Conspiracy theorists often wonder why Flight 77, the Boeing 757 that crashed into the Pentagon did not leave an “airplane-shaped” hole in the Pentagon.The answer’s this: lay off the Roadrunner cartoons. The fact is a speeding aircraft slamming into a concrete wall won’t leave an imprint of itself. Daylightatheism.org (which is run by a LIBERAL) provides a picture showing severe damage to the Pentagon.
The 9-11 “Truth” Movement often uses the above information to claims a missile hit the Pentagon, but as we see here, there’s an obvious problem with that claim. When Flight 77 hit the Pentagon it flew directly across I-395, where there was presumably a lot of traffic, not to mention numerous eyewitnesses. If you go here, you’ll see that all those eyewitnesses saw a PLANE hit the Pentagon.The reason the lawn was covered with gravel is they needed to bring in new dumpsters ( the dumpsters had to be new to avoid evidence contamination) and the ground was too soft for the trucks carrying the dumpsters , so they had to build a road for said trucks.
With regard to the claim that it was a military jet, the full quote, found here, is “The speed, the maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that that was a military plane,” O’Brien said. “You don’t fly a 757 in that manner. It’s unsafe.” Notice, she said they THOUGHT it was a military plane- that’s NOT the same as saying it was a military plane. Furthermore, as we see from the full quote, it’s not that a 757 can’t maneuver like that, it’s just not recommended as it’s considered unsafe. Hint: Terrorists intent on killing people aren’t going to be concerned about passenger safety.
The “truthers” also misquote CNN correspondent Jamie McIntyre, as evidenced here. First of all, Flight 77 did not crash near the Pentagon, it crashed INTO the Pentagon. Also, here’s the full quote from the aforementioned source,
Share ThisA short — a while ago I walked right up next to the building, firefighters were still trying to put the blaze. The fire, by the way, is still burning in some parts of the Pentagon. And I took a look at the huge gaping hole that’s in the side of the Pentagon in an area of the Pentagon that has been recently renovated, part of a multibillion dollar renovation program here at the Pentagon. I could see parts of the airplane that crashed into the building, very small pieces of the plane on the heliport outside the building. The biggest piece I saw was about three feet long, it was silver and had been painted green and red, but I could not see any identifying markings on the plane. I also saw a large piece of shattered glass. It appeared to be a cockpit windshield or other window from the plane.
It is good to see someone use some hard evidence as a support for a 747 going in to the building.
But let me ask you or anyone who reads this a couple things:
Why would FBI agents quickly seize any video from cameras nearby that would have shown exactly what hit the Pentagon? If it is “obviously” a 747, then what it there to hide?
Where are all the bodies of the supposed passengers? Don’t tell me they were vaporized or some BS like that. Check out every other plane crash in history that has photographic evidence. Even if it crashed into a mountain, there are bodies or body parts. I have not seen any picture from the Pentagon crash that shows bodies anywhere.
Answer those questions then I might start to believe that a plane full of people hit that building. Your facts take care of the arguments you brought up, but do not answer those questions.
What?! How old are you, Dave? Because those of us who were adults on 9/11/01 WATCHED two planes full of people hit those buildings.
you guys obviously need to watch this movie http://zeitgeistmovie.com/ And see the REAL truth.
You are obviously right about the 9/11 attacks; there was no conspiracy. Loose Change had me convinced for about all of three seconds before I did some research about its claims.
However, I take issue with this sentence: “Daylightatheism.org (which is run by a LIBERAL) provides a picture showing severe damage to the Pentagon.”
Craziness and ignorance are not limited to any end of the political spectrum. Implying that only liberals could be stupid enough to believe in the 9/11 conspiracy theory grates on me, as I consider myself a liberal.
Dave, have you any sense in your head?
why did the FBI immediately take all the surveillance tapes?
Oh, gee, I don’t know… maybe because they’d be EVIDENCE showing what happened, and they needed to study them to glean as much information as possible? As is standard practice with ANY evidence in any crime scene, let alone a plane hitting the pentagon?? Also, you’ll likely moan and whine about how they’ve not been released to the public yet.
How many tapes filming the pentagon are released to the public by the FBI, huh? It’s the goddamn pentagon. national security and all that? Not to mention the fact that the tapes are now evidence, and are, most likely, sitting in an evidence locker somewhere, to prevent somebody from tampering with them. Same with all evidence that’s been seized from anywhere.
Why are there no photographs of the bodies?
Hmm. Maybe the government thinks it’s a bad idea to show pictures of a load of mangled corpses all over the evening news? Seriously, how dumb is this? Seriously, would you WANT pictures of these poor souls all over the net and TV?
Seriously. Go get a brain, look at the evidence that’s been presented to the general public, make some informed intelligent decisions, and then MAYBE think about coming back.
Oh, and JennSierra, you’re just as idiotic as Dave is. Where are the twin towers mentioned? EVERYTHING here is talking about a plane hitting the PENTAGON. Dave is presenting arguments (mis-informed and stupid, but still arguments) as to why it wasn’t a plane that hit the PENTAGON.
He’s not saying that it wasn’t a plane hitting the twin towers. Perhaps READING would be usefull?
Can you explain why many capital buildings had anti-aircraft defense systems (pre-911) and you somehow believe the Pentagon does not? The Pentagon was not surprised by this aircraft. It was tracked for over an hour by NORAD (Russian planes don’t use transponders either when they are attacking) and also flew past the Pentagon before turning to hit it. Are you saying our fighting men and women failed us on that day? Is the most powerful military in the world really going to have a headquarters that can be hit by a plane they see coming for over an hour?
So a vast conspiracy is more believable than “he most powerful military in the world really going to have a headquarters that can be hit by a plane they see coming for over an hour?”
One of the most solid arguments for the missile theory is that the airplane’s engines were never shown in any pictures or video; there are no impacts in the wall corresponding to them and they are not on the outside of the building. Do you know of any theory to explain this?
Chris, that post was F’n brilliant !
Anthony, next time a plane gets hijacked I’m going to instruct the military to shoot it down over your head, or did you want the Pentagon to just move out of the way?
David, you’ve been watching too much Looney Toons. When something penetrates something it does not leave it’s exact out line in what it goes through.