Discussion:
"Leaked" Video irrelevant. A Boeing 757 Hit The Pentagon. There is NO question about it.
(too old to reply)
Black People Don't Care About George Bush
2005-09-13 00:11:31 UTC
Permalink
A cruise missile hit the pentagon.
Forget about planes. You said yourself you don't have any evidence of
a plane.
757.
So you can't show evidence of a plane.
Except for part of a single engine, which doesn't appear to be from a
757.
That's fine. But you
can't use your *lack* of evidence of a plane as constructive evidence
of anything else.
When you eliminate the impossible...
No, you need to show evidence of a cruise missile.
A cruise missile is most unlikely.
Lack of a plane, doesn't make your case for a cruise missile. You're
not done until you come up with evidence. Like pieces of a cruise
missle. Or a missing cruise missle. Or maybe we'd settle for open
testimony from the commander who gave an order to fire a cruise missile
at the Pentagon.
The unofficially released stills seem to support a missile fired from
close range by an F-16 type plane.
Yeah, that's hard. But that is the task you have in front of you, if
you want people to believe your theory.
Who gives a shit what people believe?
I don't care if government coverups make your job difficult. That's
not my problem. Bring evidence. Quit trying to put forth the lack of
evidence of a plane as proof of something else. It's not working, and
it's not going to ever work.
All that needs to be established is that no 757 hit the Pentagon.
http://www.bedoper.com/pentagon/asce




Problems With the ASCE Report On The Pentagon Cast Further Doubt on 757
Story

By Jason Christie
8/8/2004


Three years after 9/11, there is still little to no evidence indicating a
757 struck the Pentagon. Indeed, there seems to have been no "official"
investigation into this topic at all. Many who claim a 757 hit the
Pentagon cite an American Society of Civil Engineers building study as
proof. I contend that the ASCE report, despite its assumptions regarding
the day in question, actually supports the belief that no 757 hit the
Pentagon.


The report, some sixty pages long, was released in January of 2003. Its
stated purpose was not to investigate the events that caused damage to
the Pentagon, but to examine the performance of the building after the
incident in question. It makes certain base assumptions regarding the
assumed presence of a 757, and works forward from there.


While there are an impressive number of PhDs behind the building
performance report, some of the logic is rather spotty, and the report
seems to include at least one falsehood. Other areas of the report openly
contradict the claims many have made in support of the 757 theory.


The most serious error in the ASCE report can be found in section 3,
"Review of Crash Information". Figure 3.3, a still frame from the
unofficial, yet released Pentagon security camera footage, incorrectly
labels the white smoke trail in the still "Approaching Aircraft". If the
many building performance experts on the panel who assembled the report
cannot tell the difference between a white, bumpy smoke trail and a 757,
their credibility is questionable, at best.


Smoke trail mislabled as 757.

Figure 3.4 clearly shows an extension of the same smoke trail reaching
all the way to the Pentagon, which would make this "757" hundreds of feet
longer than a real 757. That is, of course, ignoring the fact that this
supposed 757 lacks any wings, a tail, or any marking that would indicate
it is an airliner.


Smoke trail remains in place. Clearly, that was not a 757.


In fact, the ASCE report is the only place I have seen this bumpy,
irregular smoke trail referred to as a 757. I believe this piece of
disinformation is deliberate. If it is unintentional, then the ASCE
should correct this report in order to save their credibility. There is
nothing in the still frames that remotely resembles a 757, so it is
difficult to believe a team of engineers could make a mistake of this
magnitude.


The ASCE report also aids supporters of the 757 theory by misrepresenting
the width of the initial impact damage. While the photograph in figure
3.8 indicates that only two windows, and a single column are missing from
the second floor, the drawing placed beside it (figure 3.10) shows a
total of four missing windows. This illustration does not correspond to
any known photograph. Its inclusion is yet another reason to doubt the
veracity of the report.


Note the fencing in place, where the left wing clearly would have struck,
had a 757 hit the Pentagon.


The ambiguous presence of the two windows on the second floor are
revealed only under magnification. No columns are shown on the bottom
floor.


This is crucial, as the small size of the initial entry point, along with
the stunning lack of debris, is the main reason so many doubt the claim
that a 757 struck the Pentagon to begin with.


Careful reading of the report shows that only a single column and two
windows from the second floor were removed. This makes the width of the
damage at the top of the entry point somewhere between sixteen and twenty
feet. Of course, part of the top of the column is still evident in
photographs, which calls into question the possibility that a massive 757
inflicted the damage, yet left this piece of the building in position.

Note the lack of tail damage.
Two windows wide, with the top part of the column hanging down. Total
lack of tail damage above presumed impact area.


