One conspiracy theory is that the damage to the Pentagon was caused by a missile, but this source shows why that could not possibly be true.

Of course, the most obvious reason there could not possibly have been a missile attack on the Pentagon is due to the NUMEROUS eyewitnesses who saw a COMMERCIAL PLANE hit the Pentagon (Reference). You can also confirm this by checking the sources at the bottom of my April 4, 2008 article.

11-Settembre also points out that the damage is inconsistent with a truck bomb.

A speech given by Fidel Castro in 2007 has lent new life to the missile theory, where Castro states that “‘only a projectile could have created the geometrically round orifice created by the alleged airplane.’” (source) Hmm, apparently Castro missed the physics class that explained that it’s the MASS AND VELOCITY of the object that determines the shape of the hole, NOT the shape of the object. That and anyone with half a brain- which is more than “truthers” have- knows that a speeding aircraft IS a projectile.

If you scroll about a quarter of the way down the page here, you’ll see some pictures of missile tests conducted at proving grounds.

In point of fact, missiles do NOT explode on impact. They penetrate the target THEN explode (source). This quote from here describes it quite nicely: “In practice, penetration is achieved thanks to the kinetic energy of the missile and to the use of penetrators made of steel and, more recently, titanium, which enclose the explosive charge.

When detonation occurs, the entire structure is subjected to extremely intense stresses from the inside outward, due to the detonation of the explosive charge carried by the missile body and of any ammunition stored inside the target.” Hint: If the explosion occurs INSIDE the building, then the majority of the debris should be pushed OUTWARD, but that was NOT the case with the Pentagon.

Now, go a little further down the page here and have a look at the missile damage to Milosevic’s home in Belgrade. Second, go to my article titled “The Truth About the Pentagon,” and take a look at the damage to the Pentagon. The difference between the impacts is clearly obvious.

There’s also the fact that in a missile attack, the resultant explosion would result in damage radiating outward in ALL directions. However, the damage to the Pentagon was cone-shaped, with the widest point being where the plane hit and progressively narrowing (source). Furthermore, if you go about halfway or so down the page here you’ll notice that the damage is in preferential directions aligned with the path of the plane.

This quote from here sums it up nicely: “These two aspects alone completely rule out the possibility that the Pentagon might have been hit by a missile. If we then consider that the floor slabs remained substantially intact, with no craters in the floor or in the ceiling, the theory of a missile explosion becomes totally unfounded.”

Once again, we see that the 9-11 “Truth” Movement is in dire need of a physics lesson.

Close this WindowBookmark and Share This Page

Save to Browser Favorites

Ask backflip blinklist BlogBookmark Bloglines BlogMarks Blogsvine BUMPzee! CiteULike co.mments Connotea del.icio.us

DotNetKicks Digg diigo dropjack.com dzone Facebook Fark Faves Feed Me Links Friendsite folkd.com Furl

Google Hugg Jeqq Kaboodle kirtsy linkaGoGo LinksMarker Ma.gnolia Mister Wong Mixx MySpace MyWeb

Netvouz Newsvine PlugIM popcurrent Propeller Reddit Rojo Segnalo Shoutwire Simpy Slashdot Sphere

Sphinn Spurl.net Squidoo StumbleUpon Technorati ThisNext Webride Windows Live Yahoo!

Email This to a Friend

Copy HTML: 

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed.

Powered by Bookmarkify™

More »

Powered by Bookmarkify™