Retired USAF pilot Col. Guy S. Razer says 9/11 was 'inside job' perpetrated by US government

reply to post by Utah62

The three most dense parts of an aircraft are the fuselage and the engines, period...of all the pictures I have looked at of the impact site there is but one hole...well sir, that cannot be. That side of the Pentagon had just been re-furbished with high density concrete. You should at a minimum see three distinct holes and additionally see "wing" and "tail" imprints on the building with shattered windows and lots of wing and tail metal on the ground... the wings would not have penetrated the building and the upper portion of the vertical tail above the fuselage would not have either. If you are aware of any photos out there that show three distinct holes I would like to see them. Or any pictures of wing and tail metal or imprint damage to the building.

Well sir, the above paragraph shows that you have a distinct lack of accurate information when it comes to the Pentagon. The total length of the impact area is in the neighborhood of 94 feet. Your line about three distinct holes....wow. There were plenty of shattered windows....at the immeadiate impact point. The surrounding BLAST PROOF windows did their jobs as advertised. If you want to see pictures of wing and tail damage, I strongly suggest you study the Pentagon building performance report.

Your pilot credibility remarks demonstrate that you were not a fighter pilot as you display disdain and disrespect towards me.

As a 24 year aviation maintenance person, I deal with fighter pilots on a daily basis. And the majority of them have a God complex (of which Naval Aviators seem to be the worst). And this would include two of my friends who were on duty at the Pentagon and saw first hand what happened there. Claiming to have been a Blue....well that would be a new one for the board, but I will grant it is possible.

Oh yes, the lie you so boldly claim I made. In a normal NTSB aircraft investigation the crash site is treated as a crime scene. The area is taped off and secured, everything is photographed, labeled and put in catalog. The NTSB folks do their investigation and then the makers of the aircraft and engines come in and take the pieces and parts back to their respective companies for their own analysis. Once that is complete the material is normally sent to one of two places.

There was absolutely NOTHING normal about that day. Trying to fit YOUR idea of normalcy to a day that was anything but normal.......

To my knowledge the only video ever released of the impact on the Pentagon was the two frames of film from the parking lot. There were other video cameras operating that day that could dispel many of the myths of this tragedy.

Really? You have access to 1. The Pentagon physical security office and 2. the work orders for the maintenance of said cameras?

When an aircraft crashes, even with fuel, heat and fire you will still find identifiable pieces and parts, seat frames, luggage and their contents and unfortunately human tissue as well.

Of which, plenty was found at the Pentagon.

Two Rolls Royce jet engines that are 8 feet wide.

With their cowlings, yes. The center "hub" of the engines maybe 2 1/2 feet. Do you seriously believe that the fan blades are going to survive impact with the wall, without fragmenting into a few thousand pieces? The Rolls Royce engines on that jet are an entirely different animal than the engines in a fighter. I would expect an experienced pilot to know better.

reply to post by vipertech0596

The total length of the impact area is in the neighborhood of 94 feet.

Well that's odd because the plane was a fair bit wider than that..

But anyways, care to point out the holes in the wall in this pic..

reply to post by Utah62


Thank you, great post your information and knowledge was very helpful. I have been waiting to see how long it would take for a REAL pilot to come in here that doesn’t agree with the OS. It takes a lot for someone to just risk their reputation and G-d knows your career, most pilots will not give their opinions about 911, because of fear of career suicide.

From your professional view, you have confirmed that most people are not out of touch with their critical thinking and observations that a 757 did not crash at the Pentagon and most will agree with you because, of lack of physical debris and lack of physical damaged, as many debunkers continue to ignore.

I have been saying for years it was impossible for a 757 to have crashed into the Pentagon as the government claimed, what I found so disturbing, was the unbroken windows on each side and above of the entry hole. There are earlier photos that were taken before the Pentagon collapse and in some of the photos you will see there are no airplane wreckage, later photos taken at same angle show airplane debris, but I have always wonder if these men at the Pentagon carrying black garbage bags were not just picking up airplane wreckage but planting bone yard debris.

reply to post by backinblack


Not sure why you continue to insist to post that distance shot. Oh well, whatever helps you sleep better.

Originally posted by Alexandre1980

Originally posted by randyvs
This is so ridiculous. Fire dosn't effect steal that thick. Blow torches do. There was no fire that day that was even close to the same temperature as a blow torch. Sorry it's ridiculous but it really is.

edit on 25-2-2011 by randyvs because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-2-2011 by randyvs because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-2-2011 by randyvs because: (no reason given)

And where did you get those informations? Steel is an excellent heat conductor. Are you aware of the temperatures reached in the WTC fires? Are you aware of the temperature a standard candle can reach?
I suggest you research this information. Again, contact your local firefighters station and ask them about fire and steel.
[/quote

I'm an ironworker. ] No matter what you've read I know what takes to weaken the steel ivolved. I work the stuff everday pard. You can't tell me squat about it.

edit on 25-2-2011 by randyvs because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by backinblack

 

Not sure why you continue to insist to post that distance shot. Oh well, whatever helps you sleep better.