The damage to the first floor columns, based on photographic evidence and
the ASCE report text, shows only 5 columns were removed at that point.
However, figure 3.10, again, seems to show a much larger area of damage.
This confusion aids many 757 theorists by enabling them to claim,
falsely, that the entry hole into the Pentagon was one hundred to one
hundred and twenty feet wide. This figure, as revealed in the ASCE text
(section 6.1), actually refers to damage to the Pentagon’s façade, and
not the actual entry hole.


Deceptively, both missing and damaged columns are assigned the same
color. In the front wall, only columns 10-14 were removed, in fact.

Finally, the diagrams 6.2 and 6.3 show another fallacy of the 757 story,
and illustrate a dramatic lack of critical thinking on the part of the
report’s authors. The supposed exit point of the alleged 757 is commonly
referred to as the "AE punch-out". It was a circular hole approximately
eight feet wide in the rear wall of the Pentagon, where the remains of
the aircraft are claimed to have exited.


An amazing number of columns in front of the AE punch-out "exit hole".
Did a giant pachinko ball strike the Pentagon?


However, as diagrams 6.2 and 6.3 clearly illustrate, at least four
columns remained in place in front of the claimed exit hole. It is
difficult to imagine something with the size and mass required to create
this exit point weaving around the columns like a giant pachinko ball in
order to reach the rear wall and create this circular-shaped hole. This
facet of the damage in not questioned in the ASCE report.


Whatever made this hole couldn't have been a 757, or even a missile, due
to the columns in front of it. Probably man-made.

Furthermore, the supposed 757 engines remain unaccounted for in the
ASCE’s study. With these obvious holes in the 757 theory, and the lack of
debris, supporters of the 757 story are reduced to reliance on eyewitness
testimony. This testimony, hearsay evidence, would not even be allowed in
court unless presented by the eyewitness themselves, and certainly cannot
account for the lack of 757 debris or explain the other serious flaws in
the 757 theory.


There is an ambiguity to the World Trade Center case that allows for
endless debate on the issues involved. There is considerably less "wiggle
room" when it comes to the Pentagon, and that is probably why FEMA
neglected to study the Pentagon at all. A formal report on the cause of
the damage itself would have renewed debate, and put FEMA on the
defensive.


Unless definitive evidence indicating a 757 is uncovered, the most
logical conclusion that can be reached when studying all of the available
evidence is that no 757 hit the Pentagon, and a subsequent cover-up was
attempted. And of course, if no 757 struck the Pentagon, then all of the
events surrounding 9/11 must be questioned. I invite all interested
parties to read the ASCE report for themselves and consider the many
flaws in this building performance report.

ASCE Report Online in PDF Format:
http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build03/PDF/b03017.pdf
tw
2005-09-13 07:31:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
A cruise missile hit the pentagon.
Forget about planes. You said yourself you don't have any evidence of
a plane.
757.
So you can't show evidence of a plane.
Except for part of a single engine, which doesn't appear to be from a
757.
Says who?

<snip>
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
The unofficially released stills seem to support a missile fired from
close range by an F-16 type plane.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! How'd you work that out, ace?
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
All that needs to be established is that no 757 hit the Pentagon.
http://www.bedoper.com/pentagon/asce
Which you utterly fail to do, again..
Seethis Pass
2005-09-13 08:27:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by tw
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
A cruise missile hit the pentagon.
Forget about planes. You said yourself you don't have any evidence of
a plane.
757.
So you can't show evidence of a plane.
Except for part of a single engine, which doesn't appear to be from a
757.
Says who?
<snip>
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
The unofficially released stills seem to support a missile fired from
close range by an F-16 type plane.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! How'd you work that out, ace?
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
All that needs to be established is that no 757 hit the Pentagon.
http://www.bedoper.com/pentagon/asce
Which you utterly fail to do, again..
The official release of five frames of video are obviously false.
Find them.I will have nothing to do with where you get them.

Look at the shadow in the foreground.

It has a black outline around it.

Therefore the ONLY official versionwhich is found in these five
frames is false. since there is an outline around a shadow the frames
have been doctored.

