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.

 

Why they didn't use a 757 to hit the Pentagon.

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
So tell me why out of all these 100 so called witnesses, not one can verify it was a 757.


A pilot who saw the impact, Tim Timmerman, said it had been an American Airways 757. "It added power on its way in," he said. "The nose hit, and the wings came forward and it went up in a fireball."

The Guardian, 12 Sep 2001

[edit on 11-6-2006 by vor75]




posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by tuccy
EDIT: Quote of previous post deleted


How many of them would be able to recognize a 757 standing still on the ground?
[edit on 11-6-2006 by tuccy]


Yes but alot of them could not even verify if it was a big airliner. Thier are too many different reports.

[edit on 12-6-2006 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 05:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by vor75

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
So tell me why out of all these 100 so called witnesses, not one can verify it was a 757.


A pilot who saw the impact, Tim Timmerman, said it had been an American Airways 757.
[edit on 11-6-2006 by vor75]


Um 1 person,, seems like thier would be more with all the military people there.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 05:40 PM
link   
ULTIMA1, that's not what you asked, you asked for one person, you got one person. By the way, that witness later in his testimony said American Airlines, not American Airways.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 06:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Um 1 person,, seems like thier would be more with all the military people there.


Alan Wallace -- firefighter with safety crew at Pentagon's heliport

"We have had a commercial carrier crash into the west side of the Pentagon at the heliport, Washington Boulevard side. The crew is OK. The airplane was a 757 Boeing or a 320 Airbus."

Albert Hemphill -- from inside the Naval Annex

"Immediately, the large silver cylinder of an aircraft appeared in my window, coming over my right shoulder as I faced the Westside of the Pentagon directly towards the heliport. The aircraft, looking to be either a 757 or Airbus, seemed to come directly over the annex"

James S. Robbins -- Robbins, a national-security analyst and 'nationalreviewonline' contributor, watched from his 6th story office window in Arlington

"The Pentagon is about a mile and half distant in the center of the tableau. I was looking directly at it when the aircraft struck. The sight of the 757 diving in at an unrecoverable angle is frozen in my memory, ..."



posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 02:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by tuccy
Why a different thread? The subject clearly belongs to the "Why they didn't use a 757 to hit the Pentagon." topic, no? It is a fully legitimate question to ask in this thread a question what clipped those lamp poles if not a 757...

Well if a 757 didn't hit there, no need to explain the lamp poles then!



posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 02:36 AM
link   
So someone just pushed them over for the fun of it? In a pattern consistent with the wingspan of a Boeing 757? Why didn't all those people stuck in a traffic jam notice people knocking over lamp poles?



posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 02:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by FatherLukeDuke
You are assuming that the people flying the plane targetted an exact bit of the building, and then with some skill (apparently beyond their training) hit it.

That's not what I'm saying at all. go back and re-read.


As the OP said: in terms of death and destruction that section of the Pentagon wasn't the best to attack anyway, so might not have been the plan.

No, it was the govt's plan to hit it.


To say that Rumsfield ordered a missle attack on his own HQ to cover up an investigation that he initiated is just silly.

So it was just one great big huge coincidence that crash happened there?



posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 02:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by vor75
A pilot who saw the impact, Tim Timmerman, said it had been an American Airways 757. "It added power on its way in," he said. "The nose hit, and the wings came forward and it went up in a fireball."

The Guardian, 12 Sep 2001

[edit on 11-6-2006 by vor75]

This guy also said the plane hit the lawn first. Do you still believe his testimony?



posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 02:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by vor75
James S. Robbins -- Robbins, a national-security analyst and 'nationalreviewonline' contributor, watched from his 6th story office window in Arlington

"The Pentagon is about a mile and half distant in the center of the tableau. I was looking directly at it when the aircraft struck. The sight of the 757 diving in at an unrecoverable angle is frozen in my memory, ..."

You forgot to mention the part where he admits that he didn't recognize what he saw.



posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 02:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aotearoa
So someone just pushed them over for the fun of it? In a pattern consistent with the wingspan of a Boeing 757? Why didn't all those people stuck in a traffic jam notice people knocking over lamp poles?

I like the lampost that fell in the WRONG direction!



posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 03:54 AM
link   
Just one lamp pole? How do you know that, just before the traffic was moving again to get out of the area, someone didn't move it to get it out of the way of the traffic? Just because one lamp pole was in the wrong position, you automatically assume the others are? Therefore no 757, no aircraft, witnesses all wrong?



posted on Jun, 16 2006 @ 12:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aotearoa
Just one lamp pole? How do you know that, just before the traffic was moving again to get out of the area, someone didn't move it to get it out of the way of the traffic? Just because one lamp pole was in the wrong position, you automatically assume the others are? Therefore no 757, no aircraft, witnesses all wrong?

WEll then, there are more aircraft than a 757 that could knock down those poles!



posted on Jun, 16 2006 @ 12:09 AM
link   
For the people going on about how pilots hit a runway so they could easily hit the pentagon.

Its the speed factor, when landing an airliner is going pretty slow, flaps extended falling happily from the sky then right at the end pull back drop some speed and lower the decent rate and kiss the ground.

These planes are built for this.

Theyre not designed to dive out of the sky at high speed into the sides of buildings.



posted on Jun, 16 2006 @ 12:25 AM
link   
I tried to tell them that, but they are like, "duh, how hard it it to crash a plane? duh."



posted on Jun, 16 2006 @ 04:17 AM
link   
Some people need to look up a few natural laws of aviation, like compressablity and ground effect.

[edit on 16-6-2006 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Jun, 16 2006 @ 11:46 AM
link   
d'uh should view # of pages first


[edit on 16-6-2006 by Long Lance]



posted on Jun, 20 2006 @ 09:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Some people need to look up a few natural laws of aviation, like compressablity and ground effect.

What effects would those have?

I always wondered if the air pushed from underneath the plane should have made a noticable imprint in the grass (did that make sense?).



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by shanemcbain


PLEASE give me an explanation to those witness testimonies. An honest and correct one that can be explained.


He is WRONG or a plant. He says: " It was not completely level, but it was not going straight down"

How is it possible that the plane was not on a level flight path if ALL of the following are true:

A) Knocked down the light poles but didn't hit the cement road. (Wing at aprox. 10-14' high)
B) Did not touch the lawn.
C) Impacted the wall with wings GREATER than the height of the engines. (10'-14')

These three pieces of evidence CLEARLY show that the plane or whatever WOULD HAVE indeed been on a level flight path. It would have been too high to hit the poles had it come in at an angle.

This guy is a fraud.

[edit on 21-6-2006 by Slap Nuts]




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join