It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

# how deep can you go? Investigation vs common sense / Pentagon Jerry Henson interview

page: 2
3
share:

posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 10:26 PM

Originally posted by Thermo Klein

you say there's only ONE hole in the Pentagon, and then when you recognize you made a 100% impossible and stupid statement you don't have the B***s to say you were wrong...

there was more than one hole... anyone can tell this
even you

I DID NOT say there was only one hole. You did, twice now!

Why don't you just answer the question and respond to my post above in an honest and correct manner. Are my posts so "proposterous" (sic) that you're getting tongue tied? Are you getting frustrated or angry because you're trapped with no response. Exactly, how many holes are there on the First Floor of the Pentagon between the facade and the C-Ring "punchout" hole? How many holes were there in the C-Ring Wall besides the doors?

PS: I don't care if the thread is bumped to 1,000 posts. What's a few more pages?
edit on 22-3-2011 by Reheat because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:56 PM

Originally posted by Reheat
Alright Einstein, if there is more than one hole, let's see it....No good photograph clearly showing another hole, it did not exist...

There were actually 8 holes... not one
not all of them are pictured but it's obvious they exist; if you must assume they don't exist, per your previous statement, then just go with the fact there are "MORE THAN ONE".

E-ring outer = 1 (pictures available)
E-ring inner = 2
D-ring outer = 3
D-ring inner security wall = 4
D-ring inner security wall to C-ring walkway = 5
D-to-C breezeway wall = 6
C-ring outer = 7
C-ring inner = 8 (pictures available)

There are at least two that we have pictures of, proving your "only one hole" theory as wrong,
your "one hole" theory is what's under discussion here and it's been answered.
If you choose to propose another question please feel free to do so, but please refrain from your incessant claims that I'm wrong or lying - you said there was one hole, I've shown there is more than one, end of story.

posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 01:28 AM
Look at that above picture, and try to imagine an airplane crashing into that outer wall.... then careening through wall after wall, hallways, security walls, outside and back in, outside again, and back in...

and there was

"a very large crump-thump noise. It was just a single noise. It wasn't a sliding-type impact or a succession of events or anything. It was just one loud, sharp report"

posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 06:23 AM
Do some math.

You are looking at greater than 2.6 billion footpounds of energy at impact. That ignors the explosion.

That's 10,400 cars impacting at 50mph.

Name a building that can withstand that amount of energy.

edit on 23-3-2011 by samkent because: More detail

posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 08:14 AM

Originally posted by Thermo Klein

Originally posted by Reheat
Alright Einstein, if there is more than one hole, let's see it....No good photograph clearly showing another hole, it did not exist...

There were actually 8 holes... not one
not all of them are pictured but it's obvious they exist; if you must assume they don't exist, per your previous statement, then just go with the fact there are "MORE THAN ONE".

E-ring outer = 1 (pictures available)
E-ring inner = 2
D-ring outer = 3
D-ring inner security wall = 4
D-ring inner security wall to C-ring walkway = 5
D-to-C breezeway wall = 6
C-ring outer = 7
C-ring inner = 8 (pictures available)

There are at least two that we have pictures of, proving your "only one hole" theory as wrong,
your "one hole" theory is what's under discussion here and it's been answered.
If you choose to propose another question please feel free to do so, but please refrain from your incessant claims that I'm wrong or lying - you said there was one hole, I've shown there is more than one, end of story.

I'm going to write in large letters so you can read.....

Stating something as fact and showing pictures of the outside of a building as opposed to the inside proves what?

You need to address the inside of the building, the FIRST FLOOR as that's where the bulk of the aircraft was located, Duh'

Once you correctly address the issue, I won't have to ask again and again. I've given you several hints, but you are either ignoring or don't comprehend the material. Which is it?

911research.wtc7.net...

edit on 23-3-2011 by Reheat because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 08:32 AM
Sopposedly THREE airliners reached their targets on 9/11.

We have videos of two airliners impacting their targets. (I will ignore the fakery claim for now)

We have seismograph detection of the two New York impacts from two miles away.