ONLY the criminal needs to falsify and confiscate and hide evidence.
Period.
The government did that.
Therefore they are the guilty party.
m***@yahoo.com.ar
2005-09-13 08:50:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Seethis Pass
The official release of five frames of video are obviously false.
Find them.I will have nothing to do with where you get them.
Look at the shadow in the foreground.
It has a black outline around it.
Therefore the ONLY official versionwhich is found in these five
frames is false. since there is an outline around a shadow the frames
have been doctored.
ONLY the criminal needs to falsify and confiscate and hide evidence. Period.
The government did that.
Therefore they are the guilty party.
Precisely
tw
2005-09-13 13:58:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Seethis Pass
Post by tw
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
A cruise missile hit the pentagon.
Forget about planes. You said yourself you don't have any evidence of
a plane.
757.
So you can't show evidence of a plane.
Except for part of a single engine, which doesn't appear to be from a
757.
Says who?
<snip>
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
The unofficially released stills seem to support a missile fired from
close range by an F-16 type plane.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! How'd you work that out, ace?
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
All that needs to be established is that no 757 hit the Pentagon.
http://www.bedoper.com/pentagon/asce
Which you utterly fail to do, again..
The official release of five frames of video are obviously false.
..and your credentials in image processing are?
Post by Seethis Pass
Find them.I will have nothing to do with where you get them.
Look at the shadow in the foreground.
It has a black outline around it.
Therefore the ONLY official versionwhich is found in these five
frames is false. since there is an outline around a shadow the frames
have been doctored.
..or it could be a camera artefact.
Post by Seethis Pass
ONLY the criminal needs to falsify and confiscate and hide evidence.
Just as well noones arguing tah tthe video is evidence. There is plenty of
far more compelling evidence taht a 757 hit the pentagon than this video the
konspiro-bitches are whining about.
Post by Seethis Pass
Period.
The government did that.
Therefore they are the guilty party.
Pooh Bear
2005-09-13 14:48:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by tw
Just as well noones arguing tah tthe video is evidence. There is plenty of
far more compelling evidence taht a 757 hit the pentagon than this video the
konspiro-bitches are whining about.
Then there's the small matter that the video actually clearly shows a 757. It's
blurry admittedly but it's there.

Of course it *has* to be there actually. Kinda QED really.

Graham
Bertie the Bunyip
2005-09-13 22:42:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pooh Bear
Post by tw
Just as well noones arguing tah tthe video is evidence. There is
plenty of far more compelling evidence taht a 757 hit the pentagon
than this video the konspiro-bitches are whining about.
Then there's the small matter that the video actually clearly shows a
757. It's blurry admittedly but it's there.
Of course it *has* to be there actually. Kinda QED really.
Netkkkoping twat.



Bertie
Black People Don't Care About George Bush
2005-09-13 23:04:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pooh Bear
Post by tw
Just as well noones arguing tah tthe video is evidence. There is
plenty of far more compelling evidence taht a 757 hit the pentagon
than this video the konspiro-bitches are whining about.
Then there's the small matter that the video actually clearly shows a
757. It's blurry admittedly but it's there.
Heh. You're a liar, or a kook.

Which is it?



Or can you show us a 757?


; )
Post by Pooh Bear
Of course it *has* to be there actually. Kinda QED really.
Of course. The government said so.
Pooh Bear
2005-09-13 23:30:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
Post by Pooh Bear
Post by tw
Just as well noones arguing tah tthe video is evidence. There is
plenty of far more compelling evidence taht a 757 hit the pentagon
than this video the konspiro-bitches are whining about.
Then there's the small matter that the video actually clearly shows a
757. It's blurry admittedly but it's there.
Heh. You're a liar, or a kook.
Which is it?
Actually, I'm simply someone who bothered looking without having some dumb
'agenda' distorting my vision.
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
Or can you show us a 757?
; )
There's a white object that you nuts called the missile exhaust. It's
actually a 757 gleaming in the sun. If you look really closely you can even
make out the engine pods. If you do the sums and scale it from dimensions
in the picture ( involves some algebra ) you can even see it's the right
diameter. 14 ft IIRC.
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
Post by Pooh Bear
Of course it *has* to be there actually. Kinda QED really.
Of course. The government said so.
I wouldn't expect you believe anything so inconvenient as the truth - no.

