youcanhandlethetruth

******** government-op scumbag liar.

__________________
Before tyranny and television, "conspiracy theorists" never existed.

cointelpro/halfwits(in order of Porkpies) Clippo,Wowbanger TIP, Akria,Besoeker,Bear,Eurosceptic Antlantacist

The Bear

OK, let’s now consider the Pentagon attack and the garbage about it being a drone or some such and not a plane flown by a devout Muslim and filled with innocent people being used to attack the defence heart of the country that had welcomed him as a guest.

First the size of the hole. It aligns perfectly with the size of the fuselage of a 757. The majority of the mass of the aircraft would be centered in the fuselage and moreover the structural strength of the fuselage and the wing of an aircraft is aligned longitudinally though the wing also is designed to experience a repeated vertical bending moment but comparatively little shear strength.

It therefore follows that a high speed high energy impact would see the wing fail catastrophically and the mass of the individual parts be relatively low and so the energy they dissipate on further impact not be particularly high, whereas the fuselage whole remain intact for longer and so dissipated colossal amounts of energy concentrated on a small area.

This would create the phenomena of “liquefaction”, not a case of melting but the way that a rapidly moving high mass collection of parts behave dynamically when striking a solid high mass stationary target.

So much for the hole in the wall.

Next the debris field.

“Where is the ‘plane” is a constant howl from the conspiracy nuts.

The plane is there in bits. Look at the myriad of photo’s all over the web.

“It’s a drone engine!” is another shriek from the people who WANT the real story to be false.

Wrong. The supposed drone engine is actually the APU, a small gas turbine engine that provides much of the power used by a 757. The remains of the RB211 flight power plants are also in the various ‘photo’s that abound on the web.

So, rather than grind through the whole sorry story that really does show how utterly stupid and insulting to those who died, and in fact to the whole American nation, that their government were in any part responsible for some engineered thing as an enabling factor to go to war against a thing that needs going to war against more than anything for centuries, why not accept the real circumstances behind the murdering cowardly event that even puts Pearl Harbour into the shadows (at least that was a military on military hit).

The simple and awful truth is that an activist group, devout followers of a demonic cult, learned sufficient skills in order to guide an in-flight aircraft onto ground based targets in a raw hate attack against the modern world.

The hard part for them had been done. The aircraft had been made airborne, the flight surfaces had been configured for steady speed flight, the autopilot had been engaged.

All the murderous dogs that flew the aircraft needed to do was change three settings on the autopilot and the ‘plane would have guided itself to within a mile or less from the target.

Even then it is quite possible to have flown the aircraft into the buildings by further use of the autopilot alone, though there would have been a hell of a noise on the flight deck with all the warnings going off!

All the thrust settings, trim settings, and more, the bits that need experience to do right when done “by hand”, are better and automatically done by modern autopilots.

If the guy in the left hand seat was able to grasp the principles that the control column alters speed and the thrust levers alter altitude, so much the better (better?) but certainly no great skills are needed to do a very great deal with a modern jet, especially a “heavy”, using the autopilot alone once it is in the sky.

So much for the gainsaying regarding the skills needed to fly a 757 heavy.

The Bear

I object to being called a "********"!

As for a "liar" - that's silly.

"Scumbag" however, well, there I may be on a sticky wicket!

youcanhandlethetruth

The only thing that's sticky is the web of deceit you're trying to weave with your unaccountable sequence of events.

You say:
"The plane is there in bits. Look at the myriad of photo’s all over the web."

Where is this "myriad of photos" you claim ?
And why didn't you post them on your thread ? In fact, do you have any supporting evidence whatsoever about anything you claim ?

Ok I'll be fair to your case - I will post the official photos for you......
This link shows some of the official photos used to actually SUPPORT the theory that a boeing hit the pentagon !!! Have a look....

911 Case Study: Pentagon Flight 77

So did you mean these photos ?

I see small bits of wrackage and the odd small engine but no sign of an enormous boeing 757 plane anywhere....

Can you see the enormous boeing ? I certainly can't !....
What do other people on this forum think ?
If anyone has any evidence of this plane hitting the pentagon please come forward with it....

