#Login Register


  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
Home 


CCTV shows explosion at the Pentagon - 9/11. No Plane
01-10-2013, 07:33 PM #1
Ghost of 51:50 Member
Posts:285 Threads:58 Joined:Nov 2012




damned.gif

Website: http://www.666themark.com

Blog #1 - The Dream State
http://the-dream-state.blogspot.com/

Blog #2 - RFID and You!
http://rfid-and-you.blogspot.com/
01-10-2013, 08:01 PM #2
Accidental Stoner Member
Posts:8,927 Threads:71 Joined:Feb 2011

A wee bit too late, maybe...
01-11-2013, 01:14 AM #3
オタマジャクシ Member
Posts:1,310 Threads:32 Joined:Nov 2012
Well the problem is the plane came in at about a 60 degree angle to the camera behind the berm of the roadway. Since it took out the light poles on it's way in - which are too low to be seen over the berm - it came in from the right and was below the berm when it came into frame. The most that might be seen is a glint of the top of the tail. The tail is 16 ft taller than the rest of the plane, and may have been visible off to the right were there no obstructions.

None of the plane would ever have been visible in the boxed area in the center of the frame.
01-11-2013, 02:00 AM #4
Ghost of 51:50 Member
Posts:285 Threads:58 Joined:Nov 2012
(01-11-2013, 01:14 AM)オタマジャクシ Wrote:  Well the problem is the plane came in at about a 60 degree angle to the camera behind the berm of the roadway. Since it took out the light poles on it's way in - which are too low to be seen over the berm - it came in from the right and was below the berm when it came into frame. The most that might be seen is a glint of the top of the tail. The tail is 16 ft taller than the rest of the plane, and may have been visible off to the right were there no obstructions.

None of the plane would ever have been visible in the boxed area in the center of the frame.


If there was a plane, then why did it take a law suit to get this video.


Website: http://www.666themark.com

Blog #1 - The Dream State
http://the-dream-state.blogspot.com/

Blog #2 - RFID and You!
http://rfid-and-you.blogspot.com/
01-11-2013, 02:50 AM #5
オタマジャクシ Member
Posts:1,310 Threads:32 Joined:Nov 2012
(01-11-2013, 02:00 AM)Ghost of 51:50 Wrote:  
(01-11-2013, 01:14 AM)オタマジャクシ Wrote:  Well the problem is the plane came in at about a 60 degree angle to the camera behind the berm of the roadway. Since it took out the light poles on it's way in - which are too low to be seen over the berm - it came in from the right and was below the berm when it came into frame. The most that might be seen is a glint of the top of the tail. The tail is 16 ft taller than the rest of the plane, and may have been visible off to the right were there no obstructions.

None of the plane would ever have been visible in the boxed area in the center of the frame.


If there was a plane, then why did it take a law suit to get this video.


Beats me.



The actual video is so low quality that it is hard to tell if you would see anything, the video tape skips, the camera shakes, the area beyond the road is horribly out of focus, and only one frame could have captured an aircraft at 513 ft. per second. The road is straight - so the camera has a fisheye effect that distorts everything.

Since it is pretty obvious that a 757 aircraft hit the Pentagon (the engine parts were from an RB211), why is it so important to ignore or discredit obvious facts?

What is the end game? What is the importance of this conspiracy? What does this belief buy you?

If you explain this theory to an engineer - he will listen intently for about a minute and then start giving you that patient expression people have when listening to a small, excited, and somewhat retarded child.

Occam's razor tells us that the terrorists did it. Murphy's law tells us the conspiracy explanation never happened. It is too complicated, defies too many facts and laws of physics, requires too many things to happen perfectly, assumes that Americans would willingly slaughter thousands of their countrymen, and posits that thousands of people can keep a secret.

