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.

 

What Caused the Pentagon C-Ring Exit Hole Into A&E Drive?

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 09:23 AM
link   


So what formed the Exit Hole?

A soft flimsy 757 fuselage nose cone?

A landing gear of which there was no trace in the A&E Drive?

A Rolls Royce RB-211 turbofan engine of which there was no trace in the A&E Drive?

A focused cone of energy from exploding jet fuel of which there was no trace in the A&E Drive?

Or a Military Rapid Wall Breaching kit or similar linear shaped charge.









Full Size Image Of Official Alleged DNA Locations



So how did all that alleged Flight 77 passenger DNA survive the intensive heat of the alleged focused cone of energy from exploding jet fuel, and somehow make it out into the A&E Drive? And since the passengers were allegedly in the back of the plane, and the jet fuel would be ahead and below them and on each side, then how did their alleged DNA make it through all that alleged exploding and burning jet fuel?

Pentagon Directional Damage Pattern Taken From Official Pentagon 911 Book



Could it be because no aircraft impacted the Pentagon and there was no exploding burning jet fuel nor passenger DNA out in A&E Drive and the DNA results were faked? Lots of water out there isn't there? But there is no sign of a heavy steel landing gear (and all three landing gears are missing in action) and no sign of a turbofan engine (and both six ton RB-211 turbofan engines are missing in action) and no sign of exploding burning jet fuel. Is there? The jet fuel also seems to be missing in action. Doesn't it?





[edit on 3/26/09 by SPreston]




posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 09:31 AM
link   
Its a chunk of the cargo bin door frame.
You can see a ring pattern in the wreckage that is above the cargo hold interior light switch panel:





posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 09:46 AM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 


Would this be Exit Hole cause #5 or are we sticking with #4; the focused cone of energy from exploding jet fuel?

A soft flimsy 757 fuselage nose cone?

A landing gear of which there was no trace in the A&E Drive?

A Rolls Royce RB-211 turbofan engine of which there was no trace in the A&E Drive?

A focused cone of energy from exploding jet fuel of which there was no trace in the A&E Drive?

A light weight cargo bin door frame


Seems like not enough mass to blast that hole through that reinforced brick wall doesn't it? Looks light enough for an enterprising person to carry in and set there doesn't it? In fact the same person could probably have carried in the tire or wheel in the other hand. For some strange reason, the tire and wheel are not always there nor both at the same time. And of course, nine other alleged 757 tires and wheels are also missing in action.

I think the defenders of the 9-11 Pentagon OFFICIAL STORY need to come up with a better cause of the Exit Hole. The first four were not too convincing. It seems the Military Rapid Wall Breaching kit is the most likely culprit.



posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 09:54 AM
link   
Nope...
Sorry...
I am not playing your Truth movement baiting game today.
I don't have time for it.

The topic of the thread is:
Caused the Pentagon C-Ring Exit Hole Into A&E Drive?

I gave you the answer.
Don't believe me?
Go work a couple of aircraft, they all have that ring pattern in them.
Don't like that answer?
Well... Tough!

Oh, BTW door frames are some of the toughest parts of an aircraft because they have to handle ground equipment contact, but you spin things however it floats your boat.

Don't bother with a reply cause I am through here.



posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 10:15 AM
link   
Supposedly both Black Boxes were found near the C-Ring Exit Hole; and this is allegedly a photo of one of them sitting on somebody's sooty footprints. However, other alleged witnesses claim the FDR was found at the alleged 757 E-Ring entrance hole. That is quite a difference in the alleged FDR locations.

That floor around the alleged FDR shows no sign of jet fuel exploding and burning upon it. Actually that floor could be anywhere on earth and nobody would be the wiser.



Original photo from Official Defense Department Pentagon 911 book





[edit on 3/26/09 by SPreston]



posted on Mar, 29 2009 @ 08:09 AM
link   
reply to post by SPreston
 





A landing gear of which there was no trace in the A&E Drive?

A Rolls Royce RB-211 turbofan engine of which there was no trace in the A&E Drive?


Landing gear set



More here from Italian blog

11-settembre.blogspot.com...

Of course you will find some reason to disbelieve this because it doesn't
comport with your fantasy....



posted on Mar, 29 2009 @ 10:06 AM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


That photo could easily have been taken in Italy. There is no chain of custody or authorship with the photo. Those rusty old parts could be found in any number of aircraft boneyards across the world.

One known photo


The architecture along that wall is certainly different than the architecture along Pentagon walls. How come that alleged photo waited for years to popup? How come there is only one photo of this alleged room if this was evidence for the 9-11 crime at the Pentagon?



There are other alleged photos of 'evidence' at the Pentagon crime scene, in which there is only one known photo of the alleged aircraft debris and it showed up much later.
Why is that?

One known photo


One known photo


One known photo





[edit on 3/29/09 by SPreston]



posted on Mar, 29 2009 @ 10:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by SPreston
So what formed the Exit Hole?

A soft flimsy 757 fuselage nose cone?

A landing gear of which there was no trace in the A&E Drive?

A Rolls Royce RB-211 turbofan engine of which there was no trace in the A&E Drive?

A focused cone of energy from exploding jet fuel of which there was no trace in the A&E Drive?

Or a Military Rapid Wall Breaching kit or similar linear shaped charge.



Definitely agree a soft flimsy 757 certainly couldn't do it. But you neglect the fact that it could also of been a missile.




[edit on 29-3-2009 by Insolubrious]



posted on Mar, 29 2009 @ 10:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Insolubrious
 


Nah. Couldn't have been a missile. A missile could not possibly have knocked down five light poles. A missile could not possibly have hurled the #1 light pole hundreds of feet up the road into a taxi windshield. A missile could not possibly have moved the heavy generator trailer. A missile could not possibly have weaved between the heavy columns holding up the 2nd story floor slab nor destroyed them, to reach the Exit Hole in the C-Ring wall.

Pattern of 1st story columns at the Pentagon Wedge 1



A missile would have continued through the B-Ring wall if it possibly could have reached that far or exploded in the A&E Drive creating tremendous damage. No such evidence. Witnesses (20+) saw an aircraft Over the Naval Annex and not a missile. There is not one single confirmed eyewitness who saw a missile. If the missile was supersonic, nobody heard a sonic boom. There is no evidence of a missile whatsoever.

Staged light pole - Why would the lamphead travel opposite the direction of alleged impact?


They would not dare stage the light poles and use a missile, because if somebody got photos or video of the missile, and the FBI could not eliminate the evidence or witnesses, then they would be in big trouble. I see absolutely no genuine evidence of a missile nor aircraft impacting the Pentagon on 9-11.




[edit on 3/29/09 by SPreston]



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join