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 a missile could NOT have hit the pentagon

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 05:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by denythestatusquo

Where are the witnesses? I keep asking but nobody delivers. Let's make a TV special where all the pro-Israel crowd parades out their lackeys to lie for the military industrial complex and present people to say they saw: 'da plane boss.. da plane."

What role will you play in the show Fox? Heck we could even have it on the Fox network.. they could sell it to the Christians that will do whatever Israel desires.

Of course the landing gear was up because a: it didn't have any or b: they were not coming in for a landing. Also, any plane/missile can be painted with a logo and it is quite easy to do.


The names of the witnesses have been posted several times. Why dont you google the names...get their phone numbers and spew out some anti-semetic RANTS to them. You post has just proven to most on here what your true intentions are.

Gee someone saw a plane fly into the pentagon... They are JEW LOVERS! you just proved to me what type of a person you are and quite frankly, unless you have FACTS to back up that disgusting post...I will refrain from responding to anymore of your hate fill posts.




posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 05:22 PM
link   
Where are the people who were on the plane? For that matter, where is the plane?

Wasn't the reason why they wouldnt release the videos because a criminal court trial was using it as evidence? And you can't release court evidence.

I tend to agree with CameronFox on this.



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
I have done a lot of research and have access to a lot of research material. Thier are no FBI or NTSB reports for Flight 77 or for that matter any of the planes on 911.

The FBI was the lead investigating agency but i have not seen any incident reports on the aircraft from 911. I can find other reports from other aviation crime scenes but none from 911.

The NTSB is the only agency regulated by the FAA to do crash scene investigations.


Ok, so you did research....where is it? Where does it say " There were no matching serial numbers on the aircraft recovered at the pentagon."



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 06:52 PM
link   
As far as identifying aircraft goes, I have trouble telling the difference between a 757, 767 and a 777 in a picture and I worked as a aircraft mechanic for 10 years. I can tell you that it is a twin engined Boeing product though.



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 07:00 PM
link   
and why is it assumed that anyone in the air force is an expert on what a missile sounds like? LOTS of desk jobs in the airforce...specifically at the pentagon


ive fired shoulder fired rockets and tows and i wouldnt claim to be an "expert" in those.



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Think About IT


First off a missile can be ground launched, air launched, ship launched or submarine launched. There are dozens of types of missiles fired using different equipment.


D.C, the missile could not have stayed parallel to the ground and hit the pentagon without first hitting buildings or trees or whatnot. Therefore, the missile would have to come in at a very sharp angle. The missile would have most likely impacted the top of the pentagon, not the side.

Missiles do not leave impact holes. Why? Well, when a missile penetrates its target it then explodes. As seen in the video it basically blows everything to #. My point: The hole created by the penetration would not be there because it would have been blown up with the explosion. A missile would have left an impact crater, not a small hole. Most of, if not the entire wall would have been gone, there would not have been a small hole in it!


Ok , becuase of the sensitive nature of this subject i usually try not to get involved in it because as i allways do here on ATS, If i dont know enough about something then i simply wont pretend that i do HOWEVER,
i will bite on this one,
first of all i would like to say that im not discrediting you in anyway and i respect all viewpoints here on ATS including yours,
Now
There are misseles that can fly parrallel to the ground and sidewind object and structures so as not to hit them, look them up, they do exist , and it wouldnt neccessarily have to hit the pentagon at an angle either what one would have to do is look at the line of sight from the pentagon wall to the furthest point of clearence to trully come up with a theory on this,
there are also missiles that can be steered or guided via remote or advanced sps, the ones that are menoverable are called "fly by wire"
they are out there,
Second of all there are hardnosed missiles that penetrate a structure then blow in the burrow they made, what is also crucial to this is the type of missile it is in itself, some napalm or incindiary missiles do this and do not explode when they hit they just spray liquid or tar like substance everywhere and burn the bejeesus out of things,
and there are certain missiles that are made to penetrate a structure and then explode when it is in depth or they can be timed,
one such missile is what is commonly known as The Bunker Buster.



missile would leave a crater not a hole. no missile diamtere comes close to being 2 and 1/2 yards

Some do . . .



