It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The strangest Coincidence regarding the Pentagon attack on 9/11

page: 38
292
<< 35  36  37    39  40  41 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 09:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Mianeye
a reply to: facedye

Still avoiding.

Ok... let me put it very simple.

A plane hit the Pentagon, do you agree or do you disagree, going from the evidence contradicting or not ?

It can be more simple to answer....


consciously read through the past 30+ pages of this thread to find out my answer to your question highlighted above.

you're not going to take the time to understand my point of view and expect me to respect your baseless, confused, offensive approach?

what a world we live in.

my mother almost died standing 2 blocks away from the towers when they *poofed* into thin air. I've had romantic relationships with women whose fathers were firefighters that were completely out of work and breathing through oxygen tanks just to live.

take this seriously. it could have been yours.

I REFUSE to respect and legitimize a federal government whose agencies so blatantly lie to the families of those who have actually lost lives due to their actions and subsequent NEGLIGENCE.

you should take a hard look in the mirror one day and realize you're defending a government that has been pillaging and raping the entire world for the past few decades.

it has to stop - and it starts with unpacking 9/11 to the American masses. the rest of the world is already well aware. digest that.
edit on 23-2-2017 by facedye because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 10:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: GBP/JPY
Neutron, baby......that's the first post you've made including any real life experience, sorry I thought you were a Hal9000....

But it still loooks bad......us in the know talk marvel mystery oil when ya have nuts stuck on a bolt......hey the hit at the pentagon is obvious fakery.......757 rolls Royce 211 turbines are really large and the turbine section found at the scene was cruise missile sized.....so you'll know

I'm a pilot....I smell cheet,,,no sheet


Ok? Which of the several fan discs of a turbo jet, which are all of different sizes, is it incorrectly sized for.

And tips of the blades on a fan disc from a turbofan jet can and will break off if they strike something while sping at thousands of RPMs.

Can you state which fan disc of serval in a turbofan jet you are referring to?

Can you state the original size of the damaged fan disc?

Can you show the damage of the collision did not knock of blade tips, changing the diameter.



www.aerospaceweb.org...

whatever piece this is, it appears to be only the central hub of a compressor or turbine stage. Normally, each of these rotating stages would be fitted with several curved blades mounted along its circumference. These blades were apparently knocked off the rotor hub found in the wreckage due to the force of the impact


If the referred to fan disc at the pentagon did not have its diameter changed due to collision damage, then what fan disc does it look like? What aerospace application uses a large disc with stuby blades of various lengths of 1 to 2 inches. None. It would take only one blade of a different size to throw a fan disc out of balance resulting in destroying the jet engine.


(post by facedye removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 12:05 PM
link   
Did the puncture in the most outer layer of the Kursh, incorrectly labeled "torpedo puncture", ever get resolved?

The most outer layer is a metal wrap who's only purpose is to make the Kursk streamlined. It has no function as a water tight hull.

Right under the black metal wrap is the missile tubes, and then the double hull pressure boundary.

I think the pressure hull for the compartments and tubes are painted red.

I have looked and look. Did not find a picture from inside the hull that showed evidence of torpedo damage. Nor evidence of an inward rupture in the pressure hulls that correlate to the hole in the outer metal wrap.

The bow of the Kursk was cut off in front of the missile tubes before raised to the surface. The tubes show no damage from a torpedo.

en.m.wikipedia.org...

More interior pictures of the Kursk. A acouple of pictures look like missiles in tubes? The missiles don't look serviceable?
englishrussia.com...

edit on 23-2-2017 by neutronflux because: Fixed finger fumbles


(post by facedye removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 01:08 PM
link   
a reply to: GBP/JPY

Look inside the engine it's been gone over many times on here.
Cruise missile my ass.



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 01:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: GBP/JPY

Look inside the engine it's been gone over many times on here.
Cruise missile my ass.





posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 01:54 PM
link   
a reply to: wmd_2008

flight 77 manually controlled by dimwit terrorists, my ass.



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 02:08 PM
link   
a reply to: facedye

And experienced pilots manage to crash?

Even taxiing passengers jets into light poles...

Or clip airport landing light posts on take off....

While being assisted by flight computers, warnings, tower guidance, ground guidance, power assisted controls, autopilot, radio positioning, radar, and GPS.

Sad, but even inflight collisions by experienced pilots trying to not hit anything happen from time to time....
edit on 23-2-2017 by neutronflux because: Fixed taxiing



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 02:17 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

your reply makes zero sense and is inconsiderate of every fact and detail I've raised in this thread.

don't make me post pictures of how you were dodging my direct questions just a few pages ago.

your arbitration is without supportive content. it's just that - arbitration.

