Author Topic: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington (Read 761 times)

Masherbrum · « **Reply #15 on:** April 24, 2002, 09:36:14 AM »

You are correct 8ball. The Tomahawks don't have one, if that is one that Frenchman is talking about in the articles. Maybe the gov't hid a M-1 in the crest of the hill, loaded with true depleted uranium shells and fired in a "military exercise"?!

I wouldn't it past the govt., that much is true, but tell me this. How in the hell could anyone, ANYONE within a five mile radius, mistake a F&*%in' missle for a 757???!!!! You read the "eyewitnesses" that weren't even sure.

I have a close cousin that worked in that wing, she was transferred to another area, because of the "reinforcing" of that wing. I have heard from my cousin, off the record. "It was a plane." People underestimate the temp. of aviation fuel fires, they do get hot. There would be enough kinetic energy to penetrate three sections. The planes fuselage is still moving forward like an accordian immediately after impact.

My .02 cents.

If the french want to write about controversy, why did they make the fixtures of the Maginot line fixed.?!

Fishu · « **Reply #16 on:** April 24, 2002, 05:46:20 PM »

This guy obviously doesn't know anythign about physics

Quote

The nose would crush on impact with an obstacle, not penetrate it

What would had happend to rest of the fuselage?
splat on the wall like pizza since nose cone didn't happen to penetrate wall?

I wonder how he explains of those two planes breaking through both WTC towers...

Theres a big mass in that fuselage, which has tremendous energy and will go through such wall.
Almost like shaped charge, projectile itself doesn't penetrate but the "energy blast".

Quote

An aircraft would have demolished the building rather than penetrate the walls.

[/b]

Two planes which hit WTC, didn't exactly demolish whole building themself, but went through, without causing so big damage vertically or horizontally, other than mostly there where it penetrated side of the building and close by areas with the blast.
'demolition' only happend afterwards due to tremendous heat from fires.

SFRT - Frenchy · « **Reply #17 on:** April 24, 2002, 07:46:04 PM »

Yeah, when I came back to france, I saw this guy on TV. I couldn't help to think :"Welcome back Frenchy".

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #18 on:** April 24, 2002, 08:11:28 PM »

Frenchy you are no longer living in USA or are you just visting France?

Yeager · « **Reply #19 on:** April 25, 2002, 12:14:41 AM »

Moon landings were a sham. There never was a USSR and Hitler really did win.

Nuff said?

Gwjr2 · « **Reply #20 on:** April 25, 2002, 10:38:39 AM »

Frenchy no Offense to you in this...but I consider France the stepchildren of the world ...well them and Quebec. Some times I wonder why we dont kick em outta NATO.

AKDejaVu · « **Reply #21 on:** April 25, 2002, 11:26:18 AM »

Something these guys don't seem to be grasping is that bombs/missiles do specific things. You can shape them to blast forward... to just explode... to penetrate deeply then explode... to be incindiary... to be primarily concussion... basically... you can specialize them to do many things.

I just don't know of a bomb or missile that can do all the things necessary to cause the damage seen at the Pentagon. It penetrated 3 rings of the building... it caused a massive fire... it blew a circle out in the third ring... but didn't damage the next ring...

A car/vehicle (didn't they originally say this?) would not have been able to blow that hole in the inner ring... something had to penetrate to do that. A cruise missle would have had to stay together until penetrating the third ring... then the explosion would have damaged the next ring too.

Something went in... and caused damage where it went. It caused one hell of a hot fire while penetrating hardened concrete. There simply is no substitute for mass.

AKDejaVu

straffo · « **Reply #22 on:** April 25, 2002, 01:48:52 PM »

This is the rise of dead thread or what ?

mjolnir · « **Reply #23 on:** April 25, 2002, 02:50:27 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Masherbrum
People underestimate the temp. of aviation fuel fires, they do get hot.

To illustrate this point, look at the WTC. Those towers were built to withstand the impact of a Boeing 707. Of course, that was prior to the days of the 757/767. It wasn't the impact of the airplanes that caused the towers to collapse, it was the fact that jet fuel burns so hot it caused the structural integrity of the building to fail. All the steel and concrete and whatever else was holding that building up essentially started to melt.

Wlfgng · « **Reply #24 on:** April 25, 2002, 05:13:01 PM »

fishu, the aircraft hit the ground before it hit the pentagon.

Ozark · « **Reply #25 on:** April 25, 2002, 06:32:11 PM »

I've been in the ARFF (Aircraft Rescue Fire Fighting) work for the last 20 years. I'm amazed that folks with little information can create such a big disinformation event.

"In 1988, Sandia National Labs in the U.S. crashed an F-4 fighter aircraft into a reinforced concrete wall at 770 km/h. The F-4 completely disintegrated while the deepest point of penetration of the wall was only six centimetres. Although no one has conducted the test of crashing a fully fueled jumbo jet into a mock reactor containment wall, Ralph Beedle of the U.S. Nuclear Energy Institute believes the results would be similar."

8ball · « **Reply #26 on:** April 25, 2002, 06:41:04 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ozark
I've been in the ARFF (Aircraft Rescue Fire Fighting) work for the last 20 years. I'm amazed that folks with little information can create such a big disinformation event.

"In 1988, Sandia National Labs in the U.S. crashed an F-4 fighter aircraft into a reinforced concrete wall at 770 km/h. The F-4 completely disintegrated while the deepest point of penetration of the wall was only six centimetres. Although no one has conducted the test of crashing a fully fueled jumbo jet into a mock reactor containment wall, Ralph Beedle of the U.S. Nuclear Energy Institute believes the results would be similar."

The difference in mass, and therefore energy, of a 757/767 and an F4 is so significant that you cannot draw conclusions based on that test. Plus, that test was against a reinforced, thick conrete wall that was allowed to move freely to help absorb the collision. If your going to use data from a test like that, make sure you include it all next time so that you don't mislead people.

Ozark · « **Reply #27 on:** April 25, 2002, 06:41:38 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by AKDejaVu
You see footage of the crash site in Illinois? I was amazed at how little was left.

Are you talking about the United flight that crashed in Pennsylvania?

Ozark · « **Reply #28 on:** April 25, 2002, 06:49:11 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by 8ball
make sure you include it all next time so that you don't mislead people.

Did you really read it? Show me the link of the report!

Remember Value Jet? They hit water. How much did they recover?

Dune · « **Reply #29 on:** April 25, 2002, 11:15:47 PM »

Don't forget, the leftover Nazi's are working with the Rand Corp. the CIA and the UN to take over the world: The Omega File

Quote

The OMEGA File
THE BEGINNING

"...Another figure has an EVIL face... 'HE LOOKS LIKE A GERMAN NAZI. HE'S A NAZI... HIS EYES! HIS EYES. I'VE NEVER SEEN EYES LIKE THAT BEFORE!!!"

The above quote was made under regressive hypnosis by one of the first publicized 'UFO abductees', Barney Hill who -- along with his wife Betty -- claimed to have been abducted by grey-skinned entities from a space craft which apparently originated from the Zeta II Reticuli star system. The Grey alien abductors were obviously working with the human military officer who was encountered by Barney. This military officer was apparently a full-fledged Nazi, although this incident took place over 15 years after Europe had 'supposedly' been de-Nazified. This quote can be found in the paranormal encyclopedia "MYSTERIES OF THE MIND, TIME & SPACE", p. 1379.