737 Wheel recovered at the Pentagon on 9/11

page: 3
4
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 12:54 PM
link   
No doubt about there being aeroplane parts there at the pentagon but they didn't come from the device that went through a reinforced building to its core with an almost perfect shadow hole.

It was a missile, don't need to see the footage (would be nice though) as I can see the whole it left.

So where did the engines end up, the ones either side of the whole?

And yet again perfectly rational, reasonable people debating physic's laws and kinetic energy and not too bothered about a supposed lack of wings, tail or otherwise? Or about the ability of this plane to clip several light poles at some incredible speed with again ‘force’ that bends and breaks but has little reactive force to affect its amazing, floating just barely above the ground flight path, on route to penetrate deep into the building. All without any indentations on the lawn (I’ve seen along with others on here the film/photos) but then it all gets messed up by a couple of fire engines blowing foam everywhere just to cover the non-tracks.

Go to the BBC website of two days ago and look at a real Cessna jet albeit a very small one and see the sort of mess it made of a large two story house!

Stop being so stupid trying to make sense of planted evidence.




posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by mlmijyd
 


Mlmijyd.....again, as I stated earlier, a mis-understanding can 'mushroom' into a conspiracy theory...OK, I didn't say that exact same thing previously, I just thought it up as I wrote this post.

BUT, it is kinda sorta what I've been trying to say....let's ask this: A cruise missile hit the Pentagon. However, it was reported that a Light Pole was sheared off, and witnesses saw an airplane shear off this Light Pole....

A missile is a very compact cylinder, in fact, it is about 7 or 8 feet in diameter. A B757 is larger, and has wings....(to shear off light poles, etc.).

We've already discussed the kinetic energy involves....but a missile would also have a warhead, I'd assume? I mean, how would a cruise missile, WITHOUT explosives accomplish the damage that is well documented?

OR, did the Cruise Missile have explosives onboard, yet no traces were discovered?

SO...either it was a Cruise Missile, even though many people saw an airplane (and they were confused as to type of airplane, by HEY! That's eyewitnesses for ya!)

Or, these are paid witnesses, paid to lie. And it was a missile....and NO ONE in the Military has come forth, yet, to announce the lie, to reveal the lie.

There would have to have been at least ONE person by now...one person from the Military, with no family to protect, to come out and reveal the 'truth'....

Comments? WW



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 01:31 PM
link   
If you're going to plant aircraft debris in order to 'prove' that the aircraft you said hit the Pentagon really did, why plant debris from a completely different model of aircraft?

It further reinforces the contention that all this is disinfo aimed deflecting attention away from what really happened and/or undermining US security and integrity. Or, if it really was a 'false flag' operation it was perpetrated by a bunch of incompetent school kids.

Now, I am willing to accept that the US administration / CIA / Mossad / NWO / Reptilians or however are believed responsible for a false flag operation are indeed no better than a bunch of incompetent school kids. Are you?



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Essan
 


Essan,

Couldn't have said it better myself!!!

WW



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Essan
If you're going to plant aircraft debris in order to 'prove' that the aircraft you said hit the Pentagon really did, why plant debris from a completely different model of aircraft?


Becasue most people are not going to know its from a different aircraft.

Most people are just going to go by what the media tells them.



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by Essan
If you're going to plant aircraft debris in order to 'prove' that the aircraft you said hit the Pentagon really did, why plant debris from a completely different model of aircraft?


Becasue most people are not going to know its from a different aircraft.

Most people are just going to go by what the media tells them.


True.

As long as there's not an internet .....

Besides, it's as easy to plant 757 debris as 737 debris. So why take the risk? Unless you're completely stupid and naive ?



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Essan
Besides, it's as easy to plant 757 debris as 737 debris. So why take the risk? Unless you're completely stupid and naive ?


Who said its 737 debris? We have no reports matching the parts to any plane.



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Who said its 737 debris? We have no reports matching the parts to any plane.


Nor, do we have any reports stating the parts don't match. As I have asked in three threads now, what proof do you have this is true?



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 05:01 PM
link   
okay, everybody, my picture was a 727, yay, at least two people got it so it wasn't much of a trick question after all.

So keep on churning the missile mysteries and keep having fun.

Here's a Q... what if the wreckage WAS IDd as from a 757 and even N644AA. What if they blew it up in advance and planted its parts? Nope... they gotta go scrapes wrecks outta the jungle with all the wrong features and stuff those inside hoping no one looks too close but whaddya know! The internet has free software and zoom functions and now we're onto them, neat-o. The Truth Movement rocks.



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 05:12 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


ULTIMA....do I see a pot czlling the kettle??

I know, I know....we've hashed this before...not sure if Ockham's Razor should be introduced at this point, or not...

BUT...IF this was such a terribly heinous 'False Flag' on civilians (and I know you know that many who work in the Pentagon are civies...)

not to mention, the deaths in the Towers in NYC...breaks my heart too...as do the deaths on UA93.......

IF you are to believe that ANY administration, even as terrible as the current one the USA has suffered under for the last seven years, is capable of such heinous acts, pre-meditated acts....then you MUST cry out, and DEMAND justice!! Not just here on ATS! Go out, and tell the story! Bring these criminals to justice!!!

