Bodies strapped to seats on AA77, Pentagon?

Click here to learn more about this warning.

Originally posted by Seymour Butz


You still haven't convinced me that you're asking a valid question yet. Instead of asking for answers that you'll ignore anyways because you don't want to hear them, why don't you do an analysis that shows how the bodies should have been in the same condition at both crash sites.Blah blah blah blah blah.

I have a valid question for you if that is what you need. I am sure that what I will get in return is ignored or insulted, but not answered. You want to make this a legitimate argument with a legitimate question.

Where is there any proof of any passengers still strapped into their seats at the pentagon crash scene?

Yes - bodies still in their airline seats were discovered inside the Pentagon

FIREFIGHT (Patrick Creed/Rick Newman) reports firemen finding bodies
in aircraft seats near the exit hole at the C Ring in a debris pile (Pg 373-374) - this was described by Fairfax Va firefighter Mike Regan who was
leader of the FEMA search team. The bodies were witnessed by numerous
others including NTSB experts evaluating the scene.

In addition a number of other bodies were recovered seated - they
were Pentagon emplyees, both military and civilian killed by the impact
or fireball (pg 349) . In some cases were found still sitting at tables
(pg 349, 374)

reply to post by cashlink


You continue to amuse me with your inane postings. You really should try to do some legitimate research, instead of relying on goofy conspiracy sites.

Click here to learn more about this warning.

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
And you continue to compare apples to oranges when it comes to the impacts of each plane. Then again, thats no surprise either.

No, Swampfox. You have not explained why the two crashes differ. You have not explained why there should be bodies at one site and not another.

Please, show me the fundamental differences in these alleged crashes, both at more than 850 km/h, that would cause a body to dissapear at one site, yet remain at another.

Originally posted by thedman
Yes - bodies still in their airline seats were discovered inside the Pentagon

Please supply evidence in the form of a coroners report that states which bodies were found strapped to the seats.

Thanks for doing so.

reply to post by thedman


Is this true? Is there a coroner report to confirm this? If so, then I too must wonder just how the entire plane disintegrates but not the bodies and seats but I will admit, I do not know. I would like to see something official though. "eyewitness accounts" really do not mean much anymore.

reply to post by tezzajw


A plane slamming into the ground and stopping in forty feet and a plane crashing over 300 feet through a building. If you cannot figure out the differences there, then I cannot help you.

Im curious. Just what makes you people think that you are entitled to read any of the autopsy reports for the victims of Flight 77?

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
A plane slamming into the ground and stopping in forty feet and a plane crashing over 300 feet through a building. If you cannot figure out the differences there, then I cannot help you.

You're not trying to help me, Swampfox. You have not explained anything.

You have not provided ANY data that shows how many passengers were restrained on both alleged flights at the time of impact. You have not shown a seating map which indicates where the passengers were restrained.

Your utter handwaving and guesswork does not work on me. I want proof of why a body can allegedly survive the Pentagon impact, but not survive the Shanksville impact. Both were at speeds greater than 850 km/h.

What will it be, Swampfox? Some proof from you, or handwaving about apples and oranges?

[edit on 15-10-2008 by tezzajw]

reply to post by Swampfox46_1999


The coroner's report does not have to be the autopsy report.

We are paying for it. The investigation, the damage, the repairs, every bit of it. It was our building that was attacked. Or do you not pay taxes? There is also that whole matter of public record business.

reply to post by tezzajw


Ugh, cannot believe I am going to do this.

Okay, try to follow this (if you can) Flight 93 hit the ground, solid ground forty feet of it. Flight 77 hit a brick wall (yeah, yeah a reinforced wall, but just a wall), about 18 inches thick, then it hit a few more interior walls. Flight 93 was a much more violent impact (for those onboard it) than Flight 77's impact. Now, if you want to do some more research, go check out the book "Pentagon" from your local library. During the reconstruction of the Pentagon, they made a few discoveries about the original construction of the exterior walls. In the haste of World War II construction, the masons, did not put mortar between every layer of brick. They would go two or even three bricks up, before they layed mortar. What significance does this hold? It decreases the strength of the walls, which actually helped Flight 77 breach the exterior wall.

reply to post by MorningStar8741


You also pay for the CIA, NSA and the courts system. You do not get carte blanche access to their records either. Rightfully so.

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
Okay, try to follow this (if you can) Flight 93 hit the ground, solid ground forty feet of it.

It couldn't have been that solid if it allegedly swallowed part of the plane, where the flight recorder was dug out!

Flight 93 was a much more violent impact (for those onboard it) than Flight 77's impact.

Can you show me some physics or maths to prove that, please?

Have you managed to locate the data that showed which passengers were strapped into their seats on both alleged flights at the alleged time of impacts?

I'm still waiting for your calculations and proof to show me the difference between two high speed collisions, both over 850 km/h.

Thanks for your efforts, Swampfox. I'll keep asking you until you get it right though - ok?

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by MorningStar8741

 

You also pay for the CIA, NSA and the courts system. You do not get carte blanche access to their records either. Rightfully so.

So far all you have done is insult and deflect. You have not addressed one thing directly, nor have you contributed anything to even begin to back up any of the claptrap you prattle on about in between empty diversions and pointless derision.

dp

[edit on 10/16/08 by MorningStar8741]

reply to post by Swampfox46_1999


You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your comments or opinions fail to offer any meaningful dialog or information, and are worthless except to pander to emotionalism, and in fact, reveal you to be emotionally insecure with these matters. If you do not like reading 'this crap', why do you frequent this thread which is clearly for the purpose of such discussion? Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics.

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
Ugh, cannot believe I am going to do this.

Okay, try to follow this (if you can) Flight 93 hit the ground, solid ground forty feet of it.

I see “you” have not done your research on 911 do some reading before attacking poster in this thread. There never was flight 93 that hit the Pentagon, which is a fact!
www.flight93crash.com...

Now would you please enlighten us with proof of flight 77 hitting the ground first?
I would like to see some photos of the ground in front of the Pentagon, lets see now it should show the front lawn destroyed, Ah yes, you say forty feet please show this proof thank you.

If you need the real dimension of a Boeing 757 this might help you.
www.boeing.com...






[edit on 10/16/2008 by cashlink]

[edit on 10/16/2008 by cashlink]


Mod edit: Fixed quote.

[edit on 10/16/2008 by Hal9000]

reply to post by thedman


You still do not understand hearsay is not enough any more people lie all the time.
Even good people lie, where is the coroner’s report that back this info with some “real” facts, or photos that prove they are telling the world the truth. Give us PHOTOS!
I do not want to hear he said this, he said that! She saw this, it mean nothing the world is full of liars.

reply to post by Swampfox46_1999


You continue to amuse me with your inane postings. You really should try to do some legitimate research, instead of relying on goofy conspiracy sites.




'You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your imply your own authority and expertise but fail to provide credentials, and you also fail to address issues and cite sources. You simply cite useless information to make us think you know what you are talking about. Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics!





[edit on 10/16/2008 by cashlink]