Do you have any other photos Bear ? If there's so many of them at least you should be able to produce one surely ?

But of course you can't since the truth is BECAUSE THERE AREN'T ANY are there ?.......

If you're saying that the photos I posted show clear proof a plane hit the pentagon, then you must be the nutter, not me.

In fact the FBI seized 84 surveillance tapes in the aftermath:
FBI Withholding 84 More Tapes of Pentagon on 9/11

This article shows what a plane hitting the pentagon would probably look like if it was caught on camera.....
How Flight 77 Hitting The Pentagon Would Really Look?

Do people agree this seems a lot more believable than a load of hot air and space being the actual plane ?

If you do have other photos though, please show evidence to support your claim and post them up here. If you say nothing people must assume you have no evidence.

As for your claim "no great skills are needed to do a very great deal with a modern jet, especially a “heavy”, using the autopilot alone once it is in the sky."

As I have said twice before the pilot who flew the exact same plane said it was "impossible"(see link) for HIM let alone the hijackers.
But even if we are to assume autopilot could have been used, how on earth could a hijacker program the autopilot to fly into the World Trade Centre ?!!

Normally planes are pre-programmed for their intended destination.
They can't just be programmed to fly into any building the hijacker fancies as their target.... It just doesn't make any logical sense.......
How gullible and stupid do you take people on this site for ?
And again where's your proof to back up your assertions/theories ?

And also, what about all the other points that I refuted that you failed to even mention ?
What about the fact that I showed Silverstein clearly profited from WTC7, the fact that the pilot who flew the EXACT same planes said it was "impossible" for even him, what about evidence there were explosives used ? (just a handful). Nothing to say ?

But apart from all of this, the fact remains......

YOU HAVE FAILED TO PRODUCE A SINGLE PIECE OF SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT A SINGLE THING YOU HAVE SAID.

In fact, one could argue it's no more than a conspiracy theory !

In my opinion, all you're attempting to do is
1) overwhelm people with scientific sounding junk words they can't understand and don't exist in an attempt to take the moral highground and have no case to answer.

It's a very basic tactic that means that you don't have to pay lip service to the OBVIOUS questions you can't answer and give the impression you are someone of authority who understands the technical explanations

2) Paint a picture that anyone who questions the ofiicial story is "mentally unstable", "undermining government", a terrorist or part of a political group.

3) Insinuate that in previous threads that I have been claiming there were "no innocent people on board" the planes and making money from it ("there’s a dollar to be made")

How dare you misquote me like that ?

I challenge you - point to where in the thread I said any of these things.....

If people read this thread they will clearly see you have been misquoting me and telling porkies from start to finish.
You are very cunning to add comments in like "and filled with innocent people" - suggesting that somebody like me, said there were never any people on board.

And you object to me calling you a liar when you are clearly misquoting me and twisting the facts ?!

That's why no-one with more than an ounce of intelligence should believe anything you say....

But rather than arguing with each other, let's simply let people make their mind own up whether these photos which support the official story and have been used as exhibits, show evidence of a boeing hitting the pentagon or not.

Maybe we should have a poll "Do any photos/video footage prove a boeing 757 hit the pentagon ?"

So me thinks it's you that's on the sticky wicket, "sunshine".....

So much for evidence of a plane hitting the pentagon.

P.S Don't forget your "myriad" of photos that you claim exist......

__________________
Before tyranny and television, "conspiracy theorists" never existed.

cointelpro/halfwits(in order of Porkpies) Clippo,Wowbanger TIP, Akria,Besoeker,Bear,Eurosceptic Antlantacist

The Bear

Here’s the URL of the ACTUAL surveillance cameras capture of the hit and not a contrived animation.

It is blurred, an aircraft at even 400 knots, that’s well in excess of 460 MPH and that speed would be needed if droop slots and flaps were not to be deployed (and why should they) is covering about 700 feet per second and so with an equivalent shutter speed of typically 1/60 sec. a target would move 11 feet so accounting for the blur.

http://atsmedia.cachefly.net/images/...7/camera1b.gif

Ok, now let’s just review the facts and not the fevered imagination of the conspiracy nuts.