I'm retired, I have a few minutes or hours on my hands....pull the evidence, and then let's do this thing! Or....maybe the evidence is too cirmumstantial....oops....well, let's not shoot our powder until it's dry....

WW

[edit on 4/2/0808 by weedwhacker]



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 06:18 PM
link   
Bingo Essan, you win the big the snoopy at the carnival fair. Because this junk they are showing is carnival fair material. Doesn't add up, won't add up, never will add up. I don't care if Aunt Bee with her rosaries says she was outside her minivan and saw it with her very own eyes. Plants.
And yes, whomever concocted this plot must be inheritantly retarded due to all the inaccuracies. I will never read Popular Mechanics again after they went to such great lengths trying to explain how a 737 engine next to the towers came from a 767.

[edit on 2-4-2008 by jpm1602]



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 09:37 PM
link   
Sorry but can't help myself in correcting the spelling of your byline:


There are more things in heaven and earth Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
There is something in the pang of change. More than the heart can bare.
Unhappiness remembering happiness.
The black dog is back. And it looks like he's here to stay.

[edit on 2-4-2008 by spaceweaver]



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 09:52 PM
link   
reply to post by spaceweaver
 


That is indeed a huge difference, between the words 'bare' and 'bear', in the context.

Although they are homonyms, they certainly have very different meanings....I'm not a student of the Bard, but I feel I must become more acquainted...as these are the times that try men's souls.....

WW

[adding] to bare one's heart is possibly more than one can bear...

I know, off-topic, but scholarly nonetheless.....

[edit on 4/2/0808 by weedwhacker]



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 09:57 PM
link   
Ever thought that maybe a plane did hit the pentacon and the videos are withheld, combined with a lack of concrete evidence making a disinfo ploy to keep the CT'rs busy infighting (so they can be discredited). This keeps them away from the real issues... wtc1,2,7 pretty much free falling and the rest...

I don't think we'll ever prove beyond reasonable doubt what hit the pentacon, I used to be a missile theorist but I'm currently on the fence.

edited for typos

[edit on 2-4-2008 by GhostR1der]



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 10:21 PM
link   
reply to post by GhostR1der
 


Ghost, I keep seeing this term 'freefalling' when pertains to the WTC Towers. This is a thread about the Pentagon, but can we entertain for a moment this silly notion of 'freefalling'?

Stuff falls, in a gravitional field. On Earth, things fall, or accelerate, excluding atmospheric interference, at a rate of about 9.8 meters/sec/sec.

(30 feet/sec/sec).

If a building begins to collapse....whether from a damage due to an airplane, or any other reason, it will collapse consistent with the laws of gravity. If it happened on the Moon, it would look different, but of course, it wasn't on the Moon, it was on Earth.

WW

[edit on 4/2/0808 by weedwhacker]



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 10:25 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


My bad. 'Collapsing' at nearly 9.8ms-2..

Always good to read ya posts Mr WW.



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 10:33 PM
link   
reply to post by GhostR1der
 


'sok, Ghost. I've been thinking about writing to the 'pilots for 9/11 truth', just to hear their side. Nearly seven years now, and we sitll argue about it, that being 9/11.

I think it's time for me to get to know these other pilots, and hear what they have to say.....

Maybe it'll change my mind...maybe not...but I'm keeping the mind open for now....

WW



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 10:50 PM
link   
www.youtube.com...&hl=en


??????????/

[edit on 2/4/2008 by weemadmental]



posted on Apr, 3 2008 @ 12:25 AM
link   
reply to post by weemadmental
 


Good find, weemadmental...only thing, and it's not your video, you got it from YT...but in the clip there is a picture of an AA B767.

This is one of my points, that eyewitness testimony as to the TYPE of airplane that impacted the Pentagon may be in dispute...

BUT, some eyewitnesses SAW an airplane...not a missile...flying down Columbia Pike, and eventually I-395, and impacting.

Many have tried to deflect the discussion by saying that 'eyewitnesses saw a B737'....I have pointed out that a 'modern' B737-800 looks very much like a B757, to the untrained eye, at a quick glance.

What's more, the YT clip showed a still photo of a B767! I know this, because I used to fly the airplanes...I can recognize the differences.

Just wanting to point out how 'eyewitness' testimony can be corrupt....not their fault, just due to lack of experience....

WW

[edit]...changed spelling...adding text...those are great finds, so I'm not bashing you, weemad...I applaud you for finding it. Ya know, I actually live right here, in the Nation's Capital...was here on that day, as a matter of fact...I hope everyone reads this, and realizes that those of us who actually live here KNOW...we SAW...so don't pretend to know, don't pretend you saw...and STOP repeating junk just because it's on the Internets (I added the 's' on purpose....if you don't get the joke, then you don't get it!)

WW



[edit on 4/3/0808 by weedwhacker]



posted on Apr, 3 2008 @ 12:47 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Some people did reportadely see a plane, but, they saw a small plane going extremely fast.

Answer this. If a 7#7 did hit the pentagon, where is the wing damage, where is the ground damage, where is the burning fuel damage, why were there no reports of cars flipping as this plane flew extremely low to the ground only probably 100 feet over a highway, why did they take so many security tapes, and lastly, why did people smell corodite(Spelling error?)?





new topics
top topics
 
4
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join