Graham
Don Freeman
2005-09-13 23:47:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pooh Bear
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
Post by Pooh Bear
Post by tw
Just as well noones arguing tah tthe video is evidence. There is
plenty of far more compelling evidence taht a 757 hit the pentagon
than this video the konspiro-bitches are whining about.
Then there's the small matter that the video actually clearly shows a
757. It's blurry admittedly but it's there.
Heh. You're a liar, or a kook.
Which is it?
Actually, I'm simply someone who bothered looking without having some dumb
'agenda' distorting my vision.
Now don't you go confusing him with actual research.
Black People Don't Care About George Bush
2005-09-14 00:52:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Freeman
Post by Pooh Bear
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
Post by Pooh Bear
Post by tw
Just as well noones arguing tah tthe video is evidence. There is
plenty of far more compelling evidence taht a 757 hit the
pentagon than this video the konspiro-bitches are whining about.
Then there's the small matter that the video actually clearly
shows a 757. It's blurry admittedly but it's there.
Heh. You're a liar, or a kook.
Which is it?
Actually, I'm simply someone who bothered looking without having some
dumb 'agenda' distorting my vision.
Now don't you go confusing him with actual research.
Claiming a cloud is a 757 is not research.
Black People Don't Care About George Bush
2005-09-14 00:52:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pooh Bear
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
Post by Pooh Bear
Post by tw
Just as well noones arguing tah tthe video is evidence. There is
plenty of far more compelling evidence taht a 757 hit the pentagon
than this video the konspiro-bitches are whining about.
Then there's the small matter that the video actually clearly shows
a 757. It's blurry admittedly but it's there.
Heh. You're a liar, or a kook.
Which is it?
Actually, I'm simply someone who bothered looking without having some
dumb 'agenda' distorting my vision.
Heh.
Post by Pooh Bear
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
Or can you show us a 757?
; )
There's a white object that you nuts called the missile exhaust.
The bumpy, irregularly shaped cloud?
Post by Pooh Bear
It's
actually a 757 gleaming in the sun. If you look really closely you can
even make out the engine pods. If you do the sums and scale it from
dimensions in the picture ( involves some algebra ) you can even see
it's the right diameter. 14 ft IIRC.
Please have your eyes checked.


Cloud, Not A 757
http://www.bedoper.com/pentagon/asce
Post by Pooh Bear
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
Post by Pooh Bear
Of course it *has* to be there actually. Kinda QED really.
Of course. The government said so.
I wouldn't expect you believe anything so inconvenient as the truth - no.
Is everything the government claims "the truth"?
Don Freeman
2005-09-13 23:45:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
Post by Pooh Bear
Post by tw
Just as well noones arguing tah tthe video is evidence. There is
plenty of far more compelling evidence taht a 757 hit the pentagon
than this video the konspiro-bitches are whining about.
Then there's the small matter that the video actually clearly shows a
757. It's blurry admittedly but it's there.
Heh. You're a liar, or a kook.
Oh, the irony...
Black People Don't Care About George Bush
2005-09-14 00:50:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Freeman
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
Post by Pooh Bear
Post by tw
Just as well noones arguing tah tthe video is evidence. There is
plenty of far more compelling evidence taht a 757 hit the pentagon
than this video the konspiro-bitches are whining about.
Then there's the small matter that the video actually clearly shows a
757. It's blurry admittedly but it's there.
Heh. You're a liar, or a kook.
Oh, the irony...
Do you see a 757, Don?


