Remote Control 747? Bombers?...Israeli technology! You decide.

Originally posted by longjohnbritches

Originally posted by pteridine

Originally posted by longjohnbritches
More IMPORTANT is how the rest of Joes kids and grand kid died.

As for the A3. It could have been some old mothballed 765 or whatever retro pimped.
The tiny bit of crap at the Pentagon is meaningless compared to an entire plane loaded with folks. The pentagon was internal bombs anyway. No PLANE PICS AT ALL.
Take a good look at the the ones at the Towers.
They could be any remote control plane.

No, the explosion at the Pentagon was a deflagration. From the fireball and smoke, it was thousands of gallons of hydrocarbons burning. Internal bombs would tend to blow the walls outward which was not seen.

After hitting a reinforced building at 400 kts, what pics of a plane would you expect? Then you'd have to explain what happened to the passengers.

It seems that we have been down this pathway before. You could just look over the old threads and get an idea what you would be called on to explain.

Very quickly cause I have other ATS stuff cooking that takes priority to your nonesense.
No plane at the Pentagon. No photo no video.
Only an ignorant fool would call the portion of that building reinforced.
If it were the TOTAL package, of any normal aircraft it would never penetrate the exterior wall let alone all the way to the center. They are aluminum duh!
YOU want to call me OUT or you want to Call me to explain something??
Whatever is your mania go for it ,ATS is AWARE. It's all goodgle
shivering ljb

I'm sure your other stuff that is cooking is far more important than another idiotic 'no plane' thread. Apparently, the building was in the process of being strengthened where the plane struck it. Possibly some ignorant fools didn't realize that.
Airplanes are high strength aluminum alloys and have components made of steel, stainless steel, titanium, and other alloys.

There is no reason to call you out. All the readers of this thread know that you have absolutely no evidence for anything other than a passenger airliner striking the Pentagon.

"It's all goodgle shivering ljb?"

reply to post by pteridine


No video = no plane hit the Pentagon
No photographs = no plane hit the Pentagon
No passanger bodies = no plane hit the Pentagon
pterdine says plane hit Pentagon= no plane hit Pentagon
So what is left, Bombs sure looks like that.
Missile yeah Secretary of Defence said that.
Remote control Global Hawk oh yeah.
All three sure why not.

Here is a little something I ran accross while trying to get a link to this company. Stewart Nozette was a consultant for them,

Israel Aerospace Industries moving production to Mississippi
www.haaretz.com/print-edition/business/israel-aerospace-industries-moving-p
The Israel Aerospace Industries is moving certain production lines from Israel to the United States. The production lines are being moved to group company Stark Aerospace, located in Starkville, Mississippi.
Stark is technically a subsidiary of IAI International, which is the main U.S. subsidiary of the Israeli firm.
IAI set up Stark in 2006 to drum up business in America. The following year inaugurated its first production outfit, which makes Hunter unmanned vehicles that it sells through Northrop Grumman. In fact, the U.S. armed forces have been using Hunter drones since the early 1990s.
cheers ljb

Originally posted by longjohnbritches
reply to post by pteridine

 

No video = no plane hit the Pentagon
No photographs = no plane hit the Pentagon
No passanger bodies = no plane hit the Pentagon
pterdine says plane hit Pentagon= no plane hit Pentagon
So what is left, Bombs sure looks like that.
Missile yeah Secretary of Defence said that.
Remote control Global Hawk oh yeah.
All three sure why not.

global hawk does not have the speed/mass to cause that much damage.

no video doesnt mean that a plane didnt hit the pentagon, just means that a UFO (not Extraterrestrial just a simple unidentified flying object or bogey) hit the pentagon.

there were charred bodies inside the pentagon, but i cant say for certain if it was from the aircraft or not. most likely not, given the shape of the bogey after impact i doubt there would be any intact body parts maybe some splatter.

