Quoted: Going by some of the images on that little Flash movie, the hole in the side of the Pentagon shows no sign of the wings or engine even hitting the wall. And it is pretty weird how the "thing sheet metal" frame of the plane penetrates (was it) three rings? The Pentagin is a fricking fortess.

I didn't say it wouldn't damage the building.  What I was trying to explain is that no big pieces, except the engine cores and major landing gear components, would remain fairly intact.  Those pieces would be carried deeper into the building.

I can explain it, but I can't force anyone to believe this.

(I've been working with large aircraft since 1978).

Whats the agenda ? - we KNOW FOR A FACT that the world trade center were hit by planes . . . So why run a missle into the pentagon ? Are the unrelated ? Is the plane that crashed into the middle of a valley that same day unrelated ?  

This crap cracks me up -

What was to gain ? Why would the goverment do this ?

Oh yeah ! thats right ! I remeber - Bush hired those terriost to fly into the WTC - How could I forget ?
Yeah he likes killing nearly 5000 american people

why ? just to "go to iraq" - or to get "re-ellected" ?

This is stupid - I wonder if someone here can come up with ONE GOOD REASON as to why "they" would do this -

Another interesting thing . . . why do tin hatters always want to "uncover video" ? - There was be ALOT of airline radar picking up on a military plane - Usally that stuff is recorded -
The FBI took that to ? - Oh - it must have been a new stealth fighter . . . . .


ETA: Ponder this for a second - What if you slammed a grey hound bus into the side of a building at 400ish mph ? some of it would dissenegrate into TINY peices - things of Mass (engine - transmission) Would probably keep going - and cause the most damage - So Next STEP: Poneder this - What if you slammed a V-8 engine into the side of a building at let's say 200MPH - Its going to go through the wall like a bullet and keep going -
Basically the same thing, just on a bigger scale . . . .

Snopes

The notion that the Pentagon was not  damaged by terrorists who hijacked American Airlines Flight 77 (a Boeing 757) and crashed it into the military office complex, but that the whole affair was staged by the U.S. government, has been promulgated by French author Thierry Meyssan in his book, The Frightening Fraud. Meyssan offers no real explanation for what did cause the extensive damage to the Pentagon, asserting only that Flight 77 did not exist, no plane crashed into the Pentagon, and that "the American government is lying."

Fuckin Frenchman... go figure.

It's amazing what lengths people will go to in order to try to subvert the stability of this country.

Quoted: Quoted: The most substantial parts of an aircraft are the landing gear and engines.  Having a fair amount of mass, they'd be propelled farther into the building by their momentum while the airframe disintegrates into bitty pieces. Nothing magical here. Going by some of the images on that little Flash movie, the hole in the side of the Pentagon shows no sign of the wings or engine even hitting the wall. And it is pretty weird how the "thing sheet metal" frame of the plane penetrates (was it) three rings? The Pentagin is a fricking fortess.

ETA: CAN SOMEONE PLEASE TACK THIS POST, PLEASE.

Stuttering fools.....  say you take a long tube, like an airliner full of luggage, people and parts.....and then compress the tube VERY rapidly, it gets VERY dense, making penetration possible.



Link to story WITH IMAGES
Another
ANOTHER again!!!!
More ACTUAL FACTUAL info

After reading the Snopes thing and phatmax's

Stuttering fools..... say you take a long tube, like an airliner full of luggage, people and parts.....and then compress the tube VERY rapidly, it gets VERY dense, making penetration possible.

it certainly makes more sense. I wasn't saying I believe the tin-foil hat bs... just didn't fully understand the physics and science behind the damage. That's the joy of the inertweb and this site... it's so easy to debunk BS like this nowadays.

Quoted: Snopes The notion that the Pentagon was not  damaged by terrorists who hijacked American Airlines Flight 77 (a Boeing 757) and crashed it into the military office complex, but that the whole affair was staged by the U.S. government, has been promulgated by French author Thierry Meyssan in his book, The Frightening Fraud. Meyssan offers no real explanation for what did cause the extensive damage to the Pentagon, asserting only that Flight 77 did not exist, no plane crashed into the Pentagon, and that "the American government is lying." Fuckin Frenchman... go figure. It's amazing what lengths people will go to in order to try to subvert the stability of this country.

Please tell that to the DC families who had their children on that plane (some kind of school trip).

I've said it before, and I'll say it again here. A Boeing 727 is around 150,000 pounds dry weight (i think, its been a few years). So we can assume that a 757 is greater than that. Add fuel (a lot of fuel), passengers, luggage, etc, accelerate to around 500 miles per hour and impact a solid reinforced concrete stucture. That much energy transfer is going to reduce that great big aluminum airplane into itty bitty pieces, most of which will incinerate in the ensuing fireball/inferno/hellstorm.

Aircraft are not as durable as some people think.

Johnathan

Quoted: I've said it before, and I'll say it again here. A Boeing 727 is around 150,000 pounds dry weight (i think, its been a few years). So we can assume that a 757 is greater than that. Johnathan

Boeing 727 Wingspan  108 feet (32.91 m)   Length  153 feet 2 inches (46.69 m)   Tail Height  34 feet (10.36 m)   Gross Maximum Taxi Weight  Standard: 191,000 pounds (86,600 kg) Optional: 210,000 pounds (95,300 kg) Power  Three Pratt & Whitney JT8D turbofans: -15 rated at 15,500 pounds thrust -17 rated at 16,000 pounds thrust -17R rated at 17,400 pounds thrust   Cruising Speed  570 to 605 mph (890 to 965 km/h)   Cruising Altitude  30,000 to 40,000 feet (9,144 to 12,192 m)   Range  1,500 to 2,500 miles (2,750 to 4,020 km)   Passenger Capacity  148 to 189   Fuel  8,186 U.S. gallons (31,000 L) standard at lower gross weights 9,806 U.S. gallons (37,020 L) standard for 208,000 pounds

Boeing 757 Specifications Length   155 feet 3 inches (47.3 m)   Wingspan  124 feet 10 inches (38.0 m) Tail height  44 feet 6 inches (13.6 m)   Engines  Pratt & Whitney PW2000 Maximum takeoff weight  220,000 pounds (99,790 kg) Fuel capacity  11,526 U.S. gallons (43,625 L) Maximum range  3,950 nautical miles; 4,550 statute miles; 7,315 kilometers Altitude capability  39,000 feet (11,885 m) Cruise speed  Mach 0.80

Quoted: img385.imageshack.us/img385/6372/pentstrike31fd.gif

hmmm

something about a picture and 1000 words......



TXL

From http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911_pentagon_757_plane_evidence.html

60+ bodies, matching the passenger list and flight crew roster identified and returned to families from Pentagon wreckage

 Good enough evidence for me!  

There is a difference in dry weight (no fuel) and max take off weight.

Quoted: Quoted: Is anybody stupid enough to believe this sh*t? A whole lot of folks.  A goodly number of them gun owners.

Go play with a cement mixer.

Back to the topic at hand - that' silly.
A plane hit the pentagon. Period.
A plane also hit the WTC towers in NYC. Period.
WTC building Number 7 collapsed as a result of the 2 towers collapse. Period.
A hijacked plane went down in rural PA. Period.

Quoted: Anyone that doubts a commercial airliner hit the Pentagon is either frighteningly misinformed or ignorant of the facts, incredibly stupid, or an enemy of the United States with an agenda. Can't really think of any other possibilities

You left out poopyhead.