(03-23-2021, 10:55 AM)Gointocarlton link Wrote:In the building I'd imagine, did you expect it to bounce off the wall and land in the front garden?

(03-23-2021, 10:41 AM)Gointocarlton link Wrote:Who said there was no wreckage?

Quote:Big Plane, Small Holes
Claim: Two holes were visible in the Pentagon immediately after the attack: a 75-ft.-wide entry hole in the building's exterior wall, and a 16-ft.-wide hole in Ring C, the Pentagon's middle ring. Conspiracy theorists claim both holes are far too small to have been made by a Boeing 757. "How does a plane 125 ft. wide and 155 ft. long fit into a hole which is only 16 ft. across?" asks reopen911.org, a Web site "dedicated to discovering the bottom line truth to what really occurred on September 11, 2001."

The truth is of even less importance to French author Thierry Meyssan, whose baseless assertions are fodder for even mainstream European and Middle Eastern media.

In his book The Big Lie, Meyssan concludes that the Pentagon was struck by a satellite-guided missile—part of an elaborate U.S. military coup. "This attack," he writes, "could only be committed by United States military personnel against other U.S. military personnel."

FACT: When American Airlines Flight 77 hit the Pentagon's exterior wall, Ring E, it created a hole approximately 75 ft. wide, according to the ASCE Pentagon Building Performance Report.

The exterior facade collapsed about 20 minutes after impact, but ASCE based its measurements of the original hole on the number of first-floor support columns that were destroyed or damaged. Computer simulations confirmed the findings.

Why wasn't the hole as wide as a 757's 124-ft.-10-in. wingspan? A crashing jet doesn't punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building, says ASCE team member Mete Sozen, a professor of structural engineering at Purdue University. In this case, one wing hit the ground; the other was sheared off by the force of the impact with the Pentagon's load-bearing columns, explains Sozen, who specializes in the behavior of concrete buildings. What was left of the plane flowed into the structure in a state closer to a liquid than a solid mass. "If you expected the entire wing to cut into the building," Sozen tells PM, "it didn't happen."

The tidy hole in Ring C was 12 ft. wide—not 16 ft. ASCE concludes it was made by the jet's landing gear, not by the fuselage.

(03-23-2021, 10:58 AM)Klingus link Wrote:Thanks for the reply GC. Yep, the FBI released photos, but look at the crash footage and photos of the fire fighters trying to put the blaze out. Look at the hole. Wouldn't there be damage on either side where the wings impacted? Where are the wings or the tail?

(03-23-2021, 11:02 AM)Mav link Wrote:Again from Popular Mechanics 2020 article:There you go Karen.

(03-23-2021, 09:58 AM)kruddler link Wrote:Dunno. Don't pretend to know.

Do you think its above the american government to kill innocent people to further their own greedy desires though?

(03-23-2021, 10:58 AM)kruddler link Wrote:I expected it to scratch the wall at least and maybe leave some evidence that they existed.

There was some overhead shots taken straight after the crash which i'm trying to track down....but can't.
It gives a clear idea on how improbably the story is.

(03-23-2021, 11:10 AM)Lods link Wrote:The first Gulf war didn't require an attack on American citizens. They wouldn't have needed to crash planes into buildings to start a war on terror.