I just sent you a private message by the way, respond to that if you're feeling froggy.



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 02:17 PM
link   
a reply to: facedye

The hijackers of flight 77 more or less missed on the first go around. It did take them two passes to crash?



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 02:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: facedye
a reply to: neutronflux

your reply makes zero sense and is inconsiderate of every fact and detail I've raised in this thread.

don't make me post pictures of how you were dodging my direct questions just a few pages ago.

your arbitration is without supportive content. it's just that - arbitration.

I just sent you a private message by the way, respond to that if you're feeling froggy.



You are angery because the design and safety systems of flight 77 fought to keep the jet maneuverable and in the air while the hijackers tried to crash?



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 02:24 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux


....WHAT? got a source for that?????



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 03:06 PM
link   
a reply to: AnAbsoluteCreation

that's incredible. American Airlines Flight 11 was a Boing 767 and has cruising speed of 533 MPH (so roughly the same speed of the jet in the vid). So it would've also probably crumbled on impact like that. But is the construction of the Airliner the same as that jet?



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 03:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: facedye
a reply to: wmd_2008

flight 77 manually controlled by dimwit terrorists, my ass.



Well you manage to get on the net so why not the subject was an engine part which has been PROVED as NOT PART of a cruise missile.



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 03:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: wmd_2008

originally posted by: facedye
a reply to: wmd_2008

flight 77 manually controlled by dimwit terrorists, my ass.



Well you manage to get on the net so why not the subject was an engine part which has been PROVED as NOT PART of a cruise missile.


has it been undeniably proven that flight 77 hit the pentagon, beyond a shadow of a doubt?



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 03:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: GuyFox
a reply to: AnAbsoluteCreation

that's incredible. American Airlines Flight 11 was a Boing 767 and has cruising speed of 533 MPH (so roughly the same speed of the jet in the vid). So it would've also probably crumbled on impact like that. But is the construction of the Airliner the same as that jet?



No, you are way off base there.
That concrete wall the phantom hits is nothing like the Pentagon walls AT ALL.
That concrete wall is designed to withstand a nuclear blast.
There is no correlation to be had by watching that video.



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 03:38 PM
link   
A couple of years back my CAP squadron went on a search and rescue for an aircraft that had crashed in the Appalachians. No one saw this aircraft crash. There was no radar data for it as it was not running a transponder and was on VFR local flight with no flight plan.
We found the plane, all three souls on board were lost, about 10 miles from the airport.
Since no one saw this accident happen and there was no video all we can go on is the evidence that was found
There are photographs of the crash, although I do not have them they would be in the investigation file.
What was found was a fairly contained crash site on the side of a low mountain (about 1800 MSL) at the end of a valley.
The wreckage was consistent with the type of aircraft we were looking for and the number of dead was consistent with the number missing. The parts of the aircraft revealed the tail number for the missing aircraft.

Since no one saw it happen and we didnt have a video, we could suspect that the government had destroyed this aircraft in mid air, planted the wreckage to hide the fact that they had shot this aircraft down and were lying to us all. No pilot would fly his plane into the side of a mountain, that makes no sense.
Or
We could also accept the investigation provided by the NTSB that concluded that the pilot had flown into the valley and due to the weight of the passengers (they were near the maximum working load) and the fact that it was the middle of July and 98 degrees outside, had insufficient room to gain the necessary altitude to climb out of the valley. He literally flew the aircraft into the side of the mountain.

Which one sounds more plausible?


Now lets extrapolate

Hi-jackers take control of a commercial airliner. Turn off transponders and fly the aircraft into the side of the pentagon.

OR

A secret cabal headed by Dick Cheney orders a US sub to crash into a Russian sub. Sinks the Russian sub without sinking itself. Wins the contract to salvage the Russian sub. Steals advanced cruise missiles from the sub. Determines how to activate, retarget and launch the cruise missile. Fires them into the Pentagon as part of an extremely large scale operation on 9-11. Manages to do all of this while maintaining an insane level of security on this operation that continues to this day.

Really?
Why is there even a debate?



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 03:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Dragoon01

because the simplified and clearly tailored description you just gave does not accurately describe the day's events.

NTSB contradicts the 9/11 commission report, which contradicts NIST, which contradicts the Pentagon Report.

the past 38 pages is why there is a debate. please read through them.



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 07:49 PM
link   
I was just thinking the other day about how tired I was of hearing the same 911 theory's over and over. Nice to hear a new one good job !



new topics

top topics



 
292
<< 35  36  37    39  40  41 >>

log in

join