Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6
Scott G

The 9/11 Planes and the Pentagon attack

2,524 posts in this topic

Now, let's examine the fleet history of American Airlines. From the following link, you will notice that there were B-767s and B-757s written off. Click on those numbers in order to determine why those aircraft were written off.

http://www.planespot...erican-Airlines

The following video confirms the loss of American 11 and American 77.

[media=]

[/media]

The following photo taken at the Pentagon depicting wing flaps from American 77.

2006-08-08-IO-Article-pic-1.jpg

Go to this link and you will notice the registration number for American 77 has been deregistered.

http://registry.faa....Numbertxt=644AA

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

very funny.... :rolleyes: .......no just a bog standard missile

so YOU say........ ph34r.gif

Just as I started doing my own research....someone gave me a tip on another forum.

To go to live reports when events were unfolding....(before a multi-facetted cover-up

got underway).....my words in brackets not theirs... but that was the gist of what they said.

no-one seems to be taking any notice of the live CNN reports that I've posted?

That is a big thing for me too. How the media changed from day one to day 2. After that, I don't believe any "eyewitnesses" on either side. I do however believe those people that heard bombs go off and hell, we can hear them go off.

You can't change what we hear live and they can't rig that. But we can hear what they say live and when they start ignoring what they said on day 1 while it was live. They ignore those bombs and tower 7. A coincidence?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ever notice how they always stop as soon as the wings are about to hit the wall? They can't explain what happened to the wings when it hit the building and a perfect hole came out the other end.

Edited by SpeakTheTruth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a big thing for me too. How the media changed from day one to day 2. After that, I don't believe any "eyewitnesses" on either side. I do however believe those people that heard bombs go off and hell, we can hear them go off.

There were no bombs because no explosions were seen nor detected. This are sounds that someone would describe as explosions.

Fire, Not Extra Explosives, Doomed Buildings, Expert Says

By John Fleck

Journal Staff Writer

A New Mexico explosives expert says he now believes there were no explosives in the World Trade Center towers, contrary to comments he made the day of the Sept. 11 terrorist attack.

"Certainly the fire is what caused the building to fail," said Van Romero, a vice president at the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology. The day of the attack, Romero told the Journal the towers' collapse, as seen in news videotapes, looked as though it had been triggered by carefully placed explosives.

Subsequent conversations with structural engineers and more detailed looks at the tape have led Romero to a different conclusion. Romero supports other experts, who have said the intense heat of the jet fuel fires weakened the skyscrapers' steel structural beams to the point that they gave way under the weight of the floors above. That set off a chain reaction, as upper floors pancaked onto lower ones.

My link

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ever notice how they always stop as soon as the wings are about to hit the wall? They can't explain what happened to the wings when it hit the building and a perfect hole came out the other end.

The wings will shatter into smaller pieces. In a photo, you can see wing ribs inside the Pentagon. Let's take a look at what happened when a B-25 struck the Empire State Building. Where are the wings of the bomber?

esb-crash06.jpg

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a big thing for me too. How the media changed from day one to day 2. After that, I don't believe any "eyewitnesses" on either side. I do however believe those people that heard bombs go off and hell, we can hear them go off.

You can't change what we hear live and they can't rig that. But we can hear what they say live and when they start ignoring what they said on day 1 while it was live. They ignore those bombs and tower 7. A coincidence?

Let's do comparisons between real demolition implosions and the collapse of WTC7.

And now, what you heard in the video above is not what you hear when WTC7 collapsed in the following video.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steel without thermal protection can fail extremely quickly in a fire:

"One of the most common structures today is the strip mall built with steel bar joists and metal deck roofs. A serious fire in one of these structures should be expected to produce roof collapse in as little as 5 to 10 minutes." Firehouse.com Sept. 1998

079-full.jpg

EFFECT OF SUPPORT CONDITIONS ON STEEL

BEAMS EXPOSED OF FIRE

Department of Civil Engineering

University of Canterbury

Christchurch, New Zealand

1. Introduction

1.1 General

Structural steel has been widely used throughout the world. It is one of a designer’s best

options in view of its advantages over other materials. Steel is available in a range of discrete

size, and its ductile behaviour allows plastic deformation upon yielding, therefore avoiding

brittle failures.

