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.

 

Pentagon bodies from Flight 77

page: 8
3
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 07:22 PM
link   
reply to post by GrinchNoMore
 


I am a FF - several of my friends were at the WTC. They were at World Financial Center across from WTC 7
putting out fires there

A family member from one of our department members was killed at WTC

Went to seminar 5 months after 9/11 to listen to the FDNY incident commanders describe their actions that date

"Our crew" tends to trust the observations and judgement of the FF at the WTC against gang of conspiracy
clowns posting blurry video and proclaiming every thing on them as "smoking gun" proof




posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 08:15 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 

dude
those pics are NOT dead passengers from the plane.
Look at your pic link #3.

There are 2 bodies in that pic.
Both are wearing Pentagon Maintenance Uniforms.
They worked at the Pentagon as employees.
Also, note the Pentagon ID badge on the lower
pictured body still attached to the shirt.
If the Gov is saying these are passengers
from the plane, they are lying.
How would passengers on board
flight 77 both have the same color
maintenance uniforms with a Pent ID
badge.

Also another reason why I think these are
fake pics. The lower body in that same
pic has his right arm tucked between his legs
with his arm still intact. How did his seat beat
come off in the crash with his arm between his
legs?

Also, there is no head trauma. Craniums are intact
just burned to a crisp. How can a body hit a wall
at 450+mph and NOT get his head caved-in.

I suspect these were Pentagon employees that
were already in the building when the explosion
occurred and the heat wave cooked them.
I doubt they died from blunt trauma.

I am highly suspicious of these photos.



edit on 16-9-2010 by boondock-saint because: clarifying



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


Show me one firefighter who isn't incredulous as to the destruction, show ONE that thinks that was brought down by fires, I know a firefighter who was there as well, and his whole station thinks that it was just insane the amount of heat being generated, never seen ANYTHING like it, not too mention the total devastation.

We have mountains of evidence from the firefighters stating nothing that EVER matches the official story, give me a break.



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 08:53 PM
link   
I'm still stuck on the fact that when they crash the jet with water on board to simulate fuel, it vaporizes pretty much. If that's the case they want to use an example, how do we have intact, though dead, bodies. Bodies still in thier seats etc........correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't they have vaporized too?



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 10:26 PM
link   
reply to post by adifferentbreed
 



I'm still stuck on the fact that when they crash the jet with water on board to simulate fuel, it vaporizes pretty much. If that's the case they want to use an example, how do we have intact, though dead, bodies. Bodies still in thier seats etc........correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't they have vaporized too?


Bodies are not "vaporized" as you seem to think. Fuel being a liquid is aersolized - broken into small droplets
think water from a hose. the stream breaks up into drops as it encounters resistance from air.

Bodies in a crash are often fragmented, the degree of fragmentation depending on speed and angle of impact

Seem this myself - had Lear 35 crash number of years back - walked the crash scene marking out body parts
for the coroner to recover. In this case only recognizable pieces were half of chest, hand - minus fingers and some amputated fingers. Extremities often survive because are bony with large amount of muscle/tendons

Flight 77 hit at high speed, but low angle, plane would disintergrate from front to back, expect high degree of fragmentation for those in front (hijackers), passengers according to their phone calls were clustered in rear
of cabin and would be subject to still extreme but lesser forces than those in front.

Map of recovered human remains - entry point (E Ring) at bottom right, exit hole in C Ring upper left



Blue - AA 77

Orange - Pentagon

Black - Unidentified

Note most of the AA77 remains are clustered deep within building near the exit hole



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 10:31 PM
link   
reply to post by GrinchNoMore
 


What building are you talking about - considering except for Chief Palmer, no FDNY FF were able to get to the impact zone, WTC 7 was abandoned and nobody was in it. Pentagon from reports was absolute hell

Read book FIREFIGHT to get idea of the intensity of fires



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 10:43 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


Where is the tail section? Are you telling me that a plane as long as that just "accordianed"? The wreckage should have been more "obvious".

If you are saying that it was soft enough to do so, how did it penetrate so far into the building?

Where did the "wing penetrations" happen?

How did they fly that thing fast enough 6' off of the ground?