So is that your answer as to where the holes are??
It's pretty high res, you can zoom in and show us the holes..

Originally posted by backinblack

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by backinblack

 

Not sure why you continue to insist to post that distance shot. Oh well, whatever helps you sleep better.

So is that your answer as to where the holes are??
It's pretty high res, you can zoom in and show us the holes..

High res? Are we looking at the same picture here? 500 x 317 is a pretty far cry from what I'd call a high resolution image.

I'd point to undicisettembre.blogspot.com... for a photo of the holes, even if it is a composite image, but given how futile this has been in the past, I'm not sure why I bother.

reply to post by roboe


Please point out the holes , in any photographs at all, i have yet to see anything ,, really.

reply to post by roboe

I'd point to undicisettembre.blogspot.com... for a photo of the holes, even if it is a composite image, but given how futile this has been in the past, I'm not sure why I bother.

From your link..

The picture, says Mr Murru, was "obtained by blending 17 high-resolution photographs [...] compensating for perspective distortion where needed."

Now if you could post the 17 "original" pics I would be interested..
If not, who knows what was done to "compensate" as the site states..

It's painfully obvious that a 757 did not hit the Pentagon. Planes may explode into smaller pieces, break apart, splinter, twist and shatter, but the pieces are there. It is amazing to see what investigators can do with tiny plane pieces in a hangar, rebuilding almost the entire aircraft like an immense puzzle.

The extent of wreckage and debris at the Pentagon expected from a 757 impact just is not there. The grass is mostly, if not completely, intact. The spools in front of the impact site are practically undamaged, yet the 757 was supposedly just feet off the ground.

Further, a mostly aluminum 757 should not have penetrated SO DEEPLY into the Pentagon. The believers (in the OS) state that the impact-resistant glass did its job. You can't have it both ways: the structure "did its job" yet did NOT do its job because ALUMINUM was able to penetrate into so many rings ---made of steel and concrete. The building seems to have COMPLETELY FAILED in that an aluminum 757 acted more like a BUNKER BUSTER.

Further, ALL surveillance footage was confiscated. One shot was released and it did NOTHING to illuminate us as to what actually hit the Pentagon. Cheap parlor trick on the public, a lazy PSYOPS. Better to have not released any footage at all than to release those frames that did not show what hit. Then again, the purpose of that PSYOPS maneuver was probably more to give those who have been previously conditioned to slip into "acceptance mode" of the OS, giving them something to say to debunkers (of the OS), along the lines of, "They released footage of the crash." Basically, they provided a lazy shortcut to thinking for people who blindly already accepted the OS as gospel.

Why not, then, release all of the other confiscated footage? Because it would show what really happened. And for some reason, "they" seem very afraid of the truth.

*Believers* in the OS are going to nitpick posts like the Colonel's to death, teaming up on him like rabid jackals. In the end, there was a lack of wreckage at the Pentagon. Further, a 757 traveling so fast, so low... is nearly impossible to account for, especially for a poor-performing terrorist who just supposedly hijacked that very plane high on adrenaline. Yet, once the 757 hit, it acted more like a bunker buster missile, protruding into ring after ring after ring after ring ---completely unlike the characteristic of its predominant make-up: aluminum.

And, yes, the engines should have made holes. Once the nose impacted, from the damage, we know it went deep, and even if the right wing (which should've hit first) detached, the engine should've struck and left evidence of the impact. The left wing would still have been continuing, ---as the engine was still running up until impact. Even if that wing was torn off, it would have left a crater, a hole ---something. The engines did not simply vaporize. This is not Star Trek, believers-in-the-OS. Debunked. A 757 did not hit the Pentagon. If one did, then we'd not only have one video but 20 different ones showing such. It simply did not happen, and that is why they won't release the still classified footage.

A hand salute to all veterans of all ranks and services who step forward toward the truth. In fact, a salute to ANYONE, military or not. America was duped. And the truth is slowly trickling out, and people are becoming aware.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Utah62

 

OK.....despite my reservations, you seem legit about your "experience".

NO....of course I don't have personal on-site accident investigation background experience.