Originally posted by choos

Originally posted by longjohnbritches
reply to post by pteridine

 

No video = no plane hit the Pentagon
No photographs = no plane hit the Pentagon
No passanger bodies = no plane hit the Pentagon
pterdine says plane hit Pentagon= no plane hit Pentagon
So what is left, Bombs sure looks like that.
Missile yeah Secretary of Defence said that.
Remote control Global Hawk oh yeah.
All three sure why not.

global hawk does not have the speed/mass to cause that much damage.

no video doesnt mean that a plane didnt hit the pentagon, just means that a UFO (not Extraterrestrial just a simple unidentified flying object or bogey) hit the pentagon.

there were charred bodies inside the pentagon, but i cant say for certain if it was from the aircraft or not. most likely not, given the shape of the bogey after impact i doubt there would be any intact body parts maybe some splatter.

edit on 21-4-2012 by choos because: (no reason given)

Hi cho
I have no reason to doubt you about the Hawk but in concert with explosives it could work. Why are there not Videos? The government confiscated them. Why no commercial plane.
There were NO passenger bodies. That has never happened in a commercial air crash ever. There were four that day with no bodies, IMPOSSIBLE.
Any way if you look at the whole shebang like you would in a court of law you know shadow of a doubt and all. Well then the DOUBT in these 911 shenanigans is enormous,

PS there is also merit to the fly over and could be accomplished as easy as a retard piolot hitting the one in a 3 trillion dollar jackpot spot.
Remember the spot was pretty empty.the best ljb

Originally posted by longjohnbritches

Originally posted by choos

Originally posted by longjohnbritches
reply to post by pteridine

 

No video = no plane hit the Pentagon
No photographs = no plane hit the Pentagon
No passanger bodies = no plane hit the Pentagon
pterdine says plane hit Pentagon= no plane hit Pentagon
So what is left, Bombs sure looks like that.
Missile yeah Secretary of Defence said that.
Remote control Global Hawk oh yeah.
All three sure why not.

global hawk does not have the speed/mass to cause that much damage.

no video doesnt mean that a plane didnt hit the pentagon, just means that a UFO (not Extraterrestrial just a simple unidentified flying object or bogey) hit the pentagon.

there were charred bodies inside the pentagon, but i cant say for certain if it was from the aircraft or not. most likely not, given the shape of the bogey after impact i doubt there would be any intact body parts maybe some splatter.

edit on 21-4-2012 by choos because: (no reason given)

Hi cho
I have no reason to doubt you about the Hawk but in concert with explosives it could work. Why are there not Videos? The government confiscated them. Why no commercial plane.
There were NO passenger bodies. That has never happened in a commercial air crash ever. There were four that day with no bodies, IMPOSSIBLE.
Any way if you look at the whole shebang like you would in a court of law you know shadow of a doubt and all. Well then the DOUBT in these 911 shenanigans is enormous,

PS there is also merit to the fly over and could be accomplished as easy as a retard piolot hitting the one in a 3 trillion dollar jackpot spot.
Remember the spot was pretty empty.the best ljb

if there were body parts in the pentagon than it would have been unidentifiable, ive seen pictures of the street below the towers im not sure if it was before the collapse or after, either way there were body parts or rather flesh scattered on the street, it looked like pieces of raw meat spat around on the ground. quite disturbing once you realise what it is.

the global hawk is too small doesnt have the mass to do the damage its gross weight is 22900lbs (~10400kg) and has an internal payload of 2000lbs (900kg) so maybe one 2000lb bomb, i dont know how much damage that would cause though. however it will need to launch that bomb forward, since the energy from the global hawk wont be able to punch through that many walls of the pentagon due to its small mass.

the 757 (is this what they say hit the pentagon?? anyway ill use this as a reference) has an EMPTY weight of 127000-142000lbs depending on the model. max take off weight of 255000lbs-272000lbs.

its roughly 10 times heavier.

you can say, they filled the 757 with enough fuel and about 80000lbs of weapons, this might however be quite excessive though, 80000lbs pounds of bombs is i imagine a hell of alot, would be like a small nuke going off wouldnt it?

