[rob666]

Originally Posted by Billthegravedigger ↗

HELLO !!!!!!!!???!!!

^^^^^^^^^^

Yo..... You know your shit when it comes to this stuff, so I'm gonna ask you first.

Personally I have no doubt that a plane hit the Pentagon...... But ......The only thing I question is how the Military center of the most powerful Nation on Earth doesn't have a camera that got pics of the plane........ Any input on this?

[Billthegravedigger]

Originally Posted by rob666 ↗

^^^^^^^^^^

Yo..... You know your shit when it comes to this stuff, so I'm gonna ask you first.

Personally I have no doubt that a plane hit the Pentagon...... But ......The only thing I question is how the Military center of the most powerful Nation on Earth doesn't have a camera that got pics of the plane........ Any input on this?

As crazy as it sounds, the pentagon had a video system that takes a picture every couple of seconds. At 500 mph, the plane hit in between the pictures. On the inside of the buidling is where they kept the good cameras, continous video.

You'd think the truthers would check things out a little bit for themselves.

[Zambini]

Terminal velocity varies among objects, depending on many factors such as density, mass, projected area of the object, wind resistance etc.

There is no such thing as a universal free fall speed, but we do know the acceleration of objects is 32.18 ft/s² until drag limits it's terminal velocity.

[pbraasch]

Originally Posted by Billthegravedigger ↗

Not that one, but all the others huh ? Do you REALLY think I am that stupid ?

I had no reason to apologize to robot for anything. As a matter of fact, I wouldn't apologize.
Like I said, someone posted that and it wasn't me.

[pbraasch]

Originally Posted by Billthegravedigger ↗

As crazy as it sounds, the pentagon had a video system that takes a picture every couple of seconds. At 500 mph, the plane hit in between the pictures. On the inside of the buidling is where they kept the good cameras, continous video.

You'd think the truthers would check things out a little bit for themselves.

So, you expect us to believe The Pentagon, THE most secure site on the planet, uses only instamatic cameras that pop a picture every couple seconds and not THE most technologically sophisticated CONSTANT video (you do know the difference between a camera and a video recorder right?) system that money can buy, and the "plane" hit between frames.
You believe that one pal, I got a nice piece of desert to sell you in Alaska.

[pbraasch]

Originally Posted by Billthegravedigger ↗

Yeah, it is ironic. You know why ? Because when it's controlled demo, the streamers can be seen, and the building is coming down. The WTC towers had streamers coming down the ENTIRE time they were burning. You know, the plastic that was up there, computers, drapes, carpet, all of that shit. Like in this picture here.

Yes ironic, because in the video I posted, the streams only appears as the building collapses. Not before.

[ebneter]

Originally Posted by pbraasch ↗

Do you believe buildings of that size would stand merely being held up by steel rods and gypsum?

Yes.

Or, more accurately, a carefully designed system of steel columns, trusses, and aluminum facing.

The sheetrock wasn't structural; think of the core as a tower of steel framing, linked to an outer tower, also of steel framing, by a series of trusses. The sheetrock in the core was used to firewall the core, which would have worked fine in the sorts of fires one would anticipate when designing a building. The aircraft impacts, unfortunately, were not something the sheetrock could withstand.

If you look at demolition videos, you will find that many failed demos are of buildings with concrete cores. They are incredibly tough. As I said, if the towers had had concrete cores, they might not have collapsed completely even if you'd dropped them into their subbasements.

[ebneter]

I'm not Bill, but let me see if I can answer some of this.

Originally Posted by pbraasch ↗

My problems (or questions) are the following.
A bunch of fucking reagheads train in cessnas and then are able to expertly control and navigate extremely complicated pieces of equipment to strike their targets in precisely the location to bring down both towers.

It's not that hard to fly a plane if you don't care about ever landing it. Plus it is not true that they "train[ed] in cessnas" only; they had simulator time, at least, in more advanced aircraft. Really, I am not a pilot, but I once flew a Boeing 737 simulator through the SeaFirst tower (long before 9/11) for giggles. It's not difficult, and as long as they hit the towers squarely, they were going to inflict terrible damage. (For what it's worth: I seriously doubt that they had any idea what would actually happen after they hit the towers.)

Most fighter jets on the east coast had a scheduled training exercise the morning of 9-11 and most were not even close to Manhattan that day, how convenient.

It wouldn't have mattered. Read The Eleventh Day to get a better idea of what actually happened on 9/11, but realize also that our homeland air defense had been drastically cut back after the end of the Cold War.