01-11-2013, 03:27 AM #6
Shadow Mrs. Buckwheat
Posts:12,782 Threads:1,182 Joined:Feb 2011
So a 757 can bring down a twin tower but another 757 doesn't break the windows within 10' of the impact site? Interesting.
01-11-2013, 04:20 AM #7
オタマジャクシ Member
Posts:1,310 Threads:32 Joined:Nov 2012
(01-11-2013, 03:27 AM)Shadow Wrote:  So a 757 can bring down a twin tower but another 757 doesn't break the windows within 10' of the impact site? Interesting.


http://www.rue89.com/files/2002_02_03_11...rmance.pdf
"Very few upgraded windows installed during the renovation broke during the impact and deflagration of aircraft fuel."

The upgraded windows of 2 inch thick bullet proof glass survived the impact, many of the windows that were not replaced did not. The fire and the fire response broke some of the upgraded windows.

And the towers were struck at about 600 mph by 767s (a larger, heavier plane) instead of a 757 which is about 2/3rds the size travelling at 350 mph with less than 1/4 the impact energy.
01-11-2013, 04:23 AM #8
Ghost of 51:50 Member
Posts:285 Threads:58 Joined:Nov 2012
(01-11-2013, 02:50 AM)オタマジャクシ Wrote:  
(01-11-2013, 02:00 AM)Ghost of 51:50 Wrote:  
(01-11-2013, 01:14 AM)オタマジャクシ Wrote:  Well the problem is the plane came in at about a 60 degree angle to the camera behind the berm of the roadway. Since it took out the light poles on it's way in - which are too low to be seen over the berm - it came in from the right and was below the berm when it came into frame. The most that might be seen is a glint of the top of the tail. The tail is 16 ft taller than the rest of the plane, and may have been visible off to the right were there no obstructions.

None of the plane would ever have been visible in the boxed area in the center of the frame.


If there was a plane, then why did it take a law suit to get this video.


Beats me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vq7Een-tx3s

The actual video is so low quality that it is hard to tell if you would see anything, the video tape skips, the camera shakes, the area beyond the road is horribly out of focus, and only one frame could have captured an aircraft at 513 ft. per second. The road is straight - so the camera has a fisheye effect that distorts everything.

Since it is pretty obvious that a 757 aircraft hit the Pentagon (the engine parts were from an RB211), why is it so important to ignore or discredit obvious facts?

What is the end game? What is the importance of this conspiracy? What does this belief buy you?

If you explain this theory to an engineer - he will listen intently for about a minute and then start giving you that patient expression people have when listening to a small, excited, and somewhat retarded child.

Occam's razor tells us that the terrorists did it. Murphy's law tells us the conspiracy explanation never happened. It is too complicated, defies too many facts and laws of physics, requires too many things to happen perfectly, assumes that Americans would willingly slaughter thousands of their countrymen, and posits that thousands of people can keep a secret.


You just lost all crediblity with me.


Website: http://www.666themark.com

Blog #1 - The Dream State
http://the-dream-state.blogspot.com/

Blog #2 - RFID and You!
http://rfid-and-you.blogspot.com/
01-11-2013, 04:34 AM #9
Shadow Mrs. Buckwheat
Posts:12,782 Threads:1,182 Joined:Feb 2011
(01-11-2013, 04:20 AM)オタマジャクシ Wrote:  http://www.rue89.com/files/2002_02_03_11...rmance.pdf
"Very few upgraded windows installed during the renovation broke during the impact and deflagration of aircraft fuel."

The upgraded windows of 2 inch thick bullet proof glass survived the impact, many of the windows that were not replaced did not. The fire and the fire response broke some of the upgraded windows.

And the towers were struck at about 600 mph by 767s (a larger, heavier plane) instead of a 757 which is about 2/3rds the size travelling at 350 mph.


okay. cheers.gif
01-11-2013, 04:41 AM #10
オタマジャクシ Member
Posts:1,310 Threads:32 Joined:Nov 2012
(01-11-2013, 04:23 AM)Ghost of 51:50 Wrote:  
(01-11-2013, 02:50 AM)オタマジャクシ Wrote:  
(01-11-2013, 02:00 AM)Ghost of 51:50 Wrote:  
(01-11-2013, 01:14 AM)オタマジャクシ Wrote:  Well the problem is the plane came in at about a 60 degree angle to the camera behind the berm of the roadway. Since it took out the light poles on it's way in - which are too low to be seen over the berm - it came in from the right and was below the berm when it came into frame. The most that might be seen is a glint of the top of the tail. The tail is 16 ft taller than the rest of the plane, and may have been visible off to the right were there no obstructions.

