9/11: A Boeing 757 *DID NOT* Strike the Pentagon

Originally posted by islgypsy
For simplicity, we have adopted the following citation conventions in
these endnotes. www.gpoaccess.gov...
Dozens of government agencies and other entities provided the Commission with more than 2.5 million pages of documents and other materials, including more than 1,000 hours of audiotapes. In general, we cite documents and other materials by providing the agency or entity of origin, the type of document (e.g.,memo, email, report, or record), the author and recipient, the title (in quotes) or a description of the subject, and the date.We use the following abbreviations for the agencies and entities that produced the bulk of these documents: NTSB—National Transportation Safety Board REPORT is in the 9/11 Commission Report. Please read page 449. Thanks!!

Well the people on the 911 commission have stated that they did not have enough time or money to do a proper investigation.

Also the 911 commission report is not a FBI and NTSB crime scene report. By law the FBI is the lead invstigating agency if a aircraft crash scene is found to be a crime scene, with technical help from the NTSB. All the 911 crash sites were a crime scene.

So please answer the question. Where are the FBI and NTSB crime scene reports. Also the photos of the parts and pieces taken from the crime scene.




[edit on 26-4-2007 by ULTIMA1]

First I have addresed the rivets of the "planted" part on the lawn, they dont match the 757-200 has rows of 2 and 3 rivets along the second section of the cabin, if you dig enough on airliners you will see the rivets.

second the 757 could not have been traveling as per the data flight recorder at 460 knots, simply put, at the altitude of the ground its not possible since it will exceed Vmax and flying surfaces and damage would occurr...

also the part on the lawn is painted grey and its not bare silver as the AA paint scheme.

we could go on and on, but there was no 757 and that is why NO VIDEOS WILL BE RELEASED EVER

Originally posted by kix
where is the tail?

The tail of a 757 is an empty shell, its not the reinforced tail that we are used to seeing in most of the old crash photos. Most of the old crashes are of aircraft such as DC-10’s, L-1011’s, Dc-9’s, and most frequently by far 727’s. These are all aircraft which have a reinforced tail to hold tail mounted engines.

Originally posted by kix
First I have addresed the rivets of the "planted" part on the lawn, they dont match the 757-200 has rows of 2 and 3 rivets along the second section of the cabin, if you dig enough on airliners you will see the rivets.

First off you cannot compare rivets as an estimation of whether that is a part of a 757 or not, as the rivet density increases and decreases in certain areas. For example, you will find that the frame becomes denser, and thus the rivets, around the Emergency, Crew, and Cargo Doors. The rivets also become denser toward the bottom of the aircraft.

Originally posted by kix
second the 757 could not have been traveling as per the data flight recorder at 460 knots, simply put, at the altitude of the ground its not possible since it will exceed Vmax and flying surfaces and damage would occur

When they talk about exceeding flight specs there is a chance that surfaces may be torn off or damaged, but this is not an absolute. A prime example is the 747 that went into an uncontrolled dive at something like 6 g’s and only suffered loss of a few wing panels. I don’t have the time to look this incident up for you, but if you search on the net, you’ll find it.

Originally posted by kix
also the part on the lawn is painted grey and its not bare silver as the AA paint scheme.

There are areas of composite on aircraft that have to be painted as they are not silver aluminum underneath. On the newer AA aircraft where larger sections are composite, the lower area is often pained gray. This is mainly in areas around wing roots, and landing gear doors.

Originally posted by kix
we could go on and on.

So far you have not said a single thing that is even remotely close to correct, so go ahead and lets dispel whatever else you are errant about.

[edit on 4/27/2007 by defcon5]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
1. Why is the fire department using water to fight a jet fuel fire ?

If they were using water, then they were most likely trying to run the fuel off the area, to disperse it. When the Airport Fire Department is called out to deal with a fuel spill, they wash it away with water from the main hose on the front of the truck. I believe they used foam for the most part, anywhere there was an actual fire burning, and that is visible on the photos. Halon is the best thing to use but you cannot use it if there are possibly survivors in the wreckage. Perhaps they concluded that most of the fuel was burned off in the initial explosion, and were fighting the actual building fire, at the time the water was used.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
2. Where is the debris feom a 60 ton plane ?

