterday, theres a pretty damn good chance your gonna get the same sum today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nah man, your 'facts' are hazy at best, it calls for me to draw too many conclusions based on information I don't have... your equation isn't 1+1=2 it's:

 

1 + an unknown quantity = a number that, for lack of anything better and to better support our theories about the unknown quantity, we are going to call 2ish

 

 

all dogs have tails

all cats have tails

all dogs are cats

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Register for a 12ozProphet forum account or sign in to comment

You need to be a forum member in order to comment. Forum accounts are separate from shop accounts.

Create an account

Register to become a 12ozProphet forum member.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×