Originally posted by longjohnbritches
reply to post by pteridine

 

No video = no plane hit the Pentagon
No photographs = no plane hit the Pentagon
No passanger bodies = no plane hit the Pentagon
pterdine says plane hit Pentagon= no plane hit Pentagon
So what is left, Bombs sure looks like that.
Missile yeah Secretary of Defence said that.
Remote control Global Hawk oh yeah.
All three sure why not.

This will probably come as a shock to you but things have happened without being videotaped. Photographs of wreckage and bodies are on the web.

It sure didn't look like bombs, it looked like what it was; thousands of gallons of Jet-A burning.

Your arguments are not convincing.

Originally posted by pteridine

Originally posted by longjohnbritches
reply to post by pteridine

 

No video = no plane hit the Pentagon
No photographs = no plane hit the Pentagon
No passanger bodies = no plane hit the Pentagon
pterdine says plane hit Pentagon= no plane hit Pentagon
So what is left, Bombs sure looks like that.
Missile yeah Secretary of Defence said that.
Remote control Global Hawk oh yeah.
All three sure why not.

This will probably come as a shock to you but things have happened without being videotaped. Photographs of wreckage and bodies are on the web.

It sure didn't look like bombs, it looked like what it was; thousands of gallons of Jet-A burning.

Your arguments are not convincing.

The disdain for folks on here that don't tell the truth.
The ones that spin, bend and distort the truth is immense.
You can just do a quick count on flags and stars to find that out in a hart beat.
Why don't you post up a photo of a BODY from the FLIGHT that SUPPOSEDLY hit the EMPTYIEST area of the Pentagon .
Come on now, post one up here or admit you are a member of the " MERRY BAND OF BEND"

reply to post by choos


choos,
Here is the crux son.
If the fragile aluminum aircraft or whatever it was, was totally guided in on a GPS beam to accomplish a one in a million direct (not one tinny weensy bit of pilot error) hit.
And if all the fuel is left on the exterior in the fire ball with the vaporized wings. NO WING HOLES IN THE pentagon.
Then how could the fuselage punch a hole entirely through the building and not stay intact. You see a commercial aircraft like the one that bore the flight number that supposedly hit it's pre designated mark is the least likely to fit the FACTS of all the other scenarios. Including the fly over.
And that's all one needs to know. Stop wasting your time with tons and mph and all that nonsense.
cheers ljb

Originally posted by longjohnbritches
reply to post by choos

 

choos,
Here is the crux son.
If the fragile aluminum aircraft or whatever it was, was totally guided in on a GPS beam to accomplish a one in a million direct (not one tinny weensy bit of pilot error) hit.
And if all the fuel is left on the exterior in the fire ball with the vaporized wings. NO WING HOLES IN THE pentagon.
Then how could the fuselage punch a hole entirely through the building and not stay intact. You see a commercial aircraft like the one that bore the flight number that supposedly hit it's pre designated mark is the least likely to fit the FACTS of all the other scenarios. Including the fly over.
And that's all one needs to know. Stop wasting your time with tons and mph and all that nonsense.
cheers ljb

aluminium is not exactly fragile though. the reason they use it is because it is strong yet light. so thats 115,000kg - 124,000kg worth of a fairly strong material.

im not wasting my time when considering mass and velocity when they are the key things that will cause the damage. im not saying the aircraft stayed intact after collision but it could have been anything.

incidents like this rarely ever happen, let alone test for it, its going to cost a fair amount of money that not many people will be willing to splash out. so its hard to duplicate and understand the physics behind it.

I dont mean they used a global hawk. I mean they used the technology. I mean the equipment used to comtrol the Eitan is probably consisting of equipment big enough to control a much larger plane. U wouldnt use equipment just big enough for flying that you would use overkill to greaten its measure of success.

reply to post by longjohnbritches

There were NO passenger bodies. That has never happened in a commercial air crash ever. There were four that day with no bodies, IMPOSSIBLE.

No bodies...?

Wow - really loaded up the clown car of stupid on this one....

Ever here of DNA...?

