DonAlejandroVega
Well-Known Member
(x2)have to watch my sedition..............
A Cruise Missile Slammed Into the Pentagon on 911
- Thread starter Martin Timothy
- Start date
(x2)have to watch my sedition..............
Those are some tiny little arms.
Doer
Well-Known Member
Those footage of the plane approaching and then climbing are fake, Take it from a pilot the physics of a turn, especially a turn against gravity, rules out those photos, Some dots on a video you say is a missile is meaningless.
http://disclose.tv/viewVideo.php?video_id=44286
Looks like the cruiser had a device that homed in on the laser spot!
Pentacon.com
Pentacon.com
Video File..
The diagram above, shows the thermonuclear warhead vaporized seven layers of especially reinforced concrete, before exiting on the inside of C Ring!
The nose of a plane with the rest off camera looks like a cruise missile? NO>
Both are streamline but you can see from the perspective the nose in the shot is much larger than a cruise missile.
But, let's say all of this 9/11 alternate stuff is true.
So what? You are being lied to? Of course we are. Did you just wake up yesterday?
In self rule we get the assholes that make the tough choices. And if Blue on Blue is the card, we asked for that. Some group of people, a group of 1000s I guess not only hide the facts but were following a conclusion their oath called for.
But, a nuke delivered on the Pentagon.
That is crack pot. No way to hide that.
Last edited:
tip top toker
Well-Known Member
And at 400+mph those two engines or even the wings couldn't possibly have the benefit of any kinetic energy
heckler73
Well-Known Member
kDude
Well-Known Member
good reply, though last comment was a little unnecessary.
kamikaze's only hit their target less than a 1/4 of the time though man.
and i'm assuming here, but i imagine their planes were slightly easier to fly too
granted pentagon didn't have AA guns firin
..but like i said, if the official story is truth.. i just think the guy was an amazing pilot (when evidence suggests otherwise).. ignore the objective/reason/effect, and you must admit the act itself is rather impressive.didn't just come straight down or even slightly angled, to hit it.. evened right out and was flying nicely horizontal for a time first.
and to the bigN, 2010 was just 2001 typo. but you got me on the 747 being incorrect.. touche?
kelly4
Well-Known Member
How did his hand not vaporize?
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
at high speed, the delicate structures of an aircraft fail dramatically when impacting reinforced concrete faced with stone.
[video]
and that was a fighter jet, designed to withstand high G maneuvers and supersonic flight.
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
unlike a plane, he was able to focus his chi.
Mindmelted
Well-Known Member
Holy shit !!!!!!
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
theres another video of a US Govt crash test with a prop driven cargo plane, and the wings get snipped off by wooden telephone poles.
the troofers have fucked up all sources of that video with their dopey conspiracy bullshit
[video]
ignore the shitty placard commentary and the obnoxious backing track.
DonAlejandroVega
Well-Known Member
yeah, baby!! that's what I want to do on my 80th birthday!
Mindmelted
Well-Known Member
Fuck yeah!!! No pain.
DonAlejandroVega
Well-Known Member
yes, and that aggressive US foreign policy causes blow-back. (attempting to attach rider to bill)
heckler73
Well-Known Member
I can explain that.
Work = Force x Distance
The main fulcrum is at the fuselage; therefore, it requires less force (i.e. shear stress) to do the same amount of work at the tip relative to a mid-point.
Also, in the case of the Pentagon, the wing is the "telephone pole" and the wall is the "wing". Keep track of the force vectors. Or are you talking about the knocked-down poles?
uhhh...no.
No, what Kynes is saying is that Aluminum is so powerful it can go through not one, not two, but three or more steel reinforced blast protected barriers each thicker than the one the dump truck was unable to dent. Such is the power of aluminum going nearly 350 MPH, no lie!