In reinforced concrete structures, steel enhances the concrete strength by

carrying the tensile forces. It is also commonly used to reinforce timber constructions.

In spite of its advantages, steel on its own is vulnerable in fire.

Elevated temperatures in the steel cause reduction in its strength and stiffness which eventually leads to failure due to

excessive deformations. This is crucial in steel in compared with concrete or timber members

as steel conducts heat very well and often comes in thin or slender elements.

2.4.2 Steel design at elevated temperature

There are a few modifications to be considered when designing structures for fire conditions

although the concepts are similar to those for the ambient condition. Most of the material

properties change with temperature, the strength is reduced upon heating and thermal

expansion may induce internal forces that lead to structural failure with various mechanisms

depending on the type of supports, connections and structural arrangements.

Instability failure also needs to be considered even though the structure still has adequate

strength. The applied loads for fire design are less due to very low probability of the event

occurring when the structure is fully loaded at its maximum capacity, therefore a smaller

safety factor is acceptable.

The actual load at a given time as a proportion of the load that would cause collapse of the

structure is often referred to as the load ratio. Most constructions have a load ratio of 0.5 or

less. Smaller load ratio means greater fire resistance as the reduction of strength of any

member will not necessarily cause collapse of the structure.

Failure mechanisms

The failure of a beam is reached when its strength is exceeded at one or more particular points

termed plastic hinges, depending on they way it is supported. Figure 2.13 is the illustration by

Buchanan (2000), showing the bending moment, deflected shape and the failure mechanism

for different end conditions.

The development of plastic hinges shows ductile behaviour as energy is dissipated

http://www.civil.can...ts/JSepturo.pdf

In WTC Building 5, this large column and beam buckled on floor 8 of 9.

The fire was fueled by office materials only.

076-full.jpg

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a big thing for me too. How the media changed from day one to day 2. After that, I don't believe any "eyewitnesses" on either side. I do however believe those people that heard bombs go off and hell, we can hear them go off.

If there was a bomb explosion, they would have known. Here is one example why.

[media=]

[/media]

Let's try another.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=mYKxwWZ-aRM&NR=1

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no video that shows a plane. There are couple that show something hitting it. Hard to believe you wouldn't be able to tell it was a plane. The planes that hit the WTC were pretty easy to spot. Not sure why this would be any different, especially since there are way more camera around the Pentagon. But all we get is a whole flash. Not consistent with a plane at all.

Where is your evidence that there are "way more cameras" around the Pentagon that captured the actual impact? Most of you truthers always say this yet cannot come up with any consistent information listing camera locations and the direction they are pointing in order to corroborate your "many cameras that saw impact" theory.

See, you can say all you want about how you know there were airplane parts there but none were ever found. Not ones from a 757 at least. I'm sure if there were they would've have brought them up as evidence.

None were ever found? Says who? There were many photos taken of a large commercial airliner found in and around the Pentagon impact zone.

Here is a page that shows many of interviews of witness reports and photos of plane debris.

http://therightbloggerbastard.blogspot.co.nz

yep, the FDR cut off 6 seconds from impact. That is really weird. You can't explain that away.

Actually, it was 4 seconds.

The final 4 seconds were "damaged" by the impact. The decompressor program given to the NTSB was not able to decode the final 4 seconds of the CSV file due to some columns of data missing, possible due to damage from the impact.

http://journalof911studies.com/volume/2010/Calibration%20of%20altimeter_92.pdf

The person who was able to decode the final 4 seconds is Warren Stutt. Here is a website where you can get more information regarding his updates to the decompressor and the FDR raw data given to him under a FOIA request.

http://www.warrenstutt.com/

And the fact they couldn't find one black box at the WTC but found a passport and id in perfect condition? the panes wnet poof but a passport was the main evidence to blame the hijackers (but never convict them.)