Inside a million tons of building debris….


[edit on 4/27/2007 by defcon5]

Originally posted by defcon5

The tail of a 757 is an empty shell, its not the reinforced tail that we are used to seeing in most of the old crash photos. Most of the old crashes are of aircraft such as DC-10’s, L-1011’s, Dc-9’s, and most frequently by far 727’s. These are all aircraft which have a reinforced tail to hold tail mounted engines.

Wrong the tail...its not an empty shell, in fact the auxiliary power Unit APU is in the tail, google is your friend use it! Also the tail is heavy because the fuselage is quite long and the 757 needs the tail as a cantilever for the long fuselage in front of the wing... so much that the 757-300 uses the same tail... STRIKE ONE...

First off you cannot compare rivets as an estimation of whether that is a part of a 757 or not, as the rivet density increases and decreases in certain areas. For example, you will find that the frame becomes denser, and thus the rivets, around the Emergency, Crew, and Cargo Doors. The rivets also become denser toward the bottom of the aircraft.

If you cant estimate if that part belongs to a 757 by its rivets, then EXPLAIN how zombies who believe the "official" history THINK and ARE SURE that BELONGS TO A 757?

The rivets in that forward cabin (above firts class are 2 and three rows each, goggle the images you will see them clearly, and since they planted the "american logo (how convenient that thats the only part that "appeared there") it has a different patter of rivets... I dont care about other places of the plane since "taht" planted part on the lawn is from the upper fuselage, nice try on bringing disinfo...STRIKE TWO...

When they talk about exceeding flight specs there is a chance that surfaces may be torn off or damaged, but this is not an absolute. A prime example is the 747 that went into an uncontrolled dive at something like 6 g’s and only suffered loss of a few wing panels. I don’t have the time to look this incident up for you, but if you search on the net, you’ll find it.

Your prime example is falwed because that 747 lost control at Fl 370 not at GROUND LEVEL, remember air density, if not please google it you will find it interesting that at over 20000 feet air density is MUCH MUCH less than at ground level or SL.

At sea level the air density doesnt make posible high speed traveling at VMAX....

Please dont appear as an aviation WANNABE you cant use this stupid argument over and over, its not the same. Strike three

There are areas of composite on aircraft that have to be painted as they are not silver aluminum underneath. On the newer AA aircraft where larger sections are composite, the lower area is often pained gray. This is mainly in areas around wing roots, and landing gear doors.

All the 757 AA fleet have bare metal on top of the fuselage, and MOST IMPORTANT on the lettering, only composite parts and the A-300 fleet have grey painted fuselages...pleeeeeaassseeee, use your brain, use google or both, WE HAVE ADDRESED THIS BEFORE, dont bring disinfo and circular argumentation...

So far you have not said a single thing that is even remotely close to correct, so go ahead and lets dispel whatever else you are errant about.

So far you havent even addressed anything, just the usual disinfo and the usual responses trying to prove point with NON applicable examples.... thanks but remember I am not to blame if you dont want to do some research and find out that your "so called" facts are NOT applicable, in this case.

Nice try.....

Actually kix the APU is UNDER the tail. The vertical fin, which is what defcon is talking about, has nothing but control cables, hydraulic lines etc. The APU is in the bottom of the fuselage under the tail.

Originally posted by kix
Wrong the tail...its not an empty shell, in fact the auxiliary power Unit APU is in the tail, google is your friend use it! Also the tail is heavy because the fuselage is quite long and the 757 needs the tail as a cantilever for the long fuselage in front of the wing... so much that the 757-300 uses the same tail... STRIKE ONE...

Sorry, I used to work on 757’s and the APU is below the tail and requires no additional structure such as that required by an engine.
Strike one….. For you….

Originally posted by kix
If you cant estimate if that part belongs to a 757 by its rivets, then EXPLAIN how zombies who believe the "official" history THINK and ARE SURE that BELONGS TO A 757?

