Aircraft in Pentagon security camera video

[Loki]

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/757family/pf/pf_200tech.html

cut and paste it...or do my google

yet again...shite arguments

Dear oh dear!

Those are options: either: Pratt & Whitney or Rolls-Royce engines!

Got it yet? (Hint: have a look at the plane design! I posted a pic just for you just now. Just two engines!)

 

[DexterTCN]

Firstly...I don't know what makes you a bigger wank...ignoring the fact that my 'broken link' was merely an accidental bracket typo on the end...or your inane shite about engines.

2ndly...my link lists 4 engines doesn't it...or are you such a fucking tit that you will keep talking shite, when I already said not only am I not a pilot or aviation expert...unlike your good self...but that the top link google gave me seems to be implying 4 engines. 4. My link siad 4....you think that proving 2, which I do not dispute, means that somehow the blast pattern has magically changed shape....and that 120 foot wingspan suddenly becomes 30, that no-one could fly a passenger jet with such accuracy (IMO).

3rdly...yawn. Come up with something relevant.

 

[Loki]

Firstly...I don't know what makes you a bigger wank...ignoring the fact that my 'broken link' was merely an accidental bracket typo on the end...or your inane shite about engines.

You're rather an unpleasant fellow, aren't you!

Please explain where the other two engines are: You're the one insisting it has four.

 

[laptop]

2ndly...my link lists 4 engines doesn't it...or are you such a fucking tit...

I don't know what you're on or suffering, but it's not a wise idea to write about "evidence" when your reading comprehension is thus impaired.

Two 166.4kN (37,400lb) RollsRoyce RB211-535C turbofans, or 178.8kN (40,200lb) RB211-535E4s, or 193.5kN (43,500lb) RB211-535E4-Bs, or 162.8kN (36,600lb) Pratt & Whitney PW2037s, or two 178.4kN (40,100lb) PW2040s, or 189.5kN (42,600lb) PW2043s.

So the list of alternatives in your link is incomplete. And it contains a clue: you really wouldn't want a plane with four engines with different thrusts. It'd tend to go round in circles.

 

[NuTbAr]

Oh. God.

It's midnight. I'm off to bed before the shapeshifting lizards turn me into a pumpkin.

Or before the pumpkins turn me into a shapeshifting lizard.

there is nothing about lizards fer fucks sake...it's a radio interview with the guy/lawyer taking bush to court, on behalf of 400 us citizens. he's stating his evidence, facts there bud...no reptilian shite.

if ya don't even bother to read it then why not shut your cake hole?

 

[1927]

there is nothing about lizards fer fucks sake...it's a radio interview with the guy/lawyer taking bush to court, on behalf of 400 us citizens. he's stating his evidence, facts there bud...no reptilian shite.

if ya don't even bother to read it then why not shut your cake hole?

well he's not stating his evidence actually.he merely says he has some but doesnt actually give any of the evidence!!

 

[Loki]

here's the link, 9-11 is a travesty folks...it's time to wake up to just how insidious it really is.

http://www.rense.com/general57/aale.htm

That website is selling "2005 UFO art", some wierd book entitled "THE LOVESONG OF THE UNIVERSE" and an even wierder book titled "STARPEOPLE:
THE SIRIAN REDEMPTION" -

"Are electricity blackouts the result of solar flares and inadequate supplies? Is today's freak weather really caused by ocean currents and global warming? Or is something momentous about to occur"

says one bonkers reviewer.





Thanks but no thanks.

 

[editor]

The link I posted seems to be saying that the jet has 4 engines...although I don't actually give a fuck

So you don't "give a fuck" about the fact that you haven't a clue about what the plane was and that you're incapable of comprehending the information on that site and you don't "give a fuck" about the eye witness reports, because they all contradict your ill-informed conspiracy-tastic view.

My oh my. What a smart cookie you are.

 

[editor]

What are you talking about you fucking wank?

Did you see my link? http://www.boeing.com/commercial/757family/pf/pf_200tech.html]

I did fucking link that didn't I?

It does fucking list 4 fucking engines doesn't it?

Fuck, you're stupid.

757-200s have two engines. That site lists the various two engine options for different 757 two engine configurations. The plane that hit the Pentagon had - you guessed it - two engines.

If you've got half a brain you'll apologise for making such a complete twat of yourself and insulting those people pointing out your stunning stupidity.

 

[Wess]

The link I posted seems to be saying that the jet has 4 engines.

Did you have a look at any photo's on that site?...They clearly show two engines. As would any other picture of a 757 easily accessed on the net. Just because it lists four engines doesn't mean the aircraft was fitted with four.

What I am saying is this....I have seen pics of the type of plane you are saying hit the building...and the impact marks on the building....and I say they do not equate.

Have you seen any photo's that were not off the internet?...Have you seen the structure itself? Then how do you know whether they are real or not?

You can compare me to some other idiot, you can quote people, you can gang up. Still doesn't mean fuck all to me.

Then why get upset about it? No one is having a go at you personally but the argument/s put forward are not even close to a reasonable alternative theory.

That plane did not hit that building at that time as the 'proof' offered indicates.