Is it your opinion that black boxes are still recoverable after having tons of steel and concrete landing on them? Hmmmmm...??

Can you explain why 163 out of 500 people questioned said they heard explosions, but none were ever tested for?

There is no evidence of "explosives". 163 out of 500 is a minority and the sounds of explosions can be attributed to other things. Falling bodies on the roof tops of other buildings, crashing elevators, etc.

There was even a news crew across the street of WTC 1 when it started its collapse and not one explosion was heard.

Not only that, they shipped the rubble out as fast as possible and wouldn't let anybody near it.

Actually Bao Steel, the company in China the steel was shipped to for recycling didn't receive the first shipment till the latter half of January. Doesn't seem like the shipping was "as fast as possible" as some people would like you to think.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a big thing for me too. How the media changed from day one to day 2. After that, I don't believe any "eyewitnesses" on either side. I do however believe those people that heard bombs go off and hell, we can hear them go off.

Basically confirmation bias. So you will believe eyewitnesses that support your pre-conceived conclusions, yet will not believe those who stated no explosions were heard?

You can't change what we hear live and they can't rig that. But we can hear what they say live and when they start ignoring what they said on day 1 while it was live. They ignore those bombs and tower 7. A coincidence?

News media got so many things wrong on that day, and really it was to be expected anyways. How many times have initial news broadcasts been correct in the past especially during high stress times? Were you expecting everything to be 100% accurate based on the many witness reports being handed off to reports?

Can you provide me video evidence that include audio of controlled demolition during the collapse of WTC 1,2 and 7?

People like you tend to forget that 1 large boom is not evidence of controlled demolition, controlled demolition videos generally have audio reference of several sequential explosions prior to the structure collapsing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ever notice how they always stop as soon as the wings are about to hit the wall? They can't explain what happened to the wings when it hit the building and a perfect hole came out the other end.

Boeing 757 are made from Aluminium Alloy 2024 because of its strength to weight ratio, however, it is still aluminium.

A Boeing 757 near fully fueled travelling 500+ mph on impact with a reinforce concrete building with blast proof windows, and you expect for the wings to sheer off while expecting to see a tail and intact fuselage?

Did science and physics even come to mind when coming to that horrible conclusion?

The great thing here about science is, regardless if you understand it or not, science is 99.9% correct.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was just like that ! 757 went into the building THats what happens !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where is your evidence that there are "way more cameras" around the Pentagon that captured the actual impact? Most of you truthers always say this yet cannot come up with any consistent information listing camera locations and the direction they are pointing in order to corroborate your "many cameras that saw impact" theory.

None were ever found? Says who? There were many photos taken of a large commercial airliner found in and around the Pentagon impact zone.

Here is a page that shows many of interviews of witness reports and photos of plane debris.

http://therightblogg....blogspot.co.nz

Actually, it was 4 seconds.

The final 4 seconds were "damaged" by the impact. The decompressor program given to the NTSB was not able to decode the final 4 seconds of the CSV file due to some columns of data missing, possible due to damage from the impact.

http://journalof911s...ltimeter_92.pdf

The person who was able to decode the final 4 seconds is Warren Stutt. Here is a website where you can get more information regarding his updates to the decompressor and the FDR raw data given to him under a FOIA request.

http://www.warrenstutt.com/

Is it your opinion that black boxes are still recoverable after having tons of steel and concrete landing on them? Hmmmmm...??

There is no evidence of "explosives". 163 out of 500 is a minority and the sounds of explosions can be attributed to other things. Falling bodies on the roof tops of other buildings, crashing elevators, etc.

