MAMEWorld Forums - Welcome to the War Room - Re: For the record 9/11 conspiracy theorist

> You can look at that piece of metal and say that that is evidence that a plane
> crashed. But are you ignoring what damage the Pentagon should have taken (what anyone
> with reasonable observation skills should see)? If a plane hit it or a missile hit it
> - either way it would burn. If a plane did hit it then why isn't the impact area
> consistent with a plane that large?

It was. There was a 16 ft diameter hole in the pentagon. The body of a 757 has roughly a 13 ft diameter.

> Where the engines would have hit, even the wings
> and tail-fin. The hole that was in that side of the building -before the floors of
> the building above the location of impact burned down- was NOT big enough to be a
> Boeing 757. Whatever hit it even penetrated all the way to the 3rd 'ring' from the
> point of impact in a straight line. I would imagine that a plane hitting something at
> that angle (45 degrees) would cause some deflection (it could still penetrate), even
> spreading out from breaking up as it goes through the layers of the building. Not
> making a straight line cut. Let's assume that "the plane" did go all the way through
> to that area outside of that hole. There still wasn't any plane parts in that opening
> all the way over to that side.

A 757 carries it's fuel in the wings. They would have been blown to bits along with the entire rear of the plane. The front half would have continued on like a bullet slug.

> If you want to suggest the ridiculous notion that the plane 'evaporated' from the
> heat... That can not work. If the heat melted the plane then why was there some
> office furniture still intact? (Yes or No) Do they make office furniture to hold up
> better than airplane parts?

As stated above, and as shown in most of the images taken, there are "blown to bits" pieces of the plane everywhere on the lawn. Also yes, some office furniture might have been built tougher than a 757. It's thin sheets of aluminum wrapped around a rigid half-skeleton. It's designed to be light and hold up to traveling through air. It isn't designed to survive a brick wall at 300 knots.

> Then I can look at that one small piece of supposed debris from the "plane" and look
> at the damage to the Pentagon, look back at the piece, then back at the Pentagon.
> Sadly, that piece alone doesn't suggest that a plane hit the Pentagon. It was either
> planted, or from something else.

Okay, here's some more. Maybe they planted all this too from the plane AA was missing...

> For example, if someone, not having any knowledge of 9/11, was shown pictures of this
> event (at the Pentagon), then they were asked to guess what they think would have
> caused the damage. And let's make it easy on them by making it multiple choice.
>
> a) A Boeing 767
> b) a missile
> c) a smaller aircraft armed with explosives (for the sake of variety)
>
> "Well, if it were a Boeing, where is the damage on the lawn?"
> "The hole isn't big enough to be from a Boeing either."
>
> "A small aircraft probably wouldn't have enough momentum to go through 3 layers or
> essentially 3 buildings (since they were separated).
>
> The best option is the only one that remains.
>
> "It had to have been a missile."
>
> Then again, they could have been given the suggestion by the media that is was a
> plane, to shut-up, and not ask any questions.

Yes, lets ask random people to back up your theories instead of people qualified to answer the question.

> Isn't it strange how the planes that hit the Twin Towers left a cutout of their
> shapes where they went in, but the plane that supposedly hit the Pentagon didn't? And
> even if the wings and tail-fin couldn't penetrate the Pentagon - we should have at
> least seen some impact damage of SOME SORT.

The pentagon is a lot more solid than the WTC was. By far. The wings had also taken on damage before hitting the pentagon.

> Last thing I'll mention. The corkscrew turn the hijacker made to turn around towards
> the Pentagon. This is what I was referring to when I used the word "miraculous". It
> is impossible to do. But some people will believe it without question. Unl euver - I'm
> all ears.

What was impossible about it? They guy did a long slow turn. A 757 is a friggin airborne Clydesdale. Massively overpowered for it's size. Even the shittiest of pilots shouldn't have a hard time keeping it in the air.