The size of 757 fuselage matches the initial size of hole in the building - somewhere between 13 and 16 feet (757 is 13 feet wide/high)

Wheel rims found IN building match those of a 757

The small turbine engine outside is an APU

That same engine type has been clearly proven and stated NOT to be the same as used on a Global Hawk or any other drone or cruise missile.

Lots of very damaged blue seats from 757 laying on ground in photos.

There’s a part of "American" fuselage logo visible in more than 1 photo

The flight power plant parts photographed inside match a Rolls-Royce RB211

The structural components photographed in wreckage match Boeing paint primer schemes

There’s a big diesel generator in front of building that has been struck by a large heavy object

The big diesel generator outside is spun towards the building - could not be result of bomb blast or missile explosion

Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner heading from on high towards the building

Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner hit the Pentagon

More than 60 bodies, matching the passenger list and flight crew roster identified and returned to families from Pentagon wreckage.

Now “a birra detail”!

http://atsmedia.cachefly.net/images/...inggear002.jpg

Cruise missiles do not, as a rule, have landing gear, especially gear that is so massive that it would support the all up weight of a 757 for takeoff. It would be like a kamikaze pilot having flown several successful missions!

http://atsmedia.cachefly.net/images/...n-evidence.jpg

Bits of fragmented aircraft at the point at which the aircraft fuselage penetrated the wall. Note the color of the aluminum, “in the green”. If you know what you’re on about the significance of that will not be lost on you.

http://atsmedia.cachefly.net/images/...aneparts-1.jpg

Bits of flight power plant (engine to you). Note that what you see is part of the compressor stage and is of a size that would be expected for a bit of 757 mill which is exactly what it is.

http://atsmedia.cachefly.net/images/...57/Damage9.jpg

More bits of the RB211 engine in situe at the site. Feeling embarrassed by now?

http://atsmedia.cachefly.net/images/...757/rayons.jpg

Bit of the aircraft skin shown relative to a truck to confirm size.

http://www.news.navy.mil/management/...-6157F-001.jpg

Same bit and much more in the background together with firefighters attacking the crash scene.

http://atsmedia.cachefly.net/images/...tor_fence1.jpg

Perimeter fence shown damaged by incoming aircraft.

All in all it’s a case of QED
As for programming an automatic pilot, given five minutes anyone with an ounce of grey matter could learn how to establish a way point from a aeronautical map and simply insert the target as a new “waypoint” into an existing flight plan and Robert is your mothers brother. Job done. Now just wait for the ground to get close and the buildings to get bigger!

I like this!

It's like shooting fish in a barrel!

PCMadness

YCHTT,

Glad you're still here.

I'd like you to see this footage of a test I'm sure you've seen before.

F4 Phantom at 500mph

Vapourised at speed

For me this footage speaks volumes about the amount of wreckage found at the Pentagon.

__________________
Edmund Burke (1729–1797)

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."

My Ignore List
Useless idiots, whiny little sh*ts, know it alls, people that can dish it but can't take it

The Bear

Don't confuse him with REAL facts!

youcanhandlethetruth

That's a possible explanation and a nice little theory but can I ask you to do me a favour ?

I'm about to put a post up containing a video from pilotsfor911truth.org

Watch it and then tell me whether you still think that theory you've stated is still possible......

Ok, I'll put it up now....

Thanks in advance,
YCHTT.

__________________
Before tyranny and television, "conspiracy theorists" never existed.

cointelpro/halfwits(in order of Porkpies) Clippo,Wowbanger TIP, Akria,Besoeker,Bear,Eurosceptic Antlantacist

youcanhandlethetruth

Firstly, let's be clear what the issue here is.
It is not a case of Bear or anyone else putting forward their theory as to what happened to explain the events.
It is a case of providing sufficient evidence to prove or disprove the official explanation.

Ok let's start...
Since I am no expert in aviation, let's examine what the "Pilots for 9/11 Truth", have to say based on their analysis about the pentagon:

Scholars for 9/11 Truth - 21 June 2007 - NEW STUDY FROM PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH: NO BOEING 757 HIT THE PENTAGON

ABSTRACT: Pilots for 9/11 Truth obtained black box data from the government under the Freedom of Information Act for AA Flight 77, which The 9/11 Report claims hit the Pentagon. Analysis of the data contradicts the official account in direction, approach, and altitude. The plane was too high to hit lamp posts and would have flown over the Pentagon, not impacted with its ground floor. This result confirms and strengthens the previous findings of Scholars for 9/11 Truth that no Boeing 757 hit the building.

