T1B

First, if the "757" skidded or in any way impacted the ground, it certainly wouldn't have entered and disappeared completely in a clean piercing hole. It would have immediately broken up--huge pieces of a 757 would be strewn upon the pentagon lawn. But there was NOTHING. The very few shards of fuselage which were photographed were easily distributed and collected. There was after all only two or three--and they were small enough to be hand carried.

But, have you considered this utterly bizarre clean up priority?

Whatever was under this tarp was hauled off quicker than a heckler at an AIPAC conference.


And like every single item, video, etc., has been permanently sealed.

But the crater would be necessary--and was in fact claimed to have been seen by a witness cited in the 9/11 Commission report--because the entry hole is on the very first floor--ground level. the engines would have had to have dug in. But of course this is all academic, as of course it wasn't a 757 at all. And you know it. And yet you offer such muffled mouthings as this...

"The engines most likely broke up through the wings"?

Huh? L-seater, you're claiming that these engines ran into a steel-reinforced wall at 400-mph and didn't leave a scratch. And that they apparently atomized leaving absolutely no evidence of any Rolls-Royce RB211 engine.

How the fuck do you continue in this charade?

Thanks for posting the pic that proves my point that the RB211 isn't a huge engine.

This on the other hand is a pretty big engine.

LTS wrote: But the crater would be necessary--and was in fact claimed to have been seen by a witness cited in the 9/11 Commission report--because the entry hole is on the very first floor--ground level. the engines would have had to have dug in.

Wrong. The engines wouldn't have dug in. They would have broken off their attachment points or been forced up thru the wing while still traveling forward with the rest of the fuselage. See the Asiana 214 crash. Also note this plane was in its landing configuration and going hundreds of knots slower.



See also the Continental 737 crash in Denver a few years ago. Notice the number one engine also broke free, while the number 2 forced the pylon up thru the leading edge of the wing.





Also notice how much of the fuselage burned quickly away despite this accident happening on an airport.



Then finally notice how there isn't a crater, just a few marks on the ground as the fuselage slid along the ground.

LTS wrote:And that they apparently atomized leaving absolutely no evidence of any Rolls-Royce RB211 engine.

As I said before the engines are one of the few parts that wont burn. See the photo Killian posted to see part of the engine laying on top of the debris pile. Also shown in the same photo are part of the gear.


Why don't you please show us a photo of any other plane crash where the plane was traveling at a high rate of speed, while descending under 300 ft per minute, that left a large crater. Go ahead, we will wait.

That sure is a big engine.

We notice that the examples you provide of crashed airliners all contain clear evidence of an actual crashed jet aircraft.

So...where did "filight 77" go? How come there's no similar pics of...you know, an actual crashed jet?

Tell us again how an ENTIRE 757 was sucked into the small hole and shot through three rings of the pentagon without leaving anything on the lawn? What's up with that?

By the way... how is everyone enjoying my troll ?













Don't feel bad... I'm simply smarter than you

Why don't you please show us a photo of any other plane crash where the plane was traveling at a high rate of speed, while descending under 300 ft per minute, that left a large crater. Go ahead, we will wait.

Left Seater wrote:Why don't you please show us a photo of any other plane crash where the plane was traveling at a high rate of speed, while descending under 300 ft per minute, that left a large crater. Go ahead, we will wait.

Are you talking to me... ?



I'm still on the phone talking to my boy... "Harvard grad" John Coiner... and trying to convince Alli (Duke) and Bryan (Oxford)

to shut the fuck up !

To the local media... in College Station !








We've got something working here... where we work just a couple months a year... and now they're going to find out !!!

M2 wrote:

Left Seater wrote:Why don't you please show us a photo of any other plane crash where the plane was traveling at a high rate of speed, while descending under 300 ft per minute, that left a large crater. Go ahead, we will wait.

Are you talking to me... ?

No, asshole, I'm telling you you're tedious wadness is done.

You've really no idea..

fuck you :wink:

LTS TRN 2 wrote:
fuck you :wink:

no, fuck you !


Bwhahahahahahaha

Really?

LTS TRN 2 wrote:Really?

yeah,,, timmy and co...

the good ole days... sup Renfaire posse

Left Seater wrote: I don't know why the government would seal said tapes.

At least you finally admit it is evidence of guilt. That was like pulling teeth.

Did the government have a hand in the JFK assassination? Seeing as how there are still documents sealed (to be released in 2017), that must implicate the government in some sort of involvement or cover up, right?

The rule applies to any situation. This is a concept my 9 yo understands btw.

Exactly right.

And as with the JFK coverup, indeed the government--in some capacity, whether a particular agency or sub-group--is highly suspect.

For our part, while we can responsibly attribute neither blame nor motive, we can, as with the palsied 9/11 Commission report, demonstrate that the official story does not withstand basic scrutiny--on many levels.

This is called Responsible Agnosticism.

Those who are clinging to the official story--and this means nothing more than issuing auto-smears to anyone questioning the official story, while offering nothing to support it, don't even have a name, historically, except perhaps Ignorant Bigot, or Cowardly Fool.

Moving Sale wrote:The rule applies to any situation. This is a concept my 9 yo understands btw.

So the government is going to release the rest of the sealed documents in 2017 and implicate themselves in the perhaps the most high profile murder of all time?

You're not really good at the whole "thinking things through" thing, are you? Must be why your a public defender.

I never said it was proof I said it was evidence of guilt. You are not very good at reading are you? That must be why you suck dicks on the street corner for a living.

You forgot black, tiny. And where did I say proof, you stupid bigot?

