Walking on the moon?

[Let-Me-In]

Next ....

Don't be a twerp all your life,,,take a day off.

[The Lone Gunman]

We walked on the moon, but there is no way that A Boeing hit the Pentagon!

I think you will find that there is plenty of evidence that shows how high speed crashes lead to the total disintegration of the aircraft. I think there si video footage of an F16 being flown into a wall.

Lots of damage, no plane.

[Signo_cypher]

Moon landing

I say we didnt, there is a great DVD called 'secret space' it shows that after world war 2 NASA recruited the ex nazi physisits, (all rocket propulsion stems from nazi bomb designs) and that we cant get passed the van allen belt without suffing major radiation, but if you belive the offical story all the astronaughts returned unharmed, but thats besides the point, we didn't go to the moon we have been lied to. The USA had to get one up on USSR to show what a superpower it was, it was easier to fake it, than actually go, why do you think we have never been back?

The bigger the lie the more people will belive it!!

[Old Greg]

I say we didnt, there is a great DVD called 'secret space' it shows that after world war 2 NASA recruited the ex nazi physisits, (all rocket propulsion stems from nazi bomb designs) and that we cant get passed the van allen belt without suffing major radiation, but if you belive the offical story all the astronaughts returned unharmed, but thats besides the point, we didn't go to the moon we have been lied to. The USA had to get one up on USSR to show what a superpower it was, it was easier to fake it, than actually go, why do you think we have never been back?

The bigger the lie the more people will belive it!!

Then why didn't the USSR reveal it as a fake?

[Let-Me-In]

I say we didnt, there is a great DVD called 'secret space' it shows that after world war 2 NASA recruited the ex nazi physisits, (all rocket propulsion stems from nazi bomb designs) and that we cant get passed the van allen belt without suffing major radiation, but if you belive the offical story all the astronaughts returned unharmed, but thats besides the point, we didn't go to the moon we have been lied to. The USA had to get one up on USSR to show what a superpower it was, it was easier to fake it, than actually go, why do you think we have never been back?

The bigger the lie the more people will belive it!!

physisits
suffing
suffing
offical
astronaughts thats

[zathras]

I think you will find that there is plenty of evidence that shows how high speed crashes lead to the total disintegration of the aircraft. I think there si video footage of an F16 being flown into a wall.

Lots of damage, no plane.

Forgive me but an F16 is a tad smaller than the average Boeing. No for me the problem with the Pentagon is the absence of the tail. The hole is just about the right size for the fuselage it is not for the tail, so that did not go into the building. Leaving two options; it sheared off or was disintegrated (as were the wings). Now consider last weeks crash in Brazil. Now that plane was carrying a good chunk of speed - having decided to abort a landing it was now taking off. Despite it hitting a good few buildings including a petrol storage/station adding a nice big chunk of fuel to the fire the tail survived pretty well intact.

However that is not the clincher for me. Back in my younger days I used to be in the Air Training Corp. This could be described as a kind of youth version of the RAF (Indeed me met on an airbase and war uniforms almost exactly like that of the RAF). That got me free flying lessons, not only in single engined craft, but also in a VC10 simulator. Now OK flying a simulator is not the same as the real thing, but it does give an impresiation of the differences.

So a person who had only taken a few lessons in a Cessna is supposed to have taken a Boeing. Flown it over Washington, around the Pentagon to attack the one part that was being renovated - and therefore empty. Surely if we assume that our terrorist would have taken control of the aircraft, he would have flown the aircraft into the same side from which he came! Also the turn would have been harder, with a high potential for a stall if he got it wrong. This from a pilot with a few hours on a Cessna - give me a break.

Oh and for motive - look into the Project for a New American Century, of which two members of the Bush Cabinet are high ranking officials.

[gingerjedi]

When something that is very fragile hits something that is very hard there isn’t usually much left to see.

The example about the F16 was in fact a French Mirage fighter plane that was propelled at something like 400mph into a concrete wall and literally turned to dust, it doesn't really matter how big it was as all you would get is more dust.

HTH.

[mrdonuts]

astro-NOTS more like

[Ardesco]

The big problem is the engines. Where did they go? The engines should have left two large holes to either side of the fuselage hole and the engines very rarely disentigrate in a crash.

Also the lawn was rather perfect, if the negines didn't impact into the pentagon and instead the plane hit the ground first (which is where the wings and engines must have got torn off) how come there is a perfect lawn? Where are the big grooves of two large engines being dragged through the grass?

I don't think that an airplane hit the pentagon, if it had all the US government would have to do is release all the CCTV videos from the nearby hotels and gas stations that they confiscated 5 mins after the alleged plane hit.

Strangely all those videos have dissapeared.....

I was in ATC too and did a quite a few hours in chipmunks, bulldogs and a fair bit of gliding, I would agree that somebody with only a couple of hours of flying experiance would have no chance in hell of controlling something as big as a boeing 747, it is hard enough to control a small light aircraft that is very responsive.

[Let-Me-In]

So, what did hit the Pentagon?