The rivets in that forward cabin (above firts class are 2 and three rows each, goggle the images you will see them clearly, and since they planted the "american logo (how convenient that thats the only part that "appeared there") it has a different patter of rivets... I dont care about other places of the plane since "taht" planted part on the lawn is from the upper fuselage, nice try on bringing disinfo...STRIKE TWO...

One of the bits that was on the lawn was from the section by the emergency doors, since I cannot tell which piece this is from the photo, then there is no way to tell for certain. Also to say that you can determine the rivet layout on a twisted and torn piece of aircraft aluminum is delusional to say the least.
Strike two… For you…

Originally posted by kix
Your prime example is falwed because that 747 lost control at Fl 370 not at GROUND LEVEL, remember air density, if not please google it you will find it interesting that at over 20000 feet air density is MUCH MUCH less than at ground level or SL.

At sea level the air density doesnt make posible high speed traveling at VMAX....

Please dont appear as an aviation WANNABE you cant use this stupid argument over and over, its not the same. Strike three

Nothing flawed about what I stated, the point is that an aircraft is designed to exceed its recommended specs, and they will not all break up in the same manner, nor fail the same way if that is exceeded. Also I am certainly not an aviation wannabe, I was an aviation employee for many years. I worked on many a 767 and 757 in my time. If there is someone here who has apparently never spent any time around commercial aircraft, it’s you.
Strike three… For you…

Originally posted by kix
All the 757 AA fleet have bare metal on top of the fuselage, and MOST IMPORTANT on the lettering, only composite parts and the A-300 fleet have grey painted fuselages...pleeeeeaassseeee, use your brain, use google or both, WE HAVE ADDRESED THIS BEFORE, dont bring disinfo and circular argumentation...

Please explain to me how you make a composite part be polished metal? They are not entirely aluminum, and there are large areas on some of their aircraft which are painted gray.

Originally posted by kix
So far you havent even addressed anything, just the usual disinfo and the usual responses trying to prove point with NON applicable examples.... thanks but remember I am not to blame if you dont want to do some research and find out that your "so called" facts are NOT applicable, in this case.

I don’t need to research, there is nothing here to research, I have been around these aircraft, I have worked on them, and I really get tired of you Toooofy movement guys believing every piece of crap that you come across on the net because it sounds good and it fits your opinion.

Here I went out and did a google search and this is the first photo of an AA 757 that came up….

web01.jetphotos.net...

Now, take a good long look at this photo and tell me…
What color is the ray dome (the nose since I doubt you know what that is)?
What color are the engine cowlings (the area on the engine behind the big round hole)?
How about the engine mounts (Where the big round engine things attach to the wing)?
What color is the wing roots (where the big flat things attach to the tube shaped area the people sit in)?
What color is the entire bottom under the landing gear doors (under the big flat wing thing, between the two sets of rear wheels, under the round tube where the people sit)?
What color is the entire freaken tail, for crying out loud?

Can you say…………
Gray
Maybe to be a troof movementer you first need to be totally blind.

[edit on 4/27/2007 by defcon5]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1Well the main problem with trying to comapre the F-4 test with a airliner is completly irrelivent.

The wall of the Pentagon is not as thick or made of the same material as the block from nuclear plants.

An F-4 is made with steel and titanium, if it could not punch though a thick reinforced block how can an airliner made of aluminum punch through a reinforced concrete wall ?

A 757 is about 10 times larger then an F-4 thier should be pieces left from the crash, in the F-4 test thier was some wing fragments left from the crash.

Check this out... Hope it helps you understand things better. This guy laid the most perfect outstanding research I have ever seen, and read on the Pentagon bombing. If this doesn't convince you nothing will.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.oilempire.us...

Gypsy...
Peace...

Edit spelling!



[edit on 27-4-2007 by islgypsy]

Originally posted by islgypsy
Check this out... Hope it helps you understand things better. This guy laid the most perfect outstanding research I have ever seen, and read on the Pentagon bombing. If this doesn't convince you nothing will.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.oilempire.us...
[edit on 27-4-2007 by islgypsy]

I have already seen all the photos and more evidence then you have. Which still does not show a proper debris field. Also we have no FBI and NTSB crime scene reports.