If this happened from a trajectory of say a "lawn dart" and it hit in the top middle of the building? I'd give the OS a better shake.

BTW, I've seen jet engines. They do have a fair bit of space around them but they are still the size of a small car (length wise) without the cowling. They're not terribly narrow either.

I'll grant you that was some sort of turbine engine BUT I dont think it was off of a passenger liner.

The leaked footage looked like a small attack jet or some sort of missle.

Why didnt they attack the jet if the planes were available?

Too many questions.



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 11:03 PM
link   
reply to post by felonius
 



Where is the tail section? Are you telling me that a plane as long as that just "accordianed"? The wreckage should have been more "obvious".


Tail disintergrated on impact - tails or empenage is made of light gaugue aluminium or fiberglass composite
only as strong as needs to be

Weedwhacker if around can probably elaborate

The strongest parts of aircraft are keel beam, which runs lenght of aircraft and supports cabin floor, landing gear
which is some of heaviest parts on aircraft, wing box, area between engines where wing attach to fuselage,
contain heavy duty spars and ribs . Most of aircraft is light gauge aluminium to save weight

Most of AA77 wound up inside building and was not visible

This article gives number of pictures of aircraft debris inside Pentagon

www.rense.com...



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 11:20 PM
link   
Here's a possible explanation: Flight 77 landed earlier at Andrews Air Force base where all the passengers deplaned. They were then put on some type of military transport-type vehicle that drove them to DC, where they were told that they needed to go into the Pentagon and that everything would be explained to them there. Then boom.



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 11:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by mr. toddly
Here's a possible explanation: Flight 77 landed earlier at Andrews Air Force base where all the passengers deplaned. They were then put on some type of military transport-type vehicle that drove them to DC, where they were told that they needed to go into the Pentagon and that everything would be explained to them there. Then boom.


Just when you though the truthers could not get any sillier.... and the passengers were also told to take their luggage, and seats, and plane wheels, engines, undercarriage etc with them.

They also had time to land, and get driven to the Pentagon before the plane hit it....



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 05:04 AM
link   
reply to post by TWILITE22
 


Seriously?

A marine cops emblem on a piece of 'wreckage' from a flight 77 Boeing 757 commercial passenger aircraft?

Is it normal practice in the OS la-la land to include military emblems on civilian commercial aircraft?

How was this explained away in the documentary?

Don't remember the name of the documentary do you TWILITE22? I'd like to get a copy of that for myself.

Thanks for the post.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 06:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by felonius
 



Where is the tail section? Are you telling me that a plane as long as that just "accordianed"? The wreckage should have been more "obvious".


Tail disintergrated on impact - tails or empenage is made of light gaugue aluminium or fiberglass composite
only as strong as needs to be

Weedwhacker if around can probably elaborate

The strongest parts of aircraft are keel beam, which runs lenght of aircraft and supports cabin floor, landing gear
which is some of heaviest parts on aircraft, wing box, area between engines where wing attach to fuselage,
contain heavy duty spars and ribs . Most of aircraft is light gauge aluminium to save weight

Most of AA77 wound up inside building and was not visible

This article gives number of pictures of aircraft debris inside Pentagon

www.rense.com...






No offense friend but it dont wash with me. I've seen plenty of plane crashes on tv over my life. Even with the worst ones with huge gouts of flame, its still obvious that the wreck was a plane.

The compacted plane theory would have to presuppose that the plane hit at a near perfect 90* angle. Less than that, the tail section should be either shorn off from g force or at least noticeable.

You still havent explained why no wing/ engine marks on the wall.

We can choose not to agree.


edit on 17/9/10 by felonius because: edit to add



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 07:46 AM
link   
I will admit that I am not real smart in lots of topics, but I do have some questions.

In the recently posted link to a graph showing the location of bodies recovered from the pentagon,
there are at least 13 bodies identified as pentagon personel mixed in with those outside the building
area and among the passengers.

How do you think that happened?

I have noticed the gray "chare" from the burned areas on the outside of the building, also shows up
on the windows with in the same area. If there was as much of an explosion as we have always been
told, would it not have broken out the windows glass panes? It would seem to me that these areas should
up as very dark and empty. Even the blinds or curtains should have been blown away. On one or two
of the windows there appears to be a variation in the pattern of the "chare". To me this would mean the window pane is still there.

