911 Case Study: Pentagon Flight 77

coz2112 Says:

Dec 5, 2008 - wake is right. If the FDR data showed the SoC path you'd be considering it proof and throwing it in peoples faces. -kran- The FDR data does show a SoC path. hello

coz2112 Says:

Dec 5, 2008 - its over. you have no physical evidence. only witness testimony.

CitizenSkuII Says:

Dec 5, 2008 - It dick time jizz, get on with it.

wakenbake22 Says:

Dec 5, 2008 - There is suddenly no radar data just before the crash? And instead of going south of Citgo, NORAD data just made crap up? Let me guess, the NORAD animation thought the poles were down north of Citgo, so it drew the line to match?

wakenbake22 Says:

Dec 5, 2008 - z3. invisionfree. com/CIT/index. php?showtopic=445&st=0 The cab. Pole 1. Cab travelling at 40 mph, pole flips up, spears his cab, he brakes, spinning his car into the middle of the highway. No witnesses behind him see this, no one crashes into him. No one stuck in traffic sees it, or the pole in the cab. The front of the cab is away from the Pentagon. The pole is about 30 ft long. It would've been sticking over the bridge. The bottom heavier than the top.

jizzmonger Says:

Dec 5, 2008 - "There is suddenly no radar data just before the crash?" ~Wake~ So both you and Kranstard both are totally obvlivious as to how you would determine the location of the plane using FDR data. And now we come to find out that Wakentoke doesn't realize that Radar has sampling intervals.

wakenbake22 Says:

Dec 5, 2008 - ASCE report says the right wing hits the generator. There is barely damage to the building from the right wing right of the engine. Also no fire on that side of the damage. The left engine is said to hit column 11. Mostly in the ground at impact, it completely destroys this column and wall, from ground to the 2nd floor slab. 20 ft left of this is also totally destroyed. As is 20 ft to the right. The right wing doesn't destroy the building.

CitizenSkuII Says:

Dec 5, 2008 - Just compare the back fin to the footage and it's from an AGM-86 cruise missile, not flight 77 The tail height of Boeing 757 is 45 feet The Pentagon height is 77 feet In the two Pentagon vids, the tail height in comparison to the Pentagon is not even close to being tall enough to be from a Boeing 757 Case closed.

CitizenSkuII Says:

Dec 5, 2008 - When examining all the vids of the Pentagon crash, it's beyond dispute that it was an AGM-86 cruise missile that struck the Pentagon on 911. w w w . exodus2006 . com/missile2 . htm

wakenbake22 Says:

Dec 5, 2008 - The right wing flips pole one, pushes pole 3, dents and pushes the generator, but doesn't break off at any point, doesn't break and spill fuel. Then it doesn't seem to touch the building beyond the right engine, and only damages 30 ft of the first floor. But the left wing is dragging in the dirt (to fit the right wing to the gen damage), then the engine is underground at moment of impact (to "fit" a 757 to the damage), so why does the left wing do more damage?

CitizenSkuII Says:

Dec 5, 2008 - If the tail was from a Boeing 757 it would be over half the height of the Pentagon. The vid clearly shows it barely a 1/4 of the height.

CitizenSkuII Says:

Dec 5, 2008 - w w w . debunk911myths . org/t/images/8/82/Pentagon_lan ding_gear . jpg That is a pix of debris that was placed there. FACT FACT FACT Planted parts is the name of their game!!!!

wakenbake22 Says:

Dec 5, 2008 - How thick is the left wing? How tall is the first floor? If the engines are inches off the ground and level like this cartoon, where do the wings hit? 8 feet off the ground? How high are the tips of the wings? the damage doesn't match the wings of a 757. There should be massive holes from the engines, and less from the wings themselves. 50 feet, from column 13 to 8 missing from left wing. No difference from the engine and the farthest point left on the wing? WTF?

jizzmonger Says:

Dec 5, 2008 - LOL! Wake and Kranski are both totally clueless as to how to use FDR data to determine a Flight path. You aren't getting a new investigation because you are unable to stand side by side with experts in the field. You both sound like blathering idiots.

CitizenSkuII Says:

Dec 5, 2008 - jizzmonger = idiotTard

TeleCumber Says:

Dec 5, 2008 - It's ridiculous to think 5 poles were knocked down and the wings weren't ripped to shreds, and leaving pieces of wing all over the lawn. Do we have a comparison? The learjet on route to pick up Bush snr, hit 1 smaller light pole, which left the top section of the light dangling, and completely sliced the whole wing off.

CitizenSkuII Says:

Dec 5, 2008 - Anyone that sees a plane hitting the Pentagon in any of these vids is mind-controlled by Mass hypnotism and brainwashing of the Media. jizz is this.

TeleCumber Says:

Dec 5, 2008 - "You aren't getting a new investigation because you are unable to stand side by side with experts in the field. " ~jizzmonger The experts in the field of aviation are the ones who see the obvious problem with the FDR data. They take into account discrepencies and calibration. Oh do you mean "experts" on the government payroll?

CitizenSkuII Says:

Dec 5, 2008 - An expert to jizz is anyone that agrees with him, like the bums that ass ream him in the public toilets for .50 cents,, they agree with him so he calls them experts.

wakenbake22 Says:

Dec 5, 2008 - kolumbus. fi/sy-k/pentagon/asce_en. htm More proof, from an expert, that shows a 757 doesnt fit the damage. And jizz, I keep talking about the NORAD animation, then you ask questions about the FDR. Nonsense. See pilotsfor911truth for answers to your questions about the FDR.

CitizenSkuII Says:

Dec 5, 2008 - The last expert jizz encountered was at the glory hole as the hobos flipped dimes over the stall to him.

jizzmonger Says:

Dec 5, 2008 - "And jizz, I keep talking about the NORAD animation, then you ask questions about the" ~Waketard~ The NORAD animation is based off Radar which only takes a sample every few seconds. Radar also does not allow a huge degree of accuracy in pinpointing the Plane's exact location. So NOC or SOC based on FDR or RADAR is totally irrelevant because neither methods are accurate enough to make that determination. Discuss.

jizzmonger Says:

Dec 5, 2008 - Pilots for 911 Truth links to Scholars for 911 in which Jim Fetzer states that he thinks the pieces of fuselage that were found on the lawn were dropped from the C130 that was circling overhead after the crash. Do you agree with that speculation Wakentoke?

TeleCumber Says:

Dec 5, 2008 - I guess the only thing on the pilots for truth website is a giant link in the middle of the screen to Jimmy Fetzer. Is that how it is, jizzle?

jizzmonger Says:

Dec 5, 2008 - "I guess the only thing on the pilots for truth website is a giant link in the middle of the screen to Jimmy Fetzer." ~Teledumbshit~ It says loads about the credibility of the organization. In short, they have none.