The impact holes in New York have slots for the wings.

There is no video for the Pentagon impact.

There was no seismic detection even though the plane supposedly hit at ground level. There are no slotted holes for the wings. There is no significant plane wreckage even though the Pentagon was not totallly demolished like the towers.

You don't need witnesses to conclude that the Pentagon event smells to high heaven.

psik

posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 08:44 AM

The exit for no planers is that way ------->

posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 04:34 PM

Originally posted by Reheat

Originally posted by Thermo Klein

Originally posted by Reheat
Alright Einstein, if there is more than one hole, let's see it....No good photograph clearly showing another hole, it did not exist...

There were actually 8 holes... not one
not all of them are pictured but it's obvious they exist; if you must assume they don't exist, per your previous statement, then just go with the fact there are "MORE THAN ONE".

E-ring outer = 1 (pictures available)
E-ring inner = 2
D-ring outer = 3
D-ring inner security wall = 4
D-ring inner security wall to C-ring walkway = 5
D-to-C breezeway wall = 6
C-ring outer = 7
C-ring inner = 8 (pictures available)

I'm going to write in large letters so you can read.....

Stating something as fact and showing pictures of the outside of a building as opposed to the inside proves what?

You need to address the inside of the building, the FIRST FLOOR as that's where the bulk of the aircraft was located, Duh'

Once you correctly address the issue, I won't have to ask again and again. I've given you several hints, but you are either ignoring or don't comprehend the material. Which is it?

You said there's only ONE HOLE.
I proved you wrong by listing the number of walls debris would have gone through (not including all the internal office walls)

Your answer to your ridiculous claim there's only ONE HOLE is that I need to look inside the building?

Why do you think there's only one hole?? it's plane as day there are more... unless you think the airplane debris funneled through windows again and you're not counting those as holes.

You say one hole.... it's a stupid claim, yet you still won't admit there are more than one hole in the Pentagon!!? Ask yourself, reheat,

what is the cost of being right???

- because you come across as a little delusional sticking to your claim there's only one hole in the Pentagon...

posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 04:56 PM
delete
edit on 23-3-2011 by Reheat because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 04:56 PM

Originally posted by Thermo Klein
- because you come across as a little delusional sticking to your claim there's only one hole in the Pentagon...

There are several doors and even windows. Where are the walls on the first and second floor, not the 3rd and upper floors, primarily the first floor and secondarily the second?

Floor Space Between Facade and C-Ring is Mostly Unobstructed On the first and second floors, the Pentagon has continuous interior space extending from the facade to the inner-facing wall of the C-Ring, joining the C-, D-, and E-Rings. This is because the light wells between the C- and D-Rings and between the D- and E-Rings only descend to the bottom of the third floor. The only structural elements interrupting this space are columns apparently spaced on 10-foot centers along the direction perpendicular to the facade, with each first-floor column having a square cross-section measuring 21 inches on a side.

edit on 23-3-2011 by Reheat because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 05:10 PM

You don't need witnesses to conclude that the Pentagon event smells to high heaven.

Only smells to those unique individuals who suffer under the misconception that all buildings are constructed exactly the same and react exactly the same under all circumstances. Yep, something stinks here.

posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 05:46 PM

more OS dribble, no-doubt copied from some OS fanatic site. No source? not gonna believe your lies anymore.

posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 05:55 PM

Originally posted by Thermo Klein

more OS dribble, no-doubt copied from some OS fanatic site. No source? not gonna believe your lies anymore.

I told you in the other thread that I have posted the link twice if not three times already only to have you hand wave it away. The information on Pentagon Construction on the first and second floors in that area is available on more than one site and it is available in books. The fact that you don't know or understand says more than I can say in a short post.