Also the FBI did not officially take over the Pentagon as a crime scene for 10 days. Then after stating it would take 30 days to complete the crime scene they handed it back to the military in 5 days.

www.defenselink.mil...

WASHINGTON, Sept. 24, 2001 -- The FBI assumed crime-scene jurisdiction at the Pentagon terrorist attack site Sept. 21 from the Arlington County (Va.) Fire Department, officials said.

FBI officials estimate the crime scene investigation would last about a month, Arlington Fire Chief Edward P. Plaugher said. He said he expects "additional remains will be discovered during the course of the FBI investigation" and mortuary specialists will remain on site to process them.



WASHINGTON, Sept. 26, 2001 -- The FBI handed over Pentagon crash site management to the Army Military District of Washington at 7 a.m. today.

The transfer of responsibility marks the end of the FBI's crime scene investigation following the Sept. 11 terrorist attack against the Pentagon. MDW will oversee ongoing security operations around the damaged area of the building. FBI investigators will move their operations to the Pentagon's north parking lot and continue to sift through debris for more evidence.

I am glad that you think that the evidence is good enough but i need something called facts, and we do not have them. I will believe the official story when i see the actual crime scene reports and a photo or video of flight 77 hitting the Pentagon.

Wrong the tail...its not an empty shell, in fact the auxiliary power Unit APU is in the tail, google is your friend use it! Also the tail is heavy because the fuselage is quite long and the 757 needs the tail as a cantilever for the long fuselage in front of the wing... so much that the 757-300 uses the same tail... STRIKE ONE...

Sorry, I used to work on 757’s and the APU is below the tail and requires no additional structure such as that required by an engine.
Strike one….. For you….

Ah! Now the tail is NOT an empty shell? now there seems to be an APU on the tail, and below the tail does not make it part of the tail? excuse me but for a person that claims to have worked on Boeings you make me laugh, first they said the tail is an empty shell and implying that the tail is fragile, then explain why the FDR and VDR (the orange boxes) are in the tail if it is an empty shell? so fragile and prone to complete destruction?. And the APU does not require additional structure? WOW it must be glued to the tail then !!! Dont make me laugh the APU is a big sucker and weights enough to require special tools to service now sections 70,79,73,74,82 and 48 (in boeing speak) are made by Vought and they are quite sturdy (light also) they will Not evaporate on concrete contact...LOL

If you cant estimate if that part belongs to a 757 by its rivets, then EXPLAIN how zombies who believe the "official" history THINK and ARE SURE that BELONGS TO A 757?

One of the bits that was on the lawn was from the section by the emergency doors, since I cannot tell which piece this is from the photo, then there is no way to tell for certain. Also to say that you can determine the rivet layout on a twisted and torn piece of aircraft aluminum is delusional to say the least.
Strike two… For you…

If there is red mig letters that have the A or the N of the AMERICAN AIRLINES logo on it IT HAS to be the ONLY logo on the plane and it comes from the upper fuselage on the 757 (that will be section 43 for a knowledgeable people) in your case that will be the front of the plane

Nothing flawed about what I stated, the point is that an aircraft is designed to exceed its recommended specs, and they will not all break up in the same manner, nor fail the same way if that is exceeded. Also I am certainly not an aviation wannabe, I was an aviation employee for many years. I worked on many a 767 and 757 in my time. If there is someone here who has apparently never spent any time around commercial aircraft, it’s you.
Strike three… For you…

LOL, its called Vmax for something, not Vmax plus 20% just in case! LOL, there is a great difference in flying at FL 330 than at sea level, and more so at Vmax. AND also Vmax of that FDR is way over design spec and posible if the flight path is waht they say it was, ALSO the 757 was not dive bombing the Pentagon if it really broke the light poles on the freeway the flight was almost level and at a speed not posible, AND on top of that explain the altimeter settings on the official FDR?