And lastly i would like to remind the op that i missile is not nececarily a ballistic projectile used in warfare, i can pick my computer up and throw it through the window to hit the newspaperboy , i would be using my computer as a missile, anything can be used as a missile , it doesnt have to be a prpulsion driven explosive or incindiery either, just my 2 c, im at work now but i will check back when i get home .

Omega



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 08:07 PM
link   
There are several reasons why it could not have been a bunker-buster type missile. Furthermore, the more I think about it, the more the impact hole itself dismisses the claim that a missile could have been used.

A bunker buster missile would have penetrated the outter wall and then have detonated correct? Well if this was the case most of the damage would have been done to the inner walls. However, that did not happen.
Examine this photo
www.globalsecurity.org...
clearly the damage is mostly to the outter wall which does not correlate with the claim of a bunker buster missile.

The footage from 9/11 does not show a clearly identifiable object, what it does show is an immediate explosion upon impact. If a missile were used there is no way it could have left such an impact hole because it would have detonated on impact, destroying all evidence of the hole it had created. Because an airplane does not detonate any hole made by the cabin or fuselage would have remained in tact.



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
I still cant see how a novice ARAB terrorist can fly a plane in such difficult manner, without hitting the lawn.

Why were no planes scrambled?
There was a 1 in 5 chance this plan would happened to hit the least populated part of the pentagon... but it did.

why did it do a full loop AROUND The pentagon, then slam into the renovated side?

Why would it go all the way to DC... and not hit the whitehouse?


Firstly how can you positvely declare the arab terrorists novice's at flying airplanes?
-there was a 1/5 chance, it could be coincidence, could be due to the fact that at the time recent rennovations were taking place.

Reports of it doing a full loop? I never heard this

Why didnt it hit the white house? Simple. From an aerial perspective the pentagon sticks out like a sore thumb. Its across the river, has a huge lawn around it and theres no way you can miss it. The white house, on the other hand, is in the middle of washington d.c. It is surrounded by dozens of buildings and it is rather small. You would have a hard time picking that target out nontheless accuratley hittting it with an airplane.



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 09:36 PM
link   
If it was a missile that hit the Pentagon...where did the passengers and the plane go?

I've heard the silly theory before that it landed at some military base and they were executed or some other such nonsense. Why go through all that trouble when you could just crash the plane into the Pentagon?

I'm not saying who was or wasn't behind all of this, I just think no one has ever adequately addresses the issue of where the plane and passengers went if a missile was used in the attack...



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 10:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Think About IT

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
I still cant see how a novice ARAB terrorist can fly a plane in such difficult manner, without hitting the lawn.

Why were no planes scrambled?
There was a 1 in 5 chance this plan would happened to hit the least populated part of the pentagon... but it did.

why did it do a full loop AROUND The pentagon, then slam into the renovated side?

Why would it go all the way to DC... and not hit the whitehouse?


Firstly how can you positvely declare the arab terrorists novice's at flying airplanes?
-there was a 1/5 chance, it could be coincidence, could be due to the fact that at the time recent rennovations were taking place.

Reports of it doing a full loop? I never heard this

Why didnt it hit the white house? Simple. From an aerial perspective the pentagon sticks out like a sore thumb. Its across the river, has a huge lawn around it and theres no way you can miss it. The white house, on the other hand, is in the middle of washington d.c. It is surrounded by dozens of buildings and it is rather small. You would have a hard time picking that target out nontheless accuratley hittting it with an airplane.



BEcause the flight instructors said they were AMATUERS , they had TROULBES in a flight simulator..

so how did they manage to pull off that amazing flying that low when even seasoned pilots said its unebeliveably difficult?

Yes, watch any footage of the flight path, the plane came in, did a LOOP Around the pentagon, then slammed into the only side that had renovations.


If this pilot was able to hit the pentagon, in the side, flying that low, and that fast.. there's no reason he COULDNT of done the same at the whitehouse.


