High-Ranking Army Officer Claims Missile Used at Pentagon

Show me an actual piece of the plain then Einstein, the only piece i saw was fake because the paint didn't match up. Why would they need to carry away the 20 ft 757 under a cover? A real 757 is much longer and heavier. There is no way in hell that a 757 would have gone through all those concrete pillars and walls and remain intact. Where are the wings?

Why didn't they damage the area they would have struck? Why didn't pieces fall off when they struck the lamp poles which can destroy cars? Why did fire fighters smell explosives? Why did CIA and FBI officials remove all the evidence before they reported the incident? Why does the explosion and the official time of impact differ by a few minutes? Why won't they show the good footage of the event to confirm it was a plane? Why are frames missing from the only video they released and why was it obviously tampered with?

Do some math Einstein, study some Structural Engineering Einstein, don't rely on something Bush's people drew up for him. Here is a video of a fighter jet flying into a concrete wall, just one. The tips of the wings survived, the rest was destroyed completely. A fighter jet is like a missile and would make it through easier than a blunt jumbo jet. Look at what happens to the jet and try and think what would happen to a jumbo. It doesn't fit what we were told and the evidence left behind in the photos. There wouldn't be any pieces of the jumbo that would be clean like we saw.

The object that hit the pentagon was small, very very solid and was still intact after the crash with two exit holes.

www.big-boys.com...

Originally posted by NinjaCodeMonkey
Show me an actual piece of the plain then Einstein, the only piece i saw was fake because the paint didn't match up. Why would they need to carry away the 20 ft 757 under a cover? A real 757 is much longer and heavier. There is no way in hell that a 757 would have gone through all those concrete pillars and walls and remain intact. Where are the wings?

...rest of nonsense deleted

Get your lazy butt over to the 757 Pentagon thread and view dozens of pieces of the plane, view your answer to what was under the tarp (it was being moved TO the Pentagon, not away from it), and many more answers to your post here. Surely you should have read all about the Pentagon crash in the almost 90 page long thread about it before posting and appearing to know nothing about it?

That "small" object punched a 96 foot wide, 18 foot high hole into the side of a reinforced, steel beam, concrete walled, stone faced, kevlar reinforced, blast resistent wall. It then proceeded to wide out dozens of 2 foot thick concrete pillars with spiral rebar construction, and smash it's way through to the inner 3rd ring! But, you'd know all of this if you'd have taken the time to read and educate yourself on the topic before posting about it.

But then again, you are here saying that it was a small object, and then you're saying that there was no way in hell a huge airliner like a 757 could punch through the walls and pillars. (so how could a small object?) So, I am guessing you don't really have a clue what it is you're saying.

This is the funniest thing I've ever read, in the description of that video.

"Fortunately, the pilot walked away with only a few bumps and bruises and a broken right arm."


It was rocket propelled on a set of train tracks. Why would there be a pilot in it?

Originally posted by Zaphod58
This is the funniest thing I've ever read, in the description of that video.

"Fortunately, the pilot walked away with only a few bumps and bruises and a broken right arm."

It was rocket propelled on a set of train tracks. Why would there be a pilot in it?

LOL! I didn't notice that initially, that's fantastic. I wonder if the rest of that website is a "spoof" type of site? Classic material anyway.

funny that, when "we" use a good quality version of this video as evidence, it is "spoof" ?
But when you use crappy version it is good evidence ?

I do not profess to be a pilot, I do not profess to be certified by the FAA in any way shape or form. But, since you're a pilot, with a pile of FAA certs, please explain to us what you think would have happened to the wings.

Anyone can pooh pooh about something somebody else posted, but it takes a real man to post something substiantial to counter it (as in some sort of proof other than your statement about your expertise).

Surely you have seen the F4 tests when they flew two of them into concrete walls to test just how well a nuclear reactor shell would hold up against such an "accident"? I've been looking for the video online, and finally found it on Sandia Labs website- I recall what was left, do you? Itty bitty teenie weenie bits and peices of metal and little chunks of aluminum.


Video 1 Video 2 Video 3 Video 4

(click for larger images, click links for videos)


(Gosh darn it, that magic plane just up and disintegrated by running into a wall! What a load of unadulterated BS!!)

So, please if you'd be so kind. Tell me how in the heck THIS plane can disintegrate going 320MPH into a wall and the 757 couldn't also break up into small chunks hitting the reinforced concrete/steel/kevlar wall of the Pentagon?

Yeah it takes a REAL man to post something substantial huh?