At Pentagon were able to identify remains of the crew/passengers/hijackers in the debris

I said remains because in a crash this violent followed by fire that intense only thing recoverable would be pieces
of tissue (with a few larger parts)

Here is map of remains they recovered

Below: location of human remains. An exhibit from the Moussaoui trial. Blue ovals show flight 77 victims; orange ovals, Pentagon workers; black ovals, unidentified (there were also fatalities on the second floor).

Same thing at WTC

Were able to identify those on the planes using DNA

Who They Were: Robert C. Shaler

By April 30 2004, 52 of those aboard Flight 11 were identified, 45 by DNA. 26 of those on Flight 175 were identified, 26 by DNA.

Flight 93

Death certificates for the 40 victims list their deaths as homicides. The hijackers' death certificates, not released yet, call their deaths suicides.

The four hijackers' remains will stay in FBI custody in case they prove important to the evolving investigation.

Investigators segregated remains which yielded DNA samples that did not match DNA profiles of the 40 passengers and crew. Those, by process of elimination, are the hijackers, and their remains are being grouped by common DNA.

.

Originally posted by longjohnbritches
The disdain for folks on here that don't tell the truth.
The ones that spin, bend and distort the truth is immense.
You can just do a quick count on flags and stars to find that out in a hart beat.
Why don't you post up a photo of a BODY from the FLIGHT that SUPPOSEDLY hit the EMPTYIEST area of the Pentagon .
Come on now, post one up here or admit you are a member of the " MERRY BAND OF BEND"

Here ya go John. 911research.wtc7.net...

This has pictures and addresses many of the points you [and many others before you] have made..

reply to post by sirjunlegun



Confused.

Headline of this thread mentions a "747".......the article linked has no such mention....and, the (vague) reference to 9/11 attacks??

No 747s involved, there.

What am I missing, here??

Oh, and edit:

The article linked has a "file photo" at the top, of an F-16.....but, the body of the text mentions F-15s.

Wow!

Poor job, on them and their "reporting" abilities.

reply to post by sirjunlegun


it simply DOES NOT work this "simply":

I mean the equipment used to comtrol the Eitan is probably consisting of equipment big enough to control a much larger plane.

reply to post by longjohnbritches


BS!

No video = no plane hit the Pentagon

Utter rubbish

No photographs = no plane hit the Pentagon

But, there ARE photos!!

And evidence!!!

Wow.......denial.

Sad.

Q --Why does it take three morons to hide the truth???
A --They can't!!
Post a PHOTO of a BODY of a PASSENGER at the Pentagon or eat that CROW!
POST A PHOTO of a Commercial Airliner at the Pentagon ditto
Don't post damn stupid links to pictures of alot of other crapola.
POST the ACTUAL PICTURES to save your (well I don't think you have any left) Credibility.

Then we will talk about the Raytheon.

reply to post by longjohnbritches


They exist:

POST A PHOTO of a Commercial Airliner at the Pentagon

But, not everyone who can turn on a computer is necessarily privy to EVERY photo out there.....some are just too gruesome. (The photos, I mean.....not the morons who can turn on a computer....a Chimp can do that!).

The facts are out there.

American Airlines Flight 77 hit the Pentagon......there is not only a mountain of evidence........it is an entire mountain range...a continent.

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by longjohnbritches

 

They exist:

POST A PHOTO of a Commercial Airliner at the Pentagon

But, not everyone who can turn on a computer is necessarily privy to EVERY photo out there.....some are just too gruesome. (The photos, I mean.....not the morons who can turn on a computer....a Chimp can do that!).

The facts are out there.

American Airlines Flight 77 hit the Pentagon......there is not only a mountain of evidence........it is an entire mountain range...a continent.

Nothing here but pure spin, continent of POPYCOCK disinformation.
Post the pictures if they exist to save face and one BIRD TURD of credibility.

reply to post by longjohnbritches


I do not have room for a big enough 'eye-roll'.....

....so, instead......THIS is the most definitive thread ever authored on ATS, about the Pentagon and 9/11:

9/11: A Boeing 757 Struck the Pentagon

IT will fill in all of the "blanks", on that topic.

Case closed.