NO, of course you don't? But you still decided to write a book in an attempt to defend your delusional analysis that I guarantee wasn't read by anyone? The hubris and arrogance is mind-blowing...

I will never forget the day a REAL airline pilot who actually FLIES and a REAL accident investigator who actually INVESTIGATES offered a REAL expert analysis of Flight 77 NOT hitting the Pentagon.

And I'll also never forget the absolutely disgraceful way that you treated a fellow pilot and guest of this forum who's knowledge and expertise (not to mention class) clearly exceeds yours.

Instead of referring to his "experience" in quotes, you owe Utah62 an apology.

If you're not intelligent enough to grok the fact that 9/11 was an obvious false flag operation perpetrated by traitorous globalists (read neocons) within our own government, then there's no way you could be intelligent enough to be a pilot. No way. Same goes for vipertech. The nerve of you guys to laugh off P4T's Payne Stewart intercept timeline analysis simply because it doesn't exclude the earlier and easily verifiable Air Force intercepts that were redacted from your precious NTSB record.

The only "professionals" that you guys are is professional liars...

reply to post by vipertech0596


If angle clips break that means that the load bearing posts which supported the angle clips are still standing. It has never been explained what caused the vertical post to give way. 1368 ft by 208 sq ft suare of steel frame was reduced to a pile less than 75 ft high. (source: Why Did The Towers Fall; Bazant and Zhou--I got this info from debunking 911 myths website.

The frame would have to have been broken in many places for the building to just dissolve like that. It takes torque or bending forces break steel. Just because some truss clips give way doesn't mean the whole frame is just going to dissolve into dust and rubble.

Your thinking is very unclear and not backed by any quantatative analysis.

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by Deuteronomy 23:13

 

What is assinine is the assumption that an airplane is going to fell a structure over 1000 times more massive by flying into it. The buildings were also made of tougher stuff. Building: steel and concrete. Airplane: predominately aluminum.

More illustration of ignorance. Fire a little bitty magnum round into an engine block and you can destroy the engine. Do some checking into the angle clips that attached the trusses to the vertical supports.

More illustration of faulty logic. A bullet can destroy an engine therefore fire destroyed the twin towers and bldg 7. Aren't you the one who faulted me for making assinine comparissons?

Your engine block analogy would be more accurate that if after the bullet destroyed the engine the car would catch fire and in about 1 hr later the care would suddenly dissolve into a pile of unrecognizable rubble and a cloud of dust.

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by Deuteronomy 23:13

 

Its easy to tell when you have gotten the best of someone. They resort to assinine comparisions.

It's easy to tell when you get the best of someone: They make a post bragging about how they got the best of someone.

Originally posted by admriker444

most truths seem to come out about 40-50 years later. Most secret documents are declassified by then and the perpetrators are all dead

I look at the Vietnam War, specifically the Gulf of Tonkin incident as an idea how the public will react. President Johnson KNOWINGLY lied before Congress when he claimed the vietcong attacked us. We know this truth from the President's own library tapes and NSA documents released. Are there vietnam vets protesting in the streets ? what happened to all of those peace loving hippies in the 60s ?

58,000 dead american soldiers, millions of vietnamese killed on both sides. thousands more dead from cancer causing agent orange sprayed. hundreds of thousands of homeless vets suffering from drug abuse, post traumatic stress syndrome, and depression. Unimaginable damage to Vietnam's environment, culture, and families.

and nobody seems to care. nothing surprises me anymore when the massive vietnam lie is ignored

Excellent! Here is a video interview that gets into the Gulf of Tonkin incident and 9/11. I think at least some of you will appreciate this man's passion and knowledge.

Jesse Ventura questions the media

Originally posted by liejunkie01

Originally posted by Deuteronomy 23:13

Originally posted by liejunkie01

Originally posted by Deuteronomy 23:13
reply to post by liejunkie01

 

Man, I hate to break it to you but you essentially said nothing. You have proved nothing. You do not know what you are talking about. The NIST theory is nothing but sophistry. And that is all you have.

Ok, I told you that it wouldn't matter. I am glad that I didn't take the time to explain it to you. Heat does directly affect the atomic structure of steel. Look it up. Obviously you do not know what you are talking about. Keep spreading your misinformation. You look like you know what you are talking about.

By the way, did you take a college level course for metallurgy?

EDIT: I am about to leave for welding lab. Yes, I do deal with steel everyday. This is my last semester of a two year program. Your post makes me laugh, thank you, I needed a laugh before I leave.

edit on 25-2-2011 by liejunkie01 because: EDIT

Heat will weaken steal. The question is how much fuel and oxygen are required for how much steel.