Please explain to me how you make a composite part be polished metal? They are not entirely aluminum, and there are large areas on some of their aircraft which are painted gray.

Dont come with these simply ridiculous answers... and sideways reasonings, the PART ON THE LAWN has to be polished metal because all the section 43 os ALL AA 757-200 are polished metal, other parts have to be painted grey or other colors (depending on airlines CS) but NOT SECTION 43, if that part has letter it is section 43 and the rivets DONT match, I really jope you are retired because for a guy who has worked "years" on 757 your knowledge leaves lot to be desired.

I don’t need to research, there is nothing here to research, I have been around these aircraft, I have worked on them, and I really get tired of you Toooofy movement guys believing every piece of crap that you come across on the net because it sounds good and it fits your opinion.

This sums it up perfectly why the zombies believe the "official" history, they dont research, they are walking enciclopedias LOL! and then after being owned they resort to slandering...

BTW, you have proven my point, all zombies when cornered resort to circular and sideways arguing....
show me a photo of a grey pianted secion 43 on a AA 757 plane.....dont waste your time YOU WONT find any!

[edit on 27-4-2007 by kix]

[edit on 27-4-2007 by kix]

The first problem with this whole tail argument is that you're both talking about different things. Defcon is talking about the vertical fin, and Kix is talking about the empennage. You're both right. The vertical fin IS a fairly hollow shell with little reinforcing, and only the control cables, hydraulics, and spars running up it. The APU and black boxes sit in the empennage, which encompasses the vertical fin, the aft fuselage plug, and the horizontal stabilizers.

[edit on 4/28/2007 by Zaphod58]

Originally posted by kix
h! Now the tail is NOT an empty shell? now there seems to be an APU on the tail, and below the tail does not make it part of the tail? excuse me but for a person that claims to have worked on Boeings you make me laugh, first they said the tail is an empty shell and implying that the tail is fragile, then explain why the FDR and VDR (the orange boxes) are in the tail if it is an empty shell? And the APU does not require additional structure?

Do you goofy movement people purposely act thick, or what?
You all squawk about how the vertical stabilizer is missing and left no damage, this is what you were referring to, as far as I could tell, and so was I. Now you’re trying to play at not knowing what I mean, even though another user has mentioned it to you already. So allow me to make it absolutely crystal clear what I mean.

There is nothing in the Vertical Stabilizer except a few hydraulics to move the rudder. The APU is below the rudder and between the elevators, which are also empty except for hydraulics. The APU is not a high torque, nor high stress device, and is not a requirement for the aircraft to fly, so it has no heavy reinforcement around it like an engine would.

Thus, as I said, the tail on a 757 is nothing like the tails on engine mounted aircraft such as DC-9’s, 727’s, L1011’s, or DC-10’s. The whole rumor of, "sitting in the tail cause its stronger, in the case of an accident", no longer applies.

Originally posted by kix
Dont make me laugh the APU is a big sucker and weights enough to require special tools to service now sections 70,79,73,74,82 and 48 (in boeing speak) are made by Vought and they are quite sturdy (light also) they will Not evaporate on concrete contact...LOL

Not really, the little jet-start units that we pull around on the tugs are nothing more then an APU on wheels, and a single guy can pull one around on a cart, by hand, all day long.

As you can see in zaphs picture above it's not very large:
www.b737.org.uk..." target='_blank' class='tabOff'/>

Originally posted by kix
If there is red mig letters that have the A or the N of the AMERICAN AIRLINES logo on it IT HAS to be the ONLY logo on the plane and it comes from the upper fuselage on the 757 (that will be section 43 for a knowledgeable people) in your case that will be the front of the plane

Post the picture you’re talking about which specifically has red letters on it, and a gray background. It could very well be something that came off the vertical stabilizer, which has all these colors on it. It could also be from the nose gear door, or engine cowling, which have both gray and red on them.

Originally posted by kix
that will be section 43 for a knowledgeable people

And who would these “knowledgeable people” be?
The Ancient Hities?
The American Indians?
On the other hand, did you mean “a knowledgeable person”, perhaps like a person who can learn how to use the quote feature correctly?