Madison, WI (PRWEB) June 21, 2007 - A study of the black box data provided by the government to Pilots for 9/11 Truth has confirmed the previous findings of Scholars for 9/11 Truth that no Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon on 9/11.

The new society, an international organization of pilots and aviation professionals, petitioned the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and obtained its 2002 report on American Airlines Flight 77, a Boeing 757 that, according to the official account, hit the ground floor of the Pentagon after it skimmed over the lawn at 500 mph plus, taking out a series of lamp posts in the process. The pilots not only obtained the flight data but created a computer animation to demonstrate what it told them.

According to the report issued by Pilots for 9/11 Truth, there are major differences between the official account and the flight data:

a. The NTSB Flight Path Animation approach path and altitude does not support official events.
b. All altitude data shows the aircraft at least 300 feet too high to have struck the light poles.
c. The rate of descent data is in direct conflict with the aircraft being able to impact the light poles and be captured in the Dept of Defense "5 Frames" video of an object traveling nearly parallel with the Pentagon lawn.
d. The record of data stops at least one second prior to official impact time.
e. If data trends are continued, the aircraft altitude would have been at least 100 feet too high to have hit the Pentagon.

The study was signed by 15 professional pilots with extensive military and commercial carrier experience.

They have made their animation, "Pandora's Box: Chapter 2," available to the public at
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=Pandora's+Black+Box%3A+Chapter+2

I strongly recommend you watch it ! (If only to watch the last 5 minute's summary)
You will be absolutely shocked to what really happened !

Some interesting facts from this presentation:

1. $2.3 Trillion (!) went missing from the pentagon the day before Sept 11, and in the attack all of the computerized records were destroyed.
2. Jamie McKintyre on CNN subsequently stated he had photographed pieces of the cockpit and fuselage yet on Sept 11[see video] he stated upon close inspection there were no pieces of recognizable wreckage from a large aircraft. He stated there were no fuselage, no wings, no engines.
3. The last call from the flight crew was recieved 3 minutes before the attack. Depsite the fact that the hijackers only had knives and boxcutters, the crew were apparently herded to the back of the plane. Would a pilot have given up the safety of himself and his passengers that easily ?
4. A flight controller states the only way any of the flights could not have been intercepted by fighter jet aircraft was major system failure. He confirms that this was definitely not the case that day.
5. As Casper Weinberger(former Secretary under Reagan) states, the small areas around Washington is the prohibited fly zone P-56, has several bases, and "the ability to get defensive planes in the air is very very high".
6. The part of the pentagon that was struck was the only recently re-inforced part and a flight path could have easily been taken to hit any other part. Instead it was allowed to perform a 330 degree manoeuvre south west of the penatgon, despite that one would think a terrorist would proceed directly in the least amount of time to avoid intercept.
7. The NTSB flight animation based on the flight data recorder shows that the true altitude of Flight 77 was 479 feet above sea level whereas the poles were 43 feet above sea level. Unless those poles were 436 feet high they could not have been hit.. Video shows numerous eye witness reports of a small commuter plane/small passenger jet and a nearby plane fly above it's hotel and "drop it's landing gear".

According to James H. Fetzer, founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, this result fits into the broader picture of what happened at the Pentagon that day. "We have developed 4 lines of argument that prove conclusively, in my judgment--that no Boeing 757 hit the building. The most important evidence to the contrary has been the numerous eyewitness reports of a large commercial carrier coming toward the building.
If the NTSB data is correct, then the Pilot's study shows that a large aircraft headed toward the building but did not impact with it. It swerved off and flew above the Pentagon."

