Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: DA98 on April 23, 2002, 03:25:13 PM

Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: DA98 on April 23, 2002, 03:25:13 PM
http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero14/missile/trou_en.htm

http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero14/missile/temoins_en.htm

http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero14/missile/missile_en.htm

:rolleyes:
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: JimBear on April 23, 2002, 03:32:20 PM
Le Tards
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: Mighty1 on April 23, 2002, 03:34:25 PM
It WAS a cruise missle that was hijacked by terrorist holding a box cutter up to the throat of the cruise missle's pilot.  :rolleyes:

How often are cruise missles used to intercept planes?
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: john9001 on April 23, 2002, 03:58:18 PM
ahh , zee french , zay have ,how you zay "all zee awnswers"
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: lord dolf vader on April 23, 2002, 07:41:32 PM
well how did a 100 ton plane vaporise ? sorry but that at least seems a dambed good question . the engines totaly werent there? or is that part true?
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: Pongo on April 23, 2002, 07:57:48 PM
what tards. Didnt a parking lot camera catch the impact..
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: Voss on April 23, 2002, 09:06:54 PM
Anyone know of a cruise missile with a depleted uranium nose? Inquiring minds want to know.

These bastards must have been huffing paint when they wrote this tripe.
Title: We've already been over this once....
Post by: Toad on April 23, 2002, 10:15:20 PM
From that other thread:

From Aviation Week:

"One of the aircraft's engines somehow ricocheted out of the building and arched into the Pentagon's mall parking area between the main building and the new loading dock facility"

... hmmm maybe they just trucked in a crashed engine to the loading dock and dumped it?

But how can we explain the clipped trees and light poles?

From Aviation Week:

"American Airlines Flight 77, a Boeing 757 loaded with enough fuel for a transcontinental journey, cleared the crest of a small ridge in Arlington, Va., by a few hundred feet with its engines wailing. It slightly lowered its nose, clipped trees and parking lot light poles,

And then there's this from a Washinton Post article:

FBI agents had not located the jet's black box, the data collection device that will help them piece together the plane's final moments, but they did begin to recover bits and pieces of the fuselage and engines, including what appeared to be the nose cone and throttle. Agents were putting evidence in boxes and paper bags, as well as marking with small flags what appeared to be human remains.

... so they must have smuggled pieces of a fuselage, engines and radome into the actual Pentagon ring itself.


Those conspirators are SOOOOOOOOOO sneaky!


Here's the name of the other thread:

The O' Club > Wheres the Boeing

Here's the Aviation Week article:

Pentagon Attack Hits Navy Hard (http://www.aviationnow.com/content/publication/awst/20010917/aw48.htm)
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: AKDejaVu on April 23, 2002, 11:01:18 PM
Quote
Originally posted by lord dolf vader
well how did a 100 ton plane vaporise ? sorry but that at least seems a dambed good question . the engines totaly werent there? or is that part true?
You see footage of the crash site in Illinois?  I was amazed at how little was left.

AKDejaVu
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: GRUNHERZ on April 23, 2002, 11:03:21 PM
How sad.......
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: Kanth on April 23, 2002, 11:37:38 PM
$$$$$cha-ching$$$$$


http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/newsid_1907000/1907955.stm


Kanthy
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: Saurdaukar on April 24, 2002, 12:23:19 AM
Buncha BS if you ask me - but you do have to wonder - would the nose of an airliner penatrate through three sections of teh Pentagon and leave a hole like that?  The damage does seem more consistant with a warhead, but Im no expert.
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: lord dolf vader on April 24, 2002, 12:43:55 AM
ahh thanks , money    



missed that first thread toad thanks.
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: 8ball on April 24, 2002, 01:02:56 AM
Just in case you guys don't realize this, but guided missiles explode violently, throwing shrapnel everywhere and vaporizing basically the entire missile body (and idealy everything around it).  The nose cone of a cruise missile isn't any more hardened than the nose cone of an aircraft.  Not to mention there are no missiles with a depleted-uranium nose-cone, that doesn't even make sense.. The fireball shown in the security camera footage shows that there was a very large amount of highly flammable fuel combusting, not a truck bomb exploding.

And of course, it is quite convenient that they claim that the plane never crashed into the Pentagon but don't offer any explanation at all as to where the plane and passengers dissappeared to.
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: Eagler on April 24, 2002, 08:35:58 AM
what the hell do the french know about anything?

isn't one of their best sellers on the shelves today one full of conspiracy bs about this crash? Something that belongs in a tabloid not a best seller :rolleyes:

I think the french are still pissed at the US from WW2 days when the liberating GI's showed their women what they were missing :)
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: Masherbrum 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.?!
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: Fishu on April 24, 2002, 05:46:20 PM
This guy obviously doesn't know anythign about physics :P

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.
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: SFRT - Frenchy 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".
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: GRUNHERZ on April 24, 2002, 08:11:28 PM
Frenchy you are no longer living in USA or are you just visting France?
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: Yeager 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?
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: Gwjr2 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. :rolleyes:
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: AKDejaVu 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
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: straffo on April 25, 2002, 01:48:52 PM
This is the rise of dead thread or what ?
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: mjolnir 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.
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: Wlfgng on April 25, 2002, 05:13:01 PM
fishu, the aircraft hit the ground before it hit the pentagon.
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: Ozark 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."
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: 8ball 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.
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: Ozark 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?
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: Ozark 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?
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: Dune 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 (http://www.eagle-net.org/omega/)

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.
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: Sikboy on April 26, 2002, 08:04:56 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Dune
The Omega File (http://www.eagle-net.org/omega/)


Thank you thank you thank you... I can't get enough of this stuff :)
Where's Bashwolf? He needs to get in on this!

-Sikboy
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: 8ball on April 26, 2002, 12:04:28 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Ozark


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

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


I actually watched a story on a news channel after 9/11.  I will try to find a report online for you though.
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: Wlfgng on April 26, 2002, 03:08:42 PM
please tell me you don't totally fall for the American Propoganda Machine.. er the news.
Title: More BS about the 757 crash at Washington
Post by: Sikboy on April 27, 2002, 04:15:38 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Wlfgng
please tell me you don't totally fall for the American Propoganda Machine.. er the news.

Yes, much better to get your information from The Omega files. Or better, some random French website :rolleyes:

-Sikboy