Originally posted by kix
OL, its called Vmax for something, not Vmax plus 20% just in case! LOL, there is a great difference in flying at FL 330 than at sea level, and more so at Vmax. AND also Vmax of that FDR is way over design spec and posible if the flight path is waht they say it was, ALSO the 757 was not dive bombing the Pentagon if it really broke the light poles on the freeway the flight was almost level and at a speed not posible, AND on top of that explain the altimeter settings on the official FDR?

Moreover, pulling 6 g’s is about 3 times the maximum Gforce that a 747 is rated too pull. Obviously, exceeding the specs can cause damage, but the people flying these did not care if it damaged the aircraft. Some parts in this lot may be a bit stronger then in the next lot to come off the mill, so saying at what point an aircraft is going to begin to disintegrate is certainly not a black and white number, it’s a gray area depending on many factors. Many aircraft have flown through the tops of thunderstorms, exceeded their design specs, and had frame damage, which does not mean they suddenly fall apart in mid air. I know of two aircraft that used to fly into my station that had severe frame damage from just this, yet it was repaired, trimmed out, and they still flew every day. One airline had an aircraft we used to call the “Bent Bertha”, if you stood at the nose on the pilot side of the aircraft and looked to the tail, you would see that the aircraft was clearly bowed like this =(= . This particular 727 clipper (hint) flew right up until the day that it's airlines went bankrupt.

Originally posted by kix
Dont come with these simply ridiculous answers... and sideways reasonings, the PART ON THE LAWN has to be polished metal because all the section 43 os ALL AA 757-200 are polished metal, other parts have to be painted grey or other colors (depending on airlines CS) but NOT SECTION 43, if that part has letter it is section 43 and the rivets DONT match.

You have yet to prove that it belongs to that particular section. Please post the picture so I can see what you are referring to exactly. I have seen folks claim the same section of aircraft to belong to the top of an “m”, an “e”, “r”, “c”, or an “a”, and it could just as easily belong to the side, or bottom of an “e”, ”c”, or an “a”.

I mean after all a couple posts ago, you swore up, down, and sideways that only “only composite parts and the A-300 fleet have gray painted fuselages”, and I think I pretty much stomped a mud hole in your theories bottom. You want to come off as being an aviation expert (naming specific panel sections), at least have some clue as to what you’re talking about with the rest of it.
If this:

Is the piece you’re referring to I don’t see any gray paint on it. I see a section that is bent into the shadow and not reflecting as much as the rest.

It might shock you to know that aircraft corrode, they don’t rust like a car, but they do become duller in appearance over time, and exposure to the sun. Late at night, there is this entire breed of folks that show up at airports, just to polish aircraft. Now this is a very time consuming process to perform, and its not done on the entire aircraft very often. Normally they just get a quicker, and less costly tail polish, to show the logo nice and clean. To actually polish the aluminum requires them getting out scaffolds, huge buffers, and will take an entire crew a whole night to do one aircraft. That aluminum, while it might look nice and shiny at a distance, is actually not so when you see it up close. It's big sections covered in fine scratches, much like a Delorian Sports car that was buffed with steel wool. An aircraft can go for many months between getting this level of polishing too.

Originally posted by kix
I really jope you are retired because for a guy who has worked "years" on 757 your knowledge leaves lot to be desired.

No I left of my own accord to pursue other things, but I have been asked to come back a few times, and once even accepted and went back for a while. Unfortunately, working on the ramp here, in the heat, is not something that I would recommend for someone that just got through working a number of years behind a desk.

As far as my knowledge is concerned, I have yet to say anything wrong, while you have said a ton of incorrect things. I also can run a spell checker and know how to type [ quote ] [ /quote ].

Originally posted by kix
his sums it up perfectly why the zombies believe the "official" history, they don’t research, they are walking enciclopedias LOL! and then after being owned they resort to slandering...

No, I did my research, in training, and in real time spent on aircraft. I do not feel the need to pursue any of the ignorance spewed by the Goof Movement, which is based on a fraudulent movie put out by a bunch of college students, and proliferated by folks with an agenda to sell videos, books, and advertising…

Maybe you should spend less time doing research on the net and go work for an airlines for a bit.