Main Entry: im·pli·cate
Pronunciation: \ˈim-plə-ˌkāt\
Function: transitive verb

1 : to involve as a consequence, corollary, or natural inference : imply 2 archaic : to fold or twist together : entwine 3 a : to bring into intimate or incriminating connection <evidence that implicates him in the bombing> b : to involve in the nature or operation of something

Now back to sucking dicks on the street corner for you. Zz

Now I can see why you're a public defender and not a real lawyer:

Synonyms for implicate
(verb imply, involve)

accuse affect blame charge cite embroil entangle incriminate suggest associate compromise concern connect frame hint impute

So I guess everyone of your loser clients is already proven guilty once they are accused of a crime? Short, fat and stupid is no way to go through life, son. Maybe get some lifts and hit the gym and keep telling yourself that Meatloaf was right. But you'll never be able to fix stupid.

Then why didn't you use the synonym in the first place you street corner whore?

syn·o·nym noun \ˈsi-nə-ˌnim\ : a word that has the same meaning as another word in the same language

Almost a month and that's the best you can come up with? You're not very good at this, are you?

I was just seeing how far down the rabbit hole you were willing to go. Looks like you are willing to go all the way down. If you meant something besides implicate why did you use the word implicate? Now go back to sucking cock on the street corner for nickels you stupid fucking tard.

schmick wrote:Nobody will ever convince anyone that a 757 crashed in to the Pentagon, commercial or not

LTS has some tin foil for you.

Now your parenting and coaching pproach makes more sense.

PressTV? An Iranian Website? C'mon, Sammy...

Of course it's true. As pointed out in laborious detail, there's NOT ONE part of the official story of 9/11 that stands up to basic scrutiny.

So C'mon, Trupid, what have you got? Anything whatsoever in the official story that can stand up?

Like any other publication, the articles of veterans today should be scrutinized. But certainly not dismissed out of hand.

Who....can offer ANY part of the official story that can stand basic scrutiny? You, Sam?

It is amazing how little the public knows about planes and flight.

The wings on a 757 can flex up and down (ie, bending the tip towards the sky or the ground) but are extremely ridgid and brittle on the horizontal plane. You could bring the wing tips to damn near vertical before they would fail, but a small bump by a baggage cart would put the wing and plane out of action for days. See also the horizontal stabilizer.

C'mon, willers, that's all you've got? And you're relying entirely on that (hastily arranged) stunt of running an empty lightweight F4 Phantom into a wall to prove that it's just fine that a 757--a massive airliner filled with people, luggage, gear, a kitchen, etc.--was completely swallowed into a small hole leaving no damage on the pentagon walls from the huge wings, giant engines, and towering tail section?

Have you got anything else? Because the F4 clip means nothing.

WHy do you hate physics so much?

If the lightweight (your claim) F-4 makes a hole and the lightweight (your claim) B-25 makes a hole, the heavier 757 would also make a hole?

Further the weight/ mass of the 757 is concentrated within 15 feet of the centerline.

Also, the engines on the 757 are no larger than those on the 737. Further the FAA doesn't even classify the 757-200 as a "heavy" for ATC purposes. At least use facts when spewing your tin foil crap.

Bullshit, seater, a 757 is huge. Hundreds of tons. The engines are huge. The hole was tiny. But go ahead, tell us again how the entire plane can get immediately sucked into the small hole leaving not a scratch on the walls. And not only sucked into the small hole, but then to travel through several steel-reinforced walls, leaving absolutely nothing from a 757 in the wreckage. You're either an absolute moron--or some kind of weird troll/asshole who is in some sort of denial (for whatever reason). But regardless, your fake argument is dead in the water. Whatever struck the pentagon was obviously not a 757 0r even close.

LTS TRN 2 wrote:Bullshit, seater, a 757 is huge. Hundreds of tons. The engines are huge. The hole was tiny.

No need to even read beyond this point. A 757 isn't huge and is nowhere close to hundreds of tons. In fact it's empty weight is 71 tons. You do realize that puts it in the same class and weight profile as the 737 next generation and the 727 it replaced. No one calls those planes huge.

And since this thread is all about educating you, you do understand the fuselage cross section of the 707, 727, 757 are all the same, 12' 4". Yep slightly smaller than the hole.

And if the Rolls Royce RB211 engine is so huge, why is the first stage fan diameter less than a foot larger than the CFM56 engines that power 737s?

Hell Papa, if he can't understand pictures what makes you think he is capable of understanding words?

Great, you're trying to convince yourselves that a 757 with passengers, luggage and everything else just vaporized while mysteriously boring through several steel-reinforced walls and leaving no trace of its existence. Really?

Well, perhaps then you'll be plenty ready with some similar hocus pocus in explaining why flight 93 also completely disappeared into a small hole with absolutely no trace of a 757 (much different from the provided pic, btw).

Hey, where's any sign of a 757 crash?


Here's what supposedly went into that hole..


Really?

Face it, guys, it was a massive coup upon the constitution and this country.

So far not one of you can actually state any part of the official story you can support.

So...why are you remaining in such awkward and timid denial?

As for your idiotic claims that a 757 is somehow not huge, here's exactly what it supposedly looked like



And...that airliner just completely slipped through the small hole without damaging anything else?


And let's be clear when we assert that the huge airliner passed through a small hole. Here it is..




You can wake up and be a man, or keep lying and weaseling like a fucking Israeli. It's up to you, the truth stands.

[quote="LTS TRN 2"just vaporized while mysteriously boring through several steel-reinforced walls
[/quote]


Your complete ignorance of common knowledge items shows you don't want to know the truth. The first floor of the Pentagon extended thru all the rings.

Keep lying out your ass.

It's a small hole, seater..and a very big plane...and you've got nothing.

I think we have taken enough laps on this.