None of the plane would ever have been visible in the boxed area in the center of the frame.


If there was a plane, then why did it take a law suit to get this video.


Beats me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vq7Een-tx3s

The actual video is so low quality that it is hard to tell if you would see anything, the video tape skips, the camera shakes, the area beyond the road is horribly out of focus, and only one frame could have captured an aircraft at 513 ft. per second. The road is straight - so the camera has a fisheye effect that distorts everything.

Since it is pretty obvious that a 757 aircraft hit the Pentagon (the engine parts were from an RB211), why is it so important to ignore or discredit obvious facts?

What is the end game? What is the importance of this conspiracy? What does this belief buy you?

If you explain this theory to an engineer - he will listen intently for about a minute and then start giving you that patient expression people have when listening to a small, excited, and somewhat retarded child.

Occam's razor tells us that the terrorists did it. Murphy's law tells us the conspiracy explanation never happened. It is too complicated, defies too many facts and laws of physics, requires too many things to happen perfectly, assumes that Americans would willingly slaughter thousands of their countrymen, and posits that thousands of people can keep a secret.


You just lost all crediblity with me.


I've been out there. Before and after 9/11. All the Marine Corp Marathons pre 9/11 started in the parking lot next to that grassy area just spitting distance from the Pentagon walls. I am somewhat familiar with the area.

Again, I don't understand what the significance of this conspiracy is. The adherents are difficult or impossible to reason with. The 9/11 truthers approach this with the fanaticism of a cult and I don't understand that sort of tunnel vision belief system.

What is the end game? What is the importance of this conspiracy? What does this belief buy you?

I am sorry I can't side with you. I process facts and go where the facts lead me.
01-11-2013, 04:50 AM #11
Shadow Mrs. Buckwheat
Posts:12,782 Threads:1,182 Joined:Feb 2011
(01-11-2013, 04:41 AM)オタマジャクシ Wrote:  I've been out there. Before and after 9/11. All the Marine Corp Marathons pre 9/11 started in the parking lot next to that grassy area just spitting distance from the Pentagon walls. I am somewhat familiar with the area.


You seem pretty exact in answering questions so here's a couple:

What about
All the put options on AA in the week before?
The $2.3 trillion missing from the Pentagon announced by Rummy Sep 10?
NORAD shut down?
Jets from Bolling AFB not scrambing for hours?
Bush continuing to sit reading 'my pet goat' for 20 minutes after being informed the US was under attack?
At least nine of the hijackers still alive?
Pancake collapse of three WTCs?

Building 7

01-11-2013, 04:58 AM #12
オタマジャクシ Member
Posts:1,310 Threads:32 Joined:Nov 2012
(01-11-2013, 04:50 AM)Shadow Wrote:  
(01-11-2013, 04:41 AM)オタマジャクシ Wrote:  I've been out there. Before and after 9/11. All the Marine Corp Marathons pre 9/11 started in the parking lot next to that grassy area just spitting distance from the Pentagon walls. I am somewhat familiar with the area.


You seem pretty exact in answering questions so here's a couple:

What about
All the put options on AA in the week before?
The $2.3 trillion missing from the Pentagon announced by Rummy Sep 10?
NORAD shut down?
Jets from Bolling AFB not scrambing for hours?
Bush continuing to sit reading 'my pet goat' for 20 minutes after being informed the US was under attack?
At least nine of the hijackers still alive?
Pancake collapse of three WTCs?

Building 7

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD06SAf0p9A


That's a shopping list. Some of the questions aren't physics related so I can't answer without research. Some of the others are incorrect but I need to find a supporting link.
The towers and WTC7 I've responded to and I'll gather that stuff up.