Fetzer added, "We have previously developed several lines of argument, each of which proves that no Boeing 757 hit the building," including these four:

(1) The hit point at the Pentagon was too small to accommodate a 100-ton airliner with a 125-foot wingspan and a tail that stands 44 feet above the ground; the kind and quantity of debris was wrong for a Boeing 757: there were no wings, no fuselage, no seats, no bodies, no luggage, no tail! Not even the engines were recovered, and they are practically indestructible.

(2) Of an estimate 84 videotapes of the crash, the three that have been released by the Pentagon do not show a Boeing 757 hitting the building.
At 155 feet, the plane was more than twice as long as the 77-foot Pentagon is high and should have been visible. There are indications of a much smaller plane, but not a Boeing 757.

(3) Indeed, the aerodynamics of flight would have made the official trajectory flying more than 500 mph barely above ground level physically impossible, because of the accumulation of a massive pocket of compressed gas (air) beneath the fuselage; and if it had come it at an angle instead, it would have created a massive crater; but there is no crater and the official trajectory is impossible.

(4) Flying low enough to impact with the ground floor would have meant that the enormous engines were plowing the ground and creating massive furrows; but there are no massive furrows. The smooth, unblemished surface of the Pentagon lawn thus stands as a "smoking gun" proving the official trajectory cannot be sustained.

Members of Scholars have contributed to a new book that analyses the government's official account.
Entitled, THE 9/11 CONSPIRACY (2007), it includes photographs of the hit point before and after the upper floors collapsed, the crucial frame from the released videos, and views of the clear, smooth, and unblemished lawn.

"Don't be taken in by photos showing damage to the second floor or those taken after the upper floors collapsed, which happened 20-30 minutes later," Fetzer said. "In fact, debris begins to show up on the completely clean lawn in short order, which might have been dropped from a C-130 that was
circling above the Pentagon or placed there by men in suits who were photographed carrying debris with them." The most striking is a piece from the fuselage of a commercial airliner, which is frequently adduced as evidence.

James Hanson, a newspaper reporter who earned his law degree from the University of Michigan College of Law, has traced that debris to an American Airlines 757 that crashed in a rain forest above Cali, Columbia in 1995. Fetzer has been so impressed with his research he has invited Hanson to submit his study to Scholars for consideration for publication on its web site, 911scholars.org.

"The Pentagon has become a kind of litmus test for rationality in the study of 9/11," Fetzer said.

"Those who persist in maintaining that a Boeing 757 hit the building are either unfamiliar with the evidence or cognitively impaired. Unless," he added, "they want to mislead the American people. The evidence is beyond clear and compelling. It places this issue 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. No Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon."

James H. Fetzer,Founder Scholars for 9/11 Truth
Pilots commment on "New study from Pilots for 9/11 Truth"
[Editor's note: Clarifications of some fine points]
23 June 2007, pilotsfor911truth.org, Rob Balsamo
Pilots For Truth -> New Study From Pilots For 9/11 Truth

So who are we believe Bear ? You and your unsupported claims ?
Or an international organizations of pilots and aviation professionals who based their findings on black box data and flight recordings received from the NTSB ?

I know who my moneys on !

15 professional pilots with extensive military and commercial carrier experience carried out this analysis - either they are wrong, or you are wrong, which is it to be ?

So your "birra detail" is no more than unsubtantiated theory at best.
In fact it is a total shambles of an explanation...

__________________
Before tyranny and television, "conspiracy theorists" never existed.

cointelpro/halfwits(in order of Porkpies) Clippo,Wowbanger TIP, Akria,Besoeker,Bear,Eurosceptic Antlantacist

PCMadness

So what hit them?

A big if......and then where did it go????

So now there's a C130 circling as well??? Did anyone see it???

I thought compression occurred nearer the sound barrier? That was nowhere near the sound barrier.

What's the land speed record? How was it set? Was it faster than 500mph?

Have you ever seen a fighter jet do a very fast transonic flyby at 50 feet or less? I have and it didn't crash.

Arghh...You know what? I think it was a mad plot by pinky and the brain to take over the world.

Too many other important things that I can do something about than waste my time discussing theories that will never be proved one way or another.

Don't you feel life is just passing you by?

__________________
Edmund Burke (1729–1797)

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."

My Ignore List
Useless idiots, whiny little sh*ts, know it alls, people that can dish it but can't take it