There was even a news crew across the street of WTC 1 when it started its collapse and not one explosion was heard.

Actually Bao Steel, the company in China the steel was shipped to for recycling didn't receive the first shipment till the latter half of January. Doesn't seem like the shipping was "as fast as possible" as some people would like you to think.

Not what I meant about eyewitnesses. I mean that after that day, I have a hard time believing either side than I can when it was happening.

And dude they bragged about how fast they got the ruble off that site. None of it was ever tested for explosives. The is the government's fault that there are thin many question, not mine.

Within 2 months we were at war and had the Patriot Act written and signed, but no investigation started for 14 months. That's not the actions of men who give a crap

That's the government's fault,. You can blame them for the questions existing. And for not answering the questions.

And 163 is enough of a reason to at least investigate the explosions, and didn't need to be ignored by corporate media soon after. Like day 2.

Do you guys find it the least bit odd they didn't investigate this and do you find it odd the 9/11 commission report and the media completely ignored tower 7 falling out of the sky like no building in history?

I mean you really can't be okay with all of that can you?

Edited by SpeakTheTruth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically confirmation bias. So you will believe eyewitnesses that support your pre-conceived conclusions, yet will not believe those who stated no explosions were heard?

News media got so many things wrong on that day, and really it was to be expected anyways. How many times have initial news broadcasts been correct in the past especially during high stress times? Were you expecting everything to be 100% accurate based on the many witness reports being handed off to reports?

Can you provide me video evidence that include audio of controlled demolition during the collapse of WTC 1,2 and 7?

People like you tend to forget that 1 large boom is not evidence of controlled demolition, controlled demolition videos generally have audio reference of several sequential explosions prior to the structure collapsing.

I never said there was one large boom. people like tend to forget buildings don't just fall out of the sky. You don't have to know what happened to wonder why the government covered this all up.

And of course people know there are cam,eras everywhere at the Pentagon. You know it and I know it and so does everybody. And don't pretend there is not.

ats48924_062a_COMP.jpg

let's not pretend this isn't a secured, heavily monitored building, we all know it is. If I ran the country and somebody was accusing me of killing 3,00 people, I would show a video of the plane hitting the building. And so would they.

I know, weird about the wings of the plane and how they always show the plane through the building and completely ignore what happened when the wings hit.

Did I ever say their was a controlled explosion in tower 7? I just want to know why the government and media ignored it forever. I don't know what happened, I just want a real investigation and so should you. You can bet your ass they would investigate everything they though you did. yet you just let them off the hook.

Edited by SpeakTheTruth
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's do comparisons between real demolition implosions and the collapse of WTC7.

!

And now, what you heard in the video above is not what you hear when WTC7 collapsed in the following video.

[media=]

Agreed, except what they are accused of using and what they use in demos are not the same thing.

Like I sad though, I'm not sure I ever said the building was demoed, I just want to know why it went ignored. A building of that magnitude falling out of the sky like never before and no investigation until the familiy's demanded it, and that was anything but an "independent investigation". You can't think that's right. Most of the victim's families don't think it's right I know that.

You can think their silence is okay and I will believe it's not.

It's not okay that they never convicted anybody involved with it but punished American citizens with the Patriot Act?

Do you think that's okay? Doesn't raise any level of concern for you? It doesn't concern you that over half the 9/11 commission thinks it should be re-investigated? It doesn't bother you that a whole bunch of the victim's families think they have been ignored and given the runaround?

Would it bother you if your kid had been the one who died and they were ignoring you? It bothers me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Give it a break ! A Jet Did Hit the Towers & Pentagon ! Nuff Said ! :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly right Speak The Truth--if the official story were true, that a 757 struck the Pentagon, the pictures of it would have been blazed all over the mainstream media.

Just as they had all those pictures of Atta and others at ATM, going through the airport, at motels and car rental agencies, and god knows where else, they would have had pictures of a Boeing striking the Pentagon, a very heavily monitored federal building bristling with cameras, as you have shown here.