I dont believe an arab terrorist flew a plane in.
I dont believe a MISSLE hit the pentagon either.

Both of those are too dubious to consider.

Maybe a small commuter jet filled with explosives...

But then it begs the QUestion.. why would they hit them selves?

The WTC's were ENOUGH of a terrorist attack to provoke outrage against arab states...

you wouldnt NEED to hit the PENTAGON AS WELL....

What were they trying to HIDE at the pentagon?



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 10:59 PM
link   

I dont believe an arab terrorist flew a plane in.
I dont believe a MISSLE hit the pentagon either.

Both of those are too dubious to consider.

Maybe a small commuter jet filled with explosives...


Please refer to my post right above yours.

Where did the original flight go?
Where did the passengers go?
Why would they use a separate plane/missile/whatever when they had a perfectly good 757?



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 11:22 PM
link   
Presumably, if the plane was 'disappeared' then the passengers were either conspirators who boarded with false identities, or they were 'real people' who were silenced one way or another, imprisoned, re-programmed, or killed.

If I remember, I'll dig up the passenger list later tonight, and post it here.



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 11:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne

There's a fair bit of farmland in the vicinity, as well as a (very) large body of water, and a handful of large-ish national parks. Just because nobody saw a missle being launched, doesn't necessarily mean that it didn't happen. I don't always see my mail man coming, but I know he's been there when I see the mail he's left.


Now Wyrdeone, that's trying to measure pears with apples....first off the "mailman" is not "anything unusual"... A missile flying through half of Washington DC, "is unusual". People would have heard a missile , but if someone saw a plane in Washington DC they might not see that as "something strange" until it is too late.

There are a few things that people should know about. First off, there is no missile that would have made the fireball that was made in the Pentagon crash. Looking at the videos, the fireball reached at least 120 feet up, or more, in the pictures you can see the fireball was over twice the height of the Pentagon and was almost the same in width.



For example, a tomahawk missile, which is one of the missile some have claimed hit the Pentagon, has a capacity for a 1,000 lbs blast warhead, which would never make that kind of fireball, and the tomahawk is designed to fly at low altitutes.

If you put side to side the blast generated by the planes which crashed into the WTC and the one that hit the Pentagon they are almost the same. Of course in the Pentagon the blast was mostly upwards, on the towers it was sideways because the Pentagon has 5 walls of 24 inches each I think?



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 11:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
........................
The photos of the Pentagon do not show a proper debris field and there is no damage to the lawn in front of the hole.

[edit on 10-12-2006 by ULTIMA1]


"Proper debris field".... what the heck is a "proper debris field"?......

Just like car crashes do not have a "proper debris field", plane crashes do not have a "proper debris field" whatever the heck that means.... I think you are trying to claim "it should have looked this way".......


Plane crashes are not the same, hence you won't find exactly the same pattern in different plane crash debris fields.....

As for there not being any damage to the front lawn of the Pentagon....first of all, the plane crashed mostly against the Pentagon, second even in pictures taken from above you can see the lawn "is not perfect" as some people keep trying to claim...

Anyways, Catherder did an excellent job in compiling some "real information" about the Pentagon crash in the following link.
www.abovetopsecret.com...


[edit on 10-12-2006 by Muaddib]



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 12:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
Presumably, if the plane was 'disappeared' then the passengers were either conspirators who boarded with false identities, or they were 'real people' who were silenced one way or another, imprisoned, re-programmed, or killed.

If I remember, I'll dig up the passenger list later tonight, and post it here.



So, you're suggesting that somehow the US government recruited 59 individuals, told them they were assuming false identities and boarding a plane which would land elsewhere and they would be back home, and none of these people spoke out?

You really think it's possible to keep even one person out of 59 from squealing?

To quote South Park...really??



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 01:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by CameronFox

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
I have done a lot of research and have access to a lot of research material. Thier are no FBI or NTSB reports for Flight 77 or for that matter any of the planes on 911.

The FBI was the lead investigating agency but i have not seen any incident reports on the aircraft from 911. I can find other reports from other aviation crime scenes but none from 911.