As I said, I don't claim to have any answers. I am just asking more question.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 08:28 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


I posted the wrong link, back there yesterday ....(Grrrr!)

@TWILLITE22, is this the Nat Geo video you were mentioning???

channel.nationalgeographic.com...-Videos/08583_00



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 09:42 AM
link   
reply to post by hdutton
 


Windows in Pentagon were being replaced with blast proof windows to resist car/truck bombs set off outside
building . Blast proof windows designed not to break . Gave FF lot of trouble as could not break them to release heat & smoke to ventilate building

read this about blast proof windows

911research.wtc7.net...



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 10:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by exponent

Originally posted by Amaterasu
Um... I don't need their names... I need the people in the pictures identified. Geez.

That's not going to happen, can you imagine the outcry from the families if the Pentagon did release identifiable photos of their loved ones? It would be a particularly brutal kick to the stomach of these families.


Yeah. Have they asked the families if they can release the names? I guess we can only speculate. In all cases - unless a family came forward - we just have to trust that when they say that body is of someone on the plane, killed in a crash, then that is what it is, and not a Hollywood set or a shot from an entirely different place and time. I would think there would be an effort to ask families to come forth to relieve us of our doubt.


Why do you need to identify people in the pictures anyway? DNA evidence is much more reliable, or if you prefer the firefighters accounts you can purchase and read the book referred to on a previous page.


Seriously? As I point out, them just saying we're looking at photos of the scene, when they controlled the taking of any photos, does not remove doubt. Them saying DNA proves something also does not remove doubt. Also, would the fire fighters know they were looking at crash victims as opposed to any hapless Pentagon employees who got mutilated by a missile?

I'm telling you, if there was no wrongdoing in our government, there would be more of an effort to prove things than there is.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amaterasu
Yeah. Have they asked the families if they can release the names? I guess we can only speculate. In all cases - unless a family came forward - we just have to trust that when they say that body is of someone on the plane, killed in a crash, then that is what it is, and not a Hollywood set or a shot from an entirely different place and time. I would think there would be an effort to ask families to come forth to relieve us of our doubt.

Yes I'm sure that would go down well
"Can we look at gory pictures of your dead relatives so some conspiracy theorists can accuse you of being part of the conspiracy"?

I'm not saying you would do that, but I'm sure you can imagine how people would respond. I know I would not be particularly friendly towards that request.


Seriously? As I point out, them just saying we're looking at photos of the scene, when they controlled the taking of any photos, does not remove doubt. Them saying DNA proves something also does not remove doubt. Also, would the fire fighters know they were looking at crash victims as opposed to any hapless Pentagon employees who got mutilated by a missile?

Who's 'them'? You seem to think that everyone in the government and all related services are part of some plot. I think when a firefighter says he saw a body still strapped into an aircraft chair, when the DMORT teams identify the DNA of the victims, and when they find and return to the families the personal effects of the victim. After all of that, when my only evidence for a missile is 'well it might have been one'. I would give up and accept the reality. It's up to you which one you choose though.


I'm telling you, if there was no wrongdoing in our government, there would be more of an effort to prove things than there is.

I'm telling you, if there was a conspiracy inside the government, they wouldn't have been so stupid to try and plant DNA while using a missile. They would have (dramatic music) crashed the plane into the building.

Why is it that the conspiracy theory case always seems to disagree with the government, even when it would do no harm to the conspiracy case. I don't know.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 02:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Amaterasu
 



Yeah. Have they asked the families if they can release the names? I guess we can only speculate. In all cases - unless a family came forward - we just have to trust that when they say that body is of someone on the plane, killed in a crash, then that is what it is, and not a Hollywood set or a shot from an entirely different place and time. I would think there would be an effort to ask families to come forth to relieve us of our doubt.


Explain how personal effects of the passengers on AA77, like an engraved wedding ring, are fake?

Example Susan Calley ring was found on her remains and returned to her family.....



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 09:11 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
[s
sorry I took so long to get back,but yes thats the one about the 3:40 mark



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 09:14 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 

the 3:00 mark



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join