The one I can answer now:
"Bush continuing to sit reading 'my pet goat' for 20 minutes after being informed the US was under attack? "
That was the best use of his abilities.
01-11-2013, 05:17 AM #13
Shadow Mrs. Buckwheat
Posts:12,782 Threads:1,182 Joined:Feb 2011
(01-11-2013, 04:58 AM)オタマジャクシ Wrote:  That's a shopping list. Some of the questions aren't physics related so I can't answer without research. Some of the others are incorrect but I need to find a supporting link.
The towers and WTC7 I've responded to and I'll gather that stuff up.

The one I can answer now:
"Bush continuing to sit reading 'my pet goat' for 20 minutes after being informed the US was under attack? "
That was the best use of his abilities.


chuckle.gif True enough, but either his handlers knew the POTUS wasn't under attack or didn't care. He said he saw the first plane hit the North tower.



I agree with you in one sense, he was being fed footage of the N tower and sent into a classroom to read 'My Pet Goat' simply because they couldn't trust him to not talk.
01-11-2013, 06:00 AM #14
Ghost of 51:50 Member
Posts:285 Threads:58 Joined:Nov 2012
(01-11-2013, 04:41 AM)オタマジャクシ Wrote:  
(01-11-2013, 04:23 AM)Ghost of 51:50 Wrote:  
(01-11-2013, 02:50 AM)オタマジャクシ Wrote:  
(01-11-2013, 02:00 AM)Ghost of 51:50 Wrote:  
(01-11-2013, 01:14 AM)オタマジャクシ Wrote:  Well the problem is the plane came in at about a 60 degree angle to the camera behind the berm of the roadway. Since it took out the light poles on it's way in - which are too low to be seen over the berm - it came in from the right and was below the berm when it came into frame. The most that might be seen is a glint of the top of the tail. The tail is 16 ft taller than the rest of the plane, and may have been visible off to the right were there no obstructions.

None of the plane would ever have been visible in the boxed area in the center of the frame.


If there was a plane, then why did it take a law suit to get this video.


Beats me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vq7Een-tx3s

The actual video is so low quality that it is hard to tell if you would see anything, the video tape skips, the camera shakes, the area beyond the road is horribly out of focus, and only one frame could have captured an aircraft at 513 ft. per second. The road is straight - so the camera has a fisheye effect that distorts everything.

Since it is pretty obvious that a 757 aircraft hit the Pentagon (the engine parts were from an RB211), why is it so important to ignore or discredit obvious facts?

What is the end game? What is the importance of this conspiracy? What does this belief buy you?

If you explain this theory to an engineer - he will listen intently for about a minute and then start giving you that patient expression people have when listening to a small, excited, and somewhat retarded child.

Occam's razor tells us that the terrorists did it. Murphy's law tells us the conspiracy explanation never happened. It is too complicated, defies too many facts and laws of physics, requires too many things to happen perfectly, assumes that Americans would willingly slaughter thousands of their countrymen, and posits that thousands of people can keep a secret.


You just lost all crediblity with me.


I've been out there. Before and after 9/11. All the Marine Corp Marathons pre 9/11 started in the parking lot next to that grassy area just spitting distance from the Pentagon walls. I am somewhat familiar with the area.

Again, I don't understand what the significance of this conspiracy is. The adherents are difficult or impossible to reason with. The 9/11 truthers approach this with the fanaticism of a cult and I don't understand that sort of tunnel vision belief system.

What is the end game? What is the importance of this conspiracy? What does this belief buy you?

I am sorry I can't side with you. I process facts and go where the facts lead me.


No. I have a mentally challenged niece and you used a not so nice name for them.