The NTSB is the only agency regulated by the FAA to do crash scene investigations.


Ok, so you did research....where is it? Where does it say " There were no matching serial numbers on the aircraft recovered at the pentagon."



As stated i can not find any FBI or NTSB reports on any of the 911 aircraft crash scenes, no reports of any parts found mathcing any of the 911 aircraft.


Originally posted by Muaddib

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
........................
The photos of the Pentagon do not show a proper debris field and there is no damage to the lawn in front of the hole.

[edit on 10-12-2006 by ULTIMA1]


"Proper debris field".... what the heck is a "proper debris field"?......

Just like car crashes do not have a "proper debris field", plane crashes do not have a "proper debris field" whatever the heck that means.... I think you are trying to claim "it should have looked this way".......


Plane crashes are not the same, hence you won't find exactly the same pattern in different plane crash debris fields.....

As for there not being any damage to the front lawn of the Pentagon....first of all, the plane crashed mostly against the Pentagon, second even in pictures taken from above you can see the lawn "is not perfect" as some people keep trying to claim...

Anyways, Catherder did an excellent job in compiling some "real information" about the Pentagon crash in the following link.
www.abovetopsecret.com...


[edit on 10-12-2006 by Muaddib]


Their are parts on an aircraft that can survive impact and fire. Their are no photos or reports of these parts.

Also some of eywitnesses at the Pentagon stated that the planes wing wing tore into the ground after hitting the generator and before hitting the building, other witnesses stated the plane itself hit the gound before hitting the building. From every photo i have seen thier are no qouges or marks in the ground in front of the hole that would be from the wing or airframe.

No burning from the jet fuel fire on the lawn in front of the hole. Also thier are conflicting reports on where the black boxes were found, 1 reports states they were found in the cockpit (black boxes are kept in the tail) another report states the black boxes were found at the hole in the building.



[edit on 11-12-2006 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 01:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

As stated i can not find any FBI or NTSB reports on any of the 911 aircraft crash scenes, no reports of any parts found mathcing any of the 911 aircraft.


Maybe you are not so good as a researcher?

There is quite a bit of information about what was found in those crashes.

www.gwu.edu...

and do check Catherder's link which i gave above there is a lot of informaiton there on what was found which some people around here keep claiming was never found...


[edit on 11-12-2006 by Muaddib]



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 02:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

As stated i can not find any FBI or NTSB reports on any of the 911 aircraft crash scenes, no reports of any parts found mathcing any of the 911 aircraft.


And?.... maybe you are not so good as a researcher...

Could that be the reason?...

www.gwu.edu...

and do check Catherder's link which i gave above there is a lot of informaiton there on what was found which some people around here keep claiming was never found...

[edit on 11-12-2006 by Muaddib]


So you gave me a NSA archive link (I work at NSA). That have basic ATC recordings. What we need are the FBI and / or NTSB incident reports on the 4 aircraft crash scenes?

As stated i have seen all the infomration Catherder had posted, the photos of the parts do not have a source of who took them, thier are no reports matching those parts found to Flight 77.
[edit on 11-12-2006 by ULTIMA1]

[edit on 11-12-2006 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 02:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
...................
So you gave me a NSA archive link (I work at NSA). That have basic ATC recordings. What we need are the FBI and / or NTSB incident reports on the 4 aircraft crash scenes?

As stated i have seen all the infomration Catherder had posted, the photos of the parts do not have a source of who took them, thier are no reports matching those parts found to Flight 77.
[edit on 11-12-2006 by ULTIMA1]


Well, since you work at a government agency why don't you ask the FBI to give you some information about it?

If you are not going to believe the pictures with the parts that were found in the crash you are not going to believe anything else given to you...

[edit on 11-12-2006 by Muaddib]



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 02:21 AM
link   
Anyways... how about you start here. THere are some FBI reports there about 9/11.

www.gpoaccess.gov...

Here is a link to the FBI about 9/11 reports...

search.fbi.gov...

Have fun.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join