Originally posted by kix
BTW, you have proven my point, all zombies when cornered resort to circular and sideways arguing....
show me a photo of a grey pianted secion 43 on a AA 757 plane.....dont waste your time YOU WONT find any!

Nothing sideways about my logic, as there is no gray paint in that picture. If you had spent ONE REALWORLD SECOND around these aircraft you would understand the condition of their skin when not polished recently.
This is not an aircraft skin, but the effect is very similar:
Before:

After:

Up close the skin looks very similar to this:



[edit on 4/28/2007 by defcon5]

Originally posted by defcon5
Do you goofy movement people purposely act thick, or what?
You all squawk about how the vertical stabilizer is missing and left no damage, this is what you were referring to, as far as I could tell, and so was I. Now you’re trying to play at not knowing what I mean, even though another user has mentioned it to you already. So allow me to make it absolutely crystal clear what I mean.
[edit on 4/28/2007 by defcon5]

And yet you still have no actual physical evidence, reports, videos or photos of a 757 of FLight 77 hitting the Pentagon.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
And yet you still have no actual physical evidence, reports, videos or photos of a 757 of FLight 77 hitting the Pentagon.

I can see parts that I can recognize as from a 757, which the normal person cannot, in those photos. I mean what are you expecting, that the only way that a 757 hit the pentagon is if the government shows up with a truckload of debris at my door? Even then, you’ll claim it was from somewhere else.

So using your logic, show me PHYSICAL PROOF of a missile, thermite, a nuke, a hologram, a skywarrior, a UCAV, a UFO, or whatever none-sense it is, which hit the building this week, in the Foof movements opinion. I mean you guys cannot even agree amongst yourselves, all you can seem to come into agreement on is that you don’t like the idea that it was a 757. Maybe this is because you all have an agenda to sell books, DVD’s, and website advertising, Hm…?

If you cannot show PHYSICAL PROOF to the contrary then Occam's Razor applies and the simplest solution is the correct one.

Originally posted by defcon5
I can see parts that I can recognize as from a 757, which the normal person cannot, in those photos. I mean what are you expecting, that the only way that a 757 hit the pentagon is if the government shows up with a truckload of debris at my door? Even then, you’ll claim it was from somewhere else.

Oh but i am not a normal person. I have a background in aviation, federal law-enforement and a analyst for the government. So i see and understand a lot more then you so called normal people.

But you still have no actual reports matching said parts to a 757 or to flight 77. You might be happy with the evidence as you see it but i need something called facts.

Originally posted by defcon5

Maybe this is because you all have an agenda to sell books, DVD’s, and website advertising, Hm…?

I can't speak for the others but I have no DVD's or books for sale or website advertising.

If you cannot show PHYSICAL PROOF to the contrary then Occam's Razor applies and the simplest solution is the correct one.

I agree. If you cannot show where a Boeing 757 went through the wall, then the simplest solution is...it didn't. As far as WHAT went through the wall it could have been a missile, a small jet, a Predator. But it wasn't a Boeing 757.

Originally posted by johnlear
I can't speak for the others but I have no DVD's or books for sale or website advertising.

I see you all around the net, your telling me you don’t make a thing for going on other websites, radio shows, or giving talks? I find that harder to believe then your Soul Catcher, or Hologram theories.

Originally posted by johnlear
I agree. If you cannot show where a Boeing 757 went through the wall, then the simplest solution is...it didn't. As far as WHAT went through the wall it could have been a missile, a small jet, a Predator. But it wasn't a Boeing 757.

No same crap applies to you guys…
If you cannot show me parts from a missile, Parts from another Jet, or a Predator, then the logical result is that it’s what they said it was. Would it make any difference in the world if the terrorists actually brought the towers down with explosives? Would we still be at war if they shot the Pentagon with a missile?