Where did that come from?
I clearly remember watching the TV via satellite the event/s while they were unfolding and not a single thing that has come from any of the conspiracy theory's on what happened even come close to what I was watching that day....and yes it is possible that certain parts of the footage could have been fabricated by the CIA/Masons/Pope/Illuminati/whoever the fuck....but there was just way to many people around at the time that had nothing whatsoever to do with what happened. Why do these people say they say are passenger aircraft hit the building?

 

[Jazzz]

well he's not stating his evidence actually.he merely says he has some but doesnt actually give any of the evidence!!

He has given details of the kind of evidence he has. He is keeping the documents to present in court, I wouldn't blame him for that. He has already had his office broken into.

 

[Jazzz]

Did you have a look at any photo's on that site?...They clearly show two engines. As would any other picture of a 757 easily accessed on the net.


Have you seen any photo's that were not off the internet?...Have you seen the structure itself? Then how do you know whether they are real or not?

Then why get upset about it? No one is having a go at you personally but the argument/s put forward are not even close to a reasonable alternative theory.

Where did that come from?
I clearly remember watching the TV via satellite the event/s while they were unfolding and not a single thing that has come from any of the conspiracy theory's on what happened even come close to what I was watching that day....and yes it is possible that certain parts of the footage could have been fabricated by the CIA/Masons/Pope/Illuminati/whoever the fuck....but there was just way to many people around at the time that had nothing whatsoever to do with what happened. Why do these people say they say are passenger aircraft hit the building?

Our minds work in strange ways. Our memories can change depending on what we are given to believe happened.

For instance, perhaps you have personally forgotten that when the Pentagon was hit, the initial news reports were of a truck bomb? Surprising that a 757 hits, just like at the WTC, and the media gets it wrong! It was in fact quite a while before flight 77 took root as the culprit.

But as mentioned many times, the eyewitness reports vary wildly. I'm not going to cherry pick mine like editor does, but if you want to look over them perhaps the best resource is on this page...
conflicting witnesses

 

[Wess]

there is nothing about lizards fer fucks sake...it's a radio interview with the guy/lawyer taking bush to court, on behalf of 400 us citizens. he's stating his evidence, facts there bud...no reptilian shite.
if ya don't even bother to read it then why not shut your cake hole?

The guy is a conman for christsakes...he writes this shit to sell books and to make money.

We believe in the intelligence, judgment and wisdom of our readers to discern for themselves among the data which appears on this site to that which is valid and worthy...or otherwise.

btw, have you bought your "2005 UFO Art calender" yet...
UFO calander !!!!.......Real UFO's from space including a big one hovering over Stonehenge!!
edt to add calender link.

 

[editor]

For instance, perhaps you have personally forgotten that when the Pentagon was hit, the initial news reports were of a truck bomb? Surprising that a 757 hits, just like at the WTC, and the media gets it wrong! It was in fact quite a while before flight 77 took root as the culprit.

Right.

So why did so many independent, credible eye witnesses - including a pilot and a news reporter for Chrissakes - come forward and say that they categorically saw a 757 hit the Pentagon? Why is that?

Are they all lying? All of them?!! Why?

What do you think hit the Pentagon?

 

[editor]

btw, have you bought your "2005 UFO Art calender" yet...

Woohoo! What a tempting purchase, but if the calendar doesn't do it for you, there's always the Splashscreen Gallery of UFO Related Artworks (linked from the homepage of rense.com).

Hundreds of spoddy UFO fantasies for every conspiracy/X-Files fan!

 

[DexterTCN]

Fuck, you're stupid.

757-200s have two engines. That site lists the various two engine options for different 757 two engine configurations. The plane that hit the Pentagon had - you guessed it - two engines.

If you've got half a brain you'll apologise for making such a complete twat of yourself and insulting those people pointing out your stunning stupidity.

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/757family/pf/pf_200tech.html
As I said...even though I know nothing about engines or passenger jets....the official site I posteed, Boeing's site....seems to be saying that the 757 has 4 engines....I am not saying that it does, I am merely saying that I thought that was what the site says. And it does say that

I didn't bring up the amount of engines ed, you did. Laptop also ignored the official link I posted. You ignore it because it does say 4. I am not saying that the plane has 4, I don't care. I am saying when I went to check the wingspan (which you don't address) and fuel capacity (ditto) the site seems to say 4 engines, so I mentioned it. You have neither the honour nor decency to acknowledge that. Fair enough.

I do care that no-one can have a conversation on anything 9/11 orientated without all the same usual suspects ganging up every time, holding up the debate with nonsense, accusations and stupidity.

Lizards? Masons?

Editor said: 'because they all contradict your ill-informed conspiracy-tastic view.' wtf you on about?

 

[WouldBe]

and what's this being removed from the Pentagon... literally covered up?

The specs for a tomahawk missile have been posted up severel times before, it's body is only 18 inches in diameter.

So if this mystery object is from a tomahawk missile then the people carrying it can only be about 6 inches high

 

[editor]

I didn't bring up the amount of eng...elf here. You screwed up. Live with it.

 

[DexterTCN]

You cluelessly claimed that it was a jumbo jet involved with the Pentagon crash.