Listen to yourself. You are saying that because you are taking a welding cirriculum you are an expert on metallurgy? I wish you success on that.

I am not a christian but I do believe that some of us need to remove the log from our eye before trying to remove a sliver from someone elses.

You have proven nothing. Your condescending attitude counts for squat.

You are obviously a TROLL. Here is what I said about my college metullurgy experience. and I quote:

Now I am in now way saying that I know everything on metallurgy. I am saying that I have had a college course on this subject. I have my tests and notes near me. I am what you could say a little educated on this topic.

Did I say I was an expert? I obviously know way more on how steel reacts to extreme heat and cold than you do.You have no sense of reasoning, and therefore I am done debating this with you. I will eventually make a nice thread on my take on the towers steel capabilities and u2u the facts.
I just asked my teacher about how the towers fell. He is a professor and he is not a mainstream type of guy. As a matter of fact he is one of the people I credit for my serious awakening. He spelled it out for me in an extreme technical manner. A manner I wish not to share with you right now because you obviosly are oblivious to any sort of conscious reasoning.

Have a good day TROLL.

edit on 25-2-2011 by liejunkie01 because: spelling

Peace, Man. I wish you well. I hope you do well at your vocation and I take my hat off to you because you are tying to educate and better yourself. But, I believe you are mistaken and the fire theory of how the towers fell defies common sense. The government never proved anything and neither have any debunkers.


I apologize if I got snotty. Sometimes frustration and disgust get the best of me.


This debate is about fire and steel. But it is also about what kind of world we are going to live in. I don't see why I should just take the governments word without any proof. Questioning authority is a good thing.

Originally posted by Alexandre1980

The towers didn’t fall because an airplane hit them. They fell because the fire weakened the steel, which was no longer capable of sustaining the weight of the structure above.
You can verify independently the behaviour of steel at different temperatures. I suggest you contact the closest Firefighters station and ask them about fires in steel buildings.

Riddle me this. Why are we not being told that fires can bring down these skyscrapers? If so, why are skyscrapers still being erected? It would seem the risk to human life is tremendous and only balanced against monetary gain.

I have been accused of misinformation. If I misinformed anyone it was by mistake and not design. All the info I use I get from debunking sites or the msm. My analogy of the hammer and nail was my own. I believe it illustrates the comparative strength of steel particularly with respect to verticle load strenghts of steel shafts. Steel shafts were what held up the towers.

I know fire can weaken steel. Enough heat and you could turn anything into plasma. But the questions are: How much fuel is required? How much oxygen is required? And how much steel are we talking about? Until one can answer these questions with accurate numbers one doesn't really know what they are talking about. (See my earlier post where I quoted Lord Kelvin; Lord Kelvin was a true scientific genius unlike these debunkers that come in here and spread their dubious 'information' around.)

"So the collapse of the tower must be an almost free fall. This conclusion is supported by the observation that the duration of the collapse of the tower, observed to be 9 s, was about the same as the duration of a free fall in a vacuum from the tower top (416 m above ground) to the top of the final heap of debris (about 25 m above ground), which is..." From the paper Why Did The Towers Fall; Bazant and Zhou

I got this quote from debunking911myths about 7 yrs ago. The guy running the site told me that the duration of the collapse could not be accurately measured. Then he recomended this paper to me. Talk about self contradiction.

Anyway I want to commend all good hearted truthers. Your questions are reasonable and your susupicions are well warranted. The truth will out!

To all of you debunkers: I don't hate you. I forgive you.

"Hypocracy, insolence, anger, cruelty, ignorance, conceit---these, Arjuna, are the qualities of men with demonic traits." From the Bhagavad Gita; translation by Stephen Mitchell

reply to post by GhostLancer

yet did NOT do its job because ALUMINUM was able to penetrate into so many rings ---made of steel and concrete. The building seems to have COMPLETELY FAILED in that an aluminum 757 acted more like a BUNKER BUSTER.

ONE wall of Limestone, brick, kelvar and steel. ONE. The other walls were drywall, studs...things you normally find interior walls made of.

Then you address the "lack of wreckage" There wasnt a lack of wreckage, what there is, is a lack of public photographs of wreckage. There are PLENTY of witness accounts about what was found. Oh wait, I forgot, they are all in on it.....

reply to post by Deuteronomy 23:13


And you think a 1300 foot tall steel column is going to remain standing all by itself? And MY thinking isnt clear. Thanks for the laugh.

Not sure why you keep stating the 75 foot height of the debris pile That would only be relevant if all of the debris remained within the footprints of their respective buildings. But it didnt, it spread all over the area.

If you are going to challenge someone on their thinking processes, you might want to start with yourself.