It was a hoax, a false flag, and that's why there are no pictures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know, weird about the wings of the plane and how they always show the plane through the building and completely ignore what happened when the wings hit.

What happened to the wings of American 77, happened to the wings of the B-25, which struck the Empire State building.

empirestatebldgcrash.jpg

A couple of wing flaps basically survived somewhat, intact.

cuaiq.jpg

And, ribs and honeycomb core that is used in certain wing panels, found inside the Pentagon.

0901_163.jpg

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed, except what they are accused of using and what they use in demos are not the same thing.

It takes carefully placed explosives to bring down buildings the size of the WTC buildings. There were no explosions. The fact the WTC buildings began to buckle indicates that fire, not explosives, is weakening the structures.

Like I sad though, I'm not sure I ever said the building was demoed, I just want to know why it went ignored.
]

There was no evidence of explosives, In other words, if explosives were used, there would be a need to investigate, but there was nothing there to investigate as far as explosives were concerned, and remember, investigations cost a lot of money and looking for something for which there was no evidence for in the first place waste money and time and deflects from a real investigaton. During the clean-up, no evidence of explosives of any kind was found, either in the rubble nor at the Fresh Kills landfill.

You can think their silence is okay and I will believe it's not. It's not okay that they never convicted anybody involved with it but punished American citizens with the Patriot Act?

Three weeks before the 911 attacks, I left the Philippines for San Francisco, and while waited for my flight, I remarked as to why security at US airports was not as strict at those in the Philippines.

Would it bother you if your kid had been the one who died and they were ignoring you? It bothers me.

Yes! But remember, the terrorist had planned and carried out the 911 attack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if a plane flew over my head I would have heard it.

That depends on how high the aircraft is flying.

And I i had a lot of cameras something would've recorded it.

Video of American 11 striking WTC1

Video of United 175 striking WTC2

[media=]

Video of American 77 striking the Pentagon

757_pentagon.gif

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ats48924_062a_COMP.jpg

let's not pretend this isn't a secured, heavily monitored building, we all know it is. If I ran the country and somebody was accusing me of killing 3,00 people, I would show a video of the plane hitting the building. And so would they.

Radar data, eyewitness accounts--in the sky and on the ground--B-757 wreckage inside and outside the Pentagon, and of course, the report from American Airlines, operator of American 77, placing that aircraft on the grounds of the Pentagon. Videos are not required and in many cases, videos are not available for aircraft accident investigations. How was it determined that a bomb was responsible for the crash of Pan Am 103? How was it determined that Libya was behind the bombing of Pan Am 103?

Don't allow yourself to become a victim of 911 conspiracist because much of what they post is false, and many conspiracist know they are lying, but they hope you won't notice.

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly right Speak The Truth--if the official story were true, that a 757 struck the Pentagon, the pictures of it would have been blazed all over the mainstream media.

And, photos and a video have been provided proving that American 77 struck the Pentagon, but then again, American Airlines, operator of American 77, reported the loss of its B-757 at the Pentagon.

Just as they had all those pictures of Atta and others at ATM, going through the airport,at motels and car rental agencies, and god knows where else,...

You might remember that Atta was the pilot who flew American 11 into WTC1.

... they would have had pictures of a Boeing striking the Pentagon, a very heavily monitored federal building bristling with cameras, as you have shown here.

They had the report from American Airlines, eyewitness accounts, and radar data in addition to this video.

757_pentagon.gif

It was a hoax, a false flag, and that's why there are no pictures.

The above imagery proved you wrong again! :yes: Needless to say, people have indicated that they are hip to your deceptive nature and practices regarding 911. :yes:

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It blows my mind that so many people cannot see with there own eyes and logic,that THe Aircraft Did all this damage. You know something ? Im done posting on here . Too many Idiots ! :tu:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.