Did I indeed? Well...whatever the lizards are telling you, I suppose.

Meanwhile back on earth I said that it was not a large passenger jet, as the blast pattern is wrong and the ability for such accurate steering does not exist, unless like I said the front doors had a homing beacon

But as it is pretty obvious that this is the way all these 9-11 'discussions' are treated by yourself and your mates - keep the thread to yourself.

 

[editor]

But as it is pretty obvious that this is the way all these 9-11 'discussions' are treated by yourself and your mates - keep the thread to yourself.

So you're still unable to admit to your repeated, stupid blunders that are here for all to see?

Weird.

 

[alphaDelta]

Am I the only one that can see the monkey?

Technical note: I made it bigger and blurrier by a factor of three, which unarguably increases the worth of what I'm claiming (that Shergar shot JFK from the moon, again) by an exponential amount, and then made it half the size again to cover my own lack of self-worth.

 

[1927]

He has given details of the kind of evidence he has. He is keeping the documents to present in court, I wouldn't blame him for that. He has already had his office broken into.

Well this thread has contained links to various pieces of evidence,eye witness accounts etc., that it WAS a 757 that hit the Pentagon
,but you seem unable to accept this.however you are prepared to accept another story just because someone says that they have evidence,but wont reveal what it is!!

Do you know what I find really depressing?The fact that in this country we have a flawed system of democracy,universal manhood suffrage,and that means that deluded individuals that believe in all this crap have as much say in the election of a government in this country as I and the rest of the saner individuals on these boards!

 

[Jazzz]

Well this thread has contained links to various pieces of evidence,eye witness accounts etc., that it WAS a 757 that hit the Pentagon
,but you seem unable to accept this.however you are prepared to accept another story just because someone says that they have evidence,but wont reveal what it is!!

Do you know what I find really depressing?The fact that in this country we have a flawed system of democracy,universal manhood suffrage,and that means that deluded individuals that believe in all this crap have as much say in the election of a government in this country as I and the rest of the saner individuals on these boards!

Really 1927 I'm giving you the nice treatment here. I've made the point countless times that the eyewitness reports conflict wildly here's the link again. Some claim to have seen a jumbo. Others a small jet. Some heard a missile (notably, military guys). Some saw it hit the ground first (which it couldn't have done).

It's really very difficult to reach a firm conclusion from the eyewitnesses. Particluarly as when it happened, the media reported a truck bomb!

You are testament to the propaganda tactic that if editor repeats a lie often enough, people will believe it.

And where did I say I base my belief on what happened because of Stanley Hilton? I don't. I've been posting pretty much the same theory up on these boards years before I'd heard of the guy.

I really don't have to bother with nonsense like this post.

 

[Stigmata]

I really don't have to bother with nonsense like this post.

God forbid you should waste your time with nonsense of any sort.

 

[Jazzz]

nonsense...

What, like a hopeless pilot can pull off military acrobatics in a passenger jumbo, descending 600ft in two minutes while making a 270 degree-hairpin, fly over a busy interstate without blowing any cars around, then pick out the Pentagon with a horizontal approach, somehow making the plane invisible to all the cameras that were around, and then hitting the pentagon making just a twelve-foot impact hole with the wings and tail leaving no trace, and then of course leaving no wreckage that can be officially identified.

Yes, that's the kind of nonsense I don't feel the need to seriously entertain. How about you?

 

[editor]

Some claim to have seen a jumbo. Others a small jet. Some heard a missile (notably, military guys). Some saw it hit the ground first (which it couldn't have done).

But none - repeat NONE - said they saw a fighter jet blasting missiles as it smashed into the Pentagon. In fact, not one eye witness say they saw a missile either.

What they did say however - in great numbers - was that they saw an American Airlines jet hit the building. Those independent eyewitnesses included a preacher, a news reporter and a pilot who would certainly know the difference between a 757 and a missile.

Have you any proof whatsoever that he was lying - because if you haven't, your 'theory' is nothing short of complete bollocks.

And what do you think hit the Pentagon and what evidence can you provide to support this claim with? Anything?

Anything at all?!

 

[editor]

What, like a hopeless pilot can pull off military acrobatics in a passenger jumbo, descending 600ft in two minutes while making a 270 degree-hairpin, fly over a busy interstate without blowing any cars around, then pick out the Pentagon with a horizontal approach, somehow making the plane invisible to all the cameras that were around...

But not invisible to all the eye witnesses, of course,

 

[Jazzz]

... some of whom heard a missile and some of whom saw a small jet, yes, editor.

 

[Loki]

All witnesses, including local residents and journalists with many years' experience reported seeing a passenger jet DrJazzz. Why do you find that fact so hard to stomache?

 

[editor]

... some of whom heard a missile and some of whom saw a small jet, yes, editor.

No one saw a missle. Nobody. Not a soul.

But why don't you discuss the pilot who clearly said that he saw the American Airlines 757 jet?

I'd say he's a very credible and suitably qualified independent eye witness.

So have you any reason to doubt his word?

And what do you think hit the Pentagon and what evidence have you to support you claim?