Yes or no.
Black People Don't Care About George Bush
2005-09-13 22:53:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by tw
Post by Seethis Pass
"Black People Don't Care About George Bush"
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
A cruise missile hit the pentagon.
Forget about planes. You said yourself you don't have any
evidence
of
Post by Seethis Pass
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
a plane.
757.
So you can't show evidence of a plane.
Except for part of a single engine, which doesn't appear to be
from a 757.
Says who?
<snip>
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
The unofficially released stills seem to support a missile fired
from close range by an F-16 type plane.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! How'd you work that out, ace?
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
All that needs to be established is that no 757 hit the Pentagon.
http://www.bedoper.com/pentagon/asce
Which you utterly fail to do, again..
The official release of five frames of video are obviously false.
..and your credentials in image processing are?
Certified Photoshop Expert. And you?
Post by tw
Post by Seethis Pass
Find them.I will have nothing to do with where you get them.
Look at the shadow in the foreground.
It has a black outline around it.
Therefore the ONLY official versionwhich is found in these five
frames is false. since there is an outline around a shadow the frames
have been doctored.
..or it could be a camera artefact.
"Artifact". No, an outlined shape is never a camera artifact.
Post by tw
Post by Seethis Pass
ONLY the criminal needs to falsify and confiscate and hide evidence.
Just as well noones arguing tah tthe video is evidence. There is
plenty of far more compelling evidence taht a 757 hit the pentagon
than this video the konspiro-bitches are whining about.
Thankfully, you represent the government's side.
tw
2005-09-14 07:57:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
Post by tw
Post by Seethis Pass
"Black People Don't Care About George Bush"
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
A cruise missile hit the pentagon.
Forget about planes. You said yourself you don't have any
evidence
of
Post by Seethis Pass
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
a plane.
757.
So you can't show evidence of a plane.
Except for part of a single engine, which doesn't appear to be
from a 757.
Says who?
<snip>
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
The unofficially released stills seem to support a missile fired
from close range by an F-16 type plane.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! How'd you work that out, ace?
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
All that needs to be established is that no 757 hit the Pentagon.
http://www.bedoper.com/pentagon/asce
Which you utterly fail to do, again..
The official release of five frames of video are obviously false.
..and your credentials in image processing are?
Certified Photoshop Expert.
By whom? The mental health authroities, no doubt.
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
And you?
I have never been certified by the mental health authorities.
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
Post by tw
Post by Seethis Pass
Find them.I will have nothing to do with where you get them.
Look at the shadow in the foreground.
It has a black outline around it.
Therefore the ONLY official versionwhich is found in these five
frames is false. since there is an outline around a shadow the frames
have been doctored.
..or it could be a camera artefact.
"Artifact".
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=artefact&db=*
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
No, an outlined shape is never a camera artifact.
Prove it.
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
Post by tw
Post by Seethis Pass
ONLY the criminal needs to falsify and confiscate and hide evidence.
Just as well noones arguing tah tthe video is evidence. There is
plenty of far more compelling evidence taht a 757 hit the pentagon
than this video the konspiro-bitches are whining about.
Thankfully, you represent the government's side.
Nope, I represent the non-kooky, honest side.
Black People Don't Care About George Bush
2005-09-13 22:48:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by tw
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
A cruise missile hit the pentagon.
Forget about planes. You said yourself you don't have any evidence of
a plane.
757.
So you can't show evidence of a plane.
Except for part of a single engine, which doesn't appear to be from a
757.
Says who?
Says lots of people. Check out the research available online.
Post by tw
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
The unofficially released stills seem to support a missile fired from
close range by an F-16 type plane.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! How'd you work that out, ace?
How did what work out for me?
Post by tw
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
All that needs to be established is that no 757 hit the Pentagon.
http://www.bedoper.com/pentagon/asce
Which you utterly fail to do, again..
Then you can debunk the article in question?
tw
2005-09-14 07:59:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
Post by tw
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
A cruise missile hit the pentagon.
Forget about planes. You said yourself you don't have any evidence of
a plane.
757.
So you can't show evidence of a plane.
Except for part of a single engine, which doesn't appear to be from a
757.
Says who?
Says lots of people. Check out the research available online.
So magic me up a cite then, bitch. Of course, it has to be from someone who
knows what they're talking about wrt airliner engines, not on eof your kook
buddies.
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
Post by tw
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
The unofficially released stills seem to support a missile fired from
close range by an F-16 type plane.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! How'd you work that out, ace?
How did what work out for me?
Got alzheimers?
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
Post by tw
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
All that needs to be established is that no 757 hit the Pentagon.
http://www.bedoper.com/pentagon/asce
Which you utterly fail to do, again..
Then you can debunk the article in question?
The article does not establish that no 757 hit the Pentagon, thus it debunks
itself quite nicely.
MuhammadColumbo
2005-09-13 15:04:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
Lack of a plane, doesn't make your case for a cruise missile. You're
not done until you come up with evidence. Like pieces of a cruise
missle. Or a missing cruise missle. Or maybe we'd settle for open
testimony from the commander who gave an order to fire a cruise missile
at the Pentagon.
The unofficially released stills seem to support a missile fired from
close range by an F-16 type plane.
Not so close range. Because the cruise missile need some distance
tostabilise its guidance regulator before being precisely guided. As they
used cruise missile type guidance for the plane, they probably used the same
kind of missile to manage all the weapons by the same work desk. That's why
the UA93 waited the strike on Pentagone (minus 3 minutes) before deviate
from its flight route.
tw
2005-09-14 09:10:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by MuhammadColumbo
Post by Black People Don't Care About George Bush
Lack of a plane, doesn't make your case for a cruise missile. You're
not done until you come up with evidence. Like pieces of a cruise
missle. Or a missing cruise missle. Or maybe we'd settle for open
testimony from the commander who gave an order to fire a cruise missile
at the Pentagon.
The unofficially released stills seem to support a missile fired from
close range by an F-16 type plane.
Not so close range. Because the cruise missile need some distance
tostabilise its guidance regulator before being precisely guided.
"Guidance regulator"?! LOL!
Post by MuhammadColumbo
As they used cruise missile type guidance for the plane , they probably
used the same
Post by MuhammadColumbo
kind of missile to manage all the weapons by the same work desk. That's why
the UA93 waited the strike on Pentagone (minus 3 minutes) before deviate
from its flight route.
So how come so many people saw a large passenger plane, (and large passenger
plane-sized damage was caused to the Pentagon), yet no one reports seeing
fighter jets firing missiles?
Loading...