You know my take on the Pentagon, no way in hell a 757-233 makes a hole that small. And I don't accept the fact that it was reinforced concrete and rebar. The nose makes it through, but not the wings. Don't buy it.

Actually, the hole is about the right size. The wings outboard of the engines are mostly just lightweight aluminum and probably were basically shredded on impact. From the engines inboard they are sturdier (and full of basically incompressible fuel) and they, as well as the engines, definitely penetrated the outer wall. But going through the wall would have shredded them, freeing the heavy engines to continue forward, and spilling the fuel, which ignited. The mass of the fuselage would have carried it through much farther than the wings.

When something is traveling at a high rate of speed, even if it is rather fragile it can penetrate things you would not necessarily expect. Look at photographs of pieces of straw (!) which have been blown through planks of wood by tornadic winds, for instance.

Not one single photo or video exists of anything striking the Pentagon. Really? Today when EVERYONE has a camera and people catch shit happening ALL the time, not ONE person clicked a photo of a jetliner that is 155ft long, 124ft wide and 44ft high, damn, I don't even care about it actually hitting the pentagon, what about flying, what, 50ft off the ground over 395? For fucks sake, someone caught the Concorde on fire when it took off and not ONE photo exists of this plane APPROACHING the building 20-100 feet off the ground. NOT ONE!

There's only two videos of the first plane striking the North Tower. I'm not that surprised, actually. A bit surprised that there is not more security video, but the DoD may have their own reasons for not wanting to release more. (I can think of valid security reasons for that.)

And yes, I believe that in this country there are certain VERY WEALTHY individuals that control a LOT of what goes on in our government. And said individuals control corporations that do make enormous amounts of money if there is a war. Do I think our government is capable of pulling off a despicable act for monetary benefit. Yes I do. This country is not some sweet, little, creampuff, who wants to make sure we are all happy, well fed, and tucked into bed with our jammies on at night. This country is controlled by wealthy, powerful, people who will do whatever that will make them more money and more powerful. We are just along for the ride.
Do I have proof that 9-11 was a setup? No, and neither do the believers or the truthers. I just question, that is why we have brains. Not to just accept what is force fed us by anyone, but to think for ourselves and question authority. It is what I believe. There are just too many holes in this story for me to blindly accept it.

Bill and I have both said that we believe, or are willing to believe, that there was government involvement in not preventing the attacks, that the Bush administration eagerly wanted an excuse to go to war against Iraq. What neither of us believes is that the government actually carried out the attacks.

Like I said before, this incident was wrapped up and resolved WAY too fast for my taste. Just like the assassination of President Kennedy. The investigation into 9-11 should still be going on today. It was THAT big of a deal. This "nothing happened here...please move on" bullshit has to stop sometime.

I agree that there are some aspects of the investigation that need to be revisited, particularly the role of the FBI and CIA prior to the attacks. But the basic outline of how the attacks occurred and how the buildings failed is not difficult to determine.

Look, I am not trying to change your mind, just question things. Like in the video I post below, watch with an open mind. Rumsfeld says flight 93 was shot down, the 9-11 commisioner who slips up and says a missle hit the pentagon. Even the actual shitty version of whatevr hit the pentagon...do you see anything in there that even REMOTELY resembles an aircraft?

Please read The Eleventh Day, which I think should be required reading for anyone who wants to debate this subject.

As for the video of the Pentagon being struck, yes, that looks very much like what I'd expect a large aircraft flying very fast to look like in a stop-frame video (frames not taken continuously).

[Zambini]

The hole in the pentagon is about the same size as the one in the empire state building as I posted.

[Billthegravedigger]

Originally Posted by pbraasch ↗

So, you expect us to believe The Pentagon, THE most secure site on the planet, uses only instamatic cameras that pop a picture every couple seconds and not THE most technologically sophisticated CONSTANT video (you do know the difference between a camera and a video recorder right?) system that money can buy, and the "plane" hit between frames.
You believe that one pal, I got a nice piece of desert to sell you in Alaska.

Get ready to sell it then. Man, understand something here, Americans are in general naive. They figured if it was trouble at the pentagon, like you said, the most secure sight on the planet, it would be inside from some disgruntled worker, not a plane coming in at 500 mph.

And to be more specific, I mean when they put the video system in. The video system had been there a while before 9/11, and when our "goverment" was hearing chatter about 9/11, they did not upgrade the system. They knew it was coming, that's a fact.