Website: http://www.666themark.com

Blog #1 - The Dream State
http://the-dream-state.blogspot.com/

Blog #2 - RFID and You!
http://rfid-and-you.blogspot.com/
01-11-2013, 06:51 AM #15
オタマジャクシ Member
Posts:1,310 Threads:32 Joined:Nov 2012
(01-11-2013, 06:00 AM)Ghost of 51:50 Wrote:  
(01-11-2013, 04:41 AM)オタマジャクシ Wrote:  
(01-11-2013, 04:23 AM)Ghost of 51:50 Wrote:  
(01-11-2013, 02:50 AM)オタマジャクシ Wrote:  
(01-11-2013, 02:00 AM)Ghost of 51:50 Wrote:  If there was a plane, then why did it take a law suit to get this video.


Beats me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vq7Een-tx3s

The actual video is so low quality that it is hard to tell if you would see anything, the video tape skips, the camera shakes, the area beyond the road is horribly out of focus, and only one frame could have captured an aircraft at 513 ft. per second. The road is straight - so the camera has a fisheye effect that distorts everything.

Since it is pretty obvious that a 757 aircraft hit the Pentagon (the engine parts were from an RB211), why is it so important to ignore or discredit obvious facts?

What is the end game? What is the importance of this conspiracy? What does this belief buy you?

If you explain this theory to an engineer - he will listen intently for about a minute and then start giving you that patient expression people have when listening to a small, excited, and somewhat retarded child.

Occam's razor tells us that the terrorists did it. Murphy's law tells us the conspiracy explanation never happened. It is too complicated, defies too many facts and laws of physics, requires too many things to happen perfectly, assumes that Americans would willingly slaughter thousands of their countrymen, and posits that thousands of people can keep a secret.


You just lost all crediblity with me.


I've been out there. Before and after 9/11. All the Marine Corp Marathons pre 9/11 started in the parking lot next to that grassy area just spitting distance from the Pentagon walls. I am somewhat familiar with the area.

Again, I don't understand what the significance of this conspiracy is. The adherents are difficult or impossible to reason with. The 9/11 truthers approach this with the fanaticism of a cult and I don't understand that sort of tunnel vision belief system.

What is the end game? What is the importance of this conspiracy? What does this belief buy you?

I am sorry I can't side with you. I process facts and go where the facts lead me.


No. I have a mentally challenged niece and you used a not so nice name for them.


Sorry about that. I was not trying to offend you. The term gets thrown around in in connection with JR Moore aficionados, followers of Ron Paul, believers in Nibiru, fans of Obama, etc. etc. and it isn't hard to forget that it offends some people.



Home 




 



DISCLAIMER / Terms of Service (TOS):
Kritterbox.com - Socialize anonymously, commentary, discussion, oddities, technology, music and more!  This website is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. kritterbox.com shall not be liable for any damages whatsoever, including, without limitation, those resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether or not advised of the possibility of damage, and on any theory of liability, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of this site or other documents which are referenced by or linked to this site.
This website exists solely for the purposes of exchange of information, communication and general entertainment. Opinions from posters are in no way endorsed by kritterbox.com. All posts on this website are the opinion of the authors and are not to be taken as statements of fact on behalf of kritterbox.com. This site may contain coarse language or other material that kritterbox.com is in no way responsible for. Material deemed to be offensive or pornographic at the discretion of kritterbox.com shall be removed. kritterbox.com reserves the right to modify, or remove posts and user accounts on this website at our discretion. kritterbox.com disclaims all liability for damages incurred directly or indirectly as a result of any material on this website. Fictitious posts and any similarity to any person living or dead is coincidental.
All users shall limit the insertion of any and all copyrighted material to portions of the article that are relevant to the point being made, with no more than 50%, and preferably less of the original source material. A link shall be visible in text format, embedded directly to the original source material without exception.
No third party links, i.e. blogs or forums will be accepted under any circumstances, and will be edited by staff in order to reflect the original source of copyrighted material, or be removed at the sole discretion of kritterbox.com.
Fair Use Notice:
This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Users may make such material available in an effort to advance awareness and understanding of issues relating to economics, individual rights, international affairs, liberty, science, and technology. This constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C.Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for educational and/or research purposes.
This Disclaimer is subject to change at any time at our discretion.
Copyright © 2011 - 2017 kritterbox.com