Furthermore, you have proven nothing that I have said wrong. ZERO! You are making false allegations and bare assertions that have no validity no matter how many times you repeat the word lie. It should be very obvious to an unbiased observer who is lying. It's certainly not me. You are simply projecting to me what you are guilty of and I've shown that on more than one occasion only to have it brushed aside as not important or merely the lack of a source for something you've said.

posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 09:20 PM
FOR THE RECORD:

I believe my information posted earlier about the number of walls the debris went through may be incorrect. I don't have a source for how many internal or external walls the debris went through and don't want to be an accidental purveyor of false information or future ignorance.

DISREGARD THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION
E-ring outer = 1 (pictures available)
E-ring inner = 2
D-ring outer = 3
D-ring inner security wall = 4
D-ring inner security wall to C-ring walkway = 5
D-to-C breezeway wall = 6
C-ring outer = 7
C-ring inner = 8 (pictures available)

it was posted by me, and is likely incorrect.

posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 09:36 PM

Originally posted by Thermo Klein
FOR THE RECORD:

I believe my information posted earlier about the number of walls the debris went through may be incorrect. I don't have a source for how many internal or external walls the debris went through and don't want to be an accidental purveyor of false information or future ignorance.

DISREGARD THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION
E-ring outer = 1 (pictures available)
E-ring inner = 2
D-ring outer = 3
D-ring inner security wall = 4
D-ring inner security wall to C-ring walkway = 5
D-to-C breezeway wall = 6
C-ring outer = 7
C-ring inner = 8 (pictures available)

it was posted by me, and is likely incorrect.

It's just not likely incorrect it is definitely incorrect.....

This is a truther site as I though that would be more to your taste. There are other sites and there is an ATS member who has worked in that area. I believe he has personal photos.....

911research.wtc7.net...
edit on 23-3-2011 by Reheat because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 09:56 PM

Originally posted by hooper

You don't need witnesses to conclude that the Pentagon event smells to high heaven.

Only smells to those unique individuals who suffer under the misconception that all buildings are constructed exactly the same and react exactly the same under all circumstances. Yep, something stinks here.

ROFLMAO

And the wings of the supposed airliner reacted HOW?

Oh yeah, the Laws of Physics in Washington D.C. are different from the Laws of Physics in New York, at least on 9/11/01 although they seem to behave rather strangely in both places.

psik

posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 05:14 PM
Oh look another no-plane Pentagon thread started by somebody who has started no-plane Pentagon threads which are still active even.

Some truthers have this theory that the real fringe ideas/hoaxes (like this) are disinformation deliberately placed to discredit anything meaningful we have to say. Could this possibly be one of those examples? It's not just you OP, there is a lot of misinfo here and elsewhere unfortunately. Think about this - there is significant real information pointing to an Israel involvement which at the very least was advanced knowledge and on the extreme end might mean they helped pull it off. Either way, their involvement is a fact.. and now I'll get to the point here. I wouldn't put it past them to continue to spew forth these nonsense hoaxes because it keeps people from wondering about the Israel connection.

posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 09:01 PM
reply to post by Thermo Klein

There were only 2 (in reality) 3 holes in the Pentagon made by American 77

1 & 2

1 - Hole approx 16 ft in diameter made by fuselage at 2nd floor level in E Ring (exterior) wall

2 - Hole Approx 90 ft at 1st (ground) level made by wings/engines in E Ring (exterior) wall

3 - Hole approx 12 ft in C Ring wall to alley (A-E drive) made by landing gear truck

As previously stated there are NO INTERIOR WALLS ON THE 2 LOWEST LEVELS

Once breaching the E Ring exterior wall there is clear path (except for occasional support columns) through to
C Ring

posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 07:16 PM

I agree the Israel involvement is one of the few facts we have on this whole thing. The 5 dancing Israelis, one of whom later admitted on live TV they were there to record the event... ya.

It's all part of the puzzle.

If you happen to be insinuating 'm part of the Israel propoganda, save it... Klein has nothing to do with me but a funny play on words

posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 07:20 PM

nice pics. My only problem is all those columns that happen to remain despite a gigantic airplane hitting them!

The inner wall thing was my mistake. I only said "likely" because reheat childishly refused to give a source and I won't believe a thing he says without one.

top topics

3