Therefore, under these circumstances there is no reason for the government to lie as to the method used in the attack, and use an alternative means. Actually using an alternative means would open them up to bungle it. So according to Occam’s razor, if they said it was a plane then it was a plane. The burden of proof for your “way out there” theories lies with the theorizer.

The tail of a 757 is an empty shell

Now its a whole new argument and its the Tail FIN (vertical stabilizer) that is empty....Not surprised the same tactic of changing the subject.

There is nothing in the Vertical Stabilizer except a few hydraulics to move the rudder. The APU is below the rudder and between the elevators, which are also empty except for hydraulics. The APU is not a high torque, nor high stress device, and is not a requirement for the aircraft to fly, so it has no heavy reinforcement around it like an engine would.

Now its the stabilizer, you see, you changed the subject and I brought the APU and NOW the APU info and side tracking the debate....Not surprised the same tactic of changing the subject.

sitting in the tail cause its stronger (*the apu*)

You said it, I did not. I said that the tail is NOT an empty shell the APU for example is in that zone, thanks for proving my point. And thanks for the photos, you see there is SOMETHING IN THERE, and also the picture show a really shinny surface...(must have been cleaned just the day before.

Post the picture you’re talking about which specifically has red letters on it, and a gray background. It could very well be something that came off the vertical stabilizer, which has all these colors on it. It could also be from the nose gear door, or engine cowling, which have both gray and red on them.

not of that size, the tail has the AA logo on capital "AA" and has not curved parts (and also a eagle on top) the other engine (NOTHING RECOVERED) or the nose gear door cant be because of the size of the letters. those have to be (if they were) the american logo on top of the fuselage.

Section 43 is the fuselage section between the nose/cockpit area and the center section of the plane, if you took a tour of Boeing facilities at Renton circa 1996 you would know how a 757 is made, and also spend a lot of time on ramp youd know, but hey I must be a native american right? (your personal attacks fail badly)

Moreover, pulling 6 g’s is about 3 times the maximum Gforce that a 747 is rated too pull. Obviously, exceeding the specs can cause damage, but the people flying these did not care if it damaged the aircraft. Some parts in this lot may be a bit stronger then in the next lot to come off the mill, so saying at what point an aircraft is going to begin to disintegrate is certainly not a black and white number, it’s a gray area depending on many factors. Many aircraft have flown through the tops of thunderstorms, exceeded their design specs, and had frame damage, which does not mean they suddenly fall apart in mid air. I know of two aircraft that used to fly into my station that had severe frame damage from just this, yet it was repaired, trimmed out, and they still flew every day. One airline had an aircraft we used to call the “Bent Bertha”, if you stood at the nose on the pilot side of the aircraft and looked to the tail, you would see that the aircraft was clearly bowed like this =(= . This particular 727 clipper (hint) flew right up until the day that it's airlines went bankrupt.

Citing Pan Ams old three holers wont save your reputation, a 757 cant exceed that speed at LOW ALTITUDE, please read LOW ALTITUDE, all you cite are high altitude incidents, please for God sakes JOHN LEAR tell this guy the diference between manuvering at over 20k feet and low altitude manuvering.

Maybe you should spend less time doing research on the net and go work for an airlines for a bit.

Show me a photo of a 757-200 from AA that is not shinny,also your photos of a tank fail miserabily because: airplanes travel a lot faster and at different altitude.... show me a pic of a 757 as bad as the tank you portrayed...

If you had spent ONE REALWORLD SECOND around these aircraft you would understand the condition of their skin when not polished recently.

love the way this zombies think that they are the only ones to know things and think we are just "inventing" things, FYI I am quite familiar with the 752, and have spent a lot of hours not only arounf some of them but also in the Jump seat, likewise some of the zombies tried to pull the same stunt on JOHN LEAR CREDENTIALS some time ago and came out burned.

Please dont turn this post into a I have more experience than you, prove me wrong (you havent), and tell us how the altimeter was reset in the FDR and the palne excedde by far VMAX in a shallow dive and also how it disapeared...

Originally posted by defcon5
No same crap applies to you guys…

If you believe the official story you should be able to provide evidence to support it and you